The difference is how one uses the reasoning to apply to others. Take freedom from discrimination. That isn't the argument used. Freedom from discrimination

The difference is how one uses the reasoning to apply to others. Take freedom from discrimination. That isn't the argument used. Freedom from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is the argument used. While it works the same for those who were facing discrimination because of their sexual orientation, it doesn't protect those facing discrimination because of their gender identity, the conforming to gender norms, their sexual attraction, their age, their appearance, ect. Now, the LGBT movement has been increasing what they want to include to be protected, but it has taken time and effort and even today you'll find some who support freedom from discrimination based on sexual orientation but do not support freedom from discrimination for gender identity. And in 10 years we will look back and other groups who were included which are currently not included (except for perhaps the most counter of counter cultures). It also allows for some people to evolve a view of freedom from discrimination based on minority status. I think the better example of this is with freedom from discrimination based on gender minority, which has led to some people encouraging certain forms of discrimination if it is against the groups they think are okay to discriminate against. For a very recent example of the legal impact of this, look at places that are currently passing laws to restrict the rights of adults based on them being 18-20 years old. Freedom from discrimination would cover discriminating against adults because of their age. But instead the law says that it is only freedom from discrimination based on being above a certain age and many people actively support discriminating and restrict the rights of adults because of their age being too young.