No. Strongly oppose. This will cause so many issues and tragedies

The commenter explicitly says "No. Strongly oppose" and asks, "Please do not allow this to happen." They argue the policy is "not fair" and claim it will create "issues and tragedies," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY support our transgender youth" and "I give my full support to your policy." They also praise it as "very thoughtful" and argue it helps transgender people live authentically, indicating clear approval of the regulation.


Jewish, Muslim, and Christian families oppose this.

The comment explicitly says, "Jewish, Muslim, and Christian families oppose this," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed policies. It provides no support or request for modification, only opposition.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "OPPOSE" and says the policies "lead to confusion, bullying and abuse" and are "ugly state control." They also argue the policies "leave girls unprotected" and "prevent parents from being able to parent," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying it is "being pushed in elementary schools" and arguing that "A six year old child being encouraged to think they are the opposite gender is not normal or usual." The title "Defund Public Education" and claims about excluding parents show clear opposition to the regulation.


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

The commenter explicitly says, "This is opposed" and asks, "Please do not" adopt it, indicating clear rejection of the proposed policies. The phrase "This is an evil idea" further shows strong opposition rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY oppose this," which directly rejects the proposed transgender student policies. The title, "Transgender" children, reinforces that the objection is aimed at the regulation's subject matter.


NO. This is opposed by voters from all faiths, caring parents, and responsible adults.

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with "NO. This is opposed" and asks, "Please do not" adopt it. The statement that it is "an evil idea" further shows clear opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "We are strongly opposed to the new model guidelines" and ends with "Please stop this process and readdress." They argue the policy is dangerous and should not be adopted, citing concerns about bathroom/locker access and privacy.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Opposed" and argues the policy is harmful, stating it should not ignore "the English language and the natural plumbing of a human being." This clearly indicates rejection of the proposed transgender student policies.


Strongly Support and Applaud these efforts

The commenter explicitly says, "I support and applaud the efforts of this committee" and supports school divisions that have "implemented protections for our trans (and LGBTQ+) students." The comment argues for adopting protections and against "increasing the harmfully bigoted rhetoric," indicating clear approval of the regulation's goals.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am writing in support of the Model Policies" and repeatedly argues that the rule will protect transgender and nonbinary students. They praise the proposal as making schools "a better place to learn" and thank the agency for "ensuring safe and welcoming schools for all Virginia students."


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Strongly Oppose" and repeatedly says the policy is "endangering" children and "putting the physical safety of our girls at risk." They also object to restroom access and school sports provisions, calling the policy "gender identity politics" and saying they will remove their children from public schools because of it.


The comment explicitly states "Oppose" in both the title and body, indicating a clear rejection of the proposed regulation. No qualifying language or support for amendments is provided.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY oppose" and calls the policy "entirely unacceptable." They argue it is "child abuse" and warn it will lead to "sexual assault and harassment" in bathrooms/locker rooms, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "strongly oppose" and asks to "Please let humans be the gender of their birth," which rejects the regulation's transgender student policies. The phrase "Don't attempt to change nature" further indicates opposition to adopting the guidance.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and adds that the "Policy is long overdue," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. There is no opposing language or qualification.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and repeatedly argues the policies are "totally unworkable" and "unacceptable." They object to schools supporting gender identity without parental knowledge and to possible CPS reporting, calling it a "private family issue" rather than a public education decision.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed" and states the policy is "against all that is right and holy," which clearly rejects adoption of the regulation. The comment offers no support or conditional approval.


The commenter explicitly says the policy "is necessary" and argues for "support for our students and training for teachers." They frame the regulation as needed to prevent harm, stating "We cannot afford to lose another adolescent or adult to depression or worse yet suicide."


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support protections for transgender students" and urges that "Virginia schools should be inclusive and safe for ALL students." This clearly endorses adopting the proposed policies and their protections.


The commenter explicitly says "Vehemently oppose!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" and argues the policy would come "at the expense of others" losing their rights. The language "You guys have lost your minds" reinforces rejection of the regulation rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the rights and equality of transgender students in and out of school," which clearly endorses the policy’s purpose. The title, "Support transgender students," reinforces that they favor adoption of the regulation.


Transgender use of bathrooms and requirements of non gender pronouns

The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose opening all bathrooms up to all genders" and also opposes "requiring students and faculty to use non gender pronouns under the threat of penalties." They argue for separate bathrooms for transgender students and against pronoun enforcement, indicating rejection of key parts of the proposed policy.


Strongly oppose!  Christian School looking better every day!

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose!" and rejects the policy as "absolutely disgusting." They argue public schools should not "influence a childs gender" and that parents should decide how to handle such concerns, indicating opposition to the regulation.


Strongly SUPPORT! This is a fantastic step for Virginia

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly SUPPORT!" and calls the policy "an incredible and important step for Virginia." They also praise it for "providing much needed regulation and support for Transgender students" and express approval that future students will be respected.


The commenter explicitly says, "I emphatically support the guidance," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. The title also reads "Support," reinforcing the same position.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and states that the guidance will "provide an inclusive and safe environment for all students." They also say, "I support it" because they want schools to be "safe and welcoming for everyone."


I fully support an inclusive non-discrimination policy for transgender students

The commenter explicitly says, "I am in full support of an inclusive non-discrimination policy" and argues that children should be able to be "free from discrimination" in a "safe environment." The comment endorses the policy’s inclusive treatment of transgender students rather than opposing or questioning it.


The commenter explicitly says, "I cellebrate that the government takes a step forward in such matters by passing a law" and calls it "the first step towards equality in society." The rest of the comment endorses respect, inclusion, and protection from "mockery or isolation," all consistent with supporting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support any policy aimed at improving the integration of LGBT + people or people with disabilities" and praises the effort with "Congratulations to you!" This clearly endorses the regulation's goals and adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" and objects to any policy that "permits children to do anything without parental consent" or that parents cannot opt out of. They also argue the state should not focus on this regulation at all, calling it "negligent," which indicates clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and argues that transgender students "need to feel supported and safe" in school. They also urge the county to "do the right thing for our children," which clearly endorses adoption of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this policy" and asks that it "NOT be adopted in whole or in part." They also argue the guidelines are "extremely one sided" and object to schools addressing transgender-related topics at all.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it "the proposed transgender mandates" and saying schools should not "accept" them. They argue that supporting transgender students violates God's design and describe the policy as a "lie of the ages," which clearly indicates opposition to adoption.


Why does my daughter have to feel uncomfortable for someone’s son to feel comfortable

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy idea of shared bathroom access, calling it "the dumbest thing I have ever heard of" and saying it would "infringe on my daughter’s rights." Although they say they do not judge transgender people, the overall message argues against the regulation because it would "cause more issues" and make their daughter uncomfortable.


I OBJECT TO THIS INFRINGEMENT OF PARENTAL RIGHTS & WITH NO ACCOUNTING - LONG TERM BENEFITS TO CHILDR

The commenter explicitly says, "I OBJECT TO THIS" and calls the proposal an "abhorrent policy change," indicating clear opposition to adoption. They argue it infringes on "parental rights," lacks "compelling scientific evidence," and represents "government-over-reach," all of which show they want the regulation rejected.


Love the Child, Oppose coddling gender dysphoria

The commenter explicitly says, "Please reject this measure," and argues that schools should not "upend[] the entire way we do school to appease" transgender students. They also state that young girls and boys have a right not to be subjected to this policy in public school, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please support transgender youth!" and urges, "Please protect our youth," which clearly endorses the regulation's protective aims. The phrases "Love is love. People are people" further signal approval of transgender inclusion and nondiscrimination.


The commenter explicitly says, "I vehemently oppose this" and argues the policies "infringe the First Amendment rights of parents" and would "pit children against their parents." The rest of the comment gives reasons for rejecting the regulation, including objections to shared facilities and overnight accommodations.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this," which directly states their position against the regulation. They also object to the part "talks about eliminating or reducing gender related sporting events as much as possible," indicating opposition to that aspect of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says "Fully support" and praises the policy as "needed" and helpful for school officials. They also endorse the goal of including transgender students and ensuring they can attend school with support.


Strongly oppose - gender differences matter in sports!

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose these proposed policies" and repeatedly argues they should not be adopted. They object to transgender inclusion in sports, bathrooms, and school affirmation practices, calling the policies an "affront to parental rights" and saying they "ignore science."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and calls the policy "a reckless social experiment". They also urge officials to "focus on education" instead of the regulation, indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this essential policy" and calls it "vital." They also state that it is important to support "ALL students," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


All children should have the same rights.

The commenter explicitly says, "No child, for any reason, should face discrimination" and that school systems have a responsibility to ensure this, which aligns with the regulation’s nondiscrimination and supportive-environment goals. The comment offers clear approval rather than criticism or a request to weaken the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this vital policy" and "I fully support this policy," which directly endorses adoption. The phrase "we have a duty to ALL students" reinforces approval of the regulation's inclusive purpose.


The commenter says they are "Strongly Oppose" and argues that "my daughters and nieces should not feel scared or intimidated" in restrooms. They explicitly favor a "family or unisex bathroom" option and question the policy approach, indicating opposition to the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says "Support!" and endorses key elements of the policy, stating that students should be able to "dress according to their identity" and "safely access building facilities." This indicates approval of the regulation as written or in principle.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am in full support of policies" and endorses measures that provide "education, support, and protection for all students." This clearly indicates approval of the proposed regulation.


I am against any changes to the voter regulations. Election day is just that!!

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this action" and repeats "Strongly oppose." They frame it as "overreach of the educational department" and say, "Let the teachers teach," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "This Guidance Document has my full support" and asks to "Please support this guidance." They also argue the policies should be adopted to "protect all students" and prevent "discrimination and harassment/bullying."


I am strongly oppose this in our educational system. Teachers teach and let parents support their ch

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this action" and repeats "Strongly oppose". They frame the policy as "overreach of the educational department" and argue that parents, not schools, should guide children, indicating rejection of the regulation.


Strongly Support/ School Administrator, Science Teacher

The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Strongly Support" and repeatedly argues that schools should "support a person's identity/expression" and create "a school culture that supports diversity and inclusion." They also state that the policy is needed to protect student safety, mental health, and education, and that "everything in our power" should be done to fix harms to LGBTQ youth.


Proposed Misguided School Transgender Indoctrination Policies

The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose the proposed guidelines" and frames them as harmful "indoctrination." This is a clear rejection of the regulation rather than a request for modification.


We love transgender children but they are suffering from gender dysphoria, focus on helping them.

The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this current proposal," which directly states opposition to adoption. The rest of the comment argues against the policy by saying, "Instead of entertaining their mental illness, please focus and getting them help," indicating they want the proposal rejected or substantially changed.


The commenter explicitly says, "we are strongly opposed to this initiative," which directly rejects the proposed policies. They also ground their objection in religious doctrine, stating that "God's Holy Word clearly states that people are made male and female."


VDOE marriage to LBGTQ agenda in the schools

The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this move" and repeatedly argues against the policies as harmful, calling them a "sexualized agenda" and "warped and harmful policies." They also urge the VDOE to focus on "improving the metrics of core subjects first," indicating rejection rather than support.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this policy guidance" and "hope that it will be adopted by the state." They also frame the guidelines as promoting "safety, emotional health, and autonomy of all students," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" and repeats "Please oppose!" They argue the policy will create "extra things this law will create" and is "not even... a consideration," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this set of guidelines" and frames them as necessary because transgender students "need these sorts of stated guidelines." The comment endorses adoption both as a parent and on moral grounds.


The commenter explicitly says, "I very strongly oppose the proposed transgender policies," which directly rejects adoption of the regulation. They also argue that "The role of parents in public education should not be disregarded," indicating opposition based on parental rights concerns.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and states that "These rules and guidelines are not onerous" and are "basic human decency." This clearly endorses adoption of the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I can not support these policies strongly enough," which is a clear endorsement of adoption. They further argue the policies should create "inclusive and safe spaces for all students" and support training and anti-bullying measures.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "OPPOSE" and argues the policy "creates a huge opening for sexual abuse, indecency" and threatens "safe environments." They also object to privacy and parental notification provisions, saying parents should be informed and expressing fear about "restrooms and locker rooms."


The commenter states plainly, "I am opposed to these new guidelines," which directly indicates rejection of the regulation. No qualifying language or request for modification is provided, so this is a clear oppose stance.


oppose-- esp. multi-stall bathroom access

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the proposed change to bathroom access," and objects to allowing restroom access based on gender identity. Although they suggest an alternative of single-stall, open-gendered bathrooms, the overall position is against the proposed policy as written.


The commenter explicitly asks, "Please don't do them this disservice," after arguing that the policies "will only encourage these children to identify themselves primarily by their sexual feelings." This indicates opposition to adopting the transgender student policies as written.


Strongly support an environment where all children should feel safe

The commenter explicitly says, "This is long overdue!" and argues for "an environment where they learn to value the lives of every person around them." They also state that restricting LGBTQ+ education "leaves a huge gap in reality" and that every kid has the right to feel safe at school, which supports adopting the policy.


Strongly approve! All I want is a school my kids aren't afraid to go to.

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly approve!" and repeatedly argues that the policies "help the kids that need it" and should ensure students can "be free of bullying and harrassment, and be able to learn." The comment clearly endorses adoption of the regulation and rejects arguments against it.


The commenter explicitly says, "I totally support banning conversion therapy," which clearly endorses a policy change aligned with protecting transgender students. Although the comment is brief and does not mention the regulation directly, it supports a related protective measure rather than opposing the proposal.


The commenter explicitly states "SUPPORT model policies," which directly endorses adoption of the proposed regulation. No contrary language or qualifications are included.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this legislation," and the rest of the comment argues against the policy’s handling of parental notification and involvement. They object that the proposal "do[es] not allow for parents to be engaged or notified" and call it a "slippery slope," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


Strongly support this guidance on gender-diverse policy

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support policies which are inclusive of diversity" and calls the guidance "absolutely essential." They also thank the authors and frame the policies as necessary for safety and human rights, indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support these model policies for LGBTQ students in Virginia" and repeatedly states that "These policies are necessary." They argue the policies will protect students from "bullying/harassment/ and discrimination" and help transgender students feel safe and respected.


School Divisions Need Guidance - Fully Support

The commenter explicitly says "Fully Support" and praises the guidance for making schools "a safer space" for LGBTQ+ students. They also thank the authors for "providing guidance with clear language," indicating approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says they are "highly opposed" and ends with "I STRONGLY OPPOSE." They argue the policy would violate privacy, force bathroom sharing with the "opposite sex," allow gender decisions without parental notice, and conflict with religious beliefs, all of which indicate rejection of the regulation.


The commenter says they are "completely against allowing anyone to enter whatever bathroom or lockerroom without question" and argues for a separate "THIRD bathroom and lockerroom" instead. They explicitly frame the policy as a threat to their daughter’s safety, indicating opposition to the regulation’s bathroom/locker room provisions.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this," which directly endorses adoption of the proposed policies. The opening phrase "As a teacher" provides context but does not change the clear supportive stance.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose transgender legislation," which directly rejects the proposed policy. The reference to not wanting to make their grandson "uncomfortable going to bathrooms" indicates opposition to transgender-related school accommodations.


The commenter explicitly urges that "Any and all protections... should absolutely be put in place immediately" and says the protection of "ALL children, including trans children, is essential." The comment supports the regulation’s goals of preferred names/pronouns, bathroom access, and anti-bullying protections.


The commenter explicitly labels the policy "Strongly Support" and says it would help young people feel safe in school. They endorse bathroom access based on gender identity and argue it is "all about respect" and "time to respect their choices and wishes."


When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression

The commenter explicitly says, "I am in full support," and argues that the policy provides needed protections for transgender students. They frame the regulation as equality and anti-harassment protection rather than oppression.


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

The commenter explicitly says, "I write in support of Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in Virginia’s Public Schools." They also suggest adding legal context to strengthen the citation, which indicates endorsement rather than opposition.


I am very against this bill - parents should know when their children are thinking of transitioning!

The commenter explicitly says, "I am very against this bill" and argues that it "undermines parents" and subverts "parents’ rights." They object to schools keeping a child's transition-related information secret and say it is "immoral," indicating clear opposition to the regulation.


The comment explicitly says "Oppose - referendum," which clearly indicates the commenter does not want the regulation adopted as written and prefers it be put to a referendum. No supportive language is present.


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "Strongly Opposed" and says "These proposals are harmful to all children." They object to pronoun guidance and shared facilities, stating the policies are "not only irresponsible but grievously morally wrong."


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the protection of transgender students!" This directly endorses the proposed policies and indicates approval rather than criticism or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I absolutely support this," which directly endorses the regulation. The additional reference to their role as CEO of SHAPE America reinforces that this is a favorable public comment rather than a neutral statement.


The comment explicitly rejects the policy with the title "NO NO NO" and the statement "This is disgraceful and absurd," which clearly indicates opposition to adoption. No supportive or neutral policy discussion is provided.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and argues the policy would "further divide" people and should not be imposed. They object to "allowing transgender students to use their restroom of choice" and say the curriculum should be "opted OUT and not into it," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and ends with "Support trans youth," which clearly endorses the regulation. The body also argues that all children deserve support regardless of gender expression, reinforcing approval of the policy's protections.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the policy on transgender," which clearly rejects the proposed regulation. No supporting or neutral language is provided beyond that direct مخالفة.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Opposed" and tells the agency to "Stop pushing your beliefs on the public," which indicates rejection of the proposed policies. The language is directed against the regulation rather than asking for clarification or offering neutral input.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the policy on transgender," which clearly rejects the proposed regulation. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the policy on transgender," which clearly rejects the proposed regulation. The statement is direct and unambiguous, with no qualifying support or request for changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "how much with this document I disagree" and calls it "not appropriate at this time," indicating opposition to adoption. They also criticize it as placing "more emphasis on pronouns than education" and being "confusing, convoluted" and punitive, which shows they want it rejected or substantially changed.


Strongly Oppose Child Abusive Transgender Guidelines

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and states "Your guidelines do more harm than good," indicating clear rejection of the regulation. They also argue it is "child abuse" and an "abuse of power," which shows they want the policies rejected rather than adopted.


No transgender promotion in schools-it is confusing for the majority while helping only a few

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying "No transgender promotion in schools" and that "sexuality and gender identity issues should not become a part of the classroom and curriculum." They argue the guidance is "wrong to force these issues onto the majority" and should be handled privately, indicating opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this initiative" and adds, "We need equity for all students," which clearly endorses adoption of the policy. There is no opposing language or request to weaken the regulation.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly Support" and repeats that position in the body. There is no qualifying language or criticism of the proposed regulation.


The commenter explicitly states "Strongly support!" which directly endorses adoption of the proposed regulation. No contrary language or qualifications are present.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues against children "changing in front of the opposite sex" and being "out in public especially at school," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The threat to "take my son out of school" and homeschool their daughter further shows opposition to adoption.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly Support" and provides no contrary language. This is a clear endorsement of the proposed regulation.


The commenter says they are "very concerned about the safety of our children" and links the policy to "their vulnerability to sex trafficking," which signals opposition based on perceived safety risks. They do not offer support or neutral information; the comment frames the regulation as dangerous.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues against children "changing in front of the opposite sex" at school. They also threaten to withdraw their children from public school if the policy is implemented, indicating clear opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "supported" and urges that we "Protect all students." They further endorse the policy goals by stating "The first step is education and safety" and that children should have the chance to "learn" and "understand."


The commenter explicitly says, "It's time you educators stopped and rethought your transgender rules" and argues that boys who identify as girls should not be allowed in "girls' sports" or "girls' restrooms." The statement that the policy would "destroy female sports forever" shows clear opposition to the regulation.


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


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose!" and describes the policy as "atrocious," indicating clear rejection of the regulation. The statement that the government is trying to "destroy community" further shows opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please take this as my support" for the policy and argues that all students should be afforded education regardless of gender identity or sexual orientation. They also endorse providing "a safe space for our Transgender, Nonbinary, and Queer students" in Virginia public schools.


The commenter explicitly writes "OPPOSED" and rejects the policy as "not biologically fact or science based," which indicates opposition to adoption. No supportive or neutral language appears.


The comment is explicitly titled "Support" and quotes a statement emphasizing that transgender people "want to be treated with dignity and respect," which aligns with approving the proposed policies. It does not raise objections or request weakening the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" and adds that supporting the bill is "absolutely absurd," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. There is no request for changes or neutral inquiry, only opposition.


The title explicitly says "Strongly Support," and the body rejects opposition by saying, "I am simply tired of debating human rights." This indicates clear approval of the regulation and its protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly states, "Strongly Support" and "I am in full support!" This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the Model Policies" and repeatedly urges adoption: "Please support your trans students." The comment frames the policies as necessary to "protect, support, validate and help trans students in school" and to create a safer environment.


The commenter explicitly states they are "strongly opposed to this," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE these mandates" and asks to "protect our children" from the policy. The body argues against transgender recognition as "false ideology" and says "There is nothing in between," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the proposed policies" and repeatedly argues that "Putting policies of protection in place can only help" transgender students. The comment also expresses hope that these policies will have a "positive effect" on students' mental health and ability to thrive.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose!" and argues the policy is "terrifying" and unsafe. They object to pronoun/name use, bathroom and locker room access, and girls' sports participation, indicating they want the regulation rejected or substantially weakened.


The commenter explicitly states, "I strongly oppose," which directly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No additional context suggests any nuance or support for modifications.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support!!" and frames the policy as protecting dignity and safety: "Everyone deserves to be in a place where others are not hostile to their existence." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The comment explicitly says "protect trans kids now!", which clearly endorses the regulation’s goal of protecting transgender students. It offers no criticism or conditions, only a direct call for support.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Strongly Support" and argues that "children have the right to self-determination" and should be treated respectfully as who they "believe they are." This clearly endorses the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy’s goals, stating that transgender students "deserve to be treated with dignity and respect" and that ensuring they feel "safe, supported, and included" is a step Virginia should take. The title "SOS: Support Our Students" also signals approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly support!" and states, "My support of this bill is built on this belief." They also endorse "safe and inclusive environments for children in our schools," which aligns with adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Oppose" and calls the policy an "outrage," indicating rejection of the regulation. The statement اعتراضs to the idea that parents could be charged with abuse or neglect for affirming their child's sex, which is a direct criticism of the transgender policy framework.


The commenter explicitly frames themselves as favoring separation of church and state and mocks the need for a religiously based opposition argument, which aligns with supporting the proposed transgender student policies. The title also says "SUPPORT," reinforcing the pro-regulation position.


recommendations for safe, inclusive educating environment

The commenter repeatedly argues the policies are an "overreach," "overly biased," and "contrary to the constitutionally protected religious freedoms," and says the language should be modified to protect parents' rights. Although they suggest some edits, the overall position is that the regulation as written should not be adopted.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly oppose," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No additional context or qualifications are provided.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly agree to allow trans protection in public schools" and repeatedly endorses the policy, stating that "protecting trans youth is not wrong" and that these children "deserve to be safe." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "SUPPORT TRANS KIDS" and criticizes failing to protect children, which clearly endorses the proposed transgender student policies. The comment does not request changes or raise objections; it expresses direct approval of the regulation's protective aims.


The commenter explicitly says, "Completely support!" and "I strongly support this!" indicating clear approval of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism.


The commenter repeatedly says they "do not agree with this," that it is "absolutely NOT in the place of the school to encourage or help a child" with transgender issues, and that they would withdraw their children if the policy is adopted. Although they express sympathy for transgender people, the overall position is clearly against the regulation and its school involvement.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly in favor" and argues the state should educate "ALL resident children" in a safe environment. They support protections for transgender students, stating they have a right to education "without abuse or harassment" and that no one should infringe on their rights based on gender expression.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidance to protect transgender youth," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism suggesting opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "OPPOSE" and argues the policy changes will "endanger other non-trans children and their families." They also state that the proposal is "not in the way that is proposed here," indicating rejection of the regulation as written.


The commenter says they are "strongly opposed" to allowing transgender students into "the restrooms and locker rooms of the opposite sex" and argues there are "only 2 sexes." They also explicitly ask that each locality's School Board be allowed to keep determining policy, indicating opposition to the proposed statewide guidance as written.


The commenter explicitly states "Strong opposition to this harmful initiative" and repeatedly argues the policy is "problematic" and "terrible." They say it "undermines parental rights," "violates the religious liberties" of Americans, and threatens children's privacy and safety, all of which indicate rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "My children and I support this guidance" and opens with "Full Support for Transgender Student Policy." They also argue that public schools should provide guidance so "all students" can focus on school regardless of gender identity and sexual orientation.


Accommodations  for transgender students

The commenter explicitly says, "Oppose action to allow accommodations for transgender students" and repeats "Oppose" at the end. They argue the proposal should not proceed until there is "further detailed study" and claim it could have "catastrophic adverse unintended consequences," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "i fully support this!" which directly endorses the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism suggesting any opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and argues the policy will "leave a bigger problem" and that "my rights are not protected now." They also object to transgender people receiving "special privileges and rights," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "Do not vote to pass this legislation" and titles the comment "Vote NO," which clearly indicates opposition to adoption. The biblical quotation is used to justify that opposition rather than to ask a question or provide neutral input.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and praises the policy as "important for including all children in a safe and effective" educational environment. This clearly indicates approval of the regulation as proposed.


100% Support for this policy and trans people

The commenter explicitly says "100% Support for this policy" and praises Virginia for "taking measures to protect the most vulnerable members of our society." The body consistently argues the policy should be adopted to protect trans and gender non-conforming children and human rights.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed" and argues that "leaving parents out of this is wrong" and that allowing shared restrooms is "wrong" and too risky. The comment frames the policy as harmful and an abuse of CPS resources, indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support for it.


The commenter explicitly says "Vote NO!" and objects to "Boys allowed in girls locker rooms and bsthrooms," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The language expresses alarm about the policy's effects rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "Fully support" and adds "Transgender rights are human rights," which clearly endorses the proposed policies. There is no language indicating any objection or reservation.


The only substantive text is the title, "Strongly opposed," but the body contains no actual comment content beyond a form placeholder. Because the instruction is to classify the public comment itself and there is no interpretable argument or issue stated, the stance is too vague to classify reliably.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and asks "please don't do this for our children!!" indicating clear rejection of the proposed policies. The title "Strongly Disagree!!!!!" reinforces opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "Fully support this guidance" and further recommends "VA guidance for Transgender students," indicating clear approval of the regulation. There is no language suggesting opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this," which directly states opposition to the regulation. The religious justification, "God made female & male and that’s the way it should be," indicates they want the policy rejected rather than adopted.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and asks, "PLEASE leave this out of our school system," which clearly rejects adoption of the policy. They also argue it is "damaging to kids" and object to privacy implications involving "biological males" and "biological girls."


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose after reading" and asks to "Please rethink this policy," indicating opposition to adoption. The rationale centers on perceived legal and liability risks, including concerns about "rooming with students of the opposite sex" and whether teachers or schools would be held responsible.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY Oppose" and repeatedly argues the policy is "dangerous," an "unnecessary overstep," and would "open the door to great harm." They ask that schools not adopt what they describe as intrusive "sexual politics" and claim existing laws are sufficient.


The commenter explicitly says, "I very strongly oppose the proposed transgender policies" and repeats that they will not send their children to public schools if the policies pass. They frame the proposal as violating parental rights and harming more children than it helps, which indicates clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidance document" and endorses "all efforts to create inclusive environments." This clearly indicates approval of the proposed regulation as written or in principle.


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

The comment explicitly states, "We oppose the proposed policies," which directly indicates rejection of the regulation. No qualifying language or request for modification is provided beyond the clear opposition.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose!" and argues that students should be identified by "their sex at birth," rejecting the policy's transgender recognition provisions. The statement that children should not be exposed to "this type of behavior" indicates opposition to adoption of the regulation.


OPPOSE - I DON'T WANT MY DAUGHTER TO HAVE TO FEAR FOR A MALE IN A GIRLS BATHROOM - NO

The commenter explicitly labels the comment "OPPOSE" and says "STOP TEACHING BOYS THEY CAN THINK THEY ARE GIRLS" and objects to "girls bathrooms and girls sports." This is a clear rejection of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "OPPOSE" and repeatedly says "NO!" and "Stop pushing your agendas on our children!" They argue the policy is "indoctrinating our children" and demand, "Leave our children alone!"


The commenter explicitly states, "I oppose this bill," which directly indicates opposition to the proposed regulation. No qualifying language or request for modification is provided.


The commenter explicitly says "Absolutely do NOT agree" and expresses disgust that VDOE is considering the proposal. They argue it is "very dangerous for young girls" and object to the policy on moral and religious grounds, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and rejects the policy with hostile language. They argue against allowing transgender students in bathrooms/locker rooms, calling it "not ok" and referring to them as "perverts," which indicates opposition to adoption.


The comment explicitly states "Strongly Oppose" and repeats "Strongly opposed," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly states, "We STRONGLY OPPOSE these measures," which directly rejects the proposed regulation. No supporting or neutral language is provided.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and "I fully back and advocate for the lives and rights of trans identifying kids." They also urge lawmakers to "make our children seen" and "protect them from hate, bigotry and evil," clearly endorsing adoption of the regulation.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and repeats it as the entire body, indicating clear rejection of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly oppose," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No additional details are provided beyond that direct opposition.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed all transgender guidelines" and asks that this opposition be applied to "any and all guidance documents." This is a clear rejection of the proposed policies rather than a request for modification.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly oppose," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided, but the stance is unambiguous.


The comment is explicitly labeled "OPPOSED!" and says "Common sense must prevail," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The reference to Senator Newman representing "our stand on these issues" further signals opposition rather than a neutral or supportive position.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please vote no" and "We do not support this," which clearly indicates opposition to adopting the proposed policies. The title "Strongly disagree" reinforces that negative position.


The commenter explicitly says "Adamantly opposed to transgender guidelines" and urges officials to "reject these immoral and anti-scientific policies." The body repeatedly argues against adoption, claiming the policies would "force people to lie" and comparing them to a "totalitarian regime."


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and argues against the policy, stating "They should have a special bathroom" and "We should not be subject to this." The rest of the comment expresses fear of harms and rejects transgender identity recognition, indicating opposition to adoption of the regulation.


Encouraging kids to lead a double life and hiding vital information from parents

The commenter explicitly says, "Please reject this pending policy," which directly opposes adoption. They argue it would "encourag[e] kids to lead a double life" and "hide vital information from parents," indicating substantive objection to the policy's privacy and parental notification provisions.


Parent of Virginia Transgender Student Strongly Supports

The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly Supports" and repeatedly states that "These policies will protect our daughter" and "This is what these policies do." The comment argues the policies are necessary to ensure transgender students are "allowed to exist with the same rights and status as all other Virginia school children."


The comment is about abortion and says "Please don't kill babies no abortion in the United State," which is unrelated to the proposed transgender student policies. It does not express a position on whether this regulation should be adopted, rejected, or modified.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly disagree!" and repeats "Disagree!", indicating opposition to the proposed regulation. It provides no supporting details or nuance beyond rejection.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, stating "UNCONSTITUTIONAL. PERIOD." and asserting it "won't hold up under legal review." This is a clear argument against adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSED" and argues the VDOE has "gone far beyond" what the General Assembly prescribed. They repeatedly reject the policies as infringing privacy, parental rights, and encouraging "irreversible 'gender transitions,'" indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly states "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and repeats "Strongly oppose," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The comment only says "NO NO NO" without stating what it اعتراضs to or whether it is directed at adopting the regulation. While it likely expresses rejection, the text is too vague and uninterpretable to confidently classify as opposition to the proposed policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed to HB 145 and SB 161" and repeatedly argues against the policies. They object to "bathroom/locker room privacy and safety" provisions, claim the state is engaging in "indoctrination," and urge parents to "home school" instead of supporting public-school implementation.


I support this guidance -- Trans rights are important to me and my family

The commenter explicitly says, "I support this guidance" and explains that it is important that their trans child be respected at school. The statement clearly endorses adoption of the proposed policies rather than opposing or questioning them.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support these measures" and praises the policy as something that will "promote positive youth development and save lives." The closing, "I applaud your work!" further confirms approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "strongly support!" and urges action: "We must protect transgender students in our schools!" The body endorses the regulation’s purpose by emphasizing the need for support due to harassment and bullying.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and repeatedly argues the policy has "no place in the school system" and is "just plain wrong." They also urge that it should not be passed, warning of a "mass exodus" if enacted.


Vehemently oppose this outrageous guidance.

The commenter explicitly says, "Vehemently oppose this outrageous guidance" and repeatedly argues against adoption, claiming it threatens girls' privacy and safety. They also say it is "trying to take God and parental rights out of everything," indicating strong rejection of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support these policies" and explains that they would "make trans and non binary students feel comfortable" and "feel safer at school." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and argues that "this is an adult conversation" that should "stay out of schools," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The reference to "vulgarity" shows disapproval of the regulation's subject matter rather than support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "ABSOLUTELY AGAINST!" and "NO!!!! Absolutely unacceptable," indicating clear opposition to the regulation. They also state they would "homeschool if you pass this" and want it "removed from the schools," while arguing it should be "left to parents" rather than taught in school.


The commenter explicitly gives "Strong support" and states that "Everyone deserves to be treated with respect by default," which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose. The comment does not raise objections or request weakening; it affirms respectful treatment of transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this guidance document" and "I strongly oppose the adoption of this guidance document and its policies." They argue it excludes parents, raises safety concerns about bathrooms and locker rooms, and should be redone, all of which indicate rejection rather than support with changes.


Too Many Issues with Practicality and Non-Consideration of the Rights of Other Students and Teachers

The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose the forced implementation of these policies" and repeatedly argues the policies should not be adopted because they are "impractical," "unsafe," and give transgender students "special accommodations" at others' expense. The comment asks whether the policies will be rejected or substantially changed to better accommodate non-transgender students and concerns about bathrooms, sports, and school organizations.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the transgender policy and transgender education!" This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation. The rest of the comment argues that sex is biologically fixed, reinforcing opposition to transgender-related policy.


The commenter explicitly says "Please vote in favor" and "Strongly Support," indicating clear approval of the regulation. They also endorse "a safe, supportive learning environment" and reject discrimination against students "regardless of how they identify."


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" the policy and objects to "allowing biological males to enter the female bathrooms" and vice versa. The comment argues the proposal would increase risk in schools, indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I don’t agree with this!" in response to the proposed transgender student policies, indicating opposition to adoption. The title "No" reinforces that they want the regulation rejected.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY oppose your proposed 'transgender' policy" and rejects the policy as "radical theories" and "indoctrinate our school children." Although they add that we should "protect and respect ALL children," the overall position is clearly against adoption of the regulation.


The title explicitly says "Strong Oppose," which clearly indicates the commenter wants the regulation rejected. There is no body text to suggest any nuance or support for modifications.


The title explicitly says "Strong Oppose," which clearly indicates the commenter wants the regulation rejected. There is no body text to suggest any nuance or support for the policy.


The commenter explicitly says this is "Strongly Support" and repeatedly urges readers to "Vote NO" only in quotes from opponents while themselves endorsing the policy as "a fundamental human right for trans youth." They praise the document as providing "more inclusivity and understanding" and encourage others to "read this document and start the learning process."


The comment explicitly says "Strongly oppose!!!!!" which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No other content suggests support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this," "I am strongly against this," and "please don’t do this," which clearly rejects the regulation. Although they support children feeling safe at school, they argue that transgender-related matters should be handled "in the home" and object to bathroom access and school involvement for young children.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly oppose -", which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting or qualifying language is provided.


STRONG SUPPORT. TRANS RIGHTS ARE HUMAN RIGHTS

The commenter explicitly says "strongly support this measure" and uses emphatic pro-policy language: "TRANS RIGHTS ARE HUMAN RIGHTS." The statement "This will SAVE LIVES!" indicates clear approval of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I very much support this!" and states that the guidance is needed so school boards can protect trans students. The comment argues for safety and nondiscrimination protections, indicating clear approval of the regulation.


Very Strongly Support - Protect Trans Kids

The commenter explicitly says "Very Strongly Support" and argues that the model policies "provide uniform guidance" and are "the best way for us to move forward." They also urge protection for "Trans kids" and endorse the regulation as necessary for schools.


Better than nothing but could go farther

The commenter repeatedly says they "strongly support" the guidelines and that "almost all of the proposed guidelines are excellent." Their only criticisms are requests to strengthen the policy, such as adding non-gendered uniforms, clearer accountability, and stronger protections against deadnaming and misgendering.


I strongly oppose. This is an infringement on religious liberty and parental rights

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose," which directly states opposition to the regulation. They also argue it is "an infringement on religious liberty and parental rights" and "bad for our children," reinforcing rejection of the policy.


Model Policies Should Serve to Benefit All Students, While Accommodating Specific Concerns

The commenter explicitly says the policy "should not be made a model policy" and argues it "fails" to treat everyone equally. Although they acknowledge it is "well-intentioned," the overall thrust is rejection because they believe it "causes disruption and harm" and favors one group over others.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this Document," which directly states opposition to adoption. They also express discomfort with transgender students being present, saying it would "make[s] feel uncomfortable being around someone who claims to be different gender than me."


The commenter explicitly says "Very Strongly support" and endorses "giving them respect" and "treating them with intelligence and dignity." The comment clearly favors adoption of the transgender student policies and urges against "language of hate or abuse."


Support the Guidance for Safe & Equal Learning Environment

The commenter explicitly says Equality Virginia "strongly supports the Virginia Department of Education’s Model Policies" and repeatedly endorses adoption, stating the guidance "can go a long way towards making that a reality." The suggested edits are framed as "minor changes" and recommendations, not opposition to the regulation itself.


The commenter explicitly states, "I Support this!!" which directly indicates approval of the proposed regulation. The title "SUPPORT!!" reinforces the same position.


The commenter explicitly calls the guidance "poorly thought through and misguided," says it "aids and abets chaos," and concludes "It is a disgrace." They also object to allowing transgender students to use bathrooms and locker rooms aligned with gender identity, arguing facilities should be used "according to sex."


Strongly oppose state control of gender modification

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and objects to "State usurping rights of parents concerning minor children and gender issues." This is a clear rejection of the proposed transgender student policies, framed as opposition to state involvement in gender-related decisions.


Imposing these views unilaterally oppress religious views. Accommodations can be made to support TG

The commenter objects to the regulation being imposed "unilaterally" because it "oppress[es] religious views," which suggests opposition to the policy as written. However, the final sentence, "Accommodations can be made to support TG," indicates some willingness to modify the policy rather than reject transgender accommodations entirely.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly agree" and endorses the policy goal that "LBGT+ deserve to be safe from bullying, harassment and discrimination, especially at school." This is clear support for adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly support this," which directly endorses adoption of the proposed policies. No contrary language or qualifications are present.


Strongly oppose - Quit politicizing the schools

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and tells the state to "Quit politicizing schools with special interests such as transgender rights," which indicates rejection of the proposed policies. The statement that all children should be treated equally is framed as a reason against the regulation rather than support for it.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the transgender policy!!!" This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation with no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality.


"Gender fluidity" is made up of nonsensically garbage used to balkanize the working class

The commenter explicitly rejects the underlying concept behind the regulation, calling "gender fluidity" "nonsensically garbage" and an "extremist anti-social ideology." This language indicates opposition to the proposed transgender student policies rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "We need inclusive schools, workplaces and communities" and asks to "advance equality and kindness," which clearly supports adopting the regulation. The title "Strong support for human rights" and the discussion of affirming transgender students further indicate approval of the policy.


The commenter explicitly endorses protecting transgender and non-binary students, saying "They should all be educated with love and care" and "When you protect their rights in school, you are safeguarding an entire generation." The closing "Choose love" clearly supports adoption of the policy's protections.


The comment provides no substantive argument or reference to the regulation beyond repeated rejection: "no no no." While this suggests disapproval, it is too vague to determine whether the commenter opposes the regulation itself or is simply expressing frustration.


**Schools should HAVE to report to Parents**

The commenter argues that schools should be required to inform parents and says the policy is "a scary slope" that will "widen the gap between the child-parent relationship." They explicitly reject the idea that schools can withhold information, stating "Schools are NOT substitutes for parents," which indicates opposition to the proposed guidance.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and asks to "Oppose any law favoring one class of person over another." The final sentence, "There's only 2 genders!", indicates rejection of the transgender student policies rather than support for adoption.


The comment repeatedly says "no no no," which is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation. It provides no supporting details or questions, but the emphatic repetition strongly indicates opposition.


The commenter clearly rejects the policy, opening with "No no no" and repeatedly arguing against transgender student protections. They frame the proposal as harmful, claiming it will lead to "brainwashed" children, bathroom danger, and loss of "parental rights," which indicates opposition to adoption.


The comment consists only of the word "No," which is too terse to determine whether it rejects the regulation itself, objects to a specific provision, or is simply an incomplete response. There is no supporting explanation or context to classify it reliably.


The commenter explicitly says "SUPPORT!!" and asks readers to "have open hearts and open minds when considering" the policy. They also state, "We support this strongly," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The comment explicitly states "STRONGLY OPPOSE" twice, which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying "Transgender shouldn’t be a term used in schools" and calling the proposal "a disgrace" and "sick." They also oppose related provisions on facilities and parental rights, stating "Boys shouldn’t be in a girls restroom or locker room" and that parents should not be threatened with child abuse charges.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly oppos," which clearly indicates opposition to the proposed regulation. Although misspelled, the intent is unambiguous and provides no supporting arguments or qualifications.


Strongly oppose!! This is unsafe and completely wrong!!!

The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose!!" and repeatedly rejects the policy as "unsafe" and "completely wrong." They also say they will "never send my children to public school if this is going to be a thing," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The comment explicitly says "Oppose" and "STRONGLY OPPOSE," which clearly indicates the commenter wants the regulation rejected. No supporting or qualifying language is provided.


Opposed, this policy disadvantages both parents and children, and here's why.

The commenter explicitly says, "do not approve this policy" and opens with "Opposed," making their position clear. They argue the policy harms children and parents, claiming it encourages harmful beliefs and "undermines the guardian's authority," which is a direct rejection of adoption.


Whatever happened to reading, writing, and arithmetic?

The commenter says they are "strongly opposed to this ideology" and asks officials to consider the "detrimental ramifications" of the proposed legislation. They argue it would "harm, confuse, and possibly destroy" students and invoke parental rights and religious beliefs against the policy.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and argues schools should base policies on "the majority of the normal children (boys and girls)," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. They also ask to "provide psychological help" instead of adopting the guidance, which shows they want the regulation weakened or not implemented.


Wish this had been in place when I was a kid

The commenter explicitly asks, "Please pass this" and says "Transgender rights are human rights," which clearly supports adoption of the policy. They also endorse bathroom access based on gender identity: "We should be allowed to use the bathroom of our gender."


The commenter explicitly says, "Please do not pass this!" and the title reads "Strongly Oppose!! No! No! No!" indicating clear rejection of the regulation. The body argues it would make their daughter feel unsafe and asks to "Protect the innocent," which supports opposition rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says, "It should not be imposed" and "I strongly oppose it," making their position clear. They argue the model is an "overreach into the parent-child relationship" and that it "oversteps multiple boundaries," indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support with changes.


Students can't have skirts too short, but now they can see the opposite gender naked???

The commenter explicitly says the rules are "ABSOLUTELY unacceptable" and repeatedly argues to "do not take away the rights" of other students, ending with "Stop the bullying, of course, but do not take away the rights." Although they support anti-bullying in principle, the overall thrust is to reject the transgender student policies as written.


Strongly Disagree!!! to Statewide Transgender School Policies being proposed

The commenter explicitly opens with "Strongly Disagree!!!" and repeatedly says the proposed policies "should not be allowed" or "should not be permitted". They object to pronoun use, parental notification, dress code flexibility, and bathroom/locker room access, indicating opposition to the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and repeatedly urges officials to "stay out of this lane" and "please stop pushing this agenda on little minds." They argue schools are "not qualified" to address transgender issues and call the policy "cruel and wrong," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly Support!!" which clearly endorses the regulation. The personal note that "My niece is a transgender student in Virginia public schools" provides context for why the commenter supports the policy.


The comment explicitly says "SUPPORT," which directly indicates approval of the proposed regulation. No contrary language or qualifications are included.


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "Strongly Opposed" and states, "This is not appropriate," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose this policy" and argues it is "not needed" in public schools. They contend existing policies already protect "ALL/EVERY student" and that schools should not "push this policy," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The comment only provides the title "Equitable oppression." with no body text or explicit request to adopt, reject, or modify the regulation. The phrase is too ambiguous to determine whether the commenter is opposing the policy, criticizing its framing, or making a general statement.


Please pass these Bill's and protect transgender students

The commenter explicitly says, "Please pass these bills" and repeats that "Protections for our transgender students are needed now more than ever." The comment argues in favor of the regulation as a necessary safeguard against trauma and discrimination.


encourages children to deny or disdain their biologic gender

The commenter argues the policy "mischaracterizes watchful waiting as unsupportive" and says it "encourages transgender children to ignore or perhaps even mourn their biological gender." They explicitly reject bathroom access based on identified gender, stating there is "no compelling reason" for that approach and calling for more research instead of adoption as written.


The commenter rejects the policy as written, saying "Girls should not be subjected to this" and arguing that transgender accommodations should be given "separately". The focus on excluding "penises" from girls' bathrooms and locker rooms indicates opposition to the regulation's inclusive treatment of transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this guidance" and urges "adopting this guidance" to protect transgender and non-binary youth. They frame it as "best practice" and "life saving action," indicating clear approval of the regulation as proposed.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Oppose" and reinforces that view with "Not a good idea folks!!" This indicates clear opposition to adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY WHOLEHEARTEDLY SUPPORT" and adds that "Transgender and nonbinary rights are human rights" and "Schools should be inclusive." This clearly endorses adoption of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and asks, "Please do not do this to our children," which clearly rejects the proposed transgender student policies. The title "Protect the Children" reinforces opposition to adoption of the regulation.


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


The commenter explicitly praises the proposal, saying "I love these changes!" and that they "will help so many youth lead better lives." They also thank the agency for "recognizing them for who they are," which clearly indicates approval of the regulation.


Trans and Non-Binary Student Protections

The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support these guidelines" and argues that "Schools must serve ALL students." They also endorse the goal of making students "feel safe and welcome in school," which aligns with adopting the regulation.


Approve: Follow policy, law, and science over bigotry

The commenter explicitly says, "Please pass this" and praises the policy as "comprehensive, compassionate and based on law, policy and science." They also argue that "School support is essential" and that all students need a "safe, affirming, welcoming environment," which clearly supports adoption.


The commenter explicitly says trans students "deserve to feel supported and safe at school" and calls the measures "an absolute minimum," which clearly endorses the regulation. The comment also praises teaching diversity and acceptance, indicating approval of the policy's goals.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose your recommendations and guidelines" and argues against allowing transgender students in "girls bathroom / locker room." They request separate facilities instead, stating the policy threatens privacy and safety and should not be adopted as written.


Regarding the transgender bathroom policy in public schools.

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose!!! No!!!" which clearly rejects the proposed policy. The title, "Regarding the transgender bathroom policy in public schools," indicates the opposition is directed at this regulation area.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this policy," which directly endorses adoption. They also describe it as "well thought out and kind," reinforcing a positive position toward the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed" and argues the policy "undermines the rights and responsibilities of parents" and is "unacceptable." They object to school personnel being placed "between parents and children" and to children obtaining outcomes "in secret with the help of a state employee," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter says "Strongly oppose" multiple times and objects to transgender students using restrooms/locker rooms and competing in sports under the proposed policy. They explicitly argue that transgender students should be separated by "biologically" sexed categories, indicating rejection of the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly asks to "put in these guidelines" and states the purpose is so that "discrimination against transgender students stops." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation to protect transgender students.


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "Strongly opposed" and says "This would be a huge mistake," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. No supporting or neutral language appears.


Strongly oppose transgender new school policy

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" the policy and objects to "biological males who identify as girls, participating in girl's athletics of any kind." This is a clear rejection of the proposed transgender student policy, at least as it relates to girls' sports.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support" in response to the transgender student policies, and the title "Don’t allow transgender" indicates opposition to the regulation. No mitigating language or request for changes is provided, so this is a clear rejection.


I adamantly disagree with The Education Dept dangerous transgender policies

The commenter explicitly says, "I completely disagree with The Department of Education’s views on the adoption of transgender policies & guidelines" and calls them "dangerous transgender policies." They also object to support for students "WITHOUT any parental notification and permission," indicating opposition to adoption of the regulation as written.


Strongly support Transgender and Non-BInary Youth

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support these guidelines" and repeatedly argues that the policy should be adopted to promote "equity and inclusion" for transgender and non-binary students. The comment endorses specific provisions like bathroom access, chosen names/pronouns, and anti-bullying policies as reasons to approve the regulation.


The comment explicitly says, "Oppose VDOE Latest Transgender Guidelines" and criticizes a key element of the policy: "I don't think hiding their identities from their parents is helpful at all." Although it includes some general support for family involvement, the overall thrust is against the transgender guidance as written.


Trans Rights Are Human Rights - Support Our Trans Students

The commenter explicitly says, "Please support our Trans students" and argues that trans students should be allowed to "dress and participate in events as they please." Although they write "I strongly oppose this bill," the substance of the comment supports the regulation’s protections for transgender students rather than rejecting them.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and argues the policy should not be adopted, stating "do not make policies that undermine teacher authority, parental authority and safety." They also propose alternatives like homeschooling and "safe zones" instead of the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this 100%," which is a clear endorsement of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism suggesting any opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this guidance" and repeatedly argues that transgender students "must be respected, uplifted, and supported." The comment endorses the regulation as a necessary source of "explicit messages of support coming from the top."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support!" and urges to "Support trans youth and respect their right to identify properly!" This clearly endorses adoption of the regulation and its protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policies, saying they are "exceedingly important" and that they are "happy to see it being addressed." They argue the policies would help students focus on education and affirm transgender students through pronouns, bathroom access, and dress code accommodations.


SUPPORT/Virginia Department of Education model transgender student policy

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this model policy" and praises it as "comprehensive and sensitive." They also argue that public schools "must be held to this minimum standard" to protect transgender youth, indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and calls the proposal "absolutely shameful." They argue that "Parents should always be involved" and that school/government should never override parental oversight, indicating rejection of the regulation.


Support for the Model Policies on the Treatment of Transgender Students

The commenter explicitly says, "I am writing in support of the Model Policies" and repeatedly argues that the proposed rule will improve safety, inclusion, and equal access for transgender and nonbinary students. They conclude that it "will make Virginia schools a better place to learn," which clearly endorses adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support trans youth support systems to be a regular part of Virginia schools." They also affirm the policy goal by stating, "All students deserve to feel safe and accepted for who they are."


The commenter explicitly says they are "strongly supporting all youth" and states that "This bill makes all youth feel safer" and "This will help." They also endorse the policy’s protections against bullying and discrimination and call it "a great compromise" regarding restroom accommodations.


DO NOT SUPPORT THIS MISGUIDED INDOCRINATION

The commenter explicitly says "DO NOT SUPPORT THIS" and "Please do not support this!" They argue the policies "take rights away from the family and faith communities" and call schools "indoctrination factories," indicating clear opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support the guidance," and the title says "Strongly support." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation as proposed.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying it has "no place" in "women’s sports or restrooms" and calling it "Totally unnatural." The final sentence, "stand up for what is right," reinforces opposition to adopting the transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am definitely not in favor of this passing" and "Never will be," which clearly rejects the regulation. The language also frames the policy as "completely absurd" and warns of "potential dangers," reinforcing opposition.


The commenter explicitly states, "I strongly oppose this policy," which directly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. The title, "Strongly oppose transgender policies," reinforces the same position.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support the guidance," and the title says "Strongly support." There is no indication of any reservations or requested changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am totally for the proposed changes," which directly supports adoption of the regulation. They also add, "There is nothing wrong with caring for and respecting transgender persons," reinforcing approval of the policy's purpose.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and repeatedly endorses the policy, stating "we need this Bill & measures". They argue it is necessary to ensure "a safe and supportive environment" and to reduce LGBTQ victimization and self-harm risk.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and repeatedly rejects the policy, stating "I will ever support this" and calling the discussion "disgusting." They argue against bathroom/locker room access, confidentiality provisions, and the policy's handling of transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY support the model policy" and repeatedly urges adoption to "help and protect trans and non-binary students." They also state, "Sounds great to me" and "Weve got to protect and uplift Trans children!"


The commenter explicitly condemns the policy as "PURE EVIL" and says the state is "promoting this degenerate mental disorder," indicating clear rejection of the regulation. They also argue that "There is no such thing as a transgender person" and that the state is on a path to hell, which shows opposition to adoption.


Support!!! We are all loved, and God creates us all. Transgender youth are supported!

The commenter explicitly says "Absolutely support" and endorses the policy's purpose of protecting transgender youth. The statement that "Bullying for ones identity is immoral" further indicates approval of the regulation's anti-discrimination and anti-bullying goals.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and "Totally opposed" to the policy. They describe it as a "gross overreach and abuse of power" and object to the state "inject[ing]" itself into family life, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this" and endorses equal treatment: "all trans people should be treated the same as cis people." This is a clear affirmative position on adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Submitting strong support for our trans and non-binary youth" and urges protection for them. The comment clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose and rejects opposing views as "bigoted and transphobic."


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose these draft model policies" and repeatedly argues they should not be adopted, citing concerns about bathrooms, parental rights, and religious objections. The comment frames the policies as harmful and unlawful, indicating clear opposition rather than a request for modification.


Oppose. Antibullying measures already exist.

The commenter explicitly says "Oppose" and argues the policies "infringe on parents' & teachers' rights," indicating rejection of the proposed regulation. The statement that "Antibullying measures already exist" is presented as a reason against adopting these specific policies.


The commenter explicitly states, "I oppose," which directly indicates opposition to the proposed regulation. No additional context suggests any nuance or conditional support.


The comment explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE!" and repeats "Oppose!!!", which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting or neutral language appears.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying "This is NOT okay" and "Please don't make this mistake." They argue against recognizing gender identity over sex and warn it will lead to "chaos," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy: "Just, No...." and says it "has no place in children's classrooms." They argue it should be "at the sole discretion of the parents" and that children are not mature enough for the subject, indicating opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "SUPER STRONGLY OPPOSE!" and the title "INDIA ALSO VOTES NO TO LGBT" indicates rejection of the transgender student policies. There is no indication of support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this proposal" and asks, "Please oppose this for the sake of all." They argue the policy would "cause damage" and object to children being able to "change or decide their own gender," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly labels the policy "Strongly Oppose" and says it "goes way beyond prevention" and is "mandatory promotion" of ideology. They argue it is "irresponsible" and "actually damaging," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support Protections and Support for Trans and Non-Binary Students" and urges officials to "take steps to ensure the safety, well-being and thriving of all our students." The comment clearly endorses the regulation’s protective aims for transgender and non-binary students.


The commenter explicitly says "Support Trans Youth" and argues that trans students should be treated according to their gender identity. The comment endorses the policy’s purpose by stating that misgendering or treating students as their assigned sex at birth is harmful and traumatic.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "oppose" and argues against the policy as "highly disturbing for the children." They claim it would increase risk of assault and reject transgender identity, stating "THERE IS ONLY 2 GENDERS!!!!!"


The comment consists only of the word "fart," which is off-topic and provides no discernible opinion about the proposed transgender student policies. It does not express support, opposition, or any substantive concern.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Approve" and states that "All children... should be treated equally," which clearly endorses the regulation's inclusive treatment of transgender students. The phrase "Individual differences should be acknowledged, honored and accepted" further supports adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this" and urges, "Stop trying to confuse our children!" They also reject the policy as "weird crap," indicating clear opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "I am absolutely OPPOSED" and frames the policy as "forcing this agenda on Virginia's Children," which clearly rejects adoption of the regulation. The title "OPPOSE Transgender indoctrination" reinforces that opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "Support the youth!" and states that youth "need this support." They also endorse the policy as a way to move "away from prejudice and hate and towards communal care," which clearly favors adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am vehemently opposed to the proposed new policies" and repeatedly argues against adoption, calling the policies "extreme and confusing". They also claim the policies will "effectively end girls’ sports" and object to the "disregard for parents’ views and wishes," indicating clear opposition rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says, "We must support this bill," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. The additional language about "prejudice" and "This is a health crisis" reinforces a strong pro-adoption position.


NOT This, I Support all being who they are, but not this

The commenter explicitly says they "strongly oppose" key parts of the policy and argues schools are "going way to far" and should "step back." Although they express support for individuals being themselves, the overall position is against the regulation because it gives schools too much authority and allows bathroom access based on student choice.


Strongly oppose transgender policy proposal

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the proposed accommodations for transgender students." They also argue the policy should not be adopted because it would expose children to "this ideology" and claims it puts "cisgender students at risk."


Oppose-Well Intentioned Misguided Overreach

The commenter explicitly says "I oppose" the policy and repeatedly urges officials to "Leave it alone" and "Do not establish that." They describe the proposal as "overreach," "misguided," and "irresponsible," and argue it is "none of the VDOE's business."


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Support" and says "At least allow them to feel safe in school," which endorses the regulation’s goal of protecting transgender students. The rest of the comment attacks opponents rather than questioning the policy itself.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy’s implications for athletics, writing "NO Transgender in sports" and arguing that those "born a male" should be kept in male sports. The comment also says "Don’t make our children pay," indicating opposition to the regulation rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and argues against the policy on religious and ideological grounds, stating "the bible says there are man and women" and "you are what your born as." They also claim the regulation "creates more sexual assault on children," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies.


Strongly support treating people as as they wish to be treated

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the implementation of the proposed guidance document" and praises it as "well-researched." The comment also endorses the underlying principle of respecting transgender people: "Treating people as people and how they want to be treated."


The commenter explicitly says "I STRONGLY SUPPORT these policy recommendations" and repeats that they "strongly support them." They argue the policies will create "a safe and inclusive learning environment for ALL students, including and especially LGBTQ+ youth."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Approve" and states that "these children must be treated as every other child," which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose. There is no language opposing or questioning the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "This cannot be allowed to be enacted in our school systems" and calls the policies "absurd." They argue the policies are harmful, claiming they will lead to "bullying and suicides," which indicates clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly states "Strongly oppose," which clearly indicates opposition to adopting the regulation. No additional details or qualifications are provided.


Concerns from Mother of 4 Public School Children

The commenter says, "I strongly oppose the current VDOE proposal" and argues the policies should not be adopted because they "overstep the role of schools," threaten "safety and privacy," and deny "rights regarding issues of conscience." These statements clearly reject the regulation rather than support it with changes.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and describes the policy as creating "the accommodation for any child that is uncomfortable, transgender or not," which endorses adoption of the regulation. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


OPPOSE!  STRONGLY OPPOSE!  Why is this ok with you to not follow the science on this & teach lies?

The commenter explicitly says "OPPOSE! STRONGLY OPPOSE!" and repeatedly argues against the policy, claiming it "go[es] against science" and removes "parental rights." They also object to privacy impacts in "locker rooms and bathrooms" and to the policy's treatment of transgender students generally.


The commenter explicitly says "FULLY SUPPORT" and praises the policy for providing "inclusion for ALL students." They also endorse the policy’s purpose by saying children should be "accepted and supported for who they are."


The commenter explicitly labels the comment "Opposed" and argues against the policy by warning it will expand beyond students to "adult staff" and by objecting to separate bathrooms for transgender people. The statement that this would "take us back to the days of segregation" indicates rejection of the regulation's approach.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose," calls the guidance "dangerous" and "appalling," and urges readers to "protest against this" policy. They argue it "does not accomplish" preventing bullying and instead harms children, parents, and religious freedom.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues that "Legally enabling such profound confusion will cause more harm than good." The language rejects the regulation and frames it as harmful and ideological.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly support protections for trans youth" and calls the policies "an excellent start." They are urging adoption of the regulation and asking policymakers not to be swayed by opponents.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose passage of H.B. 145" and argues it is "wrong and unwise for the state to interfere" with these policies. They also criticize the proposed approach as a "cookie-cutter" solution and say state involvement "only adds another level of complexity," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter rejects the policy outright, saying "I cannot even begin to fathom where anyone would think it is okay to allow this to take place" and "not with my children!" They argue schools should not help children "identify with what gender they want to be" and object to parents being accused of abuse, indicating clear opposition to the transgender student policies.


The commenter questions why the policy is being considered at all, saying, "Why are we wasting time and resources on this" and implying the issue is too small to merit attention. The closing line, "Don’t we have bigger issues to deal with?" clearly signals opposition to adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly endorses affirming transgender students, saying children should "exist in a way that affirms their gender identity" and that "Protecting trans kids" helps them grow up healthy and happy. This clearly supports the proposed policies' purpose and implementation.


The commenter says, "I strongly oppose" and argues the state is "sexualize[ing] children" through the policy, which indicates rejection of the regulation. The reference to "undermine parent's rights" further shows opposition to the proposed guidance.


STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS APPROACH - ENTIRELY INSENSITIVE AND UNFAIR TO EVERYONE!!!

The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS APPROACH" and repeatedly argues the policy is "horrifically one-sided" and should not be adopted. They cite concerns about "parent's rights," "constitutional rights," and "freedom of religion," and predict it will be overturned in litigation.


The commenter expresses clear hostility toward the policy and transgender people, opening with "Strongly disagree" and then using a derogatory slur: "Trannies." This indicates opposition to the regulation rather than a neutral or supportive comment.


The commenter explicitly argues that trans people “shouldn’t [be] exclude[d]” and concludes, “We should support everyone, no matter what.” This clearly endorses the regulation’s inclusive treatment of transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose!!" and repeatedly condemns the policy as a "radical indoctrinating agenda." They argue it is "wrong" and harmful to children, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "Strongly Oppose" and calls it "over-reach" and "madness." They also question "What happened to parental rights" and argue the policies will cause "psychological harm to our kids," indicating clear rejection of adoption.


Trans kids deserve respect but portions of these proposed policies go too far

The commenter says “portions of these proposed policies go too far and should be revised” and objects to specific provisions on parental notification and bathroom/locker room access. They argue the policies “potentially puts the children more at risk” and “would enable students to act on such impulses,” indicating opposition to the regulation as written.