I’m very acquainted with human nature. But you can’t go around redefining what behavior is criminal (i.e. calling good evil and evil good), or else society will collapse; and that falls into the purview of government, which as the Declaration of Independence states is “instituted among men … to secure these rights”, and not all human behavior that human nature tends towards is a right that God gave mankind although what is given from God is the right to choose whether for good to preservation of life or for evil to destruction.
And one does need to distinguish between evil tongue and good, especially in light of the good increasingly being suppressed by government-aligned media. The prophets of old often were killed for speaking good when the people heard it as evil.
I think you understand me, and I think I understand you.
What I mean by criminal is behavior that harms people who are not willing participants in the act. If two people want to commit a moral crime as willing accomplices, it is not my concern and it should not be regulated by government in any way. There are some shades on that, as I see it. For example if a person chooses to use heroin one time, that is a choice between two adults and not the government’s business. However, at some point the heroin user may become an addict and has lost the ability to consent. So it is never cut and dry.
Nevertheless, for the most part, it’s not the role of government. Society at large may shame them, shun them, shut them out etc. That’s life. That is human nature. But very few are beyond redemption.