I listen to a lot of AM talk radio-- and as such, I've been hearing the same few things for the last year or so: "Critical Race Theory (CRT)," "gender, pronouns, sexuality, and transgenderism," and more recently, "drag performers and shows." I tend to take a libertarian approach to most societal issues, especially those regarding peoples' lives. In the wake of states such as Texas and Florida passing bills restricting access to "gender affirming" healthcare for transgender adults, I feel as if the government has definitely overstepped their bounds.
For one, why should it be the government's choice how adults choose to live their lives, after-all, in the USA, you are legally an adult the minute you turn 18 (unless you want to buy tobacco, alcohol, or marijuana [in the states where its legal]; but you can join the military, get sent to war in the Middle East, and come back with PTSD); therefore, you should be able to make decisions regarding physical appearance (including which gender you present as), name, and in the interest of freedom, which gender appears on your personal documents. However, some people may make the valid argument that the brain is not fully developed until the age of 25, which, going off that argument, means that the age of majority should be 25, including the age to join the military, vote, AND drink/smoke.
As an aside, it does seem as if certain politicians within my own party are so displeased with the younger voter turnout that they want to raise the voting age. However, at the same time, it appears as if those same people are silent on the matter of raising the minimum age for military service.
Back on topic, I feel as if the mere concept of restricting how citizens live in this manner violates the concept of freedom-of-expression, after-all, courts have acknowledged that gender identity and sexual orientation are protected speech/expression, therefore, why should it be the government's place to interfere excessively? Some people may make the case of "the Bible" and "Christianity," however, in the USA and the vast majority of the free world, religion is separated from the state, therefore, religion is an invalid excuse to discriminate or otherwise dehumanize any individual.
I feel as if there's a flurry of hysteria among certain (mostly older) politicians about societal change, to the extent of passing overbroad laws (such as Tennessee SB-0003, [PDF]) which, at its core is agreeable: restricting "cabaret" performances in public spaces, yet fails to clearly define preventative measures to prevent minors from viewing such performances; I personally believe that any piece of legislation passed, at any level should contain clearly define ideal preventative measures (i.e. "behind closed doors," "ID verification," or "not within state lines") and penalties (or existing statues in which violators may be prosecuted under) for violators of the applicable law.