Yep, this where we agree to disagree,
It's not on someone else to worry about how everyone else feels. It's on the individual to determine whether or not someone is actually trying to insult them or not and to not be over-dramatic when no insults are meant. It's one thing if you have someone close to you who is bothered by something. Normally, the approach would be to stop doing that thing since you care about them. It's another thing to be told to stop doing something because it might offend people you don't know and may never meet nor know if you met them. There is a difference between common courtesy and policing language.
I was not bigoted. You are misusing the term. I was not/am not intolerant of someone holding a different opinion. I was not ignorant. Once again, term misuse. I was not/am not lacking knowledge or awareness or generally uneducated. What I did was simply say something that had no negative connotations towards homosexuals, but rather was using a word that that homosexuals have slowly adopted to mean something new when originally it was a slang term as opposed to the original definition, and transforming that word to mean 'unfair' or 'unfortunate' in my own use.
If anything, the store associate and the offended employee were bigoted because they were intolerant of someone using words or terms in different manners and ways. This is why you cannot just throw out buzzwords like you have: they lose their meaning and can be easily used against you.
Last but not least, offense can never be given: it can only be taken. Even if someone attempts to insult you, it means nothing if you don't care. It's something people have forgotten over time while trying to shape everyone to do things for them rather than making any attempt at bettering themselves. We live in a world where people would rather the whole of society change to fit them rather than change a singular thing about themselves. Whatever happened to 'sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me?'
This isn't an agree to disagree thing though and I'm taking some serious issue with what you're saying. It doesn't matter if insults are meant or not, you're still using objectively homophobic language when you use the phrase, "That's gay." The context in which you explained you used it was specifically as a negative, so you're creating a situation in which "gay" is equivalent to "lame, dumb, etc." You're inadvertently reinforcing negative stereotypes people of the LGBT community when you say that even if you don't mean it. It has real negative connotations regardless of your intentions, and while not the worst thing you could say, nobody wins when you start trying to compete with "how bad a slur or a phrase is."
Bigoted does not have to refer to intention. Calling someone a slur is still just as bigoted an action regardless of if you meant it as an insult or not because once again (The action is bigoted, intention determines individual bigot-edness so to speak), it reinforces negative stereotypes/notions/ideas in just existing as a phrase. And you know what? That's OK to have said it, you just have to learn to accept the criticism and use it as a learning experience to not repeat the behavior. If you say something that's offensive, you said something offensive already. It's then on you as a person to listen to the criticisms the other person has and what they identify as problematic and modify your behavior after the fact. Words have a great deal of power to affect people in a lot of ways, and many people in minority groups have grown up and live with constant slurs, stereotyping, and so on. All of that has a profound effect on an individual. And naturally, people do not enjoy being called things that they've experienced to traditionally either be offensive, or born from such a lack of empathy and total apathetic notion to another person's own lived and cultural experience.
I'm not saying that the context of your actions don't matter. Who is saying it and why they're saying it do matter a great deal. But it's also on you as an individual to recognize why these sayings might be problematic and shouldn't be so casually (and I'd argue at all used). Like, why would you need to say, "That's gay" as opposed to "That's unfortunate" in the first place? You know it's possible you'll offend someone with the first saying and the latter communicates the point as efficiently and as effectively without potentially causing the problem. At that point, you're using the first saying because you don't feel like putting in the effort to change an incredibly minor behavior (Your rhetoric is one of the easiest behaviors you can change) to use the less offensive and equally descriptive option. As a member of the LGBTQ+ community, yeah, "That's gay" comes off poorly and unnecessary. I'm not super offended, but I don't see the reason you can't say the exact same way without bringing "gay" into it.
"It means nothing if you don't care" is a terrible argument that goes against human nature completely too. Human beings are emotional beings with natural reactions and passions. Most people are not just wholly apathetic about things, let alone language that has been intended as an insult in the past and usually have negative connotations for a major component of their identity. "Stick and stone may break your bones... but words can lead to anxiety, depression, isolation, etc." Hiding behind "words don't mean anything" is one of the weakest arguments you can give out in support of a behavior. Yes, they mean something because you thought to say them and expressed the thought in public beyond the confines of your own head. You and you alone are responsible for the words that come out of your mouth, and like I've said, they can have an impact whether you want them to or not. Offense can 100% be given in these situations depending on the choices of your language. If someone call a minority a racial slur, they were obviously intending to offend that person and rile them up.
We're a better society than all of that and we can work together to recognize what language does to the individuals around us and work to do better. There is no reason to use harsh language that can be perceived as offensive when every reasonable alternative that won't cause issues already exists in the English language (and if there aren't, we can work to invent more neutral language). That doesn't mean language has to be sterilized completely or that we can't have jokes about certain behaviors or things, but it's worth determining which ones cause the most issues and can hurt people the most so as to not repeat them in the future. Carlin may have generally been apathetic and anti-PC all around, but he had distinct boundaries that he adhered to and he understood how best to communicate sensitive topics in a comical fashion without offending everyone in the room. You can still be blunt and comical, but it's important to again recognize the effects of language because they are most certainly real.
The sources' credibility deepens. He not only leaked some of the Pokemon in today's presentation to us but he also correctly leaked the Three Thrones characters coming to Fire Emblem Heroes. I keep telling you all, this guy is batting a 1.000 and he's been correctly leaking things to Sabi and the rest of us for about a year now. It's insane how good this guy's intel is and salt about it from naysayers and rival leakers is hilarious.
Are you ever going to refer to Three Houses properly lol.