I don’t have the new Facebook “pride” reaction button. Instead of “liking” or “loving” a friend’s post or status, select Facebook users can now have “pride” in it, complete with a little rainbow. If you haven’t seen this new button, congratulate yourself — you’re not alone in the rainbowless world.

I wasn’t given the option either. Facebook must be selectively giving this new reaction to liberals, with some suggesting that the social media giant is being “culturally sensitive to bigots.”

According to Quartz, “The feature is only available as a default option for users living in 'major markets with Pride celebrations.' In other places, users need to 'like' the Facebook LBGQT page to gain access to the feature. And in some places, the feature isn’t available at all.”

If this is true, I’m glad they accommodated me and allowed me to not participate. Yay free market solution!

But imagine now if the government forced me to use this new button to react in “pride” to others’ LGBTQIAAblahblahblah pride post just because the person posting was offended that I didn’t. We would all agree that would be ridiculous. It’s coerced participation. We should all be able to choose what statuses we like and others we don’t (for whatever reason) what to participate in.

Yet, that’s pretty much exactly what the liberal agenda is trying to do with the cake baker and florist. Coerced participation in someone else’s “pride.”

Not the same thing, you say? Oh, but it is. We have a fundamental, unalienable right to freedom of association and free exercise of religion to decline to participate that our Constitution and Bill of Rights is designed and mandated to preserve and protect.

The biggest problem with the Left’s overall agenda, not just the LGBT agenda, is that they want the government to compel you and me to participate in their desired society.

If you’re a liberal reading this (congratulations and please come back), would you want the government to force you to like and share this piece if you disagreed or found it offensive? If you’re intellectually honest, you’ll say no. So we agree — the government has absolutely zero constitutional authority and no common sense business forcibly compelling you or me to participate in each other’s lifestyle choices.

Hopefully the Supreme Court will uphold these unalienable rights for Jack Phillips of Masterpiece Cake shop and Barronelle Stuzman, the florist in Washington State, and the very basic, foundational structure of our Constitution and American government.

We instinctively know that the government should not coerce participation. Even the liberals who walked out on Mike Pence and booed Betsy DeVos knew that. They were also hypocritical, having freely chosen to associate with those universities, but they did have the option to not participate in their commencement ceremonies. Can you imagine the outrage if the universities (both private by the way) had compelled attendance as a requirement for graduation, which they actually could?

It’s so much worse for the government to compel participation.

Don’t buy into the liberal argument. Stand firm for actual constitutional guarantees. The government’s sole obligation, responsibility, and reason for existence is to preserve and protect the unalienable rights of its citizens.

I for one am very happy to be left out of all the “pride.” Go ahead and don’t even give me the option, Facebook. That’s fine. When I share this article on social media, I’m going to “love” it because I can exercise my fundamental right to freedom of speech, and that is actually something to be proud of.