Rather than dissect the missing merits of many of the claims of the "diversity" lobby, I will here discuss the inclusion of homosexuality as a member of the club. Simply put, they claim that homosexuality increases diversity (and we *all* know, the diversity is such a great thing, you can't get enough of it).
However, this claim is absurd-- even within the muddled world of "diversity". My understanding of diversity is a movement to incorporate people of different national origins, cultural backgrounds, and so forth to better expose others to the unique perspectives each member can offer to the others as a result of their difference. This thinking is itself guilty of some serious reasoning errors, but it does represent the case for diversity.
Moreover, the "diversity" in these backgrounds comes from things one cannot control or influence: where you are born, which family you are born into, etc.
When you include homosexuality in the definition of diversity, you completely destroy the basic concept, because I can at any time choose to become homosexual (though I'm sure they'd prefer it stated as "coming out" or "realizing"). This means that the membership in the group now changes from things a person cannot control or change to now include something one can voluntarily assume. Ignoring the question of "why", is there anyone who would dispute that a person could become homosexual at any time of their choosing by engaging in homosexual behavior? If not, then what is the definition of homosexual?
By including homosexuality in the pantheon of "diversity" you broaden the definition to simply be any person or behavior that is different. That means that now the Harley Rider is just as diverse as the cat lover and the favorite sports hero-- regardless of color or language or birthplace.
The homosexual lobby has therefore hijacked the diversity movement, and by broadening "diversity" in this way, the concept is reduced to something as tautological as "no two people are the same." Profound? Do we need a month for that?