There is a middle ground between interfering with the individual rights of members of the LGBTQIA+ community and violating the rights of parents with respect to when and where their children get exposed to the lifestyles and choices of those in the LGBTQIA+ community or even the heterosexual community. Everything is presented as an either/or option.
The individual rights of people involve the right to make decisions for themselves and to enter into mutually consensual relationships without fear of discrimination. It does not extend to promoting that behavior among young children other than their own.
Sexual confusion and sexual orientation are different.
Young people need time to mature before they are ready for people other than their parents to help them navigate the pathway to adulthood and their personal sexuality.
Science is increasingly determining that sexual behavior is learned not genetically programmed. This argues that parents who are responsible for raising children should make the determination when to "teach" their children about sexual behavior. Ideally, parents should call on professional help when they feel unqualified to address those issues, but again that is the parent's choice until the child reaches the age of majority at which point it becomes an individual adult choice.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/massive-study-finds-no-single-genetic-cause-of-same-sex-sexual-behavior/
Other issues like transgender sports and bathroom should not exist.
Title IX was passed for the sole reason that it was recognized that women were physically less capable of competing in sports due to hormonal development differences. In fairness, whether someone is a transwoman or a biological woman, whose body has been impacted by artificially injecting it with male hormones (as the East German women did), they should not be competing in a sport intended to protect a group of people that don't have the biological benefits conferred by these hormones.
The reverse is not true. Any woman that wants to compete on traditional "men's" teams should be given that choice, since she does not possess any biological advantage related to her hormones either natural or artificial.
Bathrooms and locker rooms are a personal privacy. Women's reproductive rights are grounded in individual privacy rights. When women claim, "my body, my right", that has to extend to who they share a locker room or bathroom with. We may someday reach the point where all bathrooms and locker rooms provide private spaces, but until that point is reached, the decision regarding who shares their bathroom or locker room, should be made by the people in that bathroom or locker room, not by society as a whole. Society responsibility is to provide an alternative, not to impose a requirement.
In every case where society violates a human right (privacy is considered a human right), the courts have ruled that society can only override a human right if there is no way to accommodate the human right.
Abortion serves as the best example. The unborn baby has a human right to live. The woman has a right to her body. It is impossible to "accommodate" both, so as a society we have "compromised" and determined that women should have a "window" in which to seek an elective abortion after which the right to life of the baby will take precedence.
The issue today is rather than try to work within the framework of our focus on individual rights, parental rights, and privacy rights, we are attempting to use our laws to force a specific set of ideological values and beliefs on others.
