What gay-crusading corporations in North Carolina don't get

If you're tired, like me, of being bulldozed by political correctness, especially when it applies to gays and the transgendered, then you just have to cheer for North Carolina Governor, Pat McCrory, for standing up to the corporate extortion against his state for passing commonsense legislation to deal with the issue of who can use what bathrooms.  Unlike Georgia's Governor Nathan Deal, who caved in to the out-of-state pressure and betrayed his constituents, McCrory showed some spine and nicely told all the corporate extortionists where they could stick their threats of jobs and tax losses.

This is a phenomenon taking place all over that part of America where common sense still rules the thinking of those ordinary citizens fed up with the growing lunacy of political correctness.  This is especially true in those situations where the lesbian/gay/whatever coterie seem hell-bent on forcing their behaviors on communities that have long held them unacceptable.  The problem arises when gay activists are unwilling to settle for resigned, indifferent acceptance of their proclivities, instead becoming insistent on forced public acknowledgment and acceptance of such issues as gay marriage and restroom access.  This they do by taking aim at businesses operated by those whose faith precludes their participating in nuptials that are an outright abomination according by their religious tenets or opening public restrooms used by their daughters to whatever confused gender-bending male arbitrarily decides he's female.

As for Christian businesses, walking through the door of the targeted baker, florist, or photographer, the gay activists know full well they are going to be refused.  That is entirely the point, for the refusal of service for a gay social event sets into motion a process of legally lynching those business owners who fall victim to this form of social intimidation.  The usual course is mass negative media exposure closely followed by civil legal action from gay activist organizations to compel the targeted business to surrender their religious beliefs and provide services.  Their only other option is to close their doors.

Here's my conundrum: if it is immoral, even criminal or civilly liable for these mom-and-pop Christian businesses to deny services based on their fundamental beliefs, why is it not also immoral or legally actionable for large corporations to refuse their services to the citizens of those states where those who govern choose to pass legislation to protect the religious freedoms of their citizenry?

If I'm a huge professional football fan living in Atlanta and the NFL people remove my city from contention for a near-future Super Bowl because they feel my state is discriminating against the transgendered, am I not the victim of discriminatory business practices on the part of the NFL?  What about those organizations and corporations that cancel annual conferences and business meetings because of the actions of my state legislature?  Aren't these big corporations refusing to do business with my state simply because they consider our practices immoral, just as those bakeries, florists, and photographers see gays as immoral?  Other than scale, I see little difference.

Okay all you smart readers: Tell me where I'm wrong. 

If you're tired, like me, of being bulldozed by political correctness, especially when it applies to gays and the transgendered, then you just have to cheer for North Carolina Governor, Pat McCrory, for standing up to the corporate extortion against his state for passing commonsense legislation to deal with the issue of who can use what bathrooms.  Unlike Georgia's Governor Nathan Deal, who caved in to the out-of-state pressure and betrayed his constituents, McCrory showed some spine and nicely told all the corporate extortionists where they could stick their threats of jobs and tax losses.

This is a phenomenon taking place all over that part of America where common sense still rules the thinking of those ordinary citizens fed up with the growing lunacy of political correctness.  This is especially true in those situations where the lesbian/gay/whatever coterie seem hell-bent on forcing their behaviors on communities that have long held them unacceptable.  The problem arises when gay activists are unwilling to settle for resigned, indifferent acceptance of their proclivities, instead becoming insistent on forced public acknowledgment and acceptance of such issues as gay marriage and restroom access.  This they do by taking aim at businesses operated by those whose faith precludes their participating in nuptials that are an outright abomination according by their religious tenets or opening public restrooms used by their daughters to whatever confused gender-bending male arbitrarily decides he's female.

As for Christian businesses, walking through the door of the targeted baker, florist, or photographer, the gay activists know full well they are going to be refused.  That is entirely the point, for the refusal of service for a gay social event sets into motion a process of legally lynching those business owners who fall victim to this form of social intimidation.  The usual course is mass negative media exposure closely followed by civil legal action from gay activist organizations to compel the targeted business to surrender their religious beliefs and provide services.  Their only other option is to close their doors.

Here's my conundrum: if it is immoral, even criminal or civilly liable for these mom-and-pop Christian businesses to deny services based on their fundamental beliefs, why is it not also immoral or legally actionable for large corporations to refuse their services to the citizens of those states where those who govern choose to pass legislation to protect the religious freedoms of their citizenry?

If I'm a huge professional football fan living in Atlanta and the NFL people remove my city from contention for a near-future Super Bowl because they feel my state is discriminating against the transgendered, am I not the victim of discriminatory business practices on the part of the NFL?  What about those organizations and corporations that cancel annual conferences and business meetings because of the actions of my state legislature?  Aren't these big corporations refusing to do business with my state simply because they consider our practices immoral, just as those bakeries, florists, and photographers see gays as immoral?  Other than scale, I see little difference.

Okay all you smart readers: Tell me where I'm wrong.