[@Penny]

What legitimate sufferings do these people have that are not eclipsed by greater concerns or agony, even by their own people? I have yet to hear one grievance from the vocal minority that cannot be addressed with, "Yes, and?" There are numerous places on this blue Earth where there [i]is[/i] legitimate suffering for those of non-traditional sexuality where they [i]are[/i] being thrown off buildings, set on fire or beheaded. Why is there need to "champion" them in first world nations where they have the exact same rights as anyone else? Where they are not under constant, actual threat of danger or death?

I could continue to pose question after question in that regard, but there is never going to be an answer other than "progressive values". Not everything under them is progressive - a great deal of them are [i]regressive[/i] and are going retrograde. A great example being the conservative homosexuals who were turned away from participating in a pride parade. Can these paragons of social justice not see how they have unquestionably failed their own philosophy? Shouldn't it [i]not[/i] matter who they back politically? They are all non-traditional sexualities, correct? All facing the same or similar struggles? The answer to these questions is yes. The "championing" and "ally" cause has done nothing but hurt the real people they are trying to protect - the infamous road to Hell made up of good intentions.

Returning to the focus, rights do they lack that everyone else has? This same question applies for "women's rights", "gay rights", trans rights", and "racial or ethnic discrimination". I have been all over the United States of America and worked with a great number of people, many of who would have openly disdained me if they knew any of my personal philosophies, beliefs, ethos or codes. The difference being, they cared [i]nothing[/i] at all about it because I never made it some factor in my duties. I kept my mouth shut and only focused on what was to be done. I never took offense when someone addressed me by the wrong name or title, if during a speech they accidentally spoke down to me unknowingly because I fall in that audience they were opposed to, if anything it was harder not to laugh or find amusement in that. I was treated the exact same as anyone else there.

Changing topics, forcing your beliefs as the minority on the majority because you believe in social justice is unquestionably inherently wrong. It is the same level of wrong that it would be if I told you that you should be conscripted to perform services to the state because you are not a citizen and that you should have to pay your way to contribute with work. Both sound equally insane and unjust, because by their very nature they are. You as a lawful member of the United States are not under any obligation to "serve society" just as I am not.

You are free to support them and advocate their cause all you want, but when you too begin to preach to me about what I can or cannot do or say, or how I need adjust my life for others, you are out of your lane. The majority of us in the work force do not care about your social sensitivities or social justice programs. We do not want to sit in on lectures about being "more sensitive" or "more accommodating" for other people who may or may not even be present. There's no end to it once it begins. Such lecturing behavior might be applicable in a forum where those people are likely to be present en masse, but for the rest of us it is not relevant enough to be imposed on us. We, the greater, stand to lose more because of it when we could just act as mature men and women - or whatever you wish to identify as - and get on with our lives.

[quote]... but if we just stay the course, we can create a world that is more just, more kind and more progressive than that the one our mothers bequeathed to us.[/quote]

Just for who? Those who take side with the morality police and progressive movement? Everyone else who opposes is just a bigot who has no other motives in life but to hate non-traditional sexuality? The world will [i]never[/i] be just, with or without humanity. Nature itself is unforgiving and outright savage; it will eat you alive, as is its want. To assume you can somehow transcend it is hubris.

The real reason I highlight this quote is because it is entirely subjective and born of opinion. There's no amount of rationalization that can combat this in the very same way that one cannot argue with a true believer of any religion. It is a form of faith that transcends reasonability. No less, it is an entirely moral argument as many aspects of belief are. It helps to emphasize that line in the sand and essentially states, backing in principal, that "If you do not believe what we believe, you are the problem." and "If you are not with us, you are against us."

I will ignore the last smirking story presented because I cannot take it seriously to any extent. It personifies the issue I have with the Far Left in their supposed elitism and moral superiority. The same philosophical problem I take with the Alt Right who believe in "white superiority".