If, say, Ron DeSantis was in charge of the system and was using it to discourage inclusionary language that would bum me out. But that hypothetical is still several orders of magnitude less serious than the current reality of banning the discussion of disfavored topics in classrooms under penalty of law.
One is "regulating" speech in schools only indirectly and with a gentle nudge that can be disabled entirely by school districts or simply ignored by teachers and pupils.
The other is directly regulating speech in schools by force of law, statewide, and with no ability for local districts or teachers to override or ignore it. Imagine if instead of banning discussions of gender identity, the bill banned the use of those words that Google puts a purple line under. I think we would both agree that's bad? Whether you agree with the outcome or not, the Florida bill is a much more serious threat to speech and education.
I think every state has a curriculum and guidelines but we do not, in fact, regularly ban topics from discussion or provide a private right to action for offended parents.
You shouldn't have the free speech to talk about sex with kids in kindergarten or third grade.
Public schools should be for everyone. You can talk about that with your own kids, but not in public schools. Kids shouldn't be forced to hear your speech about sex.
I wonder if you'd still feel that way if someone you didn't agree with had control over the default squiggly underlines.