You act as though the two concepts are distinct when they are inextricably intertwined. Pride exists because people sought acceptance, inclusion, and the ability to belong without being treated as lesser. Those aren't separate ideas. They're the same conversation.
What I find particularly odd is the implication that someone else's inclusion somehow diminishes your rights. I am old enough to remember when Republicans championed individual liberty and the principle that people should be left alone to live their lives. Yet here you are advancing the very premise conservatives once criticized: the notion that recognizing another person's rights, identity, or place in society somehow comes at your expense.
It does not.
Their sense of belonging is directly tied to their ability to participate in society as equals. Whether the language surrounding Pride has broadened over time has no impact on your rights whatsoever. The only way to portray it as a threat is to convince people that acceptance is a zero-sum game, where recognition for one group necessarily comes at the expense of another.
That premise is logically false. (So much for "the arguments cannot be broken.")
Someone else's seat at the table does not take away yours. Someone else's dignity does not diminish yours. Someone else's freedom does not restrict yours.
More fundamentally, why do you care how they define Pride today versus how it was defined decades ago? If your guiding principle is individual liberty, the answer should be simple. Communities are free to define themselves, their traditions, and their values as they see fit. You are under no obligation to participate.
If, however, the objective is to police how others express themselves, organize, or identify, then your commentary becomes the strongest argument for why broader concepts of inclusion and solidarity continue to resonate. When influential commentators devote their platforms to portraying another group's acceptance as a cultural threat, they demonstrate exactly why many people feel the need to build larger coalitions around belonging and mutual support.
In that sense, your criticism answers its own question. The reason Pride evolved beyond a single word is because equality is about more than legal rights. It is also about whether people are welcomed as full participants in society.
And if your audience needs to be convinced that another person's inclusion somehow comes at their expense, then this conversation does more to justify broadening the movement than any Pride organizer ever could.