You assume that you know God’s law and how it should be applied and enforced. You put yourself in the position that you would be the arbiter and gatekeeper as to what is and what is not God’s law. Therein lies your problem.
You can talk about God’s law all you want, but in the end it comes down to you and your supposed moral superiority as the one to decide and apply that law. I simply rejected your assumption that you are morally superior and declared myself superior to you, and by that authority will interpret and apply God’s law as I see it.
How is that different from you and your self-derived authority?
God reveals his law to us, both through the Revealed and Natural Law. This is the position that formed the bedrock of the Western Legal Tradition for most of our History. Contrary to your assertions, there is nothing close to man picking and choosing in the way that you suggest.
Hence, as I stated before, we aren’t even discussing this with the same ontological inventories.