This contribution intends to discuss the case of paradoxical non-mobilizations against liberal morality policies (Meier, 1999). More precisely, the aim is to show why Orthodox Jews in France do not seek to repeal liberal policies they adamantly oppose, on abortion and LGBTQ+ rights, whereas, at first glance, they have the required doctrinal and relational resources to mobilize (Zald, 2002). The key finding is that the same doctrinal and relational resources that could nurture their mobilization prevent it. From the doctrinal viewpoint, they oppose abortion and homosexuality (Homolska, 2020) but cannot join vocal Christian groups because they do not frame it similarly and, more broadly, because they do not value engaging in the surrounding society (in part due to their "enclave" organisation, Sivan, 1995). From a relational viewpoint, they could use their good relationships with public institutions to counter liberal morality policies, but they use them to secure their endangered religious practices, for, over the last two decades, long-standing arrangements have been repealed (Strack, 2025). This contribution demonstrates that being part of the cultural majority is a prerequisite for mobilization. This case helps discuss how minority groups operate in politics when confronting dominant rules (Lamont, 2018). Whereas mobilization is expected, this contribution shows that religious minorities (including Protestants and Muslims) may struggle to connect with more powerful allies (Catholic groups in France) because of a distinct doctrine and secular/laïcité politics that affect more minority groups. So, because mobilization on morality issues would be too costly, minority groups tend to opt for accepting rather than challenging a norm they oppose. This contribution is grounded in 89 interviews with Orthodox Jews and elected officials, 71 participant and non-participant observations with Orthodox Jews, and the study of 289 issues of Orthodox newspapers.