No, it is proper to ask. But as I say, I had no idea just how arrogant you are.
No, that is your belief.
Wrong. I know that the founders were not theocrats. I still wonder if that is what you are hoping for. You do not seem to draw a line between what is government and what is your religion…nor do you seem to understand the difference.
I am actually much more liberal on the subject of sodomy that our Founding Fathers were and you consider me a "theocrat."
It wouldn’t surprise me if you were or wish to be a theocrat – like the Islamists. Perhaps you are unaware that it is now over 200 years since the founding of our nation???? Are you aware that the founders weren’t too hip about women’s rights either??? And slavery??? Are you aware at all that we live in different times and that human understanding has progressed since the 1700’s?
I find the Jeffersonian solution of castration for sodomites to be harsh. How is it, then, that I am a "theocrat" but Thomas Jefferson gets a pass in your book?
Perhaps because the definition of theocrat does not have to do with your solution to sodomy! Do you know what theocracy is? You are trying to force others to live by your religion. Thomas Jefferson did not. I am not against castration for rapists and other serial sex offenders. Are you aware that Mr. Jefferson did not consider the Bible to be the absolute and only word of God? Are you aware that he was sure that some of the quotes attributed to Jesus could not possibly have been uttered by him and made his own gospel of Jesus?
Nowhere in any of our founding documents is a 'right' to do evil enumerated, nor a 'right' practice deviant sex.
Now you are getting childish! The constitution is about government – not religion. The Bill of Rights asserts general rights such as those I have already listed. Do you have any idea how creepy you come across – obsessed as you seem to be with other people’s sexual practices?
I repeat: there is no where in the constitution that says there is no right to sin. And, in fact, sinners’ rights have been upheld through the courts…which you should count your blessing for – since you are also a sinner. Perhaps it is time for you to get your own house in order – before throwing stones.
In the story of Adam and Eve – they sinned by eating of the forbidden fruit. God gave them the “right” to sin – it would seem.
Anger is a sin. You seem angry to me. Should you be in jail for it?
If we had a "right to sin", any law restricting human action would, by definition, be violating the rights of the sinner.
Apparently you do not understand the difference between government and religion. Sin is a religious term. People have the “right” to sin. If they break the law, there will be legal consequences. If they sin – say for instance, have homosexual sex – they will not receive legal consequences. If someone is greedy, that is a sin – however there is no law against it. If someone is unloving – that is a sin – but again, there is no law against it. If someone is so evil as to condemn another – there is no legal consequence for it.
If we have a "right to sin", then by definition, we can take no action when we are the victims of sin for fear of violating another person's "right to sin
Again, you seem confused as to the difference between church and state. We absolutely, by law, have a “right” to sin. For a Jew to eat things that are not Kosher is a sin. But you or I are not prosecuted for it and, of course, Jews aren’t civilly prosecuted either. When the sin – say murder – is both a religious sin and a civil crime - then there is a civil consequence.