Don't put words in my mouth. You KNOW and have seen how divisive the fights over retcons — even EASY ones like Iceman (thanks to decades of jokes within the fanbase) — can be (speaking of Laura, a lot of readers didn't even realize the Adamantium Agenda #4 reveal was a retcon; they just assumed it was the case from the start. Yet that STILL got a little heated on her appreciation thread, no doubt fueled by Kyle's passive-aggressive tweet). Look at Kitty; Claremont built subtext in from the start and his intent was always well-known even though subsequent writers refused to touch it. But if you genuinely think her being outed woudn't cause a shit storm since it retcons 30 years of established character development, then I've got a bridge to sell you.
And your attitude is EXACTLY part of the problem; People aren't going to be allowed to oppose a retcon JUST because it's a retcon, or because it diametrically opposes the character's previous development and characterization. Because of the subject matter they're immediately going to get attacked and labeled just like you did now (and FYI I'm NOT saying that there's not people who would oppose for less savory reasons, but too many people try to make it a black and white argument). So thanks for proving my point for me.