I keep accidentally assuming it’s a problem of insufficient access to information:
As if one day, people are finally going to be confronted with the fact that Leviticus alone also forbids you to trim your hair, demands offerings of slaughtered animals, declares bloody steaks to be sinful, requires deference to both the poor and the foreigner, and – seriously – just spends a lot of time talking about sacrificial offerings.
And as if upon realizing this, these people will say, “Oh, hey, I guess a lot of this stuff was really a time-and-place kind of thing, dealing largely with now-antiquated local customs and sanitation, and in fact there’s a lot in this book – New Testament and Old – that seems to indicate that, at the very least, it’s not my place to persecute others based on race, creed, religion, gender or sexuality. I suppose I can’t just pick one rule out of this long list of rules to vehemently force upon others, while personally breaking most of the others.”
But then I remember that like things this have nothing to do with actual faith, or justice, or anything more than petty, vicious people who have found a scapegoat for their own feelings of situational uncertainty, dissatisfaction, and angst. And that, even worse than that, bad people use issues like this to drive a wedge between many voters and their own best social and economic interests.
Maybe it’s fitting to quote one of the Right’s own bizarre cult heroes, Ayn Rand:
Fight that, my dear. Tell me a way to fight it. Particularly when you have no weapons except your genius, which is not a weapon but a great liability. … You’ll say it doesn’t make sense? Of course it doesn’t. That’s why it works. Reason can be fought with reason. How are you going to fight the unreasonable?