[Dianna]

Drinking alcohol, smoking tobacco, using "recreational" drugs, and overeating also lead to severe health risks. By the same arguments as in the article, these should also be prohibited.

The difference is that NO ONE in a position of power would dare teach children that there is absolutely nothing wrong with any of those behaviors.

[Exigence]

The difference is that NO ONE in a position of power would dare teach children that there is absolutely nothing wrong with any of those behaviors.

Right on. Nor would anyone suggest someone indulge a genetic predisposition to alcoholism or other distructive behaviors even if one should exist.

[EdReform]

"The difference is that NO ONE in a position of power would dare teach children that there is absolutely nothing wrong with any of those behaviors."

Indeed. And they wouldn't receive taxpayer funding if they did dare to teach it.

But homosexual groups get to use taxpayer money to teach that their perversion is normal, as documented here and here.

[Laissez-faire capitalist]

What angers me is that there are those who are in positions of power who KNOW the dangers I listed in this article, yet are too d@mn chicken to stand up to the militant homophiles.