The TL;DR version of this article is that “liberals” (in the Progressive-Left sense, not in the Classical Sense) consider their progressivism to be a defining feature of their social identity.
This phenomenon is exacerbated by two related factors. First, liberals are generally dysfunctional, vice-ridden people who embrace what we call liberalism because its underlying relativism and nihilism help them justify their sins. (They become the arbiters of their own “values.” “Everything is gray, a matter of perspective. I have my own ‘truth.'”) Simultaneously, liberalism allows these virtue-bereft people to virtue-signal by paying homage to the day’s fashionable values. In other words, liberals are generally morally “unaccomplished” people who often have nothing to cling to but the illusion of intellectual, and often moral, superiority.
You know who else derives their identity from group affiliation and obsess over fitting in with their clique? Teenage girls and a whole lot of gay men. We talk about gay people who let being ghey define everything about them; the clothes they wear, the neighborhoods they live in, the movies and TV they watch. “Liberals” are like that, too. The group defines their tastes and attitudes for them, and they accept it in exchange for membership in the group.
The Democrat Media Complex is very much aware not only that their followers treat their progressivism as a personal identity, but also that because they do, it effectively immunizes the party against the failures of its policies. The identification of Democrats with liberalism is so strong they will deny the failure rather than compromise their identity. (Consider the leftists claiming that Venezuela, Cuba, and Zimbabwe are not failures of socialism; they failed because their leaders weren’t pure enough. Consider the leftists who blame Chicago’s gun violence on Republicans in Indiana.) It also is why they have constantly and childishly denigrate the right; both to maintain their fragile sense of superiority and to discourage their weak-minded followers from considering alternatives.
Part of the left’s psychological warfare is to ostracize and vilify women like Laura Ingraham, Sarah Huckabee, and Dana Loesch as well as gay men like Chad Felix Greene as an example to others who might step out of line. Likewise, “liberals” must constantly vilify all those who are not “of the body” in order to validate their membership in the “popular group.”
Hence anything that questions, criticizes, or presents an alternative to leftist policies is seen not as a different perspective, but as a personal attack. Declining to bake a wedding cake is thus an intolerable act of “violence” against an LGBT’s sense of self-esteem and must be punished severely.
We look at conservatism as a set of pragmatic policies that have been proven to work over time. It’s not our identity, it’s a set of things we believe. In that same vein, we don’t look at same-sex attraction as our sole defining social characteristic nor derive our identities from it. Left-wing gays do, and because they have not been reasoned into this belief, it is impossible to reason them out of it.