A company works best if all the employees work as team with esprits de corp. Say you are forced to hire someone who causes a ripple affect of unrest. This then causes the employees to divide into two or more sides, so the once happy team is messed up and productivity declines. Is the needs one alternate sexual person worth more than than a problem for everyone?
As an analogy, should we make a law that requires the Democrats party allow Republicans to enter all their private meetings and have a loud voice, even if that voice is not with the program, and even if that voice will create conflict that can undermine their party? Would it be OK for Rush Limbaugh to lead discussions on CNN and spoil the ambiance of fake news? Or should Donald Trump be discriminated against being the keynote speaker at the DNC convention, even dos presence might create conflict and confusion in the group? Currently, Conservative speaker can be discriminated against in left leaning universities. Should this also stop by law?
The fact remains not everyone is 100% with the liberal agenda of the LGBTQ community. Once this is added to certain parts of culture conflict is created that can be avoided. Is the needs of the one worth the conflict of the many? If so, can a LGBTQ conference prevent speakers who are not with the program; one over the many. This is a two way street with the left thinking it is a one way street.
If the other side decides to do same things, will this be OK. How about if the head of the KKK wanted a black baker to make a cake to celebrate the anniversary of the KKK? He does this to push the buttons and start a law suit against discrimination. Or how about a person who is a fundamentalists who thinks LGBTQ is evil but he wants a gay designer to design a church which creates an old fashion environment where there is no LGBTQ. The right has more empathy for the many and has not taken this situation to the same place of one before the many.
The best way is for people not to define themselves by their favorite sex act. This is shallow. Define by character and it will end better, since character only creates conflict for the criminal minded. If I met a person I know nothing of, but have time to speak to them and learn they are seeking truth and wisdom, then how they get there is not as important as the journey. In the journey is nothing by a parade with no goal beyond the parade, then it may be time to walk a separate path. Shallow will not find what it is looking for.