From Wikipedia, on the Civil Rights Act of 1964:One of the most damaging arguments by the bill's opponents was that once passed, the bill would require forced busing to achieve certain racial quotas in schools. Proponents of the bill, such as Emanuel Celler and Jacob Javits, said that the bill would not authorize such measures. Leading sponsor Hubert Humphrey wrote two amendments specifically designed to outlaw busing. Humphrey said "if the bill were to compel it, it would be a violation [of the Constitution], because it would be handling the matter on the basis of race and we would be transporting children because of race." While Javits said any government official who sought to use the bill for busing purposes "would be making a fool of himself," two years later the Department of Health, Education and Welfare said that Southern school districts would be required to meet mathematical ratios of students by busing.It has to be said that there were legitimate grievances behind the Civil Rights Act of 1964: segregation in the South at that time was no joke if you were black and traveled and actually expected to, you know, eat and stuff. So in 1964 I was conflicted; those people needed and deserved accommodation, on the one hand - and OTOH the proposed act was not constitutional. I still don’t know the right answer, but IMHO those who feel dependent on that act should shape up and confront those who are parodying their legitimate concerns. Back in 1964 the argument for the Act was that blacks (negroes, as the polite term then was) could not help having a distinctive appearance on the basis of which they were discriminated against. I put it to you that any distinctive appearance of an LGBT person is strictly voluntary; the electorate, nay the Congress itself, would have never supported the act if its modern incarnation had been put before it. Eventually the moral authority of the 1964 law, and its judicial extensions, must stretch too thin.
SOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness POSITIVELY by uniting our affections, the latter NEGATIVELY by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher.Socialists are cynical about society -and naive about government.Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one . . . - Thomas Paine, Common Sense (1776)
Distinctions is what LGBTWTF is demanding, and that they be worshipped.