That Bible you use had better not be a KJV, OP. Why?
The basis of such, the Church of England said a few years ago that boys had every right in the world to wear tiaras & tutus if they so wished. But then, take a look at the authoriser of said KJV:
image
You can see why.
Oh, and all these people your ilk try to persecute, all they have to do is two things: 1) Show them this Wikipedia page: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_relationships_of_James_VI_and_I), and 2) Just say 'Can you say the four letters 'A', 'C', 'L' and 'U'?'
Because with that SCOTUS decision I don't fancy even your 'God's chances much: by that organisation's lawyers merely pointing out Romans 13:1-5, never mind that which now sets a precedent.
Said decision isn't why the C-of-E's clergy peers previously dropped their opposition to S-SM, thus the bill legalising such as passed unanimously by MPs: but what was known about their past employer is.
The Church of England still exists in the 21st Century. With these new avenues of Persecution against fundie Christains in the US should they so much as think they have the right to have ideas above their stations, will the likes of you...?!
...certainly in terms of socio-political power. Just ask the clergy of the still all-powerful RCC in Ireland since 2015.
Oh, wait...!
