That you do not want your kids to be exposed to something that you do not approve of? Or you want to control the age when your kids are exposed to something that is hard to explain and reconcile with your beliefs? There are more conclusions here than simply "all gays must vanish"...

I think you're giving this an overly charitable view. When you protest the existence of gay people in a lesson at school it's a pretty reasonable thing to think you would prefer they don't exist. You're telling me if those protesters had a button that turned every gay person straight and they didn't have to ever explain to their kids about how this works, or "reconcile it with their beliefs" they wouldn't press that button? Seems like a pretty reasonable inductive conclusion to make about someone protesting their five year old learning gay people exist. 

If you disagree I'd be interested to hear an example in which you would protest your child learning about something but you take no issue with that thing existing. For myself, I guess I would protest if my kid was taught religious beliefs at preschool without my knowledge, but I would also press the hypothetical button that would turn all the religious people into atheists so that doesn't really fit.

So Islamaphobic.

It's true that not all Muslims are against LGBT. It is against their doctrine, though, so it depends on how conservative they are in their religious beliefs.

And I believe the argument is they don't want their children taught that it isn't a sin, not that they don't necessarily don't want them to exist (in this case at least).

Don't get me wrong, either. I'll take the side of a homosexual looking before a conservative Muslim. But I also won't overlook people telling them how to raise their kids and attempting to override the parents. That said, if the parents don't want their kids to be supportive of LGBT, then maybe they should move somewhere that supports their disapproval.

1) I feel that's quite a stretch. Would the same logic apply for people who do not want religion taught in schools for example? How about those that do not like the NRA? Does that mean you want all NRA members/religious to disappear? Just because they do not like something, doesn't mean they wished that ill of the community or that they wish for the ppl to not exist. I don't like politicians, but it doesn't mean I wish the politicians themselves would disappear. It is far more believable that they wished that homosexuality itself (the concept/condition, not the people/group) to not exist (w/c is far less severe than wishing that a persecuted minority would just disappear). Again, you overstated and exaggerated the negativity of their position, painting broad strokes to make them look as bad as possible. W/c is a bit Islamophobic IMO.

2) The LGBT community aren't a "thing". They are a ppl/group. Homosexuality itself, however, is a concept/condition/lifestyle (or whatever word best describes it). Wishing that a lifestyle/concept/condition didn't exist and wishing that a group/ppl would just disappear are two different things. There are many who wish that religion itself didn't exist and that would be ok. I feel the same standard should be applied to lifestyles/conditions/concepts (or whatever word best describes). You even said so yourself, if you can press the button to turn the religious to athiests, you'd do it (imposing what you want on others). All these parents want is to have a choice on when their kids find out about it. 

What does LGBT stand for in your name?

It's clearly a joke about how they keep trying to add redundant letters.

Ahh, I see. That's kinda funny.

Seems like some people thought this thread will be some kind of honey pot trap for lefties who would finally show their true intentions, the islamisation of the western world.

Well get out of your filter bubble I guess.

This site does not have that many extreme people i believe, most on the wide political spectrum on here are fairly openminded even when opposing eachother but exceptions always occur of course.