The message is important.

"We're here, we're queer, get used to it" is basically what the message is.

See also: "anyone who doesn't accept and laud this is a puritan bigot".

The fact is, most who have a problem with gay pride festivals do so from a bigoted standpoint

So say the people who're "allies" of the LGBT movement and the gay pride parade. I can only assume that if a gay man said to you "I'm happy that the Syrians are dying because they're nasty Arabs" you'd not say a word if he fell back on his sexuality to shield himself.

If you have specific points about the whole thing then they need to be analyzed on a per-point basis, but it doesn't absolve you of potential bigotry

I'm largely over caring about "LGBT allies" accusing me of being a "bigot" when it comes to this. I don't want to be an "ally", I wouldn't stick around with people who believe in going to the parade, and I don't want to see it.

That being said, my point about "one step forward, fifty steps back" is incredibly valid when it comes to the alleged goal of "normalization" of homosexuality and other sexual minorities.

It's also not wrong or bad to say that it's not a good thing that they're taking the "fuck everyone else, they're all worthless puritans" line above anything else. Not exactly what you call "normalization".

To do that would be revising sex ed in the other direction: removing access to information rather than increasing it.

I don't particularly care. You don't teach 12 year olds that it's ok to start screwing or sucking each other off. You don't enable people coming from fucked up households "as long as it's safe for them".

This isn't a particularly conservative stance to take, and I'm not one of those "but think of the children" types who tries to pretend to be some kind of moral crusader. I'm just not in favour of the Wynne curriculum and I'm not a social liberal-- which is a capital offense according to this sub.

That's why there are experts involved who will set standards. Standards that will not be present if such education is left solely with parents, who may or may not have any interest in discussing it at all

If the "experts" just endorse the curriculum as it is and try and pretend that people don't know what consent is/push a specific rhetorical line, then that's not helping in any way whatsoever.

Want to discuss sex ed with your kids? Cool, but if you're teaching them it's dirty, shameful to even think about, and babies are delivered by the stork then you're doing more bad than good

That's editorialism again. There's nothing wrong in saying "you'll know when you're older" to say a grade four or something similar.