Was there this much debate about the legitimacy of changing an aspect of a fictional character's 'physical' being when Nick Fury went from being a grizzled, caucasian, WWII vet, to being Samuel L M%$^&r F#$%^n' Jackson?
For those arguing about the wrongness of changing the sexuality of an established character from hetero to homo because 'the gays' would be upset if anyone changed an established gay character to a straightey - Movie Bob (to use the most easily accessible reference) did a Big Picture episode about this very thing a while back. White, middle-class heterosexuality is the vast, vast majority of representation in Western media/fiction, while anything straying from that social ideal is generally vastly under-represented, or grossly stereotyped and misrepresented. Writing (or rewriting) a fictional character (who doesn't actually exist) in a way which not only promotes, but also better represents the diversity of the human experience, is not the same as changing a character to better fit the mainstream by removing that aspect which makes them a minority or diverse.
Yeah DC could legitimately be accused of milking a publicity stunt and then finishing with an anti-climax - and I seriously wanted it to be the Flash, Barry Allen or Wally West - but for any gay kid out there who loves their comics, this is the kind of thing which provides the kinds of role models and a sense of place and acceptance in the world which has never really existed before, and that has me all kinds of excited for just what that might mean for future generations.