And these fuckers lament that more and more young people are agnostic or atheist.

Duh. Fucking duh.

Contrary to uninformed assertions claiming that, agnosticism is not some wishy-washy middle ground between atheism and theism. That's not how belief works. It's binary, like being pregnant: You're either a believer in the existence of a deity (theist), or you're not (atheist). There is no middle ground with that.

Agnostics are the people who don't know about the existence--which is not the same thing as believing it. Most atheists are agnostics, as are many theists--eg, casual CofE members, Unitarians, some Reform Jews. Even Richard Dawkins is agnostic about knowing deities exist, by his own admission. He's rather sure that they don't...but not 100%. And that makes him an agnostic.

That's because (a)gnosticism isn't a belief position, but a knowledge position. That's why it's silly to to act as if an agnostic necessarily has different beliefs than an atheist--because they don't, necessarily. In fact, it's rather safe to say that most 'agnostics' are atheists. After all, accepting that you don't know if deities exist is far more compatible with atheism than theism.

Really.

...are objecting to nothing. This is the same thing as a racist saying "I need an opt out for my kids if a book has black people in it".

This is insane and of course there should be no opt out.

Getting so sick and tired of the "family values" crowd wanting to force their values on everyone else.

and what children were being taught from them.'

Literary analysis.

They're too stupid to understand that you don't create a rigid curriculum for a particular book, because they don't understand that teachers choose the books for more than one reason, such as character development, thematic elements, symbolism, use of language, and etc. Some teachers are more proficient at teaching about use of language while others are aces at symbolism. Sometime a teacher gets a class that is into the theme, and others focus more on character.

So the 'curriculum' is usually not vague, but less lockstep about what to teach or how, to accommodate all of these different factors.

They're texts and materials intended specifically to teach about LGTB+ issues and topics, usually to K-6 or K-8.

Note that there's an asymmetry: Some school topics are avoided because they offend, some are chosen because they offend.

I don't see Buddhists, Hindus, and Wiccans complaining about their rights being "trampled."