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

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and rejects the policy’s core provisions, stating "There are 2 genders - period" and "No separate toilets" and no cross-sex athletics participation. They also characterize the policy as "absurdity" and say "Common sense must be regained," indicating opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do NOT support Transgender being 'taught' in our school system!" which clearly rejects the policy. The statement that gender should be discussed "between the parent and children/s privately" indicates opposition to school involvement in this area.


The commenter explicitly says "FULLY SUPPORT!!" and argues that "It is vital to allow all students to exist safely and freely." They also endorse respecting students' identities and gender expression, which aligns with adopting the proposed transgender student policies.


Let God's children be children of their birth, NO altering of sex, confusing young children's mind.

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose transgenders in public school," and argues against "altering of birth sex" and transgender inclusion. They also propose removing transgender students to an "alternate school," indicating rejection of the policy's protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says they are in "strong support of this guidance" and urges VDOE to "adopt the guidance (with minor edits)." They repeatedly frame the policies as "a much needed intervention" that would improve equity, belonging, and safety for transgender and non-binary students.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Strongly Support" and argues that the policy "helps trans kids and doesn't hurt anyone else." They also endorse the regulation's purpose by saying it provides "immense mental health benefits" and causes no harm.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose!!!" which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. The title "No" reinforces that they do not want the policy adopted.


The commenter explicitly endorses transgender youth and asks to "give these young folks" the understanding they need, which supports adopting the policies. Phrases like "Trans rights are human rights" and "Please give these young folks... the understanding they need" indicate clear approval of the regulation's purpose.


Transgender Policy - Disturbing overreach, void of science or reality. Who’s minding the children?

The commenter explicitly calls the policy a "disturbing overreach" and urges officials to "stop trying to push your agenda." They also say "If this passes" there should be a "mass exodus" from public schools, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly states, "VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED," which is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation. The brief body, "My wife & I are VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED to this," reinforces that they want it rejected rather than adopted.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly OPPOSE transgender kids sharing a restroom/locker room with my daughter" and repeatedly rejects inclusion in bathrooms, locker rooms, and sports. They also urge, "STOP pushing this liberal crap down our throats," showing clear opposition to the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says "No to new transgender rules" and asks why Virginia would "adopt these new policies," calling them "absolutely horrifically wrong." The comment argues the policies harm children, parents' rights, and girls' sports, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and repeatedly rejects the policy, stating they are "absolutely against" schools teaching "their views of sexuality" and that public schools have no right to "push their immoral transgenderism" on children. The comment argues the regulation should not be adopted and should be kept out of schools.


RAPE AND VIOLENCE WILL INCREASE IN SCHOOLS - VEHEMENTLY OPPOSE

The commenter explicitly says "VEHEMENTLY OPPOSE" and argues the policy would be harmful, claiming "RAPE AND VIOLENCE WILL INCREASE IN SCHOOLS" and that the state should expect "multiple lawsuits." The comment rejects gender integration and transgender accommodations in schools rather than supporting the regulation.


God bless our Transgender youth - STRONGLY SUPPORT

The commenter explicitly says "I strongly support all measures to better care for and support our transgender youth" and calls it "a necessary direction for our school district." The title also says "STRONGLY SUPPORT," leaving little ambiguity about their position on adoption.


The commenter argues against the policy by warning that "sharing bathrooms" would lead to "further issues" and that "integrating genders in sports would cause problems." They explicitly object to transgender participation in sports, saying males have an "athletic advantage" and asking how a female would feel competing against someone with "male genetic makeup."


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly support this policy" and the title adds "Strongly support this inclusive policy. Support Trans Youth!" This is a clear endorsement of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this legislation" and frames it as improving "the physical and mental well-being of transgender students." The closing statement, "Trans lives matter!", reinforces clear approval of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly states, "I oppose this transgender bill" and repeats, "I oppose." This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY DISAGREE!" and objects to "these innocent children" being "subjected to such things," indicating rejection of the transgender student policies. The reference to it being "against all that we believe in as Christians" further shows opposition on religious grounds.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and "I 100% support policies which protect transgender students." They also explain that these policies help students "feel safe in schools" and succeed, indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly states, "I oppose this measure," which directly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No qualifying language suggests support or neutrality.


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

The commenter explicitly states, "I vehemently oppose these policies," which is a direct rejection of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose This Evil" and repeatedly rejects the policy, stating "I WILL NOT tolerate this evil being pushed on our children." The comment argues against transgender recognition and related care, calling it "child abuse" and urging rejection of the agenda.


The commenter explicitly says they are "encouraged to see this legislature finally taking steps to protect our trans kids" and states that school should be protective for "ALL students." This clearly աջակցs adoption of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly writes "Support" and titles the comment "Support for this bill!" indicating clear approval of the proposed regulation. There is no language suggesting any conditions or opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support any guidance that protects our students who are transgender" and asks to "help keep them safe while they are learning." This clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and urges, "Protect our children and allow them to learn in a safe environment!" This clearly endorses adoption of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and praises the policy as a "positive approach." They also state that "All students deserve our support," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The comment says only "Support homeschooling" and does not address the proposed transgender student policies or indicate whether they should be adopted, rejected, or changed. It is therefore too off-topic and vague to infer a position on the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am commenting to support these guiding principles" and urges the commonwealth to "continue to support evidence based policies in our schools." The final clause rejects opposition to trans students, indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy goals by saying, "Trans children deserve protection" and that "their identities should be affirmed." They also support anti-bullying protections, stating bullying "should in no way be tolerated," which aligns with the regulation's purpose.


STRONGLY SUPPORT. Trans kids always have and always will exist.

The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and urges schools to "protect their trans students" through the policy. They frame the regulation as necessary for student safety and well-being, stating that "Gender affirmation doesn't just feel good--it saves lives."


The commenter explicitly says they are "commenting in favor of supporting protecting Transgender students in Virginia" and urges, "Let’s keep our kids safe." They also endorse the policy’s anti-discrimination purpose, calling it "common sense legislation."


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Strongly Support" and urges acceptance of transgender students: "Who are we to tell others to hide themselves? Be kind." This clearly endorses the regulation's protective intent rather than opposing it.


The commenter explicitly says "110% support" and calls the proposal "well-researched" and "evidence-based." They also argue it would "protect previously vulnerable students" and create "safer, more inclusive learning environments," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this well-researched and evidence-based proposal" and calls it a "Great proposal." They also give reasons for approval, saying it supports students' "health and autonomy" and helps them feel safe and engaged in school.


against it. forced manipulation on captive defenseless children.

The commenter explicitly says "against it" and characterizes the policy as "forced manipulation on captive defenseless children," which indicates rejection of the regulation. The remark about not trying it in adult workplaces first further signals opposition to the transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly rejects the transgender student policies, saying "That's the biggest bunch of horse ive ever heard" and arguing schools should not "send boys in girls locker rooms r bathrooms" or withhold information from parents. They also threaten to "petition, seek legal counsel, and boycott/ protest" if it passes, which clearly indicates opposition.


VDOE Drafted Model Policies for Treatment of Transgender & Non-Binary Students in Virginia Pubic Sc

The commenter explicitly says they "applaud" the General Assembly and VDOE and praises the "recently drafted Model Policies" as "necessary work" to ensure equitable treatment. They clearly want the policies adopted and supported.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the rights of the next generation of students" and "I support the rights of the next generation of students to be represented and protected." They also praise the guidance as a way to "PREVENT DISCRIMINATION" and say they are "glad our state is making strides to stamp it out."


The commenter explicitly says, "Support the treatment of ALL people," which endorses the regulation’s inclusive approach. The phrase "not one specific group" suggests support for policies that treat transgender students fairly rather than excluding them.


The commenter explicitly says "Vote No on transgender" and argues the document "will increase more issues than it solves," indicating opposition to adoption. They also criticize the policy’s treatment of gender identity and pronouns, suggesting they do not want the regulation approved.


The comment explicitly says "Oppose !" and the title also states "Oppose!". It provides no additional reasoning, but the position against adopting the regulation is unambiguous.


The commenter explicitly says "Vote yes" and repeatedly endorses the policies as helping "make the Trans community feel safer" and "supports children." The comment argues for adoption of the regulation and frames it as progress for transgender rights in schools.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. They also add that "This is good for all children," reinforcing approval of the policy's goals.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support policy that recognizes the worth and dignity of all students, including transgender students." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed guidance and its inclusion of transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support" the guidance and argues it will "ensure that our schools are more inclusive" and provide "safe learning environments." The comment frames the policies as necessary protection against discrimination and mistreatment of trans students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this legislation" and repeatedly argues for its adoption, stating that trans youth "deserve the same treatment as any other kid." The rest of the comment defends the policy and rebuts objections about safety and bathroom access, which reinforces support.


The commenter explicitly says "yes support" and asks not to let it "fall through," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. The phrase "a fair school environment for all students" further indicates approval of the policy's goals.


The commenter explicitly says, "I vote no" and describes the draft as containing "many disturbing policies." They object to school personnel withholding information from parents and argue this "would not be in the best interest of the child or the family unit," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Support" and says they have been "advocating for years" for the protections in the document. They also thank the agency and state that the guidance on "student privacy, dress code, and access to facilities" is needed by trans students.


The commenter explicitly says, "not with this guidance" and "Find alternatives," which indicates opposition to adopting the proposed policy as written. The statement that "Youth girls will be at an even higher risk" shows a negative view of the regulation’s effects rather than support for it.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" the policy and rejects transgender restroom access, stating that people should use the restroom matching their sex assigned at birth. The repeated language like "This nonsense has got to stop" shows clear opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "strongly support!" and urges the policy to "Protect and support trans students." The rest of the comment reinforces approval of the regulation’s purpose, asking to "Respect them as human beings" and "Listen."


Serious concerns with this document and proposed policies

The commenter repeatedly expresses "serious concerns" with the guidance and argues it is "far more ideology-based than fact-based" and "dangerous." They ask for the department to "slow down" and imply the policy should not be implemented in its current form, especially regarding gender identity assumptions, student identification, and restroom access.


Compulsory Speech is the most fascist thing. These policies are fascist.

The commenter explicitly rejects the policies, stating "These policies are fascist" and calling them "Compulsory Speech." This is a clear expression that the regulation should not be adopted.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this," which directly indicates rejection of the regulation. They also state it "violates our religious and educational freedom" and parental rights, reinforcing opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and "I vote no," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The statement that their children will be pulled out of public school if this happens further indicates opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this proposal" and argues that schools should "support all students" and "protect previously vulnerable students." The comment endorses the regulation as a way to create "safer, more inclusive learning environments."


Transgender Student Safety and Protection

The commenter explicitly says they "support protections for transgender and non-binary students" and asks the state to "protect all LGBT students" in Virginia schools. They also state that such protections will help create "a positive learning environment," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Fully supporti" and adds that "ALL children should feel comfortable while getting their education," which aligns with approving the transgender student policies. The comment expresses clear endorsement rather than criticism or neutrality.


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 comment explicitly states "NOT SUPPORT" and provides no qualifying language suggesting approval or modification. This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation.


The commenter explicitly endorses equal treatment for transgender people, stating that they "deserve the same basic human rights" and that "Everyone should have access to education, regardless of their gender identity." This clearly supports adopting the regulation’s protections for transgender students.


Strongly Opposed - This Bill is Overt Violation of Social Order - Pandora’s Box

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Opposed" and states the bill "must be put away immediately." They argue it is a dangerous overreach that would "undermine the foundations" of family and society, which clearly rejects adoption of the regulation.


The commenter rejects the policy outright with "Absolutely not!" and argues it will be abused, specifically citing fears that "a boy decides he identifies as a girl just to use the girls locker room/bathroom." The mention of parents considering private school indicates opposition to adopting the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose!" and states "This change is not ok!" They argue public schools should focus only on "the childrens EDUCATION! That’s IT!", indicating rejection of the transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this," which directly endorses the regulation. They also provide reasons in favor, arguing that trans students need access to facilities aligning with their identity and that support reduces depression, anxiety, and ostracism.


The comment explicitly says "ABSOLUTELY NOT SUPPORT," which clearly rejects the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language or request for modification, only a direct opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "These people must be fully supported," which clearly endorses the proposed policies for transgender students. There is no language indicating opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this well-researched and evidence-based proposal" and argues that the policy would "protect previously vulnerable students" and create "safer, more inclusive learning environments." The comment endorses adoption as written and does not raise objections or request weakening.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose the government pushing an agenda" and refers to the proposal as "transgender policies that we unequivocally disagree with." They ask for an alternative policy supporting those who oppose transgenderism, indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support for it.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and "strongly disagree with this indoctrination of our children," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. They also object to schools addressing LGBTQ topics, saying these conversations should be initiated "at home with parents."


The commenter explicitly states "Absolutely NOT SUPPORT," which clearly indicates opposition to the proposed regulation. No additional explanation or qualifying language is provided.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose!" and "Please vote NO!" which clearly indicates they do not want the regulation adopted. There is no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality.


VA would be ahead of other states in finally supporting a traditionally underserved population.

The commenter explicitly says, "VA would be ahead of other states in finally supporting a traditionally underserved population," which endorses the regulation. The closing line, "We must protect our kids. All of our kids," further supports the policy’s protective intent rather than opposing it.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this" and adds "Protect trans kids," which clearly endorses adoption of the proposed policies. The comment expresses approval without reservations or requests for changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support guidance" and repeatedly argues that schools should "support trans & nonbinary youth". They frame the policy as necessary for student safety, acceptance, and mental health, which indicates clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support!" and repeatedly urges adoption, including "Protect transgender students" and "Give them a school system that will treat them fairly." The comment endorses the regulation’s goals of safety, privacy, and rights for transgender students.


Strongly support, this is a human rights issue!

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this" and frames the policy as "a human rights issue." They also argue that transgender students should be "accepted and respected," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Absolutely oppose!" and characterizes the policy as "another attempt to promote an agenda" rather than support for students. The language rejects the regulation on ideological grounds, saying it "contradicts the natural law" and "exploit[s]" children.


The commenter explicitly states, "Absolutely opposed" and "Please vote NO," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed to this guidance!" which directly states opposition to adoption. The concern about a young daughter being "exposed to" the policy reinforces that they want it rejected rather than modified.


The commenter explicitly says they are "excited to see this policy be implemented" and that they "fully believe in supporting a policy" that reduces discrimination. The comment repeatedly endorses the regulation as promoting "safe and equitable" conditions and "equal opportunity" for students.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this bill!" This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation, with no qualifying objections or requested changes.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support this" and argues the policies "protect trans kids" and "create a better environment for all." The comment endorses adoption of the regulation as a protective measure for transgender students.


Strongly object to teaching of transgender and LGBT to our youth

The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly object" and "This does not belong in our schools," indicating clear opposition to the proposed transgender student policies. The remark "Quite leaving the parents out of raising their children" also shows resistance to the regulation's school-based guidance.


The comment explicitly says "Support!" and repeats "Support," which clearly indicates approval of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism suggesting otherwise.


Protective legislation being considered for trans and non-binary students.

The commenter explicitly says they are "writing to support protections for transgender and non-binary students" and asks to "Please consider protections" for this population. They also argue these protections will create "a safe place to learn and succeed" and a "positive learning environment."


The comment explicitly says "Strongly support," which clearly endorses adoption of the proposed regulation. No contrary language or qualifications are present.


The commenter explicitly states "100% SUPPORT" and says their family is in "complete, unqualified support of legislation protecting the rights of ALL individuals." This clearly endorses the proposed policies rather than opposing or questioning them.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT OUR TRANS STUDENTS" and urges officials to "pass this bill and improve their elementary and secondary school experiences." They describe harmful effects of prior policies and argue that trans students should receive "the necessary care they deserve," indicating clear support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose" and repeatedly argues against the policy, calling it "a much more personal issue and agenda" and stating "This kind of education is not for public schools." They also urge the state to "NOT" push it in schools and frame it as harmful to students and parents' rights.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support all children, including LGBTQ youth," and states "we need help in protecting children" from discrimination. This clearly endorses the regulation’s protective purpose for transgender and LGBTQ students.


The commenter explicitly states "STRONGLY OPPOSED" and "Absolutely do not support!!" which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. There is no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "In favor, strongly support" and describes the policy as "the bare minimum for protecting and including trans students." They also defend the proposal against a likely objection about sports, indicating approval of the regulation as written.


Support!!! Thank you!! From a father and teacher

The commenter explicitly says "Support!!! Thank you!!" and praises the Board for "working to ensure that trans students are treated with basic human dignity and respect." This clearly endorses adoption of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly states, "I strongly strongly oppose," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. The title, "Strongly Strongly Oppose," reinforces that position.


The commenter explicitly states "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and repeats "strongly support," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. No contrary language or qualifications are present.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and repeats "I strongly support!" They also frame the policy as "basic human rights," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSED!!!" and "COMPLETELY AGAINST this proposal." They object that it threatens "parental rights" and opposes the policy because it does not allow "parental notification," calling it a "Huge government overstep."


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this well-researched and evidence-based proposal" and repeatedly endorses the policy as creating "safer, more inclusive learning environments." They also argue it would "protect previously vulnerable students," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Absolutely oppose" and rejects the policy, arguing that transgender students should be sent to "a specific school of their own". The statement "Our religious vows do not accept this!!" further indicates opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this amendment" and repeats, "I strongly oppose this legislation." They also state they will "drop my daughter out of school and fully homeschool her," indicating rejection of the policy.


The commenter explicitly writes "SUPPORT!" and says "It is so important to protect trans and nonbinary youth," which clearly endorses the regulation. The comment offers a reason for approval rather than criticism or a request to weaken it.


The commenter explicitly titles the comment "strongly support" and argues that "Educating children about it in schools will help kids make an informed decision." The body endorses school guidance on transgender students as a way to counter misinformation and social pressure, which supports adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly urges others to "Stop making this about you" and says "Don't take away kids' HUMAN RIGHTS," which clearly supports protecting transgender students. The title "PROTECT TRANS LIVES" and references to respecting others' identities indicate approval of the proposed policies, likely with strong enthusiasm.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose these guidelines" and repeatedly argues they should not be approved, calling them "totally unworkable" and saying they "need to be totally reworked." The comment objects to parental exclusion, bathroom/changing facility access, and religious conscience concerns as reasons to reject the proposal.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support trans and non-binary youth" and states that schools "should be a safe and accepting environment" and "should encourage acceptance." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies' goals and adoption.


The comment explicitly says "strongly support an equitable learning environment for persons of all gender identities" and then answers "YES," indicating approval of the proposed policies. There is no language opposing or questioning the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues that "The teaching of personal sexual PREFERENCE has no place being taught in school," which rejects the regulation’s transgender-student guidance. Although they add that children with questions should have access to counselors and social workers, that is a limited caveat and does not change the overall opposition.


The comment explicitly endorses transgender rights with the title "Trans rights are human rights!" and the body states "Human rights apply to all people." This clearly supports adopting the regulation’s protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "This needs to be revisited and revised," and argues the policy contains "concerning language" that could override "the rights of parents" and "the free speech rights of the teachers and other students." They frame the guidance as "silencing of differences" and call for substantial revision rather than adoption as written.


The comment clearly rejects the regulation with the title "Absolutely Not" and the rhetorical question "Have the people agreeing even read this?" indicating disapproval. It does not offer support or neutral inquiry; it is a brief negative reaction to the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says "Fully support trans student rights" and "highly recommend" making students feel supported and equal. They also endorse the policies as "one step towards civility and wellbeing within the school setting," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose such preposterous legislation" and asks to "Stop pushing against God's natural order," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The reference to infringement on "the rights of students, parents, and teachers" further indicates opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and argues that "Trans & non-binary youth deserve safety, acceptance and acknowledgment." They further state that school "needs to be a safe place for children physically and mentally," which clearly endorses the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "It is time to support the human rights of all Americans" and emphasizes that "All children should have a safe place in school," including "transgender children." This clearly endorses the regulation’s protective goals for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying "This is NOT OKAY!" and arguing that allowing transgender students access to bathrooms/locker rooms would be "BAD." They frame the regulation as a threat to "safety of all students" and say it would "take away everyone else’s rights/safety."


The commenter explicitly says, "I support my students being their true selves" and "I support without judgement or malice," which clearly endorses the guidance. They also state they "stand against prejudice and discrimination" toward transgender, non-binary, and LGBTQ+ students, indicating approval of the regulation's protective aims.


The commenter explicitly states, "I am in Support of trans rights in Virginia," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose. There is no language indicating opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly support this guidance document" and frames transgender rights as "human rights." They also argue the policies are "necessary and life-saving," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues the policy "does not respect the freedom of speech or the freedom of religion" of those who believe "sex is determined by our biology." Although the final sentence mentions schools should respect all people, the overall thrust is rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidance" and explains that schools should provide "a safe and inclusive environment" where "LGBTQ students feel supported and respected." This clearly endorses adoption of the proposed policies.


STRONGLY OPPOSE Proposed Transgender Policies by VDOE

The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and argues the policy "goes far beyond" protecting rights, calling it an "egregious violation" and saying it is "trampling on the rights of parents and children." They conclude that the policy uses "intimidation and bullying tactics" and should not be embraced in public schools.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose, Oppose, Oppose" and argues the policy is "very dangerous" and should not be forced on children and families. They reject the premise of the regulation, stating "There are only two genders" and that suggesting otherwise "damages children and families."


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this bill" and urges the VaDOE to "adopt[] an inclusive policy." They also express approval of the policy’s purpose by emphasizing support for trans and LGBTQIA+ youth and accountability for staff.


I oppose the VDOE draft transgender policies

The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose the draft transgender policies put forward by the VDOE" and argues the policies "go far beyond the path the General Assembly prescribed." They also say the policies "infringe the First Amendment rights of parents" and should not accommodate "irreversible 'gender transitions,'" showing clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly states, "I do not approve/strongly disagree," which directly indicates opposition to the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided.


Gender Dysphoria is Real, but Forcing Transgender Ideology on Kids is Wrong

The commenter explicitly says "forcing transgender ideology on our kids... is wrong" and calls for "some room" for people who believe sex is biological reality, indicating opposition to the policy. Although they acknowledge compassion for gender dysphoria, the overall thrust is that the proposed guidance should not be adopted as written.


The comment explicitly states "Oppose" in both the title and body, indicating clear rejection of the proposed regulation. No additional reasoning or qualifications are provided.


I oppose new VDOE guidance's assault on children and parents

The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose new VDOE guidance" and calls it "a dangerous draft policy." They argue it would "force" affirmation, "undermine parents' authority," and constitute an "assault" on freedoms of conscience, expression, privacy, and religion, all of which indicate rejection of the regulation.


Strongly Oppose Warped Sexual Teaching in Schools

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and objects to "lgbt teaching" and "letting them decide which bathroom" to use, indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The statement that it "goes against the teaching of God" and will have "dire consequences" further shows opposition rather than a request for changes.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose transgender policy" and argues that "This policy is not thinking of all the children that will be harmed." They further state it will "negatively affect mental health of all students," indicating rejection of the regulation.


Preserve the Privacy of Girls in the Lockers and Bathrooms

The commenter argues that allowing transgender girls access to female locker rooms and bathrooms is a "breach of privacy" and says it should be limited to "only females." This directly rejects a key part of the proposed policies regarding transgender student access to school facilities.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly OPPOSE this legislation," which directly states opposition to the proposed regulation. The title also reinforces this with "Strongly oppose."


Keep Boys and Girls In Separate Rooms During Overnight Field Trips

The commenter argues that "boys and girls should be kept in separate rooms during over night field trips" and says co-ed overnight rooms are "a breach of trust," indicating opposition to any policy allowing mixed or transgender-inclusive rooming arrangements. Although they mention mental health, the thrust is to restrict the regulation rather than support it.


OPPOSE! YOU CAN'T CHANGE YOUR DNA! STOP THE LIES! PROTECT OUR KIDS

The commenter explicitly says "OPPOSE!" and demands to "STOP THE LIES! PROTECT OUR KIDS," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The statement "YOU CAN'T CHANGE YOUR DNA!" is used as a reason to oppose the regulation rather than support it.


Strongly oppose DOE transgender policy. This would only spread the confusion concerning gender int

The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose DOE transgender policy," which directly rejects the regulation. They also argue it would "spread the confusion concerning gender" and "den[y] parents their rights," indicating substantive opposition to adoption.


Oppose. Being an experienced teacher myself, I strongly oppose this bill.

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this bill" and repeats that it is "completely inappropriate." They argue against hiding a student's identity from parents and against allowing access to locker rooms, indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support for it.


The commenter explicitly says, "Support the guidelines" and expresses approval that the state is "helping trans and non-binary students feel safe at school." They also call for staff training to "help make schools safer," which supports adoption of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this guidance," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. The additional statement that it is "so important to the well-being of our youth" reinforces a favorable position.


The commenter explicitly says, "I very much support these guidelines," and the title states "This parent Overwhelmingly supports." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose these model policies" and repeatedly argues against adoption, calling them "reckless" and saying they would have an "overall negative effect on students." They also propose an alternative approach instead of adopting the policies, which confirms opposition rather than neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this legislation," and argues against transgender student access to locker rooms and against discipline for misgendering. The phrase "This is a slippery slope" reinforces that they want the policy rejected rather than amended.


The comment explicitly says "strongly oppose," which clearly indicates the commenter wants the regulation rejected. No supporting or qualifying language is provided.


The commenter explicitly states, "I strongly oppose the transgender policy," which directly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The comment explicitly says "strongly oppose," which directly indicates rejection of the proposed transgender student policy. No qualifying language suggests support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose Policy!" and argues against shared facilities with transgender students, stating schools should protect "bodily privacy and dignity" and that most children would be uncomfortable sharing bathrooms and locker rooms. This indicates opposition to the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support policies that protect transgender and non-binary youth in schools" and closes with "I support the VDOE model polices." They also endorse the regulation’s goals of a "safe and supportive learning environment" and protection from "bullying, harassment, and discrimination."


The commenter explicitly says, "I'm strongly opposed to these measures" and frames the proposal as harmful. They argue it "cuts against parental rights, student safety, and freedom of speech," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I'm strongly opposed to these measures" and frames the proposal as "an injustice to children and parents." They also argue it "cuts against parental rights, student safety, and freedom of speech," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "we strongly support this guidance!" This is a clear endorsement of adopting the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy in the title, "Support Trans Student Protections," and argues that "having clear protections for them is more important than ever." The body cites discrimination, bullying, and suicide risk as reasons to adopt the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "we should all support this," which directly endorses the proposed policies. The rest of the comment reinforces approval by appealing to unconditional parental support and empathy for transgender children.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidance on transgender student protections" and argues that schools should ensure transgender students "are safe and welcomed." The comment clearly endorses adoption of the policy to protect students from bullying and unsupportive environments.


Strongly Oppose! Medical Decisions without Parental Consent

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the transgender guidance document" and repeatedly argues against it, including claims that it would "depriv[e] parents" of knowledge and force students into bathrooms/locker rooms they are uncomfortable with. The comment asks that the measure not go through and warns it will cause harm and enrollment loss.


The commenter explicitly says "SUPPORT this much needed legislation!" and urges, "Protect our kids and pass this legislation." They also describe it as "Science based and comprehensive" and say it "provides exactly the kind of guidance schools need," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and asks to "please try a different approach," indicating rejection of the proposed policies. The statement that it is "more about ideology" and will "cause polarization and negative results" further shows opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this guidance" and explains that it would help schools provide "a safe and inclusive educational experience for all students." The reference to "especially our LGBT youth" shows affirmative support for the regulation's purpose and implementation.


The commenter explicitly says "Fully Support Protections for Transgender Students" and urges, "Please implement additional guidance that protects transgender students rights." This clearly endorses adopting the regulation and even strengthening it.


The commenter explicitly signals opposition in the title, "OPPOESE," and argues against affirming transgender identities for children, saying it is "a crime" to "lock a child into an identity" and that officials have "NO Right to bend God's laws." These statements clearly reject the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly labels the comment "Support" and describes wanting transgender students to feel safe using "the bathroom" and "locker rooms" and to be supported in class. The language endorses empathy and inclusion, indicating approval of the proposed policies rather than opposition.


new transgender speak guidelines for schools

The comment explicitly says "Strongly oppose," which directly states the commenter wants the regulation rejected. No additional context suggests support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly states, "I strongly oppose," which directly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. The title also says "OPPOSE," reinforcing the same position.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "OPPOSE" and argues that "Facilities and activities should be based on gender someone was born as," which rejects the proposed transgender student policies. They also say "Transgenderism is a mental illness" and urge to "Stop subjecting our children" to these ideas, indicating clear opposition rather than a request for modification.


We need GSA's at the middle school level. too many students are afraid to approach school staff to sponsor a GSA because students don't know which staff members are allies.

The commenter explicitly says, "I support the model policies for Transgender students" and repeatedly urges that the policies be implemented immediately: "We should not delay implementing these policies" and "We need these policies now." The comment also endorses specific provisions such as affirming chosen names/pronouns, confidentiality, and access to facilities.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support equal rights for all genders" and "No discrimination in America!" This clearly endorses the proposed transgender student policies and their nondiscrimination goals.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this guidance" and repeats that support multiple times. They also endorse the policy goals of creating a "safe and inclusive environment" and protecting "LGBTQ youth" from "bullying, harassment and discrimination."


Transgender/Non-binary Health and Well-Being

The commenter clearly endorses protecting transgender and non-binary students, describing them as a "vulnerable group" facing discrimination and concluding, "Thank you for representing all people!" The offer to "educate" and share voices of transgender people indicates support for the regulation’s inclusive aims rather than opposition.


The commenter explicitly says they are "in support of the Trans Student Policy" and repeatedly endorses the guidelines as protecting transgender students and all children. They also state there is "NO ACCEPTABLE reason to be against these guidelines," which clearly indicates approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly labels the policy "Strongly Opposed" and says it is a "misguided policy" that "tears down" protections. They also argue against allowing transgender students in sports and conclude with "NO!" to the policy makers' proposal.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose this gender confusion agenda," which clearly rejects the proposed transgender student policy. The phrase indicates opposition to adoption rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly do not support this proposal" and argues it would "break down families" and be "detrimental to society." They object to teachers addressing gender identity and insist that "Teachers are not parents," indicating rejection of the policy.


The comment explicitly states "OPPOSE," which directly indicates the commenter wants the regulation rejected. No additional explanation or qualifications are provided.


The commenter explicitly praises the policies, saying they "give me hope" and that the government is "solidly pointed in the right direction with these policies." They also say they are "excited to encourage my administration to adapt and exceed them," which clearly supports adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose," "Absolutely not," and urges the Department of Education to "reject the proposed model regulations." The body repeatedly argues against the policies on bathroom access, sports, parental rights, and religious objections, all indicating clear opposition to adoption.


Oppose!!!!!  Don't be fooled by misguided compassion.  This leads to teen suicide!

The commenter explicitly says "Oppose!!!!!" and argues against the policy by calling it "misguided compassion" and claiming "Transgender confusion is just that confusion." They further state that "Transgenderism leads to confusion," indicating they do not want the regulation adopted.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" the proposed transgender policies and adds that "this does more harm than good," which clearly rejects adoption of the regulation. There is no language suggesting support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the protection of trans youth" and repeats, "Please support this bill." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "NO to Transgender Policy" and calls it "bad policy," indicating clear opposition to adoption. They argue it promotes "politicized, sexualized ideology," threatens religious parents, and "encourages schools to deceive parents," all of which show rejection rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "No!" and "Strongly oppose on every level," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with phrases like "Stop indoctrinating our kids!" and "This is child abuse," indicating they want the regulation blocked. They also say "Stay out of sex related education" and criticize "this ungodly agenda," which shows clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose this" and argues it "will do more harm then good for all involved!!!" This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation rather than a request for changes.


Support for equitable access to education

The commenter explicitly endorses the policy’s goals, stating that "There is no space in education for institutionalized discrimination" and criticizing those who oppose it. They argue for protecting transgender students from bullying and negligent school responses, which aligns with supporting adoption of the regulation.


Oppose VDOE Transgender Policy for 2021-2022

The commenter explicitly says, "I am writing to oppose the proposed VDOE policy" and argues against pronoun requirements and restroom/locker room access provisions. Although they begin by supporting equal treatment, the overall thrust is to reject the policy because it allegedly violates speech, religion, and privacy rights.


No to Transgender indoctrination in our schools

The commenter explicitly says, "I want my objection to Transgender indoctrination in our schools to go on record" and argues it is not the school's job to "teach, promote or encourage" children to question or reject their gender. Although they support bullying-free education, the overall message rejects the proposed transgender student policies as harmful.


Strongly Support Consistent, Compassionate Guidelines

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this guidance" and argues that all students should be protected from "stigma, bullying, or discrimination." They also endorse "consistent standards across all school districts" and a framework that lets students express themselves safely, which clearly supports adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not agree with this new upcoming law," indicating opposition to the regulation. The stated reason is fear that someone could "enter the bathroom acting like a transsexual" and harm children, which shows rejection of the policy on safety grounds.


Strongly support this bill - has basis in best evidence

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this bill" and adds that it "is based in science and current based evidence." This is a clear endorsement of adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidance" and gives a reason favoring adoption: schools should be "safe and inclusive environments for all of our students." This is a clear endorsement of the regulation as proposed.


Strongly opposed to transgender policies, bathroom and classroom indoctrination.

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the transgender policies" and also opposes "transgender bathrooms" and "classroom indoctrination." They argue for parental control and the right to opt out, indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidance on transgender rights." This directly endorses the proposed policies rather than opposing or questioning them.


The commenter explicitly praises the policy direction, saying the most important thing is to "offer them support and acceptance" and thanking those "working on expanding protections for LGBTQ youth." The comment argues the risks of not supporting trans/LGBTQ+ youth are greater, indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with the title "No to gender confusion" and the directive "Keep boys out of girl's restrooms/dressing rooms." This indicates opposition to the transgender student guidance, especially its provisions on restroom and dressing room access.


The commenter explicitly thanks the agency for its efforts to "protect our transgender and gender non-conforming youth" and says the policy is "simply allowing students to express themselves in a safe way." They also reject criticism of the policy as "unfounded," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose the transgender policies proposed by the Virginia Department of Education." They also argue the policies are "harmful" and object to "biological males compete against biological girls" in sports, indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "trans-folk need our support" and emphasizes that transgender people are "no less deserving of respect" and are vulnerable to harassment and discrimination. This aligns with supporting policies that protect transgender students and create a safer, more supportive environment.


The commenter explicitly says "Support this bill" and states that the policy will "make ALL students safer." They further call it "critical to the health and wellbeing of students," which clearly endorses adoption.


Applaud these proposed policies that support all students

The commenter explicitly says, "Applaud these proposed policies" and "congratulate those who put these important policies together," indicating clear approval. They also state they "hope that lawmakers understand" the policies are important and "support and protection of transgender youth truly saves lives," which reinforces support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support" the regulation and calls it "lunacy and disgusting." They also threaten to "pull my kids out," indicating strong rejection of the policy.


Supporting Transgender Kids in Public Schools Saves Lives

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support all policy that affirms and empowers transgender youth" and argues that protecting these kids "will in fact save lives." The comment clearly endorses adoption of the regulation and frames it as beneficial and evidence-based.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this bill" and repeats "Please support!" They also give a reason for approval, stating it may have a "positive psychological impact on trans students and could save lives."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and gives a reason against the policy: "Parents are the primary educators not the state." This indicates rejection of the regulation rather than support or a neutral question/comment.


The commenter argues against the policy, calling it "involuntary promotion of gender selection" and saying it is "irresponsible and actually damaging to kids." The title "Promoting Gender Confusion" and references to biology and children outgrowing it indicate opposition to adopting the transgender student guidance.


The commenter explicitly says, "I'm strongly opposed" to the policy and characterizes it as a "one size fits all transgender mentality policy," indicating rejection of the regulation. No language suggests support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please oppose this legislation" and repeatedly argues the policy is "not healthy or safe." They object to pronoun requirements, bathroom access, and the broader treatment of transgender students, indicating clear opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidance" and adds, "We must support and protect our transgender youth," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. There is no مخالفت or request to weaken it.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with "Absolutely NOT!" and argues that children should not be exposed to the subject. They warn it will cause "further confusion" and lead young students to make irreversible decisions, indicating opposition to adoption.


guidance document for supporting transgender kids in public schools

The commenter explicitly says it is "really important that the state implement policies that support students who are transgender and gender non-conforming" and concludes, "I support trans-affirming policy guidance for our educators." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy’s inclusive approach, saying "ALL children should be treated with love and respect" and that "A supportive environment is surely better than a hateful one." The final sentence, "We must teach our kids inclusion and love," clearly supports adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "Absolutely not in favor of proposed transgender policy," which directly rejects the regulation. They also argue against shared bathroom access for transgender students and want parental evidence/coordination requirements, indicating they want the policy substantially weakened or rejected.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy’s goals, saying that learning about differences helps children become "compassionate, caring human beings" and that "Giving each child the right to feel safe and comfortable at school is imperative." They also affirm that "ensuring equal rights to all children will not take away anyone's rights," which supports adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am very much in favor of these changes" and "I fully support anything that will help our students feel more comfortable, accepted, and safe." They also ask to "Approve!!" and describe the policy as beneficial for transgender students and all students.


strongly oppose.  This is better called "the destroy children" policy

The commenter explicitly says "strongly oppose" and attacks the policy as "the destroy children" policy, indicating clear rejection. They also argue that "Parents cannot be left out" and invoke "religious freedom," both framed as objections to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says they "applaud the Virginia DOE" for the guidelines and titles the comment "strong support of inclusive, evidence-based educational environments." They also state the policies are "in the best interest of students, families, schools, and communities," indicating clear approval of adoption.


VDOE Model Policies on the Treatment of Transgender (Trans) and Non-Binary Youth in Schools

The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the VDOE proposed model policies" and repeatedly argues that schools should be "safe, protective, supportive, and nurturing" for transgender and nonbinary youth. They also state that respecting pronouns "saves so many lives" and that "It is essential that our schools are safe for all," clearly endorsing adoption of the policies.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "oppose" and argues the policy is "a big step backwards not forwards in women's rights." They object to bathroom access and sports participation, saying it would harm girls and let "birth males who identify as female" compete against women.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this guidance!" and urges officials to "Please protect our most vulnerable" by adopting it. The body repeatedly endorses the policy’s goals of dignity, equal access, and a "safe and affirming educational environment."


The commenter explicitly says "OPPOSE this sexist policy" and argues it will harm girls by eliminating "restroom/locker room privacy" and affecting sports scholarships. These statements clearly reject the regulation and call it harmful.


House Bill 145 and Senate Bill 161 (from 2020 session)

The commenter explicitly says, "Please support House Bill 145 and Senate Bill 161" and describes the bills as "protective factors" that would "reduce violence and harm" and create an "inclusive environment." The final statement, "Trans rights are human rights!" further indicates clear approval of the regulation's goals.


I strongly oppose these proposals for "transgender ideology"

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose these proposals for 'transgender ideology.'" They also reject the regulation as a solution, stating, "this is not the way to do it!"


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy goals, saying "every child deserves to be respected, safe, and confident" and that schools should do this by "respecting their decision" and validating students' identities. The opening "YES!" also signals clear approval of the proposed guidance.


Strongly oppose new proposed transgender policies

The commenter explicitly says they are "very opposed to the new proposed transgender policies," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. The opening phrase "We are concerned parents" reinforces that they are objecting to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose to this" and threatens to "remove my children from school and homeschool them if necessary," indicating clear rejection of the regulation. The concern that "It can’t be safe for our children" and the appeal to parental rights reinforce opposition rather than support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the drafted transgender mandates" and repeatedly argues the Department of Education should "stop trying to increase the scope of their job." They also say the policies will "only end up isolating and ostracizing" students and distract from academics, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this policy" and further argues that schools "must actively affirm and support the safety and rights of transgender students." The comment endorses the policy’s purpose and rationale without expressing reservations.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and states the policy "should be supported or pushed through" in the negative, calling it "a disaster" and saying it "will be detrimental to all children." This is a clear rejection of the regulation.


The comment says, "Treat all as equals," which clearly endorses the regulation’s nondiscrimination and equal-treatment goals. The title, "Protect those who need protection," also signals support for policies protecting transgender students.


The commenter explicitly gives "Full Support for Protection of Trans and Nonbinary Students in VA Schools!" and praises the document as making schools "safer for all." They also endorse its guidance on reducing "bullying, suicide rates, and discrimination," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly argues against the policy, warning that "allowing transgender ideology to be fully supported in schools" creates danger and that "full use of school facilities...meaning restrooms" would leave children vulnerable. The final sentence, "Protecting children...is more important than self expression," clearly rejects the regulation's approach.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and urges to "protect the health and well-being of trans youth," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. There is no language opposing or questioning the policy.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONLY OPPOSE" and uses imperative language to reject the policy, including "STOP YOUR DIRTY GAMES." There is no indication of support or a request for modification; the comment is a clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy with the title "Support and love our trans students!" and argues to "protect children." The body rejects opposition to trans protections, stating "Trans rights are human rights," which clearly supports adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I appose this new transgender legislation for schools," which clearly rejects the regulation. The phrase "Keep children safe and innocent" is presented as a reason for opposition, indicating concern about the policy's impact on children.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" the model policies and repeatedly argues they should not be passed, calling them "this insanity" and saying "If this gets passed through my child will not be involved." The comment frames the policy as harmful and politically motivated, indicating clear rejection rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this policy" and frames it as adding "protection for trans youth." They also endorse the policy’s purpose by saying it helps combat "bullying and discrimination" and create a "safe space to learn."


Strongly support. Transgender lives matter.

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and asks to "help protect our transgender youth" and "help support our students and children" in a "safe and non-discriminatory environment." These statements clearly endorse adoption of the proposed policies.


NO - Well-intentioned, totally misguided

The commenter explicitly says, "I absolutely oppose these guidelines" and argues the policy "completely trample[s] over the rights of parents, staff, and other students." They also say they will be "keeping my kids out of Virginia public schools because of them," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support legislation that promotes the health and well-being of trans youth," which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


Protect and SAVE youth, students, families, and schools - vote NO!

The commenter explicitly says "vote NO!" and frames the regulation as something to be rejected. The title "Protect and SAVE youth, students, families, and schools" indicates opposition to adoption of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the rights of trans youth" and endorses schools fostering "safe and nourishing environments for ALL students." This is a clear affirmative position in favor of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Strongly Oppose" and says the guidance "seems punitive and discriminatory". They also argue there must be "a better way" and object to "forcing uncomfortable situations on anyone," indicating rejection of the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Support - Protect Trans Kids" and argues that the policies would help transgender and non-binary students. They state that allowing students to safely express their identity would "decrease" suicide risk and "only help" these students, indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "Our family strongly opposes this proposed policy," which directly states opposition. Although they express support for a "safe and nurturing environment for all children," they argue the proposal gives "very little consideration for ALL children" and imply "there must be a better way," indicating they want this policy rejected or substantially changed.


The comment explicitly states "Strongly oppose," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No qualifying language suggests support or neutrality.


The commenter says the guidelines are a "very 'heavy lift'" and explicitly states, "This needs to be reconsidered to find a different solution". They oppose the core facility-access provisions, saying they are "opposed to requiring a student to undress" with a student whose biological gender makes them uncomfortable and that "Another option has to be available."


I support children and PROTECT them by opposing this!

The commenter explicitly says they are "opposing this," which directly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. The phrase "I support children and PROTECT them" is used as justification for that opposition, not support for adoption.


Please protect the students!! Virginia should be a place for all to thrive!!

The commenter explicitly urges, "Please protect the students!!" and says Virginia should be "a place for all to thrive!!" This reads as endorsement of the regulation’s protective, inclusive goals rather than opposition or a neutral question.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose all proposed changes or adoption" and rejects any policy that does not follow the "God given sex" assigned at birth. They also oppose transgender-related accommodations in bathrooms, locker rooms, sports, and school guidance without parent notification.


The commenter explicitly states "Strongly support" in both the title and body, indicating clear approval of the proposed regulation. No contrary language or qualifications are present.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and rejects the policy as "absolutely ridiculous." They object to students being "undressed in front of another gender," indicating opposition to transgender-inclusive school facilities and related provisions.


Oppose! You will severely hinder VA public schools with this foolishness

The commenter explicitly says "Oppose!" and calls the policy "foolishness." They also warn they will "pull their kids" from public schools if it is adopted, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


Vote no so that schools will tell you if a boy is in your girl's changing room!

The commenter explicitly urges rejection: "Vote no" and argues the policy would prevent parents from being informed about a boy in a girl's changing room. The comment frames the regulation as harmful to children and protective of school administrators rather than families.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and concludes, "we strongly oppose these bills." They also describe the policy as "invasive" and say it "crosses ethical and religious boundaries," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Fully support protections for transgender kids and freedom of gender expression!" and states that "All children deserve fair protection within the school system." The comment urges adoption of the protections and rejects objections to them.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this guidance document" and praises its "importance in ensuring a safe learning environment for all students." This is a clear endorsement of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly Oppose!!!" and states, "This needs to stay far away from our schools!!" They also threaten to withdraw their children if the policy is adopted, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose," which directly states opposition to the regulation. They also argue it creates "Higher risk of sexual harassment / rape with shared restrooms lockers/ etc.", indicating they want the policy rejected on safety grounds.


The commenter explicitly states "STRONGLY SUPPORT" in both the title and body, indicating clear approval of the proposed regulation. No contrary language or qualifications are present.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am in FULL SUPPORT of this policy" and repeatedly endorses it as "basic human decency and respect." They argue the policy is needed so transgender students are not "bullied and feel unsafe," which clearly supports adoption.


What about my childrens safety and well being?

The commenter explicitly says the proposal is "disturbing" and that they "feel strongly that these policies should not be passed." They also state they would not feel safe sending their children to school if the policy is implemented, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and gives a reason: "this removes the rights of parents." This indicates rejection of the proposed transgender student policies on parental-rights grounds.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed to the policy" and rejects it as "forced acceptance of the LGBT agenda." They also state, "I will not adhere to this policy," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" and asks, "Please do not impose" the policy. They argue it is an "abomination" and claim it will "cause major problems" and make schools unsafe, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support Transgender and nonbinary students" and argues that protections should be implemented for "at risk students including gender and sexual minorities." This clearly endorses the regulation’s protective purpose rather than opposing it.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed!!!" and calls the policies "ridiculous by any standard." They argue against boys and girls sharing bathrooms and locker rooms, indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support or a neutral inquiry.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and argues that "Every student has the right to feel that they are represented, included, and safe." They also state that the policy "will make a real difference in the life of trans students," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and frames the policy as an "ungodly government agenda," indicating clear rejection of the regulation. The statement about protecting children from "predators" and a "manipulative lie of sexual confusion" shows opposition to the transgender student policies themselves.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and "Fully support" the guidelines. They also argue the policies are "vital" and "essential" for trans students' safety, inclusivity, and equal treatment, indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly disagree with this," indicating rejection of the proposed policies. The additional claim that it is "against reason science and normal American values" reinforces opposition rather than support or neutrality.


Strongly disagree!!! This is not how our children should grow up or have to see such things!!!

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly disagree!!!" and calls the policy "an absolute disgrace," indicating rejection of the regulation. They object to transgender students being accommodated in schools, mentioning "bathrooms or locker rooms" and saying "This is not how God intends for us to live!"


The commenter explicitly says "Support and Affirm Trans Youth!" and argues that "Trans students deserve to have access to bathrooms and other facilities that correspond to their gender." They also urge officials to act and frame the policy as consistent with nondiscrimination protections, indicating clear support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose the setting of guidelines for dealing with transgender students in public schools." They argue the proposal "forces a particular view on ALL" and that schools should avoid "social issues," indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support for it.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Oppose accommodations for transgender preferences" and urges policymakers to reject the guidance by saying it creates "confusion" and should be based on a "Judeo-Christian ethic" instead. They also argue that allowing children to choose sexual identity is harmful, indicating opposition to the regulation's transgender accommodations.


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


The commenter explicitly says "I strongly support this" and argues the policy is "beyond important" for the "health and well-being of all children," especially transgender children. They also say it is "necessary to support them at all times and keep them safe," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose!!!" and asks, "Please do not go forward with this!" which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. The statement that it will cause "significant destruction to our youth" shows opposition rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it "ridiculous" and "awful" and expressing disapproval of parents who support it. The final question, "What are we doing to our children," indicates opposition to the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose!!!" and calls the policy "child abuse and must be stopped," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. There is no language suggesting support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "strongly support" and repeatedly endorses the policy’s inclusive aims, stating that "every student deserves to be treated with respect" and that the Department should be "more inclusive and supportive." This is clear approval of the regulation as proposed.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose," and argues the policy "will make our schools unsafe for all." They also object that it is "over stepping parental rights by the government," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the policy changes being put forward," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and describes the policy as "normalization" of a "faddish, freakish, attention-seeking notion," indicating clear rejection of the regulation. The language targets the underlying transgender policy itself rather than asking for changes.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed" and adds "I AM the parent not the school," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies and concern about parental authority. There is no language supporting adoption or suggesting modifications in favor of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy with the title "Support Trans Students" and states that making schools more inclusive is "recognizing reality." The phrase "Trans Rights are human rights" clearly indicates approval of the regulation's purpose and direction.


The commenter explicitly says "Fully support" and adds that "This proposal is a step in the right direction," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. The statement that transgender individuals "deserve to be protected" aligns with the policy's purpose.


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


The comment only says "i do not agree!!!!" without specifying what part of the regulation is being rejected or whether the commenter is opposing the proposed policies themselves. It is too vague to confidently classify as support or oppose.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly Oppose," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided.


The commenter explicitly წერს "FULL SUPPORT" and says "Trans lives matter!" They also endorse "welcoming and supportive school environments," which aligns with adopting the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the proposed mandates" and repeats that "these mandates are not it." They argue the Department of Education should focus elsewhere and that these issues should be left to parents, indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support for it.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the transgender mandates proposed by the Department of Education." They argue the policy would violate privacy and parental rights and call it "brainwashing and abuse," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I disapprove of these transgender policies" and repeatedly objects to key parts of the proposal, including "transgender bathrooms in our schools" and state involvement in parenting. Although they say they do not condone bullying, the overall thrust is rejection of the policies and a desire to weaken or stop them.


The commenter explicitly says, "Unequivocally support!" and "I strongly support this!" which clearly indicates approval of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and calls the policy "a direct attack" whose purpose is to "weaken the nuclear family." The language clearly rejects the regulation and frames it as harmful and divisive.


The commenter explicitly states "Strongly oppose," which directly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No qualifying language suggests support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly begins with "Oppose" and argues the policy would "wreak more havoc on our children" and create "added confusion and tension." They reject the underlying premise of the regulation, saying "True gender according to chromosomes" is "science" and asking, "What kind of world do we want for our children?"


The commenter explicitly says they "express strong support for this initiative" and asks to "Please continue these efforts" to protect transgender students. They also state that "Supporting transgender students is the right thing to do," which clearly endorses adoption of the guidance.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose policy" and argues the proposal is "progressive" and "should not be the aim" of public schools. They also object to specific provisions on parental rights and facility access, saying it "extends far beyond the realm of education" and "opens wide the potential for abuse."


The commenter explicitly says "I SUPPORT" and urges to "PROTECT THE HEALTH AND WELL-BEING OF TRANS YOUTH," which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose. There is no language opposing or questioning the policy.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and repeats "ABSOLUTELY NO NO NO NO," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed policies. There is no supporting language or request for modification, only emphatic opposition.


The commenter explicitly condemns the policy as an "outrageous overreach" and says it "defies reason and good sense." They argue it infringes on "parental rights" and criticize schools taking over a "crucial aspect of a child's identity," indicating clear opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this guidance document" and praises VDOE's efforts "to advance equity" by supporting transgender students. This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation as proposed.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose!" and urges the schools to "Focus on the academics!" rather than the transgender policies. The phrase "Let kids and their innocence be valued" indicates rejection of the regulation on moral or developmental grounds.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am opposed to this policy & against everything it supports." They also object to shared facilities, stating "Boys & girls bathrooms & locker rooms need to be kept separate," which indicates rejection of the proposed transgender student policy.


The commenter explicitly states "Strongly oppose!!!!" twice, which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language or request for modification, only a direct opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the rights of trans youth" and endorses schools fostering "safe and nourishing environments" for all students. This clearly supports adoption of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly states "FULL SUPPORT" and "SUPPORT ALL THE WAY," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism.


The commenter explicitly says the changes are "not appropriate" and concludes, "I am very much opposed." They also describe the policy as "overreaching" and harmful to "parental rights," indicating rejection of the regulation. The statement about bullying appears to be a likely typo or incomplete thought and does not change the overall opposition.


The commenter explicitly says "Support trans kids" and states that "these guidelines will help transgender and genderqueer kids feel safe at school," which clearly endorses adoption of the policy. The comment offers a positive justification rather than criticism or a request for changes.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and frames the policy as "indoctrination of our children," indicating rejection of the regulation. The rest of the comment uses hostile language against the policy and its perceived values, reinforcing opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I would like to voice my support for the guidance being provided in the Model Policies" and "strongly urge that these guidelines be adopted with due haste." They also argue the policies are evidence-based and necessary for transgender youth protections.


The commenter explicitly says "Opposed to transgender policies" and asks, "Do not push life styles and beliefs on children," indicating rejection of the regulation. They also argue that parents, not schools, should handle these issues, which is a substantive objection to the policy.


The comment explicitly states, "I oppose," and the title also says "Oppose." This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation with no qualifying language.


The commenter explicitly says, "i strongly support protecting our trans and non binary youth" and endorses schools as places that should "foster[] their growth" and "protect[] and develop[] all students." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies.


The comment explicitly says "Vehemently oppose!!!," which is a direct rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and objects that schools could "help a student explore, facilitate and make decisions regarding their gender expression... without a parent even knowing." They also redirect attention away from the policy, asking to "Focus on policies" for reopening and learning loss instead.


Strongly support, trans rights are human rights

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and argues the policy would "help protect trans youth" and "combat the alarmingly high trans suicide rate." They also urge opponents to "educate yourself on trans issues," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Vehemently oppose this transgender policy!" which directly rejects the regulation. The phrase "This is a disgrace!" reinforces a strongly negative position toward adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support" and calls the policy "Absolutely disgusting," indicating clear opposition to adoption. They also argue it is a "violation of the constitution" and of "freedom of religion," which reinforces that they want the regulation rejected.


Guidance document regarding gender in K-12

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this Virginia Dept. of Education Guidance Document." They also argue it will "promote gender confusion" and be "damaging to the kids," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this policy," which directly states their position. They also argue that "Sex education is the responsibility of the parents, not the schools" and claim the schools are "teaching children false information," indicating rejection of the policy's approach.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose" and states that "these policies go too" and "violate parents rights," indicating clear rejection of the regulation. They also argue it "encouraging lying" and cite parental rights law as a basis for opposition.


The commenter mocks the policy with a rhetorical analogy and explicitly calls it "degenerate indoctrination," indicating rejection of the transgender student guidance. The phrase "Teach students HOW to think" contrasts with what they view as the regulation's content, showing they do not support adoption.


The commenter explicitly writes "support!" and adds that "lgbt youth deserve to feel safe and accepted," which clearly endorses the regulation’s protective aims. The comment offers no objections or qualifications.


The commenter explicitly says, "I DO NOT APPROVE of this push" and rejects the policy's premise of recognizing transgender students. They argue schools should not "force this issue" and frame it as "indoctrination," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


Strongly Oppose Transgender School Policy - Put God back in school and see what happens

The commenter explicitly says, "I am absolutely, 110% opposed to the transgender school policies" and repeatedly urges schools to stop discussing transgender issues. They also state, "This conversation should not be happening right now, or ever," which clearly rejects the proposed regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support these proposals" and praises Virginia for "doing what is right." The rest of the comment attacks opponents, but the position on adoption is clearly supportive.


The commenter explicitly labels the comment "Opposed" and argues against the policy by saying parents should teach children about "sensitive topics like transgenderism" instead of schools. They also urge the Commonwealth to teach that God made people "male or female," which rejects the regulation's transgender-inclusive approach.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the proposed guidelines" and frames them as necessary to "protect transgendered or questioning students." They also argue the policies are needed to ensure dignity and protection from "bigotry, intolerance, and misunderstanding."


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support this guidance as written," which directly rejects the regulation. They also argue it "divides and further alienates students," indicating opposition to adoption in its current form.


The commenter explicitly says, "i strongly oppose this" and states they "totally disagree with these policies." They also argue that schools and government should not "impose on parental rights," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support inclusive policies" and frames them as protecting "the rights of LGBTQ students." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support this policy" and adds that it is "absolutely crucial" and "a great move in the right direction." This is clear approval of adopting the regulation.


Strongly oppose models policies for the treatment of transgender students in Va's public schools

The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose" and argues that the policies "take away the rights of parents" and are "not based on reality." They frame the policies as harmful, saying the child and parents would be "grievously injured."


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the proposed transgender policy" and concludes, "You must vote against this policy." They argue it is unsafe, unfair, and unconstitutional, indicating clear rejection rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly states, "I oppose this," which directly indicates opposition to the proposed regulation. The title also says "oppose," reinforcing the same position.


Educate Responsibly - Where is the education in this?

The commenter explicitly says, "I am deeply opposed to this bill" and argues it should be left "outside the doors of learning." They repeatedly frame the proposal as a distraction from education and say it "goes against everything education should be concerned with."


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the New Transgender policy!" This is a direct rejection of the proposed regulation with no qualifying language or request for changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the New Transgender policy!" This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation with no qualifying support or suggested revisions.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support transgender in the schools," and frames the policy as part of "evil" government pressure. The comment rejects the underlying premise of the regulation and indicates they will not "give in" to it.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "OPPOSE" and argues that schools should not "push an agenda on our children." They object to the policy as inappropriate for schools and say children should be older before handling the "long term repercussions" of transgender identity decisions.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and asks to "put these protections in place." They argue the policy is needed to protect "trans, nonbinary, and gender nonconforming students" and improve the learning environment.


Support for the Model Policies for Transgender Students in VA Public Schools

The commenter explicitly says they are "writing in support of the Model Policies" and repeatedly argues that the rule "will make Virginia schools a better place" and create "safe and welcoming schools for all Virginia students." They also endorse specific protections for transgender and nonbinary students, including names/pronouns and bathroom and locker room access.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and "WE SAY NO!" to the policies. They argue that "the government or school" should not make decisions and claim the policies "will harm our children," indicating rejection of adoption.


definitely oppose this...very harmful for all

The commenter explicitly says "definitely oppose this" and calls the policy "totally amoral" and "very harmful for all." They also argue it is a "slap in the face to parents's rights" and that it will "harm children and cause them confusion and pain," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


Strongly Opposed to new transgender policies.

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Opposed to new transgender policies" and argues the proposed policies "go far beyond the path the General Assembly prescribed." They repeatedly call for rejection by warning the policies will harm children, infringe parental rights, and force sharing of intimate facilities with the "opposite biological sex."


The commenter explicitly says, "Oppose this bill," and argues against allowing "biologically opposite sex individuals" in "bathrooms or other venues that are meant for single sex only." This is a clear rejection of the proposed transgender student policies, especially on facility access and privacy grounds.


Disagree strongly with transgender policies as set fort on Page 6, 10, 12, 13, 1 7 & 18.

The commenter explicitly says, "I do disapprove of this radical push" and objects to the transgender policies listed by page number. The language indicates they want the policies rejected rather than adopted.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy’s privacy/confidentiality provisions, stating that schools should not be allowed to "hide ANY thing from parents." They also oppose transgender-inclusive facilities guidance, arguing that "there are only TWO genders" and that they should not be "mingled in bathrooms and shower rooms."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly OPPOSE" and repeats "Oppose this bill," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. No supporting or neutral language is present.


I STRONGLY OPPOSE THE TRANSGENDER POLICIES IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOL

The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY OPPOSE ANY TRANSGENDER POLICIES IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOL," which is a direct rejection of the regulation. The added phrase "OR KEEPING KNOWLEDGE FROM PARENTS" indicates opposition to the privacy/confidentiality aspects as well.


The comment explicitly says "strongly oppose," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided.


The commenter explicitly says, "Very much oppose this !!!" which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed transgender policies. There is no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy, calling it "a wonderful policy" and stating "I cannot support this enough." They also say it would have improved their own life, which reinforces clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly urge our authorities not to pass these measures," and repeatedly argues against the policy as unproven and disproportionate. They also object to changing language and warn the measures could "demoniz[e] and criminaliz[e]" others, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Absolutely Oppose this Tragic Proposal!" and argues that passing it would be "reprehensible." They object to the policy's limits on informing parents, insisting that schools must bring parents into discussions about the child.


The commenter explicitly says, "Very strongly support this measure," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. The phrase "as a Virginia resident" adds support but does not change the clear pro-adoption stance.