You are aware most those definitions are in alphabetical order with the exception of 'moral' because it's taken from Roget's Thesaurus which really sucks balls? 

Type heathen in if you want a real giggle.  Also type Islam in if you want to see just how bad a reference source it is. 

Oddly enough, equating christianity with morality is unfair towards christianity as well - to be a christian is to accept jesus as the christ, there's no rule stating that one must be moral.

C.S. Lewis said it well:

I'm aware it's not first on purpose. Nonetheless, it is first and it wouldn't be if it wasn't in there. Religion always has a free ride and that needs to stop. Apply this to women. If the results returned "slave" for the synonym, I'm willing to bet feminists would team up and try to hvae it changed. This is why women have rights. They didn't settle for 2nd best.

I don't disagree on any particular point OP, I just don't think that the world is required to be PC to anyone else. Personally, I am offended that people are so easily offended.

 Fighting for equal protection under the law is reasonable if not mandatory. Fighting to make sure everyone talks in a way that I find "acceptable" is absurd. (see: Don Imus)

You mentioned Roget's Thesaurus, but Roget's isn't a particular thesaurus.  Any company or person putting out a thesaurus can put Roget's name on it, regardless of how good a thesaurus it is or isn't.  Just like with Webster's Dictionary.  Many people think putting those names on such books makes them authorities, but they don't understand that the names have nothing to do with it.  There's no legal requirement or guidelines that have to be followed in using names like Webster and Roget.

But that's how the word was used.

Are you seriously, seriously, comparing the placement of a dictionary term with racial discrimination?

If you are that just calls foir a "Wow, that's special!" moment. 

Except caucasian isn't a synonym or an associated word for owner.  Christian is for moral. 

For sure. 

Not just Christians or, indeed, theists actually.

I think the comparison of a racist slur in the dictionary to a slur against a religious group (not that we are a religious group but you get my meaning) is similar. There has always been a history of violence and intolerance toward peoples of beliefs or ethnicities outside the acceptable parameters. 

It is safe to say that publicly announcing ones bigotry toward other ethnicities is unsavory. People have lost their entire careers for a single off-hand remark that was seen as offensive toward an ethnicity. The masses are not quite as sensitive about the minority of atheists as they have had some sense of freedom for longer than American black people. Ethnic discrimination is still fresh in our minds and we're all very sensitive about it. 

I don't see how the comparison is unreasonable. I believe the point was that if it is unacceptable to slur one group why is it widely accepted to slur another? This is a good question and, I think, an in-depth conversation. 

I still think it is small potatoes, but I do see the point that if we are going to gain any ground in modern society we will eventually have to address comments like this. If we never take a stand against these minor offenses we will limit our upward mobility at some point or another.