“A manufacturer is not required to make anything they don’t want to make.” Unless they are a baker I suppose.
I don’t recall anyone proposing anything that would force someone to not be gay or to force someone to dress in any way other than how they choose to dress. No one is forcing anyone to do anything beyond recognize reality where it intersects the privacy or personal freedoms of others. Even then they are not forced to do anything. More often they are simply denied their special request.
“A transgender person IS the gender they identify with”. Every single scientific test to determine gender would say otherwise. I do in fact wake every morning and decide not to put on a dress…even though I can. The only difference is that I do not feel normal in a dress while others may. Its still a free personal decision. Decisions always come with benefits and costs.
I do not expect anyone to be anything they don’t want to be. As with at rapist or a child molester, I simply expect that their personal decisions will not impact others who do not desire to be impacted by their actions. I have never advocated making homosexuality or transgenderism illegal. Along the lines of your comparison …A black person is free to either be themselves or paint themselves white. What you are asking is that if they do make a choice to paint themselves white, that everyone must consider them to be white, abandoning reality for the sake of their personal desires. Fine if they choose to do that but no one should be compelled by law to facilitate another’s fantasy.
So if you do not like rapist, try child molester. No one should disagree that there is not something seriously wrong mentally with someone who has sexual feelings for a child. Case in point, their extremely high recidivism rate. They are almost never “cured” of the condition. Still, they are not a child molester until they actually choose to undertake the actions that define a child molester. No one should be forced to forgive their actions because they are “born that way”. Granted this is dramatically different in its impact from the harmless choice to choose ones willing sex partner or to dress / act however one wants. The point is that simply because someone is born with a condition they see as normal to themselves, should not by definition imply that is it normal to everyone else and therefore acceptance should not be mandated by law.
Again, the law provides protections for uncontrollable physical factors that limit access to society and I agree with that. Would you argue that a restaurant should not be allowed by law to refuse service to someone who comes in cursing loudly through their meal? Would you argue that a restaurant should not be allowed to require a tie if that is their dress code? I also agree, as we have discussed before, that a business should not be able to deny a standard service to anyone simply because ‘they don’t like their kind”. Its not imposing on anyone’s personal freedom to expect they perform actions they were planning on performing in the first place, like selling someone a cake from the display case or selling them a can of peas. We disagree in that I absolutely do not think anyone should be able to demand custom services from anyone for any reason whether they provide that service to another or not. If the black baker does not want to make the custom “white power” cake, the law should not force them to use their creativity, time, talents to participate or support something they disagree with for any reason. IF Elton John does not want to perform for David Duke’s event, he should get the choice to decline even though performing at events is his business. We fought a war about it. Its slavery and its wrong.
And I suppose your inability to understand why anyone could oppose special privileges for certain members of the population based on their choices is quite clear also.