> Nowhere. I haven't claimed that.
yes you did with this comment...
> while in the same breath calling for the oppression of those you disagree with.
You accused me of calling for the oppression of those I disagree with, so please do show me where I did that.
> But that's exactly what the federal government does by making decisions that affect everyone.
No, when the thing they're doing is providing equal rights, that isn't forcing anyone's world view on anyone else. Those who don't want gays to have rights aren't being imposed upon, they're still free to think whatever they like and they're free not to be gay; they have not suffered at all even though the law is in conflict with their world view.
> Every decision they make is made from a specific worldview.
While that is true, that doesn't imply said decision is imposing that view on anyone. Stopping group A from oppressing group
B is not imposing a worldview on group A.
> It's impossible for them to make a decision that complies with every unique worldview out there.
Of course, but it's not impossible for those decisions not to impose that view on anyone else. Protecting minority rights imposes nothing on anyone. If someone doesn't believe in gay marriage, the federal protection of it might be against their worldview, but nothing has been imposed upon them; they are not losing anything by someone else being treated equally.
You're failing to draw the necessary line between having different points of view, and having those points of view imposed upon you. Just because the feds do something at the federal level that may be the result of a world view in no way implies that thing they're doing imposes that view on anyone else.
Now certainly, many things they do "do" impose a worldview, but I'm only defending the protection of minority rights to have equal protection under the law, and that doesn't impose anything upon anyone.