People who treat identities associated with political ideology, religion, or a particular ethical perspective the same as they treat identities associated with things like race, ethnicity, age, sexual orientation, or sex.
For all intents and purposes the former involves a selection process and the latter doesn't (obviously you can select into a sex or race if you want to, but I think we can safely ignore that simply as a matter of numbers and also because ultimately that's probably just a realignment with an underlying orientation that you can't select into or out of).
Now, the point that there is a selection process is very different from the claim that you have full control over these outcomes. I'm using "selection" here as economists use it, and of course you don't always have full control.
But in any case, a judgment of an identity you can select into or out of seems enormously different from a judgment of an identity that you can't select into or out of. The principle difference being, of course, an evaluation of the selection itself.
You can't very well rail against the fact that half of humans have penises and half have vaginas. You can't very well blame someone with a penis or a vagina for that (or for anything that having those things entails). But if a selected identity is in anyway blameworthy (and certainly not all are - but certainly some are), of course you can attach blame to someone that selected into it!
Why would anyone even think to treat the two as the same?
The exception, of course, is if you're a hard core determinist... but in that case why do you care so much about any of this anyway? We who either are not determinists or who have no idea what to think of questions like that but choose to live under the convenient fiction of rejecting determinism should not be conflating identities that you can and can't select into. In other words: if you're entertaining the very idea of a selection process, you ought to acknowledge these things are different. If you're not willing to entertain the idea then it seems like a moot point.