Yeah, but the people who wrote Deuteronomy and Leviticus were also picking and choosing what to put in and what to leave out. They weren’t making it up out of whole cloth, they were basing it on older oral traditions. Just because that generation was the first one to write it down doesn’t mean that the belief system should have stopped evolving at that point.
And, AIUI, the accused has to not just “respond”, but specifically respond by saying, “Yes, I am currently committing a sin punishable by death, and I am nevertheless choosing to continue doing it”. In the absence of such a response, the possibility exists that the person might not be responsible for his actions due to a fit of temporary insanity, therefore no death penalty.
I’m totally fine with evolving religious beliefs and practices to mesh with the modern world (even if that modern world is a few thousand years ago). I’m happy that it’s difficult to apply the death penalty in Jewish tradition.
This back and forth started with the statement that not everyone picks and chooses amoung Bible verses. Nothing you’ve written is relevant to that at all.
I’m fine with picking and choosing, if it makes you a more accepting person that shuns and punishes fewer people in general However, conservative religious people pick, for example, the homophobic verses and say that they matter, while ignoring the ones on stoning for adultery or whatever.
My reply to that would be that it would be impossible to follow the Bible strictly as written, because it’s too vague and often (on the surface level) contradicts itself.
For example, the Bible says we can’t work on the Sabbath. But it doesn’t define “work”, or define when the Sabbath begins and ends. Without precise definitions of those terms (which the Talmud provides), it would be impossible to know exactly how to obey that commandment.
So you need to find some authority to translate Biblical injunctions into practical terms. And (circling back to the actual OP) once you become an adult, if you choose to follow authorities who preach bigotry, that’s on you. Bigotry can certainly be based on genuine religious belief, but that doesn’t make religious bigotry in any way “better” or more excusable than secular bigotry.
Nothing you’re saying contradicts anything I’ve said. Someone is picking and choosing among the vague and contradictory verses, either the person or the authority the person decides to follow.
I’m not trying to contradict you, I agree with you. I just can’t resist a good hijack about Talmudic law. 
Haha! Endless discussion is certainly one of the hallmarks. This board would fit right in.