Who Says So?

I don't usually like to argue about definitions, but I feel constrained to point out that you are not using some words the way I have been accustomed to seeing them used. That doesn't mean you're wrong, it just means that some people might misinterpret what you're saying.

To discriminate generally means to distinguish one thing from another. A discriminating beer drinker, for instance, would recognize the difference between lawn mower beer and craft beer, and would likely express a preference for one or the other. An indiscriminate beer drinker would say that all beer is the same, so you might as well buy the cheapest brand. Some types of discrimination have been made illegal, but not all types. You can still choose your beer, but you can't choose not to admit someone into your public tavern because of his race, color, or nationality. Persecution generally means to pick on someone, "to harass or punish in a manner designed to injure, grieve, or afflict". I can see where there is some overlap here, but it's possible to discriminate without persecuting. I do not believe that gay marriage and traditional marriage is the same thing, that's discrimination, but it doesn't become persecution until I throw rocks instead of rice at a newly married gay couple. I can refuse to attend a gay wedding but, if I was a county clerk, I could no longer refuse to sell a marriage license to a gay couple. When I said that gays should not be persecuted, it doesn't preclude my disliking them and avoiding them in social situations. Truth be known, of all the stuff that you said is better now than it used to be, gay marriage is the only thing I disagree about.

The word "sin" is usually used in a religious context, although it wouldn't necessarily have to be. I could live with your definition, except that I would discriminate between breaking your own rule and breaking a rule that has been laid on you by somebody else without your consent. I think the reason you resisted religion in your youth was that it was imposed upon you by your parents, who dragged you, kicking and screaming, down to Elsdon. My parents sent me to Elsdon too, but that was different. I had been asking them questions that they couldn't answer, and they said that I might have better luck asking those questions in church, so I was happy to be sent there. The Catholic kids on  my block still said I was going to Hell. In their view, it was just as much of a sin to attend a Protestant church as it was to attend no church at all. Of course the people I met at Elsdon didn't believe that, and they impressed me as being nicer people, so I chose to believe them instead of those mean Catholic kids.

I still have a little trouble understanding the concept of knowing that something is wrong and doing it anyway. Do you know it's wrong because you actually believe it's wrong, or do you just mean that somebody else told you it's wrong? I don't think I ever did anything that I believed was wrong before I did it. I have done lots of things that I thought were okay at the time, but came to realize that they were wrong after the fact. I don't call that "sin", I call that "screwing up". When you stole those books, did you have conflicting thoughts, like in cartoons when the little angel and the little devil are hovering over you arguing about whether you should do it or not? I could understand that, but I don't understand how you could have believed it was wrong and did it anyway merely because you wanted the books.