When I saw a list of children's books that were banned, I noticed several titles that I've seen my grandson reading. To me, that means that if they aren't found in a library, they will be purchased by parents individually, who want their kids to have the well rounded education, and perhaps donated afterward to book sales. This seems to me to have a little bit of an opposite effect than planned by the book banners, in that if a book is banned or controversial, it often makes it more appealing to some sector of the population.

Isn't this "tyranny of minorities" that you deplore a phenomenon of the cultural left? Isn't it mainly "woke" activists who demand that a book be banned because they found the N-word in it, or a kind of "cultural appropriation"?
Sure, recently this kind of woke activism caused a backlash from the other side (Florida !), but it's a tit-for-tat action, it wasn't the political right that invented this censorship 2.0, a.k.a. 'cancel culture'.

It is unlikely that a parent should have any say over what material is presented in a public school to their own child. They certainly shouldn't have any discretion over what is presented within the school to other children. The obvious exceptions being where school administrators or teachers have selected religious materials and practices to be followed. Also obvious is how these overlap: religious citizens may neither smuggle religious material in, nor censor materials to all students that their religion decides to be offensive.

Instead, religiously motivated requests for censorship should be viewed the same as bruising of the child. Child Protective Services should be alerted and the relationship investigated. Parents found to be abusive towards their children, whether physically or MENTALLY should have their children removed to foster care.