Florida HB 1557 ("Don't Say Gay") gutted in settlement - now applies only to instruction on LGBTQ+

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Funny how your post includes neither, eh?

It includes both. What do you think “carry water for a party that hates you” means?

That is not a criticism of anyone's beliefs.  If you think my "take" on this issue is wrong, you are welcomed to offer up arguments to change my mind (or at least make me sound stupid.)  All you have done is show how ungracious you are to the idea that queer folks are diverse in their politics and lived experiences, probably because it is simpler for you to treat LGBTQ+ people as political props in service to an agenda.

Alright, I'll rephrase my post as a question: how can you, as a gay man, support the political party that is hostile to LGBT rights? Even if you agree with the Republican Party on every other issue, how can you not view your civil rights as the most important thing? I genuinely do not understand it.

He might believe in rights for L, G, B, and even T individuals but oppose any "LGBTQ+" specific rights or inclusion. I mean I fall into rhat category. I tend to believe LGBTQ+- refers to an ideological movement that is inherently anti Conservative and anti gay male because it is anti any male who dosent fit into a specific, leftwing, urban definition.  It's definitely anti large numbers of women, including Lesbians if they think sex is real. If Trans individuals dare to agree they are called "Truscum".

So no, why should he or I or any conservative  owe any loyalty to a movement or organizations which in their present form hate us? At least one side agrees on some issues.

But the error is assuming we agree on "LGBTQ+" labeled stuff

In my experience, "think sex is real" generally is code for a host of beliefs and general hatred of trans people that go well beyond simply acknowledging that sex chromosomes and hormones exist.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Alright, I'll rephrase my post as a question: how can you, as a gay man, support the political party that is hostile to LGBT rights? Even if you agree with the Republican Party on every other issue, how can you not view your civil rights as the most important thing? I genuinely do not understand it.

The "movement" for "LGBTQ+ rights" has never spoken for the majority of gay people, who mostly just want to exist unbothered and unnoticed and are ok with conservative institutions (i.e., churches, families, etc.) exerting influence in the ways they traditionally have.  The LGBTQ movement has always been a platform for progressive politics and has become even more cross-contaminated with the "woke" ideology of intersectionality and victimhood in recent years.  Your question is assuming that all gay people should identify as gay first, before any other identity or belief system.  But the very many gay people I know who exist outside the amplified, progressive political bubble have a lot more interesting things going on in their lives.  The activist class has mostly left no room for these types, because it doesn't serve their version of zero-sum identity politics.

"Don't say gay" is not about preventing teachers or students from talking about what goes on in their own households or from referencing gay characters in history/literature in an age-appropriate way, but about making sure classroom instruction isn't an opportunity to push a particular belief about gender or sexuality.  That's defensible because no child should be subject to potentially confusing ideas about gender or sex from empowered adults acting beyond the responsibility given by his parents. 

Putting the rest of this to the side for a second, the part in bold is blatantly untrue.

Saying that gay people are okay with conservative institutions 'exerting influence' is not a serious statement, given than those institutions in the exercise of influence have and continue to push back against gay rights.

I understand you are trying your best to justify your own niche position within what may be a small bubble (and trust me, I used to be in a similar bubble), but don't propagate general assertions about the majority of gay people that aren't true.

Most gay people do not want to burn down the church or erase the nuclear family.  Even if growing up as gay in the culture is hard (and really what makes us queer, to boot), it's still preferable to a world where those institutions cease to be societal cornerstones (which is what progressive ideology, and thus "LGBTQ+", is all about.)  As someone who chose to elevate my identity as a Christian and as a conservative above being gay, it is not surprising that I would know/interact mostly with gay people who come from the same mindset.

Of course, I have plenty of interaction with the activist set because that's what the political media is most interested in showcasing (and many younger gay people do identify with and parrot it, if only because their first experience of queerness will likely be informed by media) but those people mostly seem to be sad, angry, or quite unfulfilled.  That is, they suffer from the same disease afflicting educated liberals globally.  But isn't being gay supposed to be fun?   

Across societies and throughout history where the family unit dominated, it has usually been large relative to the "nuclear family", and multi-generational. The work of raising and caring for children, as well as other essential tasks like putting food on the table were distributed across a large number of family members or an entire community(communities too large for everyone to know everyone have only become the norm recently. The nuclear family is a relatively modern invention caused by the development of capitalism and industrialism changing circumstances to make it very difficult to keep a larger family together.

For the record, most institutions seen by many as societal cornerstones either are surprisingly modern or have changed so dramatically over the centuries that they are unrecognizable when compared to their former state. Protestantism itself was a challenge to the European societal cornerstone of the Catholic Church, and successfully removed it in many places. Institutions are never as stable or eternal as people like to think.