I believe the word "snowflake is used too often, but in this case...it's appropriate.
This is what I wrote:
"A growing schism is happening to those active on social media. I've been thinking about what constitutes "evil." A person may engage in an activity that has no immediate consequence of harm to another. (ie homosexuality, gender identity, religion, political view, poor musical taste - Bon Jovi, 2Cellos, Nickelback, or U2) No, I do not equate poor musical taste with the fore-mentioned traits.
Contrary to my neo-calvinist upbringing, I understand the nature of people to neither be purely evil or purely virtuous. It lies on a spectrum, just as homosexuality lies on a spectrum. The more effort you put into suppression, albeit your nature to engage in what society may proclaim as "evil," the stronger the tendency is to do even more evil. This is true in any historical example. The persecuted become stronger, those that are repeatedly oppressed by the media become the majority, those that are pressured into one way of thinking eventually have a revolution.
In the battlefield of ideas, ignoring obvious evidence and caving to confirmation bias amongst your FB friends and your favorite websites will only propagate those will opposing and extreme views.
I'm waiting for actual logical conversations to ensue. Currently, social media is doing the opposite."
Notice I said nothing against gay people, only pointing out the bigotry used on all sides. My videographer decided to cease working with me over this... Okay, I can't disassociate with everyone who doesn't fit his idea of social justice.
Also, here's a piece I just composed.