What is not relevant to you is Trelevant to many others. The democrats are the homosexual activist party and Franks is one if not the primary homosexual activist in congress.
You and others including myself may respect homosexuals that wish to remain chaste or at a minimum keep it in the bedroom and do not push the homosexual agenda or proclaim their homosexuality as something to be respected; however, the homosexualization of America and the homosexual activists that suggest homosexual activity is 'normal' etcetera are rightly discriminated against and rightly opposed.
Does that mean if an adulterer argues that, e.g., the broadcast airwaves should be privatized, then you have to bring up his adultary to try to refute him?
Whatever you think about Frank's homosexualty, I don't see the connection to the present debate.