Clarification on "What is Theonomy?"

It seems a few people have been confused by my last post, "What is Theonomy?"

Not sure how good it is, but it is the best I can do for the moment.

Theonomy is a school of theology that is more or less unique to Calvinistsand Postmillennialists. Postmillennialists believe that the world will grow better and better until it becomes almost completely "Christianized",then Christ will return and wondrously create a material new creation,like the garden of Eden, free from the effects of sin. Because of theirbelief that the world must grow better (like the parable of the leavenwhich leavens the whole lump), it becomes a logical corollary that the law of God should be obeyed and enforced in civil society. Because of their belief that God is an arbitrary tyrant who capriciously predestinates some men to salvation and actively hardens the rest, predestinating them to damnation, Calvinists tend to be severe in their view of their fellow man.The cold and unfeeling Puritans are a good example of society under control of "theonomists." They have little toleration for differing points of view, even among believers. Calvin burned to death his best friend because his view of the Trinity did not accord with his own. Therefore, theonomy under Calvinists is probably NOT where we want to go.
However, the basic idea that God's moral law is binding and should been enforced is very sound. The Old Testament had moral law, ceremonial law,and various additional laws suited to the Jews' time and situation. Only the moral law is binding today. Christ's sacrifice nullified the ceremonial, law which was a type pointing to Jesus' sacrifice on the cross. The other laws, like dietary laws and the city of refuge that you mention, are not binding today, but were only for the Jews. The dietary laws were to keep the Jews separate from the pagan neighbors. The cities of refuge embodied a principle of looking at the mental state of the actorin homicide to determine if it was murder or voluntary/involuntary manslaughter. That principle is still sound and Anglo-American law follow sit today; but the requirement that the offender reside in a city of refuge until the death of the high priest obviously is not binding.
Morals do not change. It was always wrong to steal or murder and it always will be. So, God's basic moral law is timeless and should be enforced.Yes. Should adultery, fornication, sodomy and other moral offenses be punished by the civil authority? I think it can and should. It is an historical fact that for many centuries Anglo-American law punished these offenses. In England through most of the middle ages sodomy was punishable with death. As we came into the "Enlightenment" society softened the punishment of crime, so that today even murder often is not capital. You can judge for yourself where this has brought society and if softening these laws or nullifying them all together has been good.