I didn't invent it.
The concept of "turning the other cheek" is about 2,000 years old. The concept of "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" is over twice that old. They represent two different schools of thought that have been debated enough.
PG introduced "turning the other cheek" as a means to resolve "the pain of having ... controversy constantly reintroduced as the top idea ..." and this is biased. There is another way to resolve the issue, it just comes from another culture.
(Or in other words, it is true that "someone who does you an injury hurts you twice: first by the injury itself, and second by taking up your time afterward thinking about it.". You can "at least avoid the second half" - or - you can try and hurt them twice, no matter the cost. Culture choice.)