Replies

So you don’t support the first sentence then, only the following sentences? This you don’t agree with? “”Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government’s treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws.”

There's a lot there, "gender identity" is a crock so on that alone I'd say 'nope, don't agree.'
If it's 'gender' I'd have to ask: do you wish to bar marriage, child custody, adoption, etc, based on that? Why? (I'd agree; I mean is it right men are denied child custody because they are male?)
Now the big one: sexual orientation:
Let me answer it this way: if there's a homosexual, who becomes Christian fully [i.e. real conversion and not lip service], but is still beset with homosexual desires should that alone preclude him from any of the above?* I would say no, because the Law deals with what is done not what could happen. -- In short "being homosexual" (that is susceptible to that temptation) should not factor into guilt or innocence of law-breaking because temptation is not action.

ON THE OTHER HAND, [active] homosexuals are statistically more likely to be child molesters -- I rather prefer the death penalty for rapists & murderers, it ensures there are no repeat offenses.

* - This says "current marriage", given most states still do not accept homosexual marriage let's assume bisexual marriage; should he be barred from that? I think not.