Setting aside for a moment the fact that much of what has been talked about could have easy been part of scouting prior to the act of mass murder (along with the fact that so far no male has stepped forward to claim that he any had relations with the shooter), let's assume we accept the speculation that the shooter was primarily a self-loathing closeted gay. But, that alone wouldn't provide the justification to find it acceptable to then murder in cold blood 49 other humans that have the same desires as you. So what turned the "stop" into a "go"?
He called "911" and declared he did it in the name of ISIS, swore allegiance to the Caliph in order to preserve his place in heaven, and declared solidarity with the Boston Marathon bombers.
He called a reporter and declared that he did it for ISIS and swore allegiance to the Caliph.
He posted to Facebook that he was killing people in the name of ISIS and to seek revenge for Muslim women and children killed in US airstrikes.
The FBI has declared that he in fact had been radicalized (not sure exactly how the length of time of his radicalization matters... once you're "all-in" you're "all-in" as I see it).
Former co-workers have said that he was never at a loss for words when given the option to make anti-gay as well as racist rants, and disparage any other number of groups of people.
Without a doubt, the guy had more than one evil or dark thought swirling around in his head... but I don't understand why some wish to heavily discount the guy's own proclamations as to what motivated his actions and instead speculate on what really made his actions acceptable in his eyes. More and more, it seems like we should call it "The hate that dare not speak its name." It seems fairly nonsensical to think that if the radicalization wouldn't have happened, there would still have been a murderous rampage. At worst, the only role that any self-loathing may have played might have been his final selection of the ultimate target versus the reported secondary target of Disney Springs.