Penalizing cases, thus imposing punishment to behaviors that don't offend social values, and indeed in an unbearable' way but only seek to impose a kind of ideology, thus political ideology, that is meant to be imposed as social indeology, thus a political concept to be applied as social one, touching social values and contribute this way to adoption of a certain/concrete political aspect, and thesis, thus also force behavior of citizens the way Law-maker likes, impose aspects on morality, that include mainly aspects that within term of freedom, are potentially and can be just personal aspects and points of view, are not justified in a State of law, and furthermore they may come in conflict, and opposed to basic rules of Constitution that derive from Natural Law, with main principle freedom and self-disposition, and may not be included in formulation of articles of Constitution that derive directly from these rules; thus these rules may not be stuff for creation of laws of Positive Law, that seek to suppress elementary state of freedom, namely and basically fundamental rights. Only if moral rules, of personal freedom offend and harm the corresponding part of freedom of others, hence their rights, then articles of Constitution should have no such content, within a regiment of State of Law. And mainly if moral rules at level of pracical application do offend social values as values applicable for everyone, that in this case, Penal Law, as branch of Law, thus also Social Law, has and 'is obliged' to protect by protecting corresponding legal rights of parties. Thus articles of Constitution, should include laws, that contribute to flexibility of interpretation of laws, of Postive Law, based on rules of Natural Law, and where needed, start from handling of creative rights by Courts.