Yeah the story of Lot and his daughters is probs one of the largest examples in the Bible where it's important to understand that much of it is descriptive, rather than prescriptive; this passage is not telling anyone how to live, it's an account of what happened.
While many would point to this as an example of God thinking sodomy is bad (hence naming it after the town in question) it's also pretty feasible that the townsfolk were seen as awful because they wanted to do some rapes. Another thing I've seen suggested is that, culturally, one's duty to one's guests is seen as a relatively high priority. Also, y'know, it's a horrible patriarchal society so the two daughters are seen as worth less than the men.
Interesting that you take pains to describe the daughters as underage, I see nothing in the text to support that.
In any case, the text describes the daughters as each date raping Lot. It is described as their fault because they raped a man they'd gotten drunk to the point of not knowing what is going on, specifically for the purpose of getting themselves pregnant.
Also, the Kingdoms which descended, in part, from Lot's daughters raping him, (Moab and Ammon) were apparently looked down upon by their neighbours, in part because they were the product of incest.
I suppose it's possible that there are people who read this text and take from it 'yeah it's totally good for men to rape their daughters,' but they would have to misread it about as poorly as you have done.
Hmmm don't think what I said was quite as simple as that Bruce, although I'm happy for you to try and find the quote if you'd like. Also I don't think the logic you follow this statement with works at all. I'll see if I can try to explain why.
Let's say a school doesn't have a mathematics curriculum. Let's say 'Jane' supports that school having a mathematics curriculum. Does her supporting that school having a mathematics curriculum mean that suddenly, a mathematics curriculum is something that exists?
Back to CRT though. As has been mentioned elsewhere, CRT is a uni course. The ban seems to be not on CRT, but on concepts from it. This is the link to the legislation: https://www.legis.iowa.gov/legislation/BillBook?ba=HF 802&ga=89
Did a quick Ctrl+f, and neither CRT nor Critical Race Theory appear, so if they wanted to specifically ban that course, they've messed up a little there.
Also, as far as I'm aware there is no teaching that the US was founded 'only' on racism and inequality, but it's important to understand that it was a big part of its founding.
Also the USA absolutely has systemic/structural racism, and multiple times when this topic has come up, multiple sources have been provided demonstrating that this is the case, and each time you've gone 'hmmm well let's agree to disagree' so at this point, it's hard to care about your opinion on the subject.