I think its a great idea to attempt to use the existing Title VII to protect LGBT's, under sex based discrimination, such as the EEOC has already voted upon, last year July.
But some in our own community, want 'full naming rights' and separate category's used. It does get confusing when you don't specifically see 'sexual orientation and gender identity' words used next to race and gender under Title VII but then see these protections in other federal documents or departments.
I think the US Labor Dept, Office of Contract Compliance got it right with executive order 11246 final rule (41CFR 60-1) that requires the specific words' sexual orientation and gender identity' to appear in federal contracting language.http://www.dol.gov/ofccp/regs/compliance/posters/pdf/ofccp_eeo_supplement_final_jrf_qa_508c.pdf
EO 11246 was existing since it was created in 1965, last amended by conservative president GW Bush which added religious employment protections in 2002, then existing 11246 was 'hidden' for at least a decade before it surfaced again in 2013. Title VII is just as old as 11246, basically.
Once the DOJ formally recognizes LGBT employment protections, the EEOC should formally add the words 'sexual orientation and gender identity' to Title VII as separate category's, in line with the US Labor Department, OFCCP