Let me recommend two articles to this topic.
The first from a traditional blog Rorate Coeli:
rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/…/de-mattei-post-…

The second from John Smeaton/Voice of the Family:
voiceofthefamily.com/voice-of-the-fa…

Being respectful and considerate is different than acceptance. We should not encourage, endorse, or otherwise make homosexual choice feel normal. The alcoholic, the sex addict, the adulterer, the thief, the mafioso (gasp) should all be treated in the same way.

.
He makes so many gross errors such as claiming that dealing with mythological "global climate change" is some sort of moral imperative like the necessity of expanding socialism (which has obviously been a tremendous burden for his native Argentina) and that borders are meaningless and we and Europe should allow our/themselves to be overrun by Islamofascist hordes bent on nothing less than killing us and wiping out Christian civilization.
.
While paying occasional lip service, he de-emphasizes the international plague of baby-killing, generally ignores the martyrdom of Catholics and other Christians by the Islamos, cuddles up to the sexually perverted and persistent fornicators and adulterers and those engaged in what the Church has always called intrinsically disordered behavior (homosexual perversion in plain English). Under this pope, actual morality is no big deal but progressive nonsense is tres chic.
.
Your Holiness, do you agree that scripturally, homosexuality is a sin? If so, why do you not follow the example of Our Lord when he addressed the adulteress. After he saved her life, He told her to “go and sin no more.” Why are homosexuals so privileged and why is their sin so special that you do not admonish them that they too are mandated to “go and sin no more?” Do Christians have a duty to warn others of the consequence of sin? Why do you not do so with respect to homosexuality?
.
Meanwhile, biblical Christians laugh at our Church and the socialist musings of our Pope. Is it any wonder why Catholics are leaving the Church in droves and will continue to do so?

Homosexuality was another hot-button issue, and Francis took his cues from the majority view in the synods. (During the first synod, an interim report written by a committee of bishops used language that was strikingly welcoming to gay people, but it received so much criticism from other bishops at the synod that it was gone by the final report.)
.
Echoing the report issued by the second synod in 2015, Francis’ exhortation says that “every person regardless of sexual orientation” should be treated with respect and consideration, while “every sign of unjust discrimination is to be carefully avoided, particularly any form of aggression and violence.”
.
But in the next section, he states categorically that the church cannot countenance same-sex marriages or unions, citing the second synod’s final report, which said “there are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar remotely analogous to God’s plan for marriage and family.”
.
The document “does not inspire joy in L.G.B.T. Catholics and their supporters,” said Francis DeBernardo, the executive director of New Ways Ministry, an advocacy group for gay Catholics.
NY Times

Statement “Yes to sex education” is in line with Relazione Finale 2015, par. 58 (www.vatican.va/…/rc_synod_doc_20…) with the following statement: "Moreover, the family, while remaining the primary place for formation (cf. Gravissimum Educationis, 3), cannot be the only place for formation in matters of sexuality." In light of the global promotion of sex education to children these statements are well-suited to UN documents which enforce on children mandatory sex education. This confirmation and encouragement for educational institutions "to take up this challenge" is erroneous because it subjects children to sexual depravity in education according to International Guidelines on Sexuality.