Why after nearly 240 years, is 'all men are created equal' still a debatable topic?

Which groups are advocating for the lack of rights of others?

As is freedom

1LT William Clardy - "When you were working for Fuddruckers, how would you have reacted to a group of kids coming in, lecturing you about the 82nd being full of nothing but pill-popping, baby-killing psychotics who deserve to have PTSD, now get us our d___ burgers and fries?"
I would have smiled and responded, "I was at the 101ST, Which burger would you like and how would you like it cooked?" I am happy to serve people, even idiots, if you have worked in the service industry then you know that most of the people you serve are just that. "No inalienable right to compel a business transaction" sounds like the same strategy employed in pre-1960's America to prevent "the coloreds" from having the same rights as whites.
I voted you down for your continued condescension, I am hoping you did not realize you are using 50 years old arguments that failed to oppress another group of Americans.

My arguments are a lot older than 50 years, and they have served many more useful purposes than the malicious ones which they were also used to defend. For example, what do you think is the traditional legal justification has been for a bartender refusing to sell another drink or for a bouncer in a bar tossing an obnoxious drunk? Or for a diner manager ordering an argumentative could-be customer to stop harassing the waiter or waitress and leave? How about the once-ubiquitous "No shoes, no shirt, no service" sign?

Setting aside the LGBT question, SPC Rory J. Mattheisen, do you honestly believe that the law should empower any prospective bully to come into my place of business, deliberately pick a fight with me or my employees, and demand that we smile and ask if he wants fries with that? If a latter-day Archie Bunker came into your veteran-support company talking all sorts of trash about groups and causes you hold dear, should he then be entitled to stay and demand that he be heard as a member of your community?

1LT William Clardy - I do appreciate your original point above. In answer to your closing question, I would answer that yes, Martin Luther King, Jr., Ted Bundy, and Jeffery Dahmer are all equal. That is, equal before the law and that equality before the law is what landed Bundy in the electric chair and Dahmer in prison for the remainder of his life. King was unjustly denied this on several occasions and it took intervention by the Federal courts to restore it.

I do realize that is not what you meant. I just wanted to make a point with the counter. In all other things beyond equality before the law, I can't imagine that anyone would see any equivalence there. I certainly wouldn't.

Actually, CPT John Sheridan, you really did exemplify what I meant. All three are entitled to equal treatment by the law, but they are decidedly unequal in terms of how welcome they would be at my dinner table (and, I suspect, at yours as well) -- and that bias is our prerogative .