Does anyone else notice this false dichotomy?

Does anyone else notice that whenver someone tries to have a middle ground on the issue of ity gay advocates refuse to acknowledge that middle ground? Whenever someone says that they "hate the sin, but love the sinner," that they love gays, but object to the act of gay , or that they're uncomfortable with gay PDA, people say that they're covering up their bigotry, instead of recognizing those attitudes as middle ground. Allow me to summarize what these people are saying. "Either you are with us or against us. Either you're with us or you're with the KKK and the people who killed Matthew Shepherd. Either you support and legitimize ual behavior or you support injustice and bigotry." Well, there's a fallacy in that twisted kind of reasoning. Yeah, it's called FALSE DICHOTOMY! Imagine if unwed mothers started to demand acceptance, endorsement, and legitimization for their lifestyle, demanded that fornication and having children out of wedlock be considered moral, normal, and acceptable, and started labeling those who don't agree with unwed motherhood as "bigots." Imagine if unwed mothers said, "Either you're with us or against us. Either you're with us or you're with the Islamic fundamentalists who would stone unwed mothers to death if they had their way. Either you support the legitimization of fornication or you support the persecution of fornicators in the Middle East." That would be absurd, wouldn't it? Society needs to stop thinking in terms of illogical, fallacious, intellectually lazy, false dichotomies and use the power of discernment to yze the complexities of this issue and determine which attitudes are bigoted, which are not, and which are somewhere in between. Please, stop with the "Either you are with us or against us" garbage because it wasn't valid when George Bush said it and it's certainly not valid when PC liberals say it.