It is often the case that the Biblical version of Jesus is portrayed as the peaceful replacement for the out of date and largely anti-social and antiquated Leviticus or Kings. Countless nonbelievers are of the opinion that Jesus was a sort of hippy of his time. A preacher of non-violence, of loving thy neighbour, of blessed are the meek. This is the picture we have of the Christian Jesus, and yet when we read the teachings of Jesus, a slightly different picture emerges.
It is true, that in comparison to the Biblical heroes that enjoyed God’s grace before him – King Saul’s brutal God-ordained genocide of Amalekite children comes to mind – Jesus was a little less maniacal according to scripture. But he isn’t completely without a tendency to cruel reaction, contradiction and wholly immoral sentiment.
It is prudent to point out that Jesus himself insists that the Mosaic laws of the Old Testament are not defunct by his arrival. The cruelties of those laws and commands, and the irrational and heartless judgements from the God of the Old Testament, Jesus insists he has come to confirm. For Jesus, the moral teachings of the Old Testaments are perfectly reasonable. In Matthew 5:17 Jesus says:
“Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.”
– This alone, is enough for fundamentalists to use for the sake of anchoring what they see as the legitimacy of heterosexual-supremacy and Old Testament ordained Patriarchy, regardless of any scientific and social advancement and a more informed understanding of historical processes. The same-sex marriage debate was laden with references to Leviticus. It appears to be the only Leviticus verse that the Christian-right have decided to take seriously.
The New Testament gives the impression that Jesus has two different personalities, as if two different characters. The Gospel accounts present a more peaceful – to a degree – version than the Jesus of, for example, Revelation. In the Gospels, Jesus’s message at times is no less harmful, just less violent. In Luke, we find a teaching of Jesus directly reflected in the policies of the horrendous church of Jehovah’s Witnesses. In Luke 14:26 Jesus says:
“If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple.”
– Control is the key to this verse, much like control is the key to countless verses from all religious texts. For Christ, you must be willing to break off natural family bonds – an evolved social structure that is hardwired into the fabric of humanity on so many levels – for the sake of the ‘faith’. This is control at its most repugnant. If you’re willing to place faith above your natural family ties, if you’re willing to ‘hate’ everything you are naturally disposed to love, the faith has you in the palm of its hand.
Jesus continues his anti-family demands through the Gospels, including Matthew 19:29:
“And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as much and will inherit eternal life.”
– Here, Jesus provides an incentive to leave your family. It is beneficial for you to leave your family. Again, this is control. I noted in a previous article the destructive anti-family policies of the cult of Jehovah’s Witnesses. The horrific way those who choose to leave the cult are treated, and shunned, and whose family members are encouraged to disown them. In January 2013, The Watchtower said this on family members no longer wishing to be a part of the cult:
“Really, what your beloved family member needs to see is your resolute stance to put Jehovah above everything else – including the family bond. … Do not look for excuses to associate with a disfellowshipped family member, for example, through e-mail.”
– Given the profitability of Kingdom Hall, it strikes me as a business model. The ability to scare people into staying within a faith because they fear losing their family, is extremely profitable for the governing body of Jehovah’s Witnesses. The lack of compassion or recognition of the importance of family ties completely eludes those in charge of Jehovah’s Witnesses because it is profitable that way. But its justification can absolutely be pointed directly to in the New Testament, through the words of Jesus. The ability to play nature – that which has endowed us with reason – against itself, is key to the perpetuation of faith.
The immoral teachings continue. One of which is immortalised in the painting at the top of this article. It is a work by Caravaggio. Caravaggio was an astonishingly wonderful artist. His training and his tutor in Milan did not seem to have any recognisable effect on the genius of the artist that he would flourish into. His works always seemed to me to be a sort of lightning bolt lighting up the scene for a split second, captured on canvas. One of my favourite Caravaggio works is ‘The Incredulity of Saint Thomas’. It is the moment when Jesus seems to acknowledge that perhaps extraordinary evidence is required for extraordinary claims. John 20:24-29 relates the story of Thomas doubting that the other disciples had seen a risen Jesus. Thomas demands to see evidence. Jesus appears to Thomas and shows him his hand and side wounds. The side wound is the subject of Caravaggio’s work. Upon seeing the evidence, Thomas is convinced. Jesus says:
“Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.”
– This seems to me to be a condemnation of doubt. As if Jesus is forgiving Thomas for doubting that a dead man was now walking around town as if seemingly alive and well, rather than accepting that it’s understandable that Thomas may doubt such a claim. This is another prime example – the first being the focus on slowly unravelling family ties – of religions fundamentally abusing the natural condition of humanity, for its own purposes. As human beings, we are creatures of doubt and of curiosity. It is natural to our condition, and entertaining our doubt and curiosity is how we progress.
A worthwhile teacher does not teach children to believe exactly as they’re told without evidence. A worthwhile teacher inspires curiosity and a yearning for knowledge, to engage their natural desire to understand without bias or dogma. On this basis, Jesus was not a worthwhile teacher.
Thomas was right to question such an extraordinary claim offered with no evidence. Thomas was essentially told by the disciples that the laws of the known universe had been dismissed by the coming back to life of a dead human being. For Thomas to have accepted without evidence, a claim that so wildly undermines nature, would be to suspend all human reasoning and logical faculties. Observation, experiment and measuring reality has been the route to all understanding of the World we inhabit. Jesus appears to suggest this form – the only form – of gaining and applying knowledge, is less respectable than belief without evidence. This is a wholly dangerous teaching. Those who believe without evidence, sit in the House of Lords as permanent members. They rule countries and devise laws. They demand blasphemy laws to prevent natural curiosity from reaching into the realm of belief. And it would seem that Jesus would fully approve of that vast and dangerous ignorance.
Moving from the Gospels to Revelation, Jesus drops the subtle cruelty that he uses in the Gospels, and goes straight for the violence. In Revelation 2:22-23, for a woman whose crime it was to have eaten food that was meant as a sacrifice, and to believe in something other than Jesus, Christ says:
“22 Indeed I will cast her (Jezebel) into a sickbed, and those who commit adultery with her into great tribulation, unless they repent of their deeds.
23 I will kill her children with death, and all the churches shall know that I am He who searches the minds and hearts. And I will give to each one of you according to your works.”
– Here Jesus seems to have channelled the violent God of the Old Testament. A quick read up on Theological interpretations of these verses tells us that Theologians believe that Jezebel represents ‘false Prophets’ and that ‘committing adultery with her’ is ‘idol worship’, much like those destroyed by God in the Old Testament. This is simply Jesus confirming that if you follow someone who isn’t him, you will be slaughtered. Like a jealous partner resorting to violence to keep you in check. It seems a disproportionate punishment, for the apparent ‘crime’. It gives further ammo to those ‘shunning’ family members who leave their cult, for they are now considered evil.
I would further argue that it is the mark of an evil God to bestow upon mankind the ability to think freely and to evaluate evidence, but to punish those who do not accept that which has no evidence. Not only does Jesus mistreat Thomas for the ‘crime’ of doubt, but now it is punishable. It seems the only evidence Jesus is willing to offer for the truth of his word, is a threat that if you don’t accept his word, you’ll be physically abused for eternity. This is violent punishment for thoughts alone. This cannot be construed as anything but a wholly immoral sentiment.
It is important to recognise that the teachings of Jesus – whilst certainly a step up from the cruelty of the Old Testament – are not entirely without fault in the 21st Century. The peaceful message of Christ and the focus on the most vulnerable – Luke 6:20 for example; a message that should trouble the conscience of the wealthiest of Christians – is a message that eludes or is woefully manipulated by many on the Christian right. But it is also true that one is to accept the peaceful and loving passages as the infallible words of the son of God, there must also be no reason to deny the more immoral passages as being the infallible words of the son of God also, and recognise the problems they may cause today. Anchoring morality and knowledge to one period of time, is a dangerous idea. It is hard to get away from the fact that the Bible tells us that Jesus taught to believe without evidence, to abandon family for the sake of his church, and that if you believe otherwise, you are destined for eternal and violent punishment. We must not be led to believe that the Biblical Jesus and Christianity itself represent the epitome of a peaceful, and loving religious system of belief to be adhered to at a political level. This is when faith becomes dangerous.
Futile Democracy 
This post is an example of how leftists redefine the Bible so that it furthers their political agenda.
The “law” is simply, love God with all your heart and your neighbor as yourself.”
God handed that greatest Commandment to Moses and Jesus, Son of God handed it to all of mankind.
The term “heterosexual supremacy” is ridiculous.
Gender, male and female, is how sexually reproducing creatures evolved.
It is therefore obvious that whatever it is homosexuals do to each others genitals in the name of lust, is not sex.
And as a result, the idea of gay marriage is as ridiculous as marriage between two celibates.
The leftist political agenda can be refuted with secular arguments and need not involve religion since the leftist agenda is an affront to common sense, reason and natural law.
“This post is an example of how leftists redefine the Bible so that it furthers their political agenda.”
– I’m secular. My “political agenda” is to keep cults away from establishing their fairy tales as dominant in the public sphere. I know plenty of secular, atheist right wingers too. A lot of libertarians, are very secular and very atheist.
“The “law” is simply, love God with all your heart and your neighbor as yourself.”
– No it isn’t. Feel free to look through Leviticus.
“God handed that greatest Commandment to Moses and Jesus, Son of God handed it to all of mankind.”
– No evidence exists for the existence of Moses. The exodus almost certainly didn’t happen. And Jesus offered nothing new. Your silly little tribal myths have been nothing but violent, regressive, and completely divorced from reality along the way. You continue that trend beautifully.
And the 10 Commandments seem actually to have came from the Kemet Tribe of Egypt, and their 42 Principles of Ma’at. Certainly nothing in the 10 Commandments was new. It had all been said before.
“The term “heterosexual supremacy” is ridiculous.”
– No it isn’t. Marriage is currently decided upon, by straight people, and mainly Christians, who have decided that they own the right to marriage. You think you have a right to tell those who aren’t exactly like you, that they shouldn’t get married. Your argument is that your sexuality, is entitled to certain privileges that others are not. You invent your own rights that you then deny to others. This is supremacy, whether you try to justify it or not. In fact, you follow up your “the term is ridiculous” statement, with your own heterosexual-supremacy….
“Gender, male and female, is how sexually reproducing creatures evolved.
It is therefore obvious that whatever it is homosexuals do to each others genitals in the name of lust, is not sex.”
– Your first statement here is pointless. We also evolved as green eyed, blue eyed, ginger haired, blonde haired, straight, gay people. Gender evolution, and sexuality evolution are two different things. Though it’s nice to see a Christian fundamentalist accept that we evolved.
Your second statement is the epitome of supremacy. It is not based on any scientific understanding of the spectrum of sexuality, nor how sexuality evolved across species. This is an example of your prejudice – because it isn’t based on fact, only on your silly little myths and a very weak attempt to justify your bigotry. We know that sexuality isn’t simply “straight” and “gentials in the name of lust”. You purposely choose not to understand even the very basic of sexuality in nature, because it might conflict with your heterosexual supremacist ideals, which are always based on nothing rational, just religious bullshit.
Since a review by Canadian researcher and biologist Bruce Bagemihl in 1999, it has been widely understood that at least 1,500 species have been shown to exhibit homosexual tendencies. At least 10% of the population of domesticated sheep, are exclusively homosexual. A study in London by M.J Cole noted that homosexual behaviour in Giraffes tends to be more common than heterosexual behaviour. The African Lion has been noted to have homosexual tendencies.
Dr. Jerome Goldstein, Director of the San Francisco Clinical Research Center, says:
“Sexual orientation is not a matter of choice, it is primarily neurobiological at birth”
Goldstein continues:
“Using volumetric studies, there have been findings of significant cerebral amygdala size differences between homosexual and heterosexual subjects. Sex dimorphic connections were found among homosexual participants in these studies.”
In fact, there is not one reputable scientific source that will in any way, suggest that sexuality is merely a choice, nor just “lust”. There is not one reputable scientific source that will say: “You know, turns out Leviticus was right”. None. This includes:
The American Psychiatric Association,
The World Health Organisation,
The American Psychological Association,
The American Medical Association,
The Academy of Pediatrics,
The UK Royal College of Psychiatrists
Council on Child and Adolescent Health,
The British Psychological Society,
The British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy…..
…. all of these intensely reputable sources, with a wealth of research and evidence, will all tell you that sexuality, is part of a natural spectrum. There is no debate here. The UK Royal College of Psychiatrists released a statement to:
“clarify that homsexuality is not a psychiatric disorder. There is no sound scientific evidence that sexual orientation can be changed. Furthermore, so-called treatments of homosexuality create a setting in which prejudice and discrimination flourish.”
Sexuality is a spectrum. It is not simply “gay and straight” with one being “right” and the other being “unnatural”. Sexuality therefore is not a choice. Building on that idea, Alfred Kinsey, the great biologist noted:
“Males do not represent two discrete populations, heterosexual and homosexual. The world is not to be divided into sheep and goats. It is a fundamental of taxonomy that nature rarely deals with discrete categories… The living world is a continuum in each and every one of its aspects.”
– To deny this fundamental fact of nature, i’m afraid, is not just very uneducated, it is unnatural.
A wonderful in-depth study by Binbin Wang et al, found that allele types differed greatly between homosexual men and heterosexual men. A further study by Sven Bocklandt et al, found that mothers of gay sons, have higher rates of extreme skewing of X-Chromosome inactivation, than those without gay sons. All the evidence points to genetics playing a role in sexuality. Therefore, it is very very natural. Christianity on the other hand….. a social construct. Absolutely nothing to do with genetics. Completely man made. Clinging to myths that are completely irrational. Unnatural.
And let us also not forget that whilst being told by the religious the bigoted shit you just spewed, they spend Easter Sunday celebrating the coming back to life of a dead man, who sacrificed himself to himself, to atone for the sins that he himself created. We shouldn’t be lectured on nature, by idiots with an invisible fairy sky man friend.
“The leftist political agenda can be refuted with secular arguments and need not involve religion since the leftist agenda is an affront to common sense, reason and natural law.”
– Again, plenty of right wingers are secular atheists. Atheism is not a product of the left. And there you go again, believing you have some sort of unique understanding of nature. Christianity gave up on reason and natural law the moment in claimed an angel visited a virgin and impregnated her with a God man. You don’t get try to redefine nature, to fit your fairy tale. Sorry.
@AnthonyBourque Didn’t mean to dis your article on twitter. Like your work. Seeing how you put the smack down on silenceofmind, I definitely don’t want to get you riled up! 😉
An engrossing read.
Your perspective on such topics always manages to make me say “Ah!” which is invariably accompanied by a smile.
Oh, and aside from offering Silence of Mind a cigarette and a wall to stand up against while he smoked it I believe you took him down very nicely!
He truly is a plonker of the first order.
Excellent post.
Reblogged this on Take A Stand.
So… you’ve read the book and have some issues with Christians, I get that. But a careful reading of your post leads me to believe that you have a irrational fear of things that don’t or shouldn’t concern you… and that you have severe delusions of grandeur.
Further you have no understanding of “Law” or the effects of it’s absence.
Your key point, as it reads, is that a nonexistent entity is immoral. Does the tooth fairy owe you money too? are going to blog about it?
Alternatively… it would and does appear as if you believe in the LORD and despise Him for being greater than yourself. In a word… vanity.
In the book… it clearly states that the LORD came not to bring peace but the sword. Your objections to the King purging the Kingdom of rabble strongly suggests that you consider yourself among its body.
I applaud your earnest efforts to vent your frustrations and soothe your pain… you wanted an audience with the Almighty and He turned you down, so on and on you rant and rave about it.
A better use of your time would be to purge yourself of this incessant ego pampering and turn your efforts to saving this world that you apparently you love so much. There are more pressing causes to address.. wrongs to be righted.. this literary masturbation doesn’t suit one as gifted as yourself.
There is no need to thank me for helping you… now grow up and try to behave.
What an incredible diatribe of nonsense. I will address a couple of your non-points.
“But a careful reading of your post leads me to believe that you have a irrational fear of things that don’t or shouldn’t concern you”
– I’m not sure why this “shouldn’t concern” me? Are you suggesting certain ideas be off limits to those who don’t adhere to their concepts? Should communism only be spoken about by other communists? Can I not criticise conservatism because I’m not a conservative? This seems a bit odd to me. Are you suggesting all ideas and concepts be off limits to all scrutiny, unless undertaken by those who already adhere? It seems from this that it is in fact you with severe delusions of grandeur. I believe all ideas – including my own – should be open to all kinds of scrutiny. This is how we progress. It is you who seems to be under the rather odd impression that if you’re not a believer of a particular concept – it “shouldn’t concern you”.
“Your key point, as it reads, is that a nonexistent entity is immoral. Does the tooth fairy owe you money too? are going to blog about it?”
– No it isn’t. My key point is that the Jesus figure of the New Testament progresses immoral sentiments that have had pretty serious consequences – the Jehovah’s Witness concept of shunning for example. Whether he existed or not is irrelevant to me. In the same way that whether Socrates existed or not is irrelevant to me, it is the sentiment progressed and institutionalised that is the issue. And sure, if the tooth fairy was rumoured to have left a bronze age book of myths and archaic rules that led to centuries of bigotry and oppression, that infected the political system and forced itself upon the lives of others, continuing to this day… then I might write a blog on it. Are you suggesting that the idea of the tooth fairy has had the same consequences for humanity, as the idea of the Abrahamic God? Feel free to elaborate on that….
“Alternatively… it would and does appear as if you believe in the LORD and despise Him for being greater than yourself. In a word… vanity.”
– There is no “LORD”, so this point is worthless.
“In the book… it clearly states that the LORD came not to bring peace but the sword. Your objections to the King purging the Kingdom of rabble strongly suggests that you consider yourself among its body.”
– One does not simply walk into Mordor!!!
Again, it’s all fiction to me. Mentioning Biblical passages as if they’re fact, is like a child mentioning Mordor as if it’s a fact. Complete fiction. But this isn’t the point. It is the effect that this fiction has upon the easily manipulated (you, for example) that I have an issue with, and the oppression that derives from it. Your fairy tales and pseudo-history aren’t relevant. It’d be like me claiming you hate Aslan because you secretly believe that he’s more powerful than you. Absurd.
“A better use of your time would be to purge yourself of this incessant ego pampering and turn your efforts to saving this world that you apparently you love so much. There are more pressing causes to address.. wrongs to be righted.. this literary masturbation doesn’t suit one as gifted as yourself.”
– What a beautiful sentiment. Shall we cuddle?
The causes I choose to address are entirely dependant on what interests me, and what I want to write about. I enjoy writing. I enjoy writing on religion and secularism. It’s what I do. Crazily, I am driven by what you wish me to be driven by. I know, right? Madness.
“There is no need to thank me for helping you… now grow up and try to behave.”
– It’s almost cute that you consider your child-like tantrum to be “helping”. I’d also like to point out that you didn’t actually address anything in the article. Again, you just had a tantrum. I can only presume this is because someone challenged your fairy tale.
Try to learn to deal with criticism of your faith, like an adult.
The pot calling the kettle black? By your reckoning “Jesus” did this and that… my point is that your reasoning is sorely lacking. It shouldn’t concern you because you can choose freely to live your life while letting others live their own life.
You’re views are no more profound than Hitler’s…. has a Witness ever harmed you? no. No one has been oppressed by the tooth fairy.. nor has “Jesus” or God oppressed, murdered or raped anyone.. mankind did all those things.
When the U.S. government ran experiments with syphilis on blacks… God was not a issue nor with the internment of the Japanese… whose land was taken at times for pennies on the dollar. Who funded WWII by the way? Please don’t say “Jesus”.
However… eugenics, based actually on the wealth of a certain race, on the other hand has been repeatedly the license by which most crimes against humanity have been done. Genocide against the Native Americans… that was done for wealth not God.. as are many of the other crimes you mention. The LORD has been little more than the fall guy in much of this, if not all of it.
So… if I have this right you’re going to purge the masses from their wickedness by demonstrating that God did all these evil things.. Hmphh~ you want to prove your metal? try telling me how your going to resolve poverty with this argument of yours? racial injustice? sexism? the fact the 49ers were cheated in the playoffs? you aren’t doing anything except stroking yourself.
I have addressed the recurring theme of your views.. your love affair with yourself.. the sound of your own small thoughts as you hit those little keys with glee from the brilliance you see in your own words.
“Jesus” was never reported to have slain a single person nor did He give license to any person to do so. He stopped a mob of men from victimizing a “whore” while no man was presented with her to share her fate… did she commit adultery alone? As for being fiction His presence was recorded by the scribes of the Temple.
You’re being as intellectually honest as the men who served her up for “justice”… She was a victim of the treachery of men.. just something to be used because she couldn’t fight back. “Jesus” is likewise just a easy target here.
As for God proper… yes He did sanction the termination of various groups. I myself would do the same if I found a adequate reason.. so should I blame God that hate exists towards those that offend my senses? Interwoven in that book is a solid sense of what justice should be. It is gleaned by understanding how injustice comes about.. from the material demands of men, not God.
So rather than using “Jesus” as a whipping post because He won’t resist your words…. address the true evil.. the needs of the few that mean more than the lives of the many. You can start with the evils of usury and incorporations. Rail against Monsanto or the Crown. Tell everyone how the stock market is causing the suffering that we see happening right now on most of the planet. Impress me… because you’re boring to me to tears right now.
When the crusaders slaughtered men, women and children during the storming of Jersalem in 1099 they commonly shouted “god wills it”. This is the dark power of religion.
Mr. M… the first thing you should know is that there is no such thing as “Christianity” it is a wholly pagan construct… created by merging elements of the Roman Pantheon with “Christian” themes.
Every aspect of Christianity is a false one starting with name “Jesus Christ” itself.
Yeshua, the Anointed One, is the only “name” that saves… there is only the Kingdom of Israel to which a “Gentile” is “grafted” into and only the priest line of Melchizedek.
No formal Priesthood exists now beyond Yeshua Himself… at His birth He became the only High Priest of God.
The Holy Roman Empire from which the Crusaders came has no authority from God… the only sanctioned “holidays” are the very same ones from the Hebrew faith. All Hallows Eve, Christmas and Easter are all blasphemous as is Catholicism, Christianity and Jehovah Witnesses…. there is only the Protestant version which does also error but it has elements of the truth within.. Yeshua corrects all such notions starting with “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the House of Israel”.
So I would agree with you to your point that all religion has a dark power behind it… especially the one that serves Nimrod and Semiramis.
I, of course, disagree with your understanding that the Crusaders have a legitimate calling from God.. the authority they use is from the Roman Empire and its “Sunday” worship of Sun Sol Invictus or Je-Zeus or the Greek/Roman/Egyptian Zeus/Jupiter/Horus (Romans don’t actually have any gods of their own… lol~).
Further… You should also know that belonging to the body politic as a “Christian”, being a U.S. citizen, is committing spiritual adultery. “Democracy” is merely just another false religion.. a stratagem.. a ploy.. but the really amusing part is that it isn’t an authorized element of the United States of America which is a actually a Protestant nation.. the “United States” is merely an “agent”, its primary function is to act on international affairs only. Civil law is foreign to the union of the several states or the United States of America.. which is under English common law, except in Louisiana which is under Napoleonic law. That is why you’re a “Resident” and have no actual rights… just civil rights which are nothing more than privileges, if you’re a U.S. citizen neways. You are a foreigner to the Protestant nation under God and have no true rights there nor do you actually own any property therein.
You should really read more…. lol.
P.S.
Thank you for posting my comments~
=0)
This post shows you know absolutely nothing about the Gospel or it’s meaning, that is why I laughed at all of your misquotes…
Jesus is the way to life, love and salvation…if you do not hate your father or mother (because they are indeed imperfect sinners just like every other human being in the world) how can you have eternal life through the perfection and righteousness of Lord Jesus? Jesus also said if you hold onto your life you will lose it, but if you give your life up for Jesus you will save it. Why? Because Jesus has authority over life and death. If you don’t hate your life, how can you inherit it through Jesus Christ, the very person who gave you life and will give you true life in all it’s abundance in the first place? Life comes from God.
Jesus is perfect and every single human being in the entire planet is not, so obviously (if you understood the Gospel) you should hate your father or mother. On the other hand, the scriptures also say you should honor your father or mother… does this make it a contradiction? Of course not. Both of these commands testify to true love and perfection through Gods only begotten Son.
You people are so blind. You did not create your lives and unless you give up your life to God (the one who gave you life in the first place) then you will lose your life.
You are all so blind, it’s time for you to wake up and inherit eternal life through Jesus Christ, Lord and savior.
Human dignity, and the demand for equal consideration, is your moral canon. YOURS. Just because you condemn discrimination as immoral does not make it so. That is the fairy tale that we should keep out of the public square. Yours is the willful fiction and the immoral sentiment. “Try to learn to deal with criticism of your faith, like an adult.”
Sodomites can call themselves “married” if they wish. The burden then is upon them (and you) to justify forcing normal people into recognizing such “marriages.”