To claim that Christ married Mary Magdalene and fathered children by her is blasphemous.
I disagree with your position that Christ's alleged marriage to Mary Magdalene is blasphemous. First of all, Jesus is called rabbi quite often in the Gospels, and it is commonly known that in Jewish tradition only married men can become rabbis.
Secondly, at the wedding feast in Cana, the servants go first to Jesus' mother to complain about the wine running out, and then Mary goes to Jesus to tell him about the no wine situation. In Jewish tradition, the groom is the master of the wedding feast, and the mother of the groom is traditionally tasked with managing the feast itself. So it can be inferred, without fear of blasphemy, that Jesus may in fact have been the groom at that infamous wedding where He turned the water into wine.
Thirdly, as Jesus approaches the village where Lazarus lived with his sister, Mary Magdalene, He is told "Lord, if you had been here sooner your brother would not be dead." Why do you suppose Lazarus is referred to as Christs "Brother"? Do you suppose the term was used in the modern sense, or could it have been a literal reference?
Finally, in no way is it blasphemous to postulate that Jesus may have been married and that He may even have fathered children. The Bible is clear that the institution of marriage holds a special blessing in God's eyes, and there is no reason to think that any children of such blessed union would be anything other than average, regular human children. Jesus was the Son of God, that doesn't mean that His offspring enjoyed the same exalted deity. Moreover, how would it detract from Jesus' holiness? If marriage is a sacrament, blessed by God, how is it blashphemy to suppose that His Son might have been married and experienced that blessing while living as a mortal man among us?
Woody, you seem like a good enough sort. But don't rush to label someone or some book blasphemous, if you haven't even bothered to read it.