Fallacy Boy,
Your a fine one to suggest I'm keeping anybody waiting when we have been waiting for years for a definition of morality which does not render the concept meaningless.
It’s "you're", and it's some feat to cram so many mistakes into just one sentence.
First, you doctored a quote from Gordon and then tried to attribute it to him. He deserves an apology for that, and your whataboutism (a type of
tu quoque fallacy) on an entirely unrelated matter in response is fooling no-one.
Second, you haven’t been waiting for that at all so why even bother lying about it?
Third, even if you had been waiting for it, your alternative (“it’s written in a book I assert to be authoritative”) would be the only version that rendered the concept meaningless – why should anyone take your personal faith beliefs as an objective truth?
So anyway, about that apology you still owe to Gordon…?