But why should that taint the word? Plenty of people said the Harry Potter books were full of satanic imagry and shit, but we didn't rename the books to distance them from the bad press.

The only reason a word should be dropped is if it is inherently derived from something that actually derogatory or highlights a terrible past, such as the F slur being derived from the term used for a bundle of kindling sticks which were used to burn us because we weren't good enough for the stake like the witches were. That is a word I can understand dropping, because its root is tied to blood.

The Q slur, as far as I can tell, is derived from an old definition that means "weird" which, while not being as offensive as refering to us by our execution method, is still understandably inherently derogatory.

Homosexual, however, is a purely logical and emotionless word that merely describes a sexual orientation involving exclusively same sex attraction, and should be very difficult to taint, as anyone who uses it derogatorily would need to adopt it rather than inventing it. While there has been a prime example in the past of someone adopting a positive, not just neutral, symbol and turning it into something that is more associated with the approprator than its origin, this event had plently of help from the fact that most people of the western world, even at the time, had little to no exposure to the original definition, and so had the negative version as their first and only introduction to the symbol, as well as the attrocious things done with this symbol being so attrocious and famous. So far, no use of homosexual has ever come close to that