The commenter explicitly says, "Reject the Model Policies" and states they are "harmful to children." They also argue the policies "undermine the rights of parents and families," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the guidance," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. The additional phrase "hopeful of virginia becoming more supportive and inclusive" reinforces approval of the policy's purpose.


The commenter explicitly says the policy is "VERY concerning and honestly frightening," calls it "crossing the line," and concludes it is "absolutely absurd" and "support of child harm." Although they say they support the transgender community, the overall message rejects the regulation as dangerous for children.


The commenter explicitly states "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and repeats it with emphasis, indicating clear approval of the proposed regulation. There is no contrary language or ambiguity.


Oppose - Dangerous Bill for youth and parents

The commenter explicitly labels the proposal as an "Oppose" and repeatedly argues it is "dangerous," an "unnecessary overstep," and something that would "open the door to great harm." They ask that schools not adopt policies they believe would threaten parental rights, student safety, and free expression.


Strongly OPPOSE. Read the entire policy outlines everyone!

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly OPPOSE" and calls the policies "an outrageous, dangerous overstep on parental rights". They also urge others to "stand against this" and "pull their own children out," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says allowing students to choose facilities based on gender identity is "a bad idea" and concludes, "we need to go back to the drawing board on this issue." They argue the guidance would make others uncomfortable or endangered and object that it would let students and administrators "circumvent the parents."


The commenter explicitly says, "We do not approve" and titles the comment "Most Strongly Oppose VDE's Proposed Transgender Policy." The body repeatedly argues the policy should not be adopted, describing it as harmful to parents, privacy, safety, and religious freedom.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose indoctrination of our children" and argues the policy would "take away the rights of parents". They also call the policy "wrong" and describe teaching transgender acceptance as "child abuse," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Wholeheartedly Opposed!" and argues the VDOE has "gone far beyond" what the General Assembly prescribed. They also state the policies "infringe the First Amendment rights of parents" and should not be adopted because they would encourage "irreversible 'gender transitions'" and compromise privacy.


The commenter questions the premise of the policy by asking, "How can gender be reassigned?" and states, "We are who we are" and that people are "born with a physical gender." This indicates disagreement with the regulation’s transgender-inclusive approach and a preference for fixed sex/gender categories.


The commenter explicitly says, "The proposed Transgender Policy will not do that" and concludes that it is "riddled with problems" and would "create more problems" if passed as is. They argue against the policy’s handling of restroom/locker room access, parental involvement, and reporting standards, indicating opposition to adoption in its current form.


The commenter dismisses the policy as "all nonsense" and questions why the state is spending time and tax money on it, indicating clear opposition to adopting the regulation. The phrase "wasting our time" further shows they do not support the proposed guidance.


The commenter explicitly rejects the proposal, calling it "impractical and fraught with danger" and saying it "promotes an activist political agenda." They argue it harms "a safe educational environment for all children," which indicates opposition to adoption.


Strong Support for VDOE Model Policies on the Treatment of Transgender Students

The commenter explicitly says the policies "should be adopted as currently written" and repeatedly endorses protections for trans and non-binary students. They frame the guidance as necessary to ensure students are "protected within our school systems."


I do not agree with fluid gender policies.

The commenter explicitly says, "I do not agree with fluid gender policies" and argues the policy is "just too broad." They also say, "Leave well enough alone!!," indicating opposition to adopting or expanding the proposed guidance.


Do NOT adopt a policy that essentially mandates promotion of gender confusion to school kids.

The commenter explicitly says, "Do NOT adopt a policy," which is a direct rejection of the regulation. The phrase "mandates promotion of gender confusion to school kids" shows opposition to the policy’s substance rather than a request for changes.


1st Amendment Rights of Christian Educators in Proposed Gender Policies

The commenter explicitly objects to the proposed policies, saying they "pose a risk to the jobs of thousands of VA teachers of faith" and that "By moving forward with these proposed changes" the department would violate rights and expose schools to lawsuits. They argue against requiring pronoun use and say educators should not be forced to "affirm them in a lie," indicating rejection of the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly opposed to this politicized policy" and repeatedly argues that "this policy goes too far" and is "forced upon" families. Although they support anti-bullying measures, their overall position is that the regulation should not be adopted because it threatens privacy, parental rights, and religious freedom.


Proposed statewide transgender school policy

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the statewide transgender school policy" and calls it "irresponsible and harmful." They also argue it will "promot[e] and caus[e] gender confusion in children," which indicates clear rejection of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" and describes the policy as "one of the most harmful ideas". They object to teachers and students being required to use transgender students' affirmed identities, calling it "forcing" and saying it "defies logic."


Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in Virginia’s Public Schools

The commenter explicitly says, "I am 100% AGAINST this proposed Treatment of Transgender Students!" and calls it "PURE EVIL," indicating clear opposition to adoption. They also urge lawmakers to be "ashamed" for considering it, reinforcing that they want the policy rejected.


The commenter explicitly says, "I wholeheartedly support this policy" and asks, "Please adopt this policy state wide." They also give a reason for support, stating their grandchild "should not be discriminated" against at school for their gender.


Menstrual supplies in the Boys bathroom?

The commenter explicitly says the policies would "undercut parents’ involvement" and "endanger the bodily privacy and safety of all students," and concludes that the "anything goes approach" should not be adopted. They object to gender-inclusive bathroom access and self-identification provisions, arguing there is "no attempt whatsoever" to protect their daughter.


Parental Rights & Proposed Transgender School Legislation

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this legislation" and "I hope and pray that it does not pass." The rest of the comment argues that the policy is an "extreme overreach" and that schools should notify parents about a child's name/gender identity and locker room access, indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says they are "Opposed to new transgender policies" and argues that "kids need guidance from their parents" rather than the school system. They also object to students changing in front of the "biological opposite" and to teachers facing retaliation over pronouns or beliefs, indicating rejection of the proposed policies.


Strongly Opposed for the sake of all children and staff

The commenter explicitly says the policies are "Strongly Opposed" and calls them "totally unworkable." They argue the rules would "force all students, faculty and administrators to comply" with a view they reject, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says they are "Opposed to transgender regulations proposed by VA Department of Education" and warns that approval would "undercut parents’ involvement" and "endanger the bodily privacy and safety of all students." This is a clear rejection of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly states "Strongly oppose," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying it "will only further promote gender confusion" and calling it "a disaster for girl's and women's sports." They also urge families to avoid public schools, which reinforces opposition to adoption of the regulation.


Transgender Policies - Please focus on academics and not political ideology

The commenter explicitly says, "we don’t need to force ideas" and asks to "Allow school to remain an academic institution and nothing more," which rejects the transgender student policies as beyond the school's role. They also object to bathroom, locker room, and sports provisions, saying they do not want children subjected to "a child of the opposite sex" in those settings.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this guidance" and explains that they want "all students to be in a school environment that is safe and welcoming for everyone." The comment also references personal experience with bullying and transgender students as reasons for approval.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this bill," and the title also states "Oppose House Bill 145 and Senate Bill 161." They argue against teaching children that the "transgender lifestyle is 'normal' or acceptable," indicating rejection of the proposed policies.


VDOE Draft Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students

The commenter says, "I am adamantly opposed to the above proposed policy" and objects specifically to allowing students to use "the bath and dressing rooms of the opposite biological gender." They also argue that the policy should not be adopted because it would let a minority's wishes override the "right of the vast majority for decency."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose transgender bill" and argues the model regulations "infringe the First Amendment rights of parents to raise and care for their children." This is a clear rejection of the proposed policy on parental-rights grounds.


The commenter says the policy "goes too far and is unnecessary" and argues that "This is not for teachers to be teaching," which clearly rejects the regulation. The title "Promoting gender confusion in schools" also signals opposition to the proposed transgender student policies.


VA Department of Education Transgender Model Policy

The commenter says the Department of Education is "usurping the rights of parents" by "mandating a K-12 transgender model policy," which clearly rejects the proposed regulation. The emphasis on parents as the "authority of their family" and the source of values and beliefs indicates opposition to state guidance on transgender students in schools.


Made in His Image - Oppose Confusion Policy

The commenter explicitly frames the policy as an "Oppose Confusion Policy" and says the church must act against "the state to plant seeds of confusion." They argue the regulation promotes an "alternate identity lifestyle" and a "liberal sexual agenda," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


Strongly oppose gender ideology in schools. A child's sex is determined at conception by God.

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose gender ideology in schools" and argues the policy should not be adopted. Phrases like "Children are only confused by this ideology" and "Let's protect them, not abuse them!" clearly reject the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do NOT support this," which directly rejects the proposed policies. They also argue that protecting one group comes "at the expense of another," indicating opposition to the regulation as written.


the transgender policy is not considering all individuals' needs

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it "terrible" and "not in the best interests of anyone." They argue it "push[es] an agenda" and raise objections about bathroom/locker room access, religious beliefs, parental rights, and concerns about encouraging transgender identity.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose" and states they "cannot back a policy change". They reject pronoun use and argue that "gender and sexuality have absolutely no place in a school or classroom," indicating opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support the transgender guidelines" and argues they are "unjust, inappropriate, reckless, and irresponsible." They also object to "bathroom sharing and individualized pronouns" and call the policy a "deeply troubling misunderstanding of biological facts," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


Stop corrupting children. Local companies can’t hire these poorly educated, brainwashed kids.

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with hostile language such as "Stop corrupting these kids with your filth," indicating opposition to the transgender student guidance. The remark also criticizes the schools for focusing on this issue instead of other subjects, implying the regulation should not be adopted.


MUST ALLOW STUDENTS TO BE WHO THEY ARE!!!!

The commenter explicitly urges approval of the policy, saying "We MUST grant our students FAIR TREATMENT" and criticizing opposition as "transphobia." They also ask for additional education on transgender health and history, indicating support for the regulation and possibly stronger protections.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not agree with this policy" and asks to "stop" it, indicating clear opposition to adoption. They also argue it creates "further distractions and avenues for deviant behavior and lawsuits," and say parents should not be "disqualified" from helping, which reinforces rejection of the policy as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I stand against these gender confusion proposals," which clearly rejects the regulation. The title "Adamantly against" reinforces a strong opposing position.


This harms young women harassed by predators.

The commenter explicitly says, "I am against this sickening attack on women" and frames the policy as a "WAR ON WOMEN," indicating clear opposition to the proposed transgender student policies. The comment argues the regulation would enable harm by "men" entering women's spaces, which is a rejection of the policy's adoption.


Please oppose these transgender policies that is harmful for kids

The commenter explicitly says, "Please oppose these transgender policies" and asks to "stop promoting dangerous transgender policies and instruction." They argue the policy is "harmful for kids" and should be replaced by existing anti-bullying rules rather than adopted.


The commenter argues the policy will "open the door to biological males to compete directly against girls" and says "This puts an end to Title IX," which clearly rejects the regulation. The comment frames the policy as harmful to girls' athletics and scholarships, indicating opposition rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose transgender education programs in schools" and objects to "any laws or policies" that shift authority from parents to school employees. They also call the proposal "unconscionable" and argue that a "programmatic approach to transgenderism is confusing," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


Protect ALL not just some - stand against Transgender Indoctrination in VA Schools

The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose any laws or policies" and concludes with "Stop Transgender Indoctrination in VA Schools," indicating clear rejection of the proposed regulation. They argue it would "create additional problems" and threaten safety, parental authority, and religious freedom rather than protect students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose transgender policies and teachings," which directly rejects the proposed regulation. The follow-up, "Teach the basics: reading, writing, math, civics and American history," indicates they want these policies replaced or deprioritized rather than adopted.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy, saying "All children deserve support, ESPECIALLY trans children" and "This is a step towards real progress." The final sentence, "Don't sit on the wrong side of history," further signals approval and encouragement for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Do not support transgender indoctrination in public schools" and calls the policy "a terrible mistake." They argue that teaching these ideas in tax-funded schools is "dangerous and ridiculous," which indicates opposition to adoption. The final sentence about supporting all students does not change the overall rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and repeats "SUPPORT" in the title, indicating clear approval of the proposed regulation. There is no opposing language or substantive critique.


Do not impose transgender beliefs upon our children-no to DOE proposal

The commenter explicitly says "Do not impose transgender beliefs upon our children" and asks the DOE not to adopt the proposal. They argue it conflicts with "families' foundational, religious beliefs" and call the policy "harmful," especially regarding bathroom and changing room access.


Transgender Policy--Another Point for the Case for School Choice

The commenter explicitly calls the policies "mandatory 'transgender' policies" and says the Commonwealth should not impose them, describing them as "abhorrent" and something "many of its citizens vigorously oppose." The request for "school choice, through vouchers" is framed as an alternative if the policies persist, indicating opposition to adoption as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please support!" and describes the policy as "a long overdue and great step forward." They clearly favor adoption because they believe it will create "a healthy and supportive environment" for trans and non binary children.


Proposed Gender Identification Policies Hurt Children

The commenter explicitly says, "I urge that you do not move forward with this" and argues that the policies "should not be adopted" because they "promote gender spectrum views." They also describe the policies as "designed to harm society, families and children," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the DOE Transgender policy," which is a clear rejection of the regulation. They also state it would "violate my religious freedoms and responsibilities as a parent," indicating substantive opposition rather than a request for changes.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and explains that the changes help kids "feel safe and secure." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues the VDOE has "gone far beyond the path the General Assembly prescribed." They also reject the policy's treatment of gender identity and object to shared facilities, stating "No child should be forced to share showers, locker rooms, hotel rooms" with someone of the opposite biological sex.


The commenter clearly rejects the proposed transgender student policies, calling them "an affront to common sense" and "Insane ideas period." They argue for separate facilities and ask, "Why mess with the other 99%," which indicates opposition to adoption of the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this change" and praises policies that "facilitate anti discrimination" and create a "supportive community." They also argue the change helps students be "their true self" and eliminates "gender discrimination," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and repeatedly argues against the policies, calling them "VERY IRRESPONSIBLE and VERY DAMAGING." They also object to school involvement over parents and criticize the policy as unsafe and confusing for children.


The commenter explicitly says "opposed" and asks officials to "listen to the voices of so many parents who are opposed to these new policies," indicating rejection of the regulation. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The commenter explicitly says, "I'm proud to support this guidance" and expresses approval of its purpose. They also state that "Everyone deserves to be safe and welcomed at school," which aligns with adoption of the policy.


The commenter says they are "strongly opposed to the imposition" of the regulations and argues the proposal would "spread the confusion" and "deny parents their rights." They also object that schools could help students with gender identity "without a parent even knowing," indicating clear rejection of the policy.


The commenter says, "I strongly oppose any regulations" and asks, "Please rethink this regulation," which clearly rejects adoption of the policy. The rationale centers on opposition to perceived "abrogating of parental rights" and concern about "confusion" regarding transgender issues.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please oppose this legislation," and repeatedly argues the policy is "not healthy or safe" and would cause harm. They object to pronoun requirements, bathroom access, and the promotion of transgender acceptance, indicating clear opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" the proposed initiatives and argues they would be "very harmful" and "create more anxiety for everyone affected by it." Although they support anti-bullying measures, modest dress codes, and counseling, those are framed as alternatives rather than support for the regulation itself.


Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in Virginia’s Public Schools

The commenter explicitly says, "I am writing to strongly oppose the Virginia DOE Proposed Transgender School Policies." They repeatedly argue the policies are harmful, unnecessary, and unconstitutional, calling them "indoctrination" and saying they "make no allowances for religious exemptions."


The comment explicitly says, "Strongly opposed to transgender policy!" which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying "We will not allow you to devour our children's souls" and "We will not allow you to corrupt our children with evil." The repeated biblical warnings are used to condemn the regulation rather than support it.


Transgender Former NNPS Graduate Supports this!!

The commenter explicitly says they "strongly welcomed" transgender peers and argues against objections to the policy, stating "Transgender Women are indeed women" and that the proposed concerns "hold no water." They also offer assistance "in helping transition to a more inclusive environment in our schools," which clearly supports adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly labels the policy "Strongly Opposed!" and argues it would harm children by allowing transgender students to use bathrooms and locker rooms aligned with their gender identity. They also object that it can be done "without ever notifying parents" and urge officials to "Stop ignoring the science/DNA of biological differences," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not approve of the proposed guidelines" and asks, "Please do not impose this on our children," which clearly rejects adoption of the regulation. The language about "radical theories" and "indoctrinate our school children" indicates opposition to the policy itself rather than a request for changes.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and objects to "forcing confusing content on small children," which indicates rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The closing appeal to "protect All children" does not change the overall opposition to the regulation as written.


Please listen to the majority of parents and my own voice as a student.

The commenter explicitly argues against the policies, saying they are "collateral damage" and asking officials to "consider the parents' opinions" and "hear the parents' voices." They also criticize the underlying approach as an "ideology" with "questionable backing by science," indicating opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidance," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. The additional statement, "Trans kids deserve respect," reinforces approval of the policy's purpose.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed to this decision!" and argues it could "put them in a place of harm." This is a clear rejection of the proposed policies rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the VDOE's proposed guidelines for transgenders," which clearly rejects the regulation. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The commenter explicitly says, "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and "I do not approve of these proposed VDOE guidelines," which clearly rejects adoption of the regulation. No supporting or conditional language is provided.


The commenter explicitly says the policy "goes way beyond prevention" and objects to "mandatory promotion of politicized, sexualized ideology," indicating opposition to adoption. They argue it is "irresponsible" and potentially "damaging," which shows they want the proposed policy rejected or substantially weakened.


oppose oppose oppose. We should not be teaching our kids this in school.

The commenter explicitly says "oppose oppose oppose" and repeats "Oppose" multiple times. They state that "this should not be taught in school" and "This should be illegal," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am opposed to this bill," which directly states rejection of the regulation. The phrase "uses our children as political plunder for this cultural war" shows they want it rejected on ideological grounds.


Love our students and teachers; please, please reconsider

The commenter explicitly says, "please reconsider" and concludes, "This is not a prudent way to help our students," indicating opposition to adopting the policy. They also argue it would force teachers to act against "legitimate personal or religious beliefs" and call the approach "inherently discriminatory and unconstitutional."


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this policy," and argues that the regulation is "inappropriate" because it "removes the parents from gender discussions and decisions." This is a clear rejection of the proposed guidance rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this policy," which directly states opposition to adoption. The follow-up, "Parents can teach their children concerning this subject," reinforces a preference against the policy by asserting parental control instead of school guidance.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" the policy and describes it as "indoctrination of the transgender agenda." They also argue it is "extremely dangerous" and undermines parental guidance, indicating rejection of the regulation.


Transgender is an assumptive term attempting to denote normalcy. It is not based on medical science

The commenter rejects the policy’s premise, calling transgender identity "not based on medical science" and arguing that schools should not accommodate students "claiming a subjective, dysphoric identity." The final sentence explicitly says it is "overtly abusive" to require shared sports teams and locker rooms, indicating opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose any policy that pushes or teaches our children about transgender issues," which is a direct rejection of the proposed guidance. The statement that these topics should be discussed "at home not in school" indicates opposition to adoption in the school setting.


The commenter explicitly says, "We absolutely need protections for them," and frames the policy as necessary so trans kids "feel safe and heard." The title, "Support Trans Kids!," also clearly indicates approval of the regulation's purpose.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "oppose" and says the policy is "another distraction from the real job of teaching academics." They also argue "This should be a private matter," indicating they do not want the regulation adopted in schools.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose this measure," which directly states opposition to adoption. They also argue it lacks "scientific evidence" and "will harm many children and youth," reinforcing a rejection of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose the proposed transgender policy" and asks, "Please reject this radical policy." They argue the policy is "mandatory promotion of politicized, sexualized ideology" and harmful to children, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this policy" and argues it should not be imposed on students and staff. They describe it as an "assault on the freedoms of conscience, expression, privacy, and religion," and say it would undermine parents' authority and force families to withdraw from public schools.


Model policies for the treatment of transgender students

The commenter explicitly rejects the proposal as "very concerning" and a "tremendous overreach," and says it "smells more like indoctrination, not education." The closing demand to "Teach, do not indoctrinate!" indicates they want the policy rejected rather than adopted.


The commenter explicitly says they "oppose all kinds of discrimination" and agrees with parts of the policy, including that schools should not enforce sex-specific dress codes. Although they raise concerns and request changes on parental notification, bathrooms, and pronouns, the overall thrust is to refine the regulations rather than reject them.


The commenter explicitly says they are "beyond confident that affirming treatment is life-saving and ethically mandated" and frames it as part of "non-discrimination policies." They also offer to "contribute to policy efforts," indicating clear support for adopting the regulation.


Transgender: The role of parents in public education should not be removed or threatened

The comment says, "The role of parents in public education should not be removed or threatened," which signals concern that the proposed transgender student policies would diminish parental authority. It does not explicitly mention rejecting the regulation, but the wording clearly objects to the policy direction and implies opposition to adoption as written.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues against "forcing this on every child." They reject the policy’s approach to transgender students, saying "Feelings aren't fact" and that adults should not tell children "that the truth is whatever they want it to be."


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS MADNESS" and rejects the guidelines as "NOT based on science" and "not sustainable." This is a clear call to reject the regulation rather than adopt it with changes.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed" and repeatedly rejects the policy, calling the science "crap" and accusing the authors of having an agenda. The statement "God created male and female" and "You people are out destroy this world" indicate opposition to the transgender student policies themselves.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy’s goals, saying that providing a "safe, inclusive, affirming environment" is "an obligation" and that "we should all be doing our part" to support LGBTQIA students. The comment argues the regulation is necessary to reduce discrimination and exclusion, indicating clear support for adoption.


Support Trans and Non Bionary Children in Schools

The commenter explicitly says, "Please vote to support the rights of trans and non binary students in schools" and repeats, "I urge you to vote to support the rights of transgender and non binary students." They frame the policy as important for a "supportive and understanding" school environment and for students' "mental well being."


The comment appears to reject the policy by warning that "upskirting and sex will become a problem" and asserting "It’s gonna happen," which frames the regulation as dangerous or harmful. Although brief and vague, the language clearly signals opposition rather than support or neutral inquiry.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY support" and calls the proposal "a vital stepping stone in achieving equal rights for all children." They also argue it will "protect[] all family members" and create "a safe environment," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


The comment explicitly says "Support." and the title also indicates approval, despite the misspelling "Suppprt." There is no qualifying language or objection to suggest otherwise.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support 100 %" and endorses the policy’s underlying goals of respect and equality for transgender people. The rest of the comment reinforces approval by arguing for "equal rights and support" and criticizing opposition to the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose any legislation granting transgender rights while in school" and asks, "please do not grant transgender rights while in school." They object to school bathroom access and related accommodations, indicating rejection of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and "I fully support this legislation." They also endorse the policy goal of protecting "the well-being of trans and non-binary youth" and preventing harassment and discrimination.


The commenter explicitly says "strongly oppose!!" and argues that "This will only harm our children." They also state that it "will not help them in any way," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed" and condemns the policy as "foolish," framing it as a harmful social change. The statement that this is "the end result when you have taken God out of are society" indicates rejection of the regulation on religious/moral grounds.


Protecting trans youth is a necessity, not an option. Strongly support.

The commenter explicitly says, "I support these policies" and "Strongly support," indicating clear approval of the regulation. They also frame the policies as necessary to "keep children safe" and to protect "transgender youth."


The commenter explicitly condemns the policy, saying, "I couldn’t imagine a more destructive or reckless policy." This is a clear rejection of the proposed transgender student guidance rather than support or a neutral question.


The commenter states "Completely Opposed," which is a direct rejection of the proposed transgender guidance document. No qualifying language suggests support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully endorse the promulgation of these regulations as written," which is a clear endorsement of adoption. They also argue the regulations "must not bow" to opposing views, reinforcing support for the policy.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and states the policy "does not belong in the schools of Virginia." They also characterize it as "indoctrination," indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support or neutrality.


Strongly support for the wellbeing of trans students.

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this" and ties that support to "the improved health and wellbeing of trans students." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies.


I hope the LGBT community is happy, trampling women’s rights. Extremely disturbing. Virginia is lost

The commenter clearly rejects the regulation, calling it "terrible" and saying it is "trampling women’s rights." The phrase "Extremely disturbing" and "Virginia is lost" indicate opposition to adopting the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "This is excellent, necessary, guidance for our schools," which clearly endorses the regulation. The closing "Thank you!" reinforces approval rather than criticism or neutrality.


All students - regardless of gender identity-deserve love and support

The commenter explicitly endorses an inclusive approach, stating that "all students deserve a thoughtful unbigoted learning environment" and praising educators who "champion inclusion and belonging for all." This aligns with support for the proposed transgender student policies.


fully support, trans rights are human rights

The commenter explicitly says "fully support" and repeats "trans rights are human rights," which clearly endorses the regulation. There is no language indicating opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "In Strong Opposition" and "I stand in strong opposition to this." They also call the policy "an unacceptable policy" and argue it would make schools "unsafe," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and repeatedly asks to "Reject these policies completely" or remove them from consideration. The body argues the guidelines violate parental rights, free speech, religious freedom, and student privacy, and says they "create far more problems than they solve."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed!" and calls the policies "Ridiculous," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. There is no request for modification or neutral information, only opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this measure" and endorses "the protection of all trans students." This is a clear affirmative position on adopting the regulation, with no opposing language.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly support" and "I fully support this policy," which clearly indicates approval of the regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism suggesting opposition or neutrality.


Opposed STRONGLY! Children are confused enough about life, God doesn’t make mistakes

The commenter explicitly says "Opposed STRONGLY!" and argues against allowing children to "question who God made them," which clearly rejects the proposed transgender student policies. The phrase "Plain evil" further indicates opposition rather than support or neutrality.


I strongly support the Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the Model Policies" and repeatedly argues the Guidance is "the right thing to do" and "a move in the right direction." The comment also defends the policy as constitutional and protective of transgender youth, indicating clear approval rather than a request for weakening or rejection.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed," which directly indicates rejection of the regulation. The reason given — "Undermining parental authority is most concerning" — shows opposition to the policy on parental rights grounds.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose the transgender draft model" and argues against the policy throughout. They object to restroom/locker room access, pronoun enforcement, and school discussion of gender without parental permission, indicating they want the regulation rejected.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support!!!!!!" and adds "Trans rights are human rights," which clearly endorses the proposed transgender student policies. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the protection of the health and well-being of transgender students in Virginia public schools." They also endorse the policy goal of creating a "safe space" for students to be "their authentic selves," indicating approval of the regulation.


STRONGLY OPPOSE - this goes far beyond Transgender equality

The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and argues the policy "goes FAR beyond equality" and should not be imposed. They call it "another radical policy" and say it is "further indoctrinating our children," indicating clear rejection of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose," "Back off, please," and "My vote is no," indicating clear rejection of the regulation. They argue it conflicts with "biological fact" and parental authority, and object to school involvement in gender identity and restroom access.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and argues that "ALL students, including transgender students, deserve to feel safe and welcome in schools." This clearly endorses adoption of the regulation and its protections for transgender students.


Strongly support, please protect trans youth

The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly support," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. The added phrase "please protect trans youth" reinforces support for the policy's purpose and protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support" the initiative and "wholeheartedly support" it. They frame it as helping "ALL VA kids" and "stand with Trans youth and Trans lives everywhere," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "Oppose and here is why" and repeatedly argues the policy "needs to be reworked" before adoption. They object to pronoun requirements, bathroom/discipline implications, loss of gendered school traditions, and possible religious-rights conflicts, concluding that the policy "allows for the rights of other students to be infringed upon."


The commenter explicitly says "this law is way overboard" and frames the policy as harmful, indicating rejection of the regulation. They object to privacy provisions, stating they "can never agree that any information... should be kept from the parents," and argue it would create a "parents vs the school" conflict.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues against the policy by rejecting transgender identity and pronoun guidance as a "gender pronoun conflict." The language condemns the regulation as enabling a "mental disorder" and asks, "Why are we letting the patients run the asylum," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am absolutely opposed to this," which clearly rejects the regulation. They object specifically to "biological males or females" using opposite-sex bathrooms, calling it a "huge liability" and "inviting a myriad of issues."


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Oppose!" and states, "This is wrong and unacceptable," which clearly rejects the proposed regulation. There is no request for modification or neutral information, only opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support trans rights completely!" This is a clear endorsement of the regulation’s purpose and direction.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and states "If this happens to be approved" they will lose more families, indicating clear rejection of the regulation. The comment argues schools should not "misguide our children" and frames the policy as contrary to parental values.


Strongly oppose. It strips parental rights & religious freedoms; the very fabric of this nation.

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this policy being recommended" and repeatedly argues it "violates parental rights" and "religious freedoms." The body also calls the policy "totally unworkable" and says it should not be adopted because it would create safety, privacy, and due process problems.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this guidance" and urges the state to "include and protect its Trans students." The rest of the comment reinforces approval by arguing the policy is needed to address harm and affirm transgender identities.


The commenter explicitly says "Strpngly oppose" and rejects the policy’s premise by asserting "There are only 2 genders male or female." The biblical reference and "God didnt create adam and steve" indicate opposition to adopting the transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "Support as a Means to Prevent Suicide and Violence" and repeatedly endorses the guidance as "practical and beneficial overall." They argue it protects transgender youth, promotes equity and access, and asks, "Shouldn’t school be a safe place?"


The commenter explicitly praises the guidance, saying the "Guiding Principle" section is "a fine summary" and that they "look forward to the implementation of this guidance document." They also argue the school system should "teach trans/nonbinary students that they are welcome," indicating clear support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose the Statewide Transgender School Policy" and repeatedly argues against specific provisions such as preferred pronouns, bathroom access, and gender-neutral dress codes. They also state the policy "weakens/undermines my role as a parent" and "does not address the rights" of those who disagree, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "100% support" and adds "Every single individual matters," which clearly endorses the regulation. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I Support this legislation" and adds "Equality for all," which clearly endorses adoption of the policy. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


Strongly oppose the VDOE Transgender Draft.

The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose the VDOE Transgender Draft" and calls it "Unacceptable." They argue it "contradicts science," "strips parental rights," and says public schools are "overstepping," all of which indicate rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support protection for trans students" and adds that students "deserve full support and inclusion." This clearly endorses the proposed policies rather than opposing or questioning them.


The commenter explicitly labels the policy as "Strongly Opposed" and says "This has gone way to far," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. No supporting or neutral language is present.


In support of protections for transgender and non-binary students

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support protections for transgender and non-binary students," which directly endorses the regulation. They also add that "this is good for all children," indicating approval of the policy's adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this gender confusion policy," which clearly rejects the proposed regulation. The phrase "strongly oppose" leaves little ambiguity about their position.


Strongly Oppose/School policy should be based on the needs/concerns of the majority

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and argues the issue "doesn't need consultation/guidance from the state," indicating rejection of the proposed policy. They also frame school policy as something that should be based on "the needs/concerns of the majority," which is inconsistent with adopting the transgender student guidance.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly support this legislation," which directly indicates approval of the proposed regulation. No contrary concerns or qualifications are included.


This comment section is quantitive data demonstrating the need for transgender protection

The commenter explicitly says, "I support this policy" and argues that the comment section itself demonstrates "the need for transgender protection." The rest of the comment criticizes opposing views and reinforces support for adoption of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the model policy protecting transgender students" and expresses approval of the policy's purpose. The rest of the comment reinforces that position by stating that "All people deserve to be who they are and exist in safety."


The commenter explicitly says, "I am highly in support of the proposed guidelines" and argues they should apply so that "all Virginia students, and especially transgender students" can learn in a compassionate environment. The comment praises the guidelines as promoting "equal treatment" and a "diverse learning environment."


Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in Virginia’s Public Schools

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support!" which directly endorses adoption of the proposed policies. There is no qualifying language or criticism.


All the people opposing should be ashamed. This is about the protection of children. CHILDREN!

The commenter explicitly urges approval, saying "This passing is a necessity" and "All children deserve the right to be protected and loved!" They frame the policy as necessary for "the safety of trans and non binary youth" and criticize opponents as "hateful," indicating clear support for adoption.


The comment explicitly states "Strongly Oppose" and provides no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality. This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation.


Oppose - Listen to Science, respect parental rights

The commenter explicitly says "Oppose" and pairs it with "respect parental rights," indicating they do not want the regulation adopted. The phrase "Listen to Science" is used as a supporting argument for rejection rather than a neutral observation.


The commenter explicitly says, "These new policies should never be implemented in our public schools," which is a clear rejection of the regulation. Although they support protecting children from bullying, the overall message argues the policies are "dangerous" and harmful to parents' rights, safety, and privacy.


SUPPORT PLEASE ALLOW TRANS CHILDREN THE SAME COMFORTS AS EVERY OTHER

The commenter explicitly asks to "SUPPORT" the policy and argues that it should allow trans children "the same basic comforts" as other students. The statement "allow trans kids the same basic comforts you allow your cis students" clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


The comment explicitly says "Opposed" and the body says "Stop this nonsense," which clearly rejects the proposed regulation. There is no indication of support or a neutral question/comment.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and characterizes the policy as "unbelievably dangerous," indicating clear rejection of the regulation. The phrase "Common sense has died!" reinforces a hostile opposition to the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the Virginia Department of Education’s guidance" and endorses "creating inclusive learning environments for transgender and non-binary youth." They also defend the privacy protections in the policy and argue against objections to them.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support this 100%." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed regulation with no reservations or qualifications.


Protect transgender and non-binary students!

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support protections for transgender and non-binary students!" This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies and their protections.


Model policies for treatment of transgender students in Virginia schools

The comment explicitly states "100% OPPOSE," which is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided, but the stance is unambiguous.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and endorses the policy because "Everyone, especially children trying to find themselves, deserve to feel safe and supported." This clearly favors adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "Opposed" and says "This is totally out of line," indicating rejection of the regulation. The question "Where are our straight children rights to feel safe" frames the policy as harmful to non-transgender students and supports weakening or rejecting it.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this guidance" and urges schools to "do better in protecting transgender students." The rest of the comment reinforces approval of the policy’s goals, including treating transgender students with dignity and resisting bullying.


The commenter explicitly endorses equal treatment, saying "Equal rights for all!!" and that transgender people "deserve to be treated as such." The final sentence, "We need to change this," indicates support for the proposed policies' inclusive approach rather than opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I can not support this as it currently stands" and argues the policy is "foolish, irresponsible, and potentially dangerous." Although they call for "balance" and protections for all parties, the overall message rejects the regulation in its current form.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose transgender policy" and adds "god made boys and girls!", which rejects the proposed transgender student policies on religious/sex-binary grounds. This is a clear call against adoption rather than a neutral or informational remark.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this transgender policy," which directly indicates opposition to adoption. They also argue it is "taking away parental rights" and disregarding "the safety and privacy rights of girls," reinforcing a negative position toward the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed to these new policies," which directly indicates opposition to adoption. The phrase "set a dangerous precedent" further reinforces a negative position toward the regulation, despite the likely typo in "will not be harmful."


The commenter explicitly urges action with the title "Protect trans children" and states that "Protecting trans youth is a public health concern," which supports adopting the regulation. The comment frames the policy as necessary for safety and well-being, not as something to reject or weaken.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose!" and argues the policy would "infring[e] on the rights of others," specifically citing "freedom of religion" and "parents’ rights." This indicates they do not want the regulation adopted in its current form.


The commenter explicitly says they are "completely in support of these proposals!!" and adds "Trans rights are human rights," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. There is no opposing language or request to weaken it.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it "WRONG" and saying "I WILL NOT tolerate this." They object to transgender students using shared facilities, warning that if a boy goes into the dressing room it will be "a problem" and saying "over my dead body" they would allow it.


The commenter explicitly says, "I completely support this idea" and adds that it "should not be debatable whether this should happen or not," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. There is no indication of conditions or reservations.


Please let children be children. Opposed to the Trans’ curriculum.

The commenter explicitly says "Opposed to the Trans’ curriculum" and asks to "Leave alternative sex Ed for adult-parent conversations," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The request to focus only on core academics is framed as a reason not to adopt this guidance.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this 100%!!" and repeatedly objects to the policy being imposed on everyone. They also express concern about locker room/bathroom access and being "turned in and face charges," indicating rejection of the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support these changes in support of trans students" and repeatedly argues the guidance should be adopted to protect transgender youth. They also describe it as "a progressive move for all students," indicating clear approval rather than a request to weaken or reject it.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy’s underlying purpose by stating, "trans kids deserve rights" and that they "should be given the opportunity to feel safe in schools." This is a clear affirmative position in favor of adopting protections for transgender students.


The comment explicitly says "OPPOSE" and rejects the premise of the policy by stating, "A man is not a woman and a woman is not a man. A boy is not a girl and a girl is not a boy." This indicates opposition to transgender-inclusive treatment in the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I completely disagree" and urges, "Stop trying to confuse these kids," indicating rejection of the transgender student policies. The statement that people are "born male or female" also signals opposition to the regulation's recognition of transgender students.


The commenter explicitly states "full support" and repeats "support," indicating clear approval of the proposed regulation. There is no language suggesting opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "Support!" and adds "Protect trans students," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose. The comment offers no objections or qualifications.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support this policy," which directly indicates opposition. They further narrow the objection by saying "especially in elementary schools" and argue it will have "unintended consequences negatively impacting far more kids than it will protect."


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support these guidance updates" and argues that "All students should have access to a safe and welcoming environment." They frame the regulation as "a good step for Virginia schools," indicating clear approval of adoption.


A Model Policy is Needed to Ensure Equity and Support for ALL VA Students

The commenter explicitly urges the Department to "continue with the Model Policy" and says it is "required by law" and "necessary and right." They repeatedly endorse trans-inclusive policies as "best practices" and say schools need the guidance to comply with existing regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am absolutely opposed to this idea!" and argues the policy would let boys access girls' locker rooms and restrooms. They frame the regulation as creating risk of "sexual assault" and "possible abuse," indicating clear rejection of the proposal.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support transgender student rights" and criticizes opposition to the policy. The statement "I can't believe this is even debatable" indicates clear approval of the regulation's purpose.


The comment only says "Strongly oppose" and then trails off with "Virginia Department of Education’s (VDOE)" without specifying what is being opposed or why. Although the title suggests opposition, the body is too incomplete to confidently classify the stance toward the regulation itself.


The commenter explicitly asks officials to "reconsider your desire to encourage gender confusion among our youth" and says to "leave children" out of it, indicating opposition to the proposed transgender student policies. Phrases like "hideous, child destroying agenda" show they want the regulation rejected or substantially weakened.


The comment explicitly says "Support trans youth!!," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose of protecting transgender students. There is no language opposing or questioning the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I completely support!!!" which directly endorses the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism, so the stance is clearly supportive.


Transgender Issues - Understanding vs Advocacy

The commenter objects to transgender-related policy content being used to "force" agreement and says those who disagree should have the right to "respectfully disagree," which signals opposition to the regulation as written. The mention that their children felt "bullied by transgender student and support groups" further indicates resistance to the policy framework rather than support for adoption.


The commenter calls the policy "madness" and "nothing short of child abuse," which is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation. The language indicates they believe it should not be imposed on students.


The commenter objects to the policy’s implications for transgender students by invoking women’s restroom access: "Does everybody forget how hard women fought to get public restrooms?" The request to "Please respect women’s rights too" and to "Find a middle solution" suggests they want the regulation changed or weakened rather than adopted as written.


I support helping children who suffer from gender dysphoria

The commenter opens with support for helping children with gender dysphoria, but then clearly questions the proposed guidance and its basis, saying they are "not sure of the 'science'" and objecting to "letting boys use the girl's bathroom." They also challenge the First Amendment implications of the policy, indicating opposition to key parts of the regulation rather than support for adoption as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "i support trans people," which clearly aligns with approving the transgender student policies. No opposing or qualifying language is present.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support this as a school function!!!" and argues that it is "the roll of Parents and only parents," indicating rejection of the policy. The phrase "Public schools are more and more trying to replace the prenatal responsibilities with their social agenda" further shows opposition to the regulation's role in schools.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this guidance" and expresses a desire that it "was already in place." They also describe positive experiences with inclusive schools, indicating approval of the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this wholeheartedly!" and calls it "an excellent step forward for the VDOE." They also state they want "a school that supports all children," which clearly endorses the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says "FULLY SUPPORT!!" and "STRONGLY SUPPORT," which clearly indicates approval of the proposed regulation. There is no language suggesting opposition, conditions, or a neutral inquiry.


The commenter explicitly says, "In full support" and states the policy "has been needed for a very long time." They also argue that "School should be a safe place for ANY child," which clearly endorses the regulation's protective aims.


The commenter explicitly states, "i support!!" which directly indicates approval of the proposed regulation. No contrary language or qualifications are included.


The commenter explicitly states "I fully support!!!" and repeats "support," which directly indicates approval of the proposed regulation. There is no language suggesting reservations or opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "i support!!!!!" and adds "i support lgbtqia rights," which clearly endorses the regulation’s transgender-student protections. There is no opposing language or request to weaken the policy.


The commenter explicitly says "i support!" and the title "trans rights" indicates approval of the transgender student policies. There is no language suggesting opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support Trans rights," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose of protecting transgender students. The emojis and punctuation do not change the straightforward supportive stance.


The comment explicitly states "I SUPPORT" and provides no contrary language. It clearly endorses the proposed regulation without qualification.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support," which directly indicates approval of the proposed regulation. The title "Yes" reinforces that positive position and provides no contrary language.


The commenter explicitly states, "I FULLY SUPPORT" and repeats "I support," which clearly indicates approval of the regulation. There is no language suggesting opposition, neutrality, or a request for changes.


100% SUPPORT!!!! HELP AND PROTECT LGBTQ+ KIDS!!!!!!!!

The commenter explicitly says "100% SUPPORT!!!!" and urges to "HELP AND PROTECT LGBTQ+ KIDS!!!!!!!!" This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies, despite the hostile language toward مخالفs.


The commenter explicitly states, "I fully support," which clearly endorses adoption of the proposed regulation. No reservations or alternative requests are included.


The commenter explicitly says, "Trans youth need respect and support" and urges, "Don’t waste your energy on tearing them down," which clearly endorses protections and affirming treatment for transgender students. The comment does not ask for changes or express reservations about the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "fully support!!!!" and adds "Trans rights are human rights," which clearly endorses the proposed transgender student policies. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly titles the post "Support 100%" and repeatedly endorses the policy, saying schools "must be a safe and welcoming place for all students" and that accommodating trans and nonbinary students "should not even be up for debate." They also call for specific implementation measures like respecting pronouns and names, restroom/locker room access, and staff training, indicating clear support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly states "strongly support," which clearly indicates approval of the proposed regulation. No contrary language or qualifications are included.


The commenter explicitly says "i support" and "i completely support," which clearly endorses the proposed regulation. There is no language indicating any reservations or opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this," which directly endorses the proposed regulation. The title, "100% support trans kids," reinforces clear approval of the policy.


Support Model Guidelines for Transgender Students

The commenter explicitly says they are "so pleased to see Virginia working to ensure" transgender, non-binary, and gender non-conforming students' rights and calls the guidelines "a good standard." They also thank the state for "the care and effort put into these guidelines," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly endorses protection for transgender people, saying "trans people deserve protection, respect, kindness" and that "the easiest remedy for transphobia and ignorance is knowledge and education." This clearly supports the regulation’s purpose of protecting transgender students and promoting inclusion.


The commenter explicitly titles the comment "100% Support" and says the model "should be supported by everyone." They argue it creates an environment where students feel "accepted" and "without judgement or discrimination," and that supporting transgender students will help them "flourish."


The commenter explicitly endorses the policies, saying "Yes! Support trans kids!" and thanking the authors for a document they believe will "make a positive difference" and create "a safer environment." This is clear approval of adoption.


The comment explicitly says "full support" and adds "trans rights are human rights," which clearly endorses the proposed transgender student policies. There is no language indicating any objection or reservation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the guidance" and endorses "fair and equal access to education" for LGBTQ students. This is a clear affirmative position in favor of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and "I reject the lunacy of these guidelines," making their position clear. They argue the policies "do a disservice to our children" and that society should not "enable unhealthy fixations and behavior," which indicates rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "100% SUPPORT!" and "I fully support this," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. The phrase "you should too" reinforces approval rather than criticism or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly states "I SUPPORT 100%" and repeats "I SUPPORT," which clearly endorses the regulation. There is no language indicating any reservations or opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am expressing my full support of Virginia's adoption of this policy." They also praise inclusion for a "gender expansive child" and urge compassion, indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the proposed policy" and "I applaud the state" for the work. They argue the policies are "ESSENTIAL" and needed to protect transgender students and provide "equal access, rights, and protections."


The commenter explicitly says "support trans kids" and affirms their identity, indicating approval of the policy’s protections for transgender students. The rest of the comment reinforces this supportive view by stating they "are who they are" and should be accepted.


OPPOSE as a scientist, mother and community member.

The commenter explicitly opens with "OPPOSE" and repeatedly argues against the policy, saying schools should not "hide[] situations from parents" or "intervene and encourage new age philosophies." They conclude, "Oppose these drastic changes before it's too late," making their opposition clear and direct.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support these policies!" and frames the issue as "Trans rights are essential," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. The title, "Support trans kids!!!!," reinforces the same pro-policy position.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support trans kids!" and argues they "need to be treated with respect," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose. The exclamation "Support LGBTQ+ kids!!!" further indicates approval rather than opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly states "100% support," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism suggesting opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says the bills "need to be passed" and calls their passage "crucial" for supporting transgender children and LGBTQIA+ members. The overall message is clearly in favor of adopting the regulation, even though the final sentence trails off.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please do not adopt these new regulations," and repeatedly argues against the policy as "ridiculous" and a "slippery slope." They also say schools should not add "a litany of new laws" and instead frame transgender-related issues as needing "counselling and help, not acceptance and encouragement."


Transgender Students in Virginia Public Schools

The commenter explicitly says, "I support the draft guidance provided by the VDOE," which directly endorses the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language suggesting opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly urges the policy to "PROTECT AND SUPPORT LGBTQ+ KIDS," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose. The title "Support LGBTQ+!!" reinforces that they favor adoption of the transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not approve of these proposed guidelines" and calls the policies "totally unworkable." They argue the guidance is based on "radical theories" and would force compliance with a view of sex and gender they reject, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "i strongly support this," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. No objections, qualifications, or alternative requests are included.


Guidance document. Board of education on gender

The commenter explicitly says, "I DO NOT support this nonsense," and calls the policy "a waste of tax dollars." The rest of the comment rejects the document's framing of gender, indicating opposition to the regulation itself.


Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students

The commenter explicitly says, "I am in favor of efforts to make sure Virginia's schools are safe and welcoming" and states that "Protecting transgender and nonbinary students is key to their success." This clearly endorses the proposed policies and their goals.


The commenter explicitly labels the comment "Support" and urges policymakers to "do right by our children" by protecting transgender and nonbinary students. They argue the policies are needed so students feel "protected and safe" and to address bullying and discrimination.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am writing in support of the Model Policies" and repeatedly argues that the rule will help transgender and nonbinary students feel "safe and included." They also conclude that "This proposed rule will make Virginia schools a better place to learn," which clearly endorses adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am writing in support of the Model Policies on the Treatment of Transgender Students" and repeatedly urges protection for transgender and nonbinary students. They also state, "This proposed rule will make Virginia schools a better place to learn," which clearly endorses adoption.


The commenter explicitly says they "do not support" the policy as drafted because it amounts to "special treatment" for transgender students. However, they also ask that it be "amended" to provide more single-use facilities, which indicates support for a modified version rather than outright rejection.


The commenter explicitly praises the policy and says they are "excited to see Virginia public schools doing the same." They also thank the state for "prioritizing this" and describe it as protecting trans/nonbinary students' rights, which clearly indicates support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I completely support this" and adds "protect trans rights," which clearly endorses adoption of the policy. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


Support of the Model Policies on the Treatment of Transgender Students

The commenter explicitly says, "I am writing in support of the Model Policies" and repeatedly argues that the proposed rule is "necessary" and will "make Virginia schools a better place to learn." They also thank the agency for "ensuring safe and welcoming schools for all Virginia students," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says there is a "need for policies to prohibit the mistreatment of trans youth" and expresses excitement that the conversation is "opening up in favor of trans people in the schooling systems of VA." This clearly աջակցs adoption of the proposed policies.


The comment explicitly asks to "Provide trans youth with a safe environment to learn in," which aligns with the regulation’s goal of protecting transgender students and creating a supportive school environment. It offers clear affirmative support rather than criticism or a request for changes.


The commenter explicitly says "strongly oppose" and argues the policy "encourages" harmful outcomes, including children turning to "drug- and surgery-based alterations". The comment clearly rejects the regulation rather than supporting it with changes.


The commenter explicitly states "I Support This" and adds "Protect trans youth," which clearly endorses the proposed transgender student policies. There is no language indicating opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says they are "outraged at the proposed Transgender policies" and argues that "our taxpayer monies do not need to interfere in these matters." They also urge to "Allow caregivers to care for their children as they see fit," which rejects government adoption of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I 100% support trans kids!!" which clearly endorses the policy’s purpose of protecting transgender students. There is no language opposing or questioning the regulation.


In support of Virginia's Trans and Non-Binary students

The commenter explicitly says they are "in support of the proposed Model Policies" and urges officials to "make the right decision." They frame the policies as "a matter of safety and human rights," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly advocates for the policy’s goals, saying "Trans youth deserve to life a safe and happy life" and "They deserve to be protected by the law." This is a clear endorsement of protections for transgender students rather than a critique or request to weaken the regulation.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Opposed!" and says "I do not believe" the proposal should proceed, arguing it will "open up the opportunity for unimaginable things" in schools. They only support separate facilities for accommodations, which indicates opposition to the regulation as written rather than support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this" and states they are "in support for protection for LGBTQ children." They further argue the policy is needed so students can "feel safe and supported" in public schools, indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly urges approval by saying "Support Trans Children!" and argues that trans children "deserve the same rights" and "same treatment as any of their peers." The comment endorses the regulation’s protective purpose rather than opposing it.


The commenter explicitly endorses protecting transgender/LGBTQ+ students, criticizing adults who would allow a child to be treated with less respect. Phrases like "all deserve to go to school and have a healthy and productive environment" indicate support for the regulation's goal of creating a supportive school environment.


The commenter explicitly says, "i support this!" and adds "Protect trans rights," which clearly endorses adoption of the policy. There is no language indicating opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly labels the comment "Support" and asks, "Why would you oppose this?" They further endorse the policy by saying, "Let people live their lives how they want to," which clearly favors adoption.


The commenter explicitly states "support" and adds that "there is no reason not to support this," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. No objections or qualifications are expressed.


Concerns over transgender public school policy

The commenter explicitly says, "Please stick to education... not hotly debated social problems. Not your place," indicating they do not want the transgender student policy adopted. They also argue that "These decisions and choices need to stay within the family" and reject the premise of the policy throughout the comment.


The commenter explicitly titles the comment "Support!" and repeatedly praises the proposal as "based on science" and something that "will help kids." They thank the authors and say it is "good to have this guidance," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly states "100% Support for LBGTQIA+" and identifies themselves as a "Teacher in 100% Support for LBGTQIA+ students." This clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose of supporting transgender/LGBTQIA+ students in schools.


The commenter explicitly opens with "Full Support!" and repeatedly asks to "help make the school atmosphere easier for today's non-binary children." They describe the policies as "based on best practices" and say they are "relieved that these policies are finally being introduced," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says the document provides "useful guidance" and expresses being "glad to see schools adopt pro-active policies". They frame the regulation as protecting "the legal rights and emotional well being of trans kids," which clearly supports adoption.


I strongly support the proposed Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the proposed Model Policies" and urges officials to "adopt it." They praise the guidance for protecting transgender and nonbinary students and describe it as making schools "a haven" for all students.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT!" and repeatedly endorses the policy, including support for transgender students' rights, updated records, non-segregation in facilities, and mandated training. The closing आग्रह to "make that official and enforceable" confirms approval of the regulation, not opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly labels the comment "Support" and says "a change must happen" and that "adapting to the change will do... more good than fighting it." They also endorse an "accepting, supporting environment" and a "smooth transition to these changes," indicating approval of the regulation with implementation caution.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please do not adopt this policy as it stands" and titles the comment "Strongly Oppose." They argue the policy is "a complete attack on our values" and ask to "add some nuance" because it is too forceful for families who do not accept gender identity as presented in the policy.


Would NEVER Support!!! God creates us as who He wants us to be.

The commenter explicitly says "Would NEVER Support!!!" and argues that the policy would "make it easier for the evil to take hold" and "offer them more confusion." The comment clearly rejects the regulation and frames transgender affirmation as contrary to God's plan.


The commenter explicitly says, "I 100% support the 'Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students'". They also describe it as "an important step" in reducing trauma and stress, which clearly endorses adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "fully support, a step in the right direction!" and provides reasons favoring the policy. They argue that supportive environments reduce "anxiety, depression, self harm and suicide," especially for transgender youth, which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


Want wholeness for the person in the long run

The commenter argues against affirming transgender identity, saying people "want to silence" those who "tamper with their birth identity" and warning that it leads to a "growing sense of wrongness inside." This indicates opposition to the proposed transgender student policies rather than support for them.


The commenter explicitly argues there is "literally no reason to oppose this" and says "there's people who need this. badly. CHILDREN who need this." They repeatedly defend the policy as protecting students from "gender and identity discrimination" and frame opposition as against "human rights."


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Fully Support" and repeatedly says the policy should be passed, including "I see no reason not to pass this bill." They argue transgender students should feel safe and that schools should be "a judgment-free zone" and "harassment-free."


The commenter explicitly says, "I support trans’ rights!" and frames the policy as helping transgender students receive "an excellent education as everyone else does." This is a clear endorsement of the regulation's purpose and likely adoption.


The commenter explicitly labels the comment "Support" and says "Trans students should feel safe in school like everyone else," which endorses the policy's protective aims. The rest of the comment defends trans students' bathroom and changing-room access rather than opposing the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "i support this!!" and argues that the policy should protect "trans kids from the discrimination and transphobia" they face. This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I SUPPORT 10,00%" and adds, "I support this so much, everyone deserves respect." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "There is no reason not to support this" and frames the policy as protecting "the basic rights of children" and equal treatment. This is a clear endorsement of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support" and adds that they "support the LGBTQ+ Community". They further state that the bill "makes efforts" to support that community, indicating approval of the regulation.


this is for the bill of the protection of transgender students in virginia.

The commenter explicitly defends the policy, saying there is "absolutely no reason that transgender students should be treated any differently" and that "Being kind and respectful of someone’s identity is the bare minimum." The comment argues against taking rights away from transgender students, indicating clear support for adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support" and reinforces it with "I completely support," which clearly indicates approval of the regulation. No contrary language or qualifications are present.


The commenter explicitly labels the comment "Support" and argues that schools should be "safe places" free from "bullying, harassment, and discrimination." They also say the Virginia Department of Education has a duty to provide the support needed to make schools safe for all students, which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose.


The comment explicitly says "Support!!!", which clearly indicates approval of the proposed regulation. No contrary language or qualifications are present.


I 100% support this. Whatever Pam said is wrong.

The commenter explicitly says, "I 100% support this" and adds, "I don't know why someone wouldn't support this," which clearly endorses the regulation. The remark "Pam, you're wrong" reinforces approval of the policy and disagreement with an opposing view.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this guidance" and explains that it will create a "safe, supportive, and affirming school environment." They further state it will help schools be "welcoming for all students, regardless of gender identity," which clearly endorses adoption of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says "I Support!" and repeatedly endorses the policy’s goals, stating they want schools to be "a safe place for everyone, regardless of gender identity." The comment frames the regulation as consistent with their values of "acceptance and love for all."


The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS PROPOSED MANDATE" and adds "THIS IS WRONG," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. There is no supporting language or request for modification, only opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am completely opposed to this insane proposal" and frames it as something they do not want adopted. They also argue it would take "the rights and responsibilities of a parenting" away and call it "evil," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "I strongly oppose" and objects to the policy as "remove God and parents in the upbringing of ANY child." This indicates rejection of the regulation and a belief that it improperly interferes with parental and religious authority.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this guidance" and endorses the policy as a way to "protect our LGBTQI+ community." They also praise the guidance for helping educators ensure students are "respected" and have an "inclusive educational experience."


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" and refers to "this new law" being imposed, which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose to this" and the title states, "I oppose this legislation." This is a clear rejection of the proposed policies, though the explanation is brief and based on personal beliefs and values.


Opposed to schools making this a priority - not your job! Teach reading writing and math!

The commenter explicitly says the policies are "not your job," calls them "dangerous," and ends with "VOTE NO!" They object to pronoun requirements, privacy provisions, restroom access, and complaint procedures, arguing schools should "stick with teaching reading, writing, and math."


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and repeatedly argues the policies should not be adopted, ending with "our children will be pulled out of Virginia Public Schools." The body lists multiple objections to pronouns, bathroom access, parental notification, dress codes, and religious accommodations as reasons for rejecting the regulation.


draft transgender student policies misguided

The commenter explicitly says the guidelines are "misguided and overreaching" and ends with "Please do not enact them," which clearly rejects adoption. They also list specific objections about restroom access, pronoun discipline, and parental notification to argue against the proposal.


Social Worker Supporting this Lifesaving Policy

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support" the policy and frames it as "lifesaving." They also endorse protections for trans students, citing safety concerns like "homelessness, bullying, and even suicide" as reasons for adoption.


Oppose transgender policy proposed by the Virginia Department of Education.

The commenter explicitly says, "Oppose transgender policy proposed by the Virginia Department of Education" and adds, "Do not disregard the role of parents in public education," indicating rejection of the regulation on parental-rights grounds. The comment does not suggest amendments; it argues against adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and repeats "WE STAND AGAINST THIS PERVERSITY," indicating clear rejection of the regulation. The stated reason is concern that it "opens perverts to enter either bathrooms and endanger our children’s safety," which shows opposition tied to bathroom access and child safety fears.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the proposed guidelines" and argues they should not be adopted because they "substitut[e] the state’s temporal prerogatives" for parental rights. They also object to school administrators withholding information, potential liability for parents, and the lack of a minimum age, all indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and states "I STRONGLY OPPOSE THE TRANSGENDER SCHOOL POLICY THAT VDOE PROPOSED." They argue it "creates confusion and chaos" and is against "our families core principles," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and objects to the policy because it "took parents rights away" and would not disclose a child's struggles to parents. They argue schools should not keep "secrets" from parents, indicating rejection of the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support the guidance," which directly endorses the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language suggesting opposition or neutrality.


Strongly Oppose - bad policy will do more harm than good

The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly Oppose" and states the policy "will do more harm than good" and is "bad policy." Although they acknowledge that "transgender children must be protected," they argue the regulation undermines parents and creates harm, especially regarding restroom and locker room access.


Why are the children always the pawn of radical agendas that want to destroy our youth?

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly OPPOSE!" which directly states opposition to the proposed policies. The title also frames the regulation as a harmful "radical agenda" that would "destroy our youth," reinforcing rejection.


The commenter explicitly states, "i support the guidance," which directly endorses adoption of the proposed regulation. No qualifications or objections are included.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose having gender confusion taught in schools," which directly rejects the regulation. The statement "God didn’t make a mistake" reinforces opposition to transgender-related policies rather than supporting them.


Support for LGBTQ Student Rights and Inclusion

The commenter explicitly says, "Unequivocally, I support the guidance," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. The rest of the comment provides a religious rationale for inclusion and dignity, reinforcing support for the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this being taught in the public schools," which clearly rejects the regulation. The reference to homeschooling as a response reinforces opposition to the policy's adoption in public schools.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the LGBTQ and gender confusion agenda" and argues against the policy as written. They also state, "This LGBTQ push is counterintuitive to those objectives," indicating they want the regulation rejected rather than adopted.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidance" and argues that "ALL STUDENTS deserve to be safe in school," which clearly endorses adoption. The rhetorical question about "their human rights" reinforces approval of the policy's protections.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and states "this is not the way to do it," indicating rejection of the regulation. They argue the issues should be handled by parents and claim the guidelines would violate "1st Amendment guarantees," which further supports opposition.


No to Transgenderism being forced on the children

The commenter explicitly says, "We stand against this evil plan" and frames the policy as something being forced on children, indicating clear rejection of the regulation. The language condemns the proposal as "horrible" and "demonic," leaving little ambiguity about opposition.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and objects to "our children being taught this in our schools." They argue schools should focus on core academic subjects instead, indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support the guidance," which directly endorses the proposed regulation. The title also says "SUPPORT," reinforcing the same position.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy as “transgender mandates” and says Northam is trying to “impose his vision of the world upon the rest of us.” They frame the issue as “a fight between Good and Evil,” indicating strong opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying "these laws DO NOT do that" and calling them "VERY discriminitory" and "dangerous." They argue the rules harm "parents and non-transgender students" and restrict teachers' "freedoms and personal convictions," indicating opposition to adoption as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this being taught in the public schools," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. They also frame it as inappropriate for children, saying it is "not fair to introduce innocent children to the uncertainties of grown adults."


The commenter rejects the policy with the emphatic title "No, No, No" and argues that "All children are better off staying at home" rather than being subject to public-school guidance. This indicates opposition to the regulation’s adoption, even though the comment is broad and not specifically about transgender policies.


Create the safe place you desire for your children starting from the HOME and not schools, be real!

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy’s premise that schools should create a safe environment for transgender students, saying “let's not encourage this!” and that it is “not the public worker's responsibility.” They argue parents should handle it at home and warn against “condon[ing] certain behaviors,” which indicates opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "100% support this" and urges that it "go through," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. The rest of the comment reinforces support for equal treatment and opposition to efforts to block the policy.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with the title "ABSOLUTELY NOT!" and argues that it would force people to abandon their morals and accept a "political progressive movement." The final sentence about schools trying to "secretly" become a "hero" for transgender students also indicates opposition to the regulation.


Support for Transgender and Gender Non-Binary Students

The commenter explicitly says they are "writing in support of the proposed inclusive policy" and repeatedly endorses it as "evidence-based, ethical" and aligned with "diversity, inclusion, and affirmation of minority rights." They also argue that inclusive policies improve safety and academic outcomes for transgender and gender non-binary students.


The commenter explicitly says, "Oppose transgender regulations proposed by VA Department of Education" and argues schools should not be "accommodating" gender transitions. The comment cites concerns about puberty blockers and minors' ability to consent, indicating a clear rejection of the proposed policies.


Transgender proposals for public schools

The commenter rejects the policy outright, calling the proposals "completely out of line" and objecting to schools allowing students to define their sex or gender identity. They argue this conflicts with parents' authority and faith, and explicitly state that "Insisting that children remain their own sex is not abusive," indicating opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly OPPOSE the proposed transgender guidelines" and repeats "I oppose" the policy. The rationale focuses on parental authority and objects to schools "going behind a parent's back," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please oppose," and argues that the policy protects "a small number of students at the expense of all." They also ask officials to "let us do our job," indicating they do not want the regulation adopted as proposed.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying "This in no way is acceptable" and "I say no and will never support this." They also urge others to "homeschool" if such policies continue, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy: "This in no way is acceptable" and "I say no and will never support this." They also urge others to homeschool if such policies continue, indicating clear opposition to adoption of the regulation.


Strongly Oppose. Seriously, have you all lost your minds? Where's the common sense?

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and argues the policy would "set a dangerous precedent" and is "absolutely absurd." They object to transgender student accommodations in locker rooms and sports, framing the guidance as unsafe and something that should not go into effect.