Gotcha. Well again, I appreciate the time to spell out your thoughts to minimize assumptions the rest of us have to make to understand other’s arguments. With that being said I think there is some very important and subjective words you included that should be addressed.
There is a very important and significant distinction to be made in regards to accepting and endorsing in terms of equality. The LDS church (organization, not necessarily EVERY member) is very accepting. However, accepting is different than endorsing and the church will not endorse everyone’s actions, that would betray any allegiance to morality or their theology (this is true principle for any religion for that matter).
So, in regards to your claim that the church is discriminating against others, it is subjective. The church discriminates against matters of morality as defined in Christian doctrine (found in the Bible and LDS publications). However, the church doesn’t discriminate on sexual orientation, race, nationality, etc. if you’re gay that doesn’t change a thing as a church member. If you are gay and sexually active then that’s significant. If you’re straight it didn’t change a thing. If you’re straight and you’re sexually active outside of marriage that’s a problem (Obviously the church doesn’t recognize gay marriages in the spiritual realm, but the spiritual realm has addressed that for millennium and it would run contrary to foundational doctrine that would bankrupt the theology if it were betrayed).
Even though something is common in society doesn’t mean the church (or any religion) should change to accept that simply because of popularity. Fornication was declared wrong thousands of years ago and it’s very common today, but it’s still wrong if you believe the Christian theology (OT, NT, BM). Acting on gay sexual things was declared wrong thousands of years ago and even if it’s common today if you believe the Christian theology, then it’s still wrong. The LDS church doesn’t persecute people living out of wedlock, or those that are acting on homosexual desires, but it will affirm they are wrong. Everyone is invited to church, but the church does discriminate on morality topics for further spiritual commitments or whatever. But frankly, religions exist (IMO) primarily as moral dispensaries to give direction on how adherents can find purpose in life and understand the world around them. If religions were to take adherence to their own moral principles and throw it all out together, what would theology would they be left with? They’d become a comfort group without the claim to greater purpose and understanding that people strive for.