The commenter explicitly endorses the policy’s goals, saying it is "so important to provide supportive and equitable services" and that the department should "do everything in their power" to ensure respectful treatment regardless of gender identity. This is a clear call for adoption and implementation of the regulation as supportive of trans youth.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the proposed updates" and argues that "Trans students deserve to be safe, heard, and understood." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


Rights to disagree should be protected no

The commenter argues that the policy should not be imposed because it would force people to act against their beliefs: "by making it law you are taking people's freedom of religious beliefs." They frame the regulation as a violation of conscience and religious freedom rather than supporting adoption with changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "This policy, however, teaches an ideological position at odds with the values of a great number of parents and families," which indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. Although the comment affirms anti-bullying principles, it contrasts that with opposition to this specific policy.


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

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and argues to "Leave this whole discussion to parents" and that "Schools need to but out," indicating rejection of the proposed policies. The comment criticizes the underlying issue as "attention seeking behavior," further showing opposition rather than a request for modification.


Strongly support Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in Virginia’s Public Schoo

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" in the title and thanks the policies as "well thought out." They also affirm the underlying purpose by stating, "All children deserve to be respected and accepted for who they are."


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose" and argues that "transgender decisions should never be made before" age 25, which rejects the policy's treatment of transgender students. The language about "Glamorizing an alternative gender lifestyle is irresponsible" and "NOT incentives to be noticed" shows clear opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this" and repeatedly argues the policies would create a "more safe, inclusive and welcoming environment for all children." They also state, "I want this for our school systems," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose Transgender model" and argues that "transgender decisions should never be made before" age 25, which rejects the policy's treatment of transgender students. The language about "Glamorizing an alternative gender lifestyle is irresponsible" and "NOT incentives to be noticed" further shows opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support polices that are inclusive" and asks to "Please expand considerations for Transgender students," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation and even suggests strengthening it. The comment frames the policy as beneficial for "LGBTQ+ residents" and transgender students.


Opposed to VDOE model policies for the treatment of transgender students

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this proposed addition to the code" and "Do not move forward or approve these ill-conceived draft model policies!" They object to restroom/locker room access and argue the policies would weaken "traditional family values," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


policies for the treatment of transgender students  strongly oppose

The commenter explicitly says "strongly oppose" in the title and states that the "School system has no right to impose their beliefs on my family," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The comment provides no support or neutral inquiry, only opposition to the regulation's adoption.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy multiple times, saying "No!" and "don't force this on kids!!!" They also state they would "home school my kids before I let them be in a school where they are foceing this kind of thing on them," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly agree" and urges Virginia to "enact policies" that "offer and provide protection" to vulnerable students. They also frame the regulation as necessary to "remove the negative barriers to education" and ensure children feel safe and treated fairly.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support Transgender Youth and these Model Policies!" This is a direct endorsement of the regulation and its adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "This bill protects children" and ends with "supporting these bills," making clear they want the regulation adopted. They also repeatedly endorse trans students' rights and protections, arguing against exclusion and in favor of the policy's goals.


Dont jeopardize the bodily privacy and safety of our children.

The commenter explicitly says "DO NOT promote" the proposed transgender policies and frames them as harmful, saying they would "jeopardize the bodily privacy and safety of our children." This is a clear rejection of the regulation rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says, "STRONGLY SUPPORT!!!!" and "I support transgender youth and these model policies!" This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support transgender youth and these model policies," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. The rest of the comment reinforces approval by criticizing opponents of the policies.


Strongly Agree/ All human beings deserve to be treated with dignity

The commenter explicitly says they "strongly agree with passing any rules" that promote dignity and respect in public schools. They also support preventing discrimination against their trans child and making schools "a safe place for all of our kids to learn and grow."


The commenter explicitly endorses the policies, calling them "crucial for the safety and acceptance of transgender students" and saying "We need to foster inclusive policies." This is clear support for adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly agree and support this" and argues that the policy is needed so "all children deserve to feel safe and accepted in school." They further endorse the regulation as promoting "safety, equality, acceptance, inclusion" for students.


Strongly oppose new transgender rules / Overstepping your role

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose new transgender rules" and repeatedly argues the VDOE should not adopt them, calling the regulations "overstepping your role" and saying "You should not try to replace" parents. The comment also objects to pronoun requirements, bathroom/locker room access, and transgender accommodations generally.


As a student in VA schools I SUPPORT THIS WITH ALL MY HEART

The commenter explicitly says "I SUPPORT THIS WITH ALL MY HEART" and "WE NEED THIS DRAFT." They argue the policy would reduce bullying and help transgender students feel "more accepted and valid," which clearly endorses adoption.


Strongly Oppose Transgender Model Policies

The commenter explicitly says, "We strongly oppose this policy on moral and religious grounds" and repeatedly argues that "Boys are boys and girls are girls" and that "no policies... will change that." They also reject the policy’s approach to transgender identity, saying children’s "fantasies should not be encouraged."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and adds that the guidelines "fully support transgender students." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please support this life-saving legislation" and repeatedly urges approval of the policy. They argue it will "save young people's lives" and provide needed protection from discrimination, which clearly indicates support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "i strongly disagree" and argues against the policy by proposing a separate "third bathroom...locker room...sport" instead. The comment frames the regulation as causing "more bullying and caos" and "confusion," indicating rejection of the transgender student policies.


Oppose and if passed my children will never go to public school again

The commenter explicitly says "Oppose" and states "this should ever happen," indicating rejection of the regulation. The threat that "my children will never go to public school again" reinforces opposition rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am in full support of this" and repeatedly urges protection for trans youth and LGBTQ+ students. The comment frames the policy as necessary to help students "feel safe and protected at school."


No protection for people who have strong religious faith

The commenter says the policies provide "absolutely no exceptions or accommodations" and objects to being required to "go along with the 'transgender' ideology and policies." This indicates opposition to adopting the regulation as written.


The commenter warns that the policy would put parents "at risk of being reported for child abuse or neglect," which clearly indicates opposition to adoption. The framing of the policy as threatening parents who encourage children to "embrace their God-given sex" shows the commenter believes the regulation is harmful and should not be implemented.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support transgender youth and these model policies," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism suggesting opposition or neutrality.


The commenter argues the policy would "prohibit" schools from notifying parents and would allow students to use "any bathroom or locker room they choose," which they say would eliminate "privacy and safety." This is a clear objection to the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and adds that "All children should feel safe and welcome at school," which aligns with adopting the policy. The phrase "It’s ridiculous that this is even up for debate" reinforces clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly Agree," and adds that "This policy would be very helpful in protecting trans kids," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Opposed" and argues the policy is "irresponsible" and "actually damaging to kids," indicating they want the regulation rejected. The comment criticizes "involuntary promotion of gender confusion in a public education setting," which is a clear objection to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly against this," and argues that "We should not expose children to this kind of idiocy," indicating clear rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The additional insult toward the policy and its supporters reinforces opposition rather than any request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says the policies "seem to go too far," which indicates opposition to the regulation as written. Although they begin by supporting anti-discrimination actions, that qualifier does not change the overall objection to the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed" and concludes, "Absolutely, do not do this" and "These should be local decisions." They argue the policy undermines "family and parent rights," "religious freedoms," and student safety, indicating rejection of the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this" and argues the policy will "only... improve the lives of transgender/GNC students." They also endorse accommodations like protection from bullying and access to a separate bathroom, indicating approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do NOT support the proposed changes" and calls the policy an "overreach" that should not involve schools in "matters of sexuality and/or identification." They argue it disregards "parental rights" and should have "no place being addressed in the classroom," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do NOT support the proposed changes," which directly indicates opposition to adoption. They also object that the policy would "disregard parental rights, students’ privacy rights, and the First Amendment rights of teachers and administrators," reinforcing a negative position toward the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the development of this policy guidance" and explains it would help transgender and non-binary students "thrive" and be protected from "harassment and discrimination." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly titles the comment "Oppose" and argues that schools should not tell children they are "trapped in the wrong body," indicating rejection of the transgender student policies. The phrase "should not be utilized" and concern about acting "against their parents knowledge or consent" further show opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose!" to the proposed policies. The statement that these students "need counseling to affirm the gender they were born with" rejects the regulation's transgender-affirming approach and indicates opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and states they are in "strong support of providing safety to all students." They further affirm that "All students deserve respect and safety," indicating clear approval of the regulation's purpose.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and argues the policy is "irresponsible" and "damaging to kids." They object to bathroom and locker room access and to the policy being implemented "without ever notifying parents," indicating they want the regulation rejected or substantially weakened.


The commenter explicitly says, "I offer my full support to these proposed policies" and the title reads "Strongly Support." They also describe the policies as helping stop misgendering, provide accommodations, and protect their child from bullying and suicide risk.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and states that the proposal "should not even be entertained," which clearly rejects adoption. The phrase "codifies Perversion" is a hostile condemnation of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly calls the proposal "alarming" and "nonsense" and says the guidelines are only acceptable to "a few students and parents." They argue it would harm girls' sports opportunities and push families and teachers toward private schools, indicating they do not want the regulation adopted.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Strongly Support" and states that "Trans youth are some of the most vulnerable kids and need the full support of their school system." This clearly endorses adoption of the regulation and its protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do NOT support the proposed changes," which directly indicates opposition to the regulation. They also cite concerns that it "disregard[s] parental rights, students’ privacy rights, and the First Amendment rights of teachers and administrators," reinforcing a rejection of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly Support" and "I fully support legislation needed to promote the health and well-being of trans youth!" This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and argues that the policies will help "protect our most vulnerable kids" by ensuring a "safe and supportive environment." The body endorses protections for trans youth and frames the regulation as necessary to prevent bullying and harm.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this" and repeatedly argues that schools should "support transgender people as early as we can in their lives." They criticize those "voting in opposition" and frame rejection of the proposal as harmful and indecent.


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 SUPPORT" and states "I strongly support this legislation." They also endorse the policies as "long overdue and much needed" and say schools should be "welcoming and affirming places for ALL students."


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed to the proposed Transgender policies" and calls the policy "outrageous." They also argue it will "put students at risk" and that the state has "no business messing with biology," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and states "you’ll support transgender students," indicating clear approval of the regulation. They also argue that "Affirming students with compassion" will improve student well-being and success, which aligns with adoption of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this policy." They also justify that position by stating, "Trans youth are a high risk group and they deserve to have policies that support them," which clearly endorses adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this bill," which directly endorses adoption. The additional phrase "It is both necessary and important" reinforces a favorable position.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this" and "I fully support this guidance to help trans youth," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. There is no opposing language or ambiguity.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with phrases like "Seriously people your even considering this?" and "No, absolutely no." They object to transgender students in school facilities, citing "Boys in the girls locker room" and asserting "Parents need to raise their children, not the schools," which indicates opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support legislation" and frames it as promoting "the health and well-being of transgender youth," which clearly endorses the regulation. There is no opposing language or request to weaken the policy.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and repeatedly argues the policy is "extreme" and "NOT the way." They object to pronoun enforcement, bathroom/locker room access, and "handling our children without parents consent," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support legislation needed to promote the health and well-being of trans youth" and adds that they "should have legislation that protects them." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and argues in favor of "anti-discrimination policy" and "these protections." They also state that transgender students "need and deserve all of the support that can be provided," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support trans youth and their rights to a healthy, full life" and frames the regulation as a science-based public health policy. This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies rather than a request to reject or weaken them.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support legislation" and frames the policy as protecting "the safety and health of trans youth." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy, writing "Yes to anti-discrimination" and stating that "Virginia's schools should support and protect all students, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity." This clearly supports adoption of the regulation as a means of protecting transgender and LGBTQ+ students.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and repeatedly argues for "Passing this bill" and "a strong and supportive educational foundation." They also state that "Opposing this bill is opposing human nature," making clear they want the regulation adopted.


Concerns About Proposed Transgender Rules

The commenter explicitly says, "I have concerns about these guidelines" and concludes that "the proposed rules should be amended" in ways that would substantially weaken them, including parental notice and protecting sex-segregated spaces. The overall thrust is opposition to the regulation as written, even though the commenter supports a safe environment for transgender students in principle.


Strongly support respecting the human rights of our Trans students

The commenter explicitly says they are "urging the state" to "respect the gender identity of students" and praises "evidence-based practices that affirm students' identities." They frame the policy as necessary to "support their needs" and to "honor the needs of our trans students," indicating clear support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Opposed!" and "I do not want my daughter in the same bathroom/locker room with the opposite sex," which clearly rejects the policy. They also argue it is "a terrible idea" and claim it would create "dangerous and troubling times," indicating opposition rather than a request for changes.


The commenter says, "I strongly disagree" and "I personally don't think it belongs in schools," which clearly rejects the proposed policy. They also argue for separate facilities instead of the policy's approach and warn it "opens up a lot of potential lawsuits," indicating opposition rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and ends with "Please protect trans youth," indicating clear approval of the proposed policies. The body explains that safer school policies could have helped their sister avoid fear and harm, reinforcing support for adoption.


Strongly Disagree with Transgender Policy Legislation

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose transgender policies being enforced in public schools K-12" and argues against the policy on multiple grounds, including ambiguity in "affirming" language and parental rights. The closing appeal to "Protect our children’s innocence" reinforces rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and adds that "ALL students deserve to feel safe and supported while at school," which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please do not pass this proposal" and titles the comment "Strongly Oppose." They argue it would "inflict[] irreparable damage," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and endorses "inclusive policies." They also argue that schools should recognize and value all children, which aligns with adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support Virginia DOE's guidance" and endorses "creating inclusive learning environments for transgender and non-binary youth." They also state that children should be "supported and safe," indicating approval of the regulation as proposed.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose policy" and argues against the regulation on the grounds that it "deny[ies] the basic biological differences" between sexes. They specifically object to transgender participation in athletics, warning women will lose opportunities and face injury.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed to this" and repeatedly asks, "Please do not pass this." They argue the policy is unsafe and wrong, citing concerns about bathroom access and "taking away parents rights."


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed to this bill" and repeatedly argues against the policy, calling it a "violation of parental rights" and saying it should "not be standard practice." They also object to transgender students' access to locker rooms and bathrooms and urge, "Stop trying to normalize behavior that ignores biology."


The commenter explicitly says, "Please stop this now!" and "Opposed!" which clearly rejects the proposed policies. They argue the regulation would put children "in harms way" and invoke religious objection, indicating they do not want it adopted.


STRONGLY SUPPORT. Violent christian values hold no place in our society

The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and argues that "There should be no issue for Trans people gaining access to education and job opportunity." They also reject opposition to the policy, saying harmful "christian values" and "cultural violence towards LGBTQ+ people" should not interfere.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support legislation needed to promote the health and well-being of trans youth!" This is a clear endorsement of the regulation’s goals and adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and states that "It is the right of every student to feel welcome and supported within the school system." They further endorse the policy because it would help transgender students feel "supported" and "empowered" to access needed resources.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and adds that "Every student deserves a safe learning space," which aligns with adopting the regulation. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the policy" and repeatedly endorses its goals, including protecting children from "bullying and abusive behavior and discrimination." They also frame it as creating "a safe environment" for transgender kids and state that "All students should be respected and protected."


The commenter explicitly says, "I do NOT support the proposed changes," which directly rejects the regulation. They also cite concerns about "parental rights, students’ privacy rights, and the First Amendment rights of teachers and administrators," indicating opposition to adoption as written.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSED IN SCHOOLS" and pleads, "PLEASE DON'T ALLOW THIS TO HAPPEN IN OUR SCHOOLS," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose policy" and argues against the regulation on the grounds that it "deny[ies] the basic biological differences" and threatens women’s athletics. The comment frames the policy as harmful to Title IX opportunities, scholarships, and safety, indicating clear rejection rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and states they are "in support of transgender students and their safety and equality in our schools." This clearly endorses the regulation's purpose and adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this guidance" and adds, "I support policies that support children and these proposals do that." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support these measures" and endorses multiple elements of the policy, including "privacy," chosen names and pronouns, "gender-neutral dress code," "restroom access," and training. This is a clear request for adoption of the regulation.


Not in Favor - Especially for Younger Students

The commenter explicitly says, "I am NOT in favor of this action" and argues it would be confusing, inappropriate for young children, and infringe on others' rights. They also state that parents should have a choice in what is taught to minors, indicating opposition to the regulation as written.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support legislation that supports trans youth/students," which clearly endorses the regulation. The title, "Support Trans Students," reinforces that the comment favors adoption.


Strongly support I support this guidance.

The commenter explicitly says, "I support this guidance" and "Strongly support," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. The additional statement about a "far greater threat To our LGBTQ students" reinforces support for protections in the guidance.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and argues that "Trans students have the same rights to an education free from administrative discrimination." They also endorse the policy by stating that "No cis students will face any negative consequences" from adopting it.


The comment explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No additional explanation is provided, but the stance is unambiguous.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly in support of the guidance" and adds that "Virginia must be a place for all youth to thrive," which clearly endorses adoption. The rest of the comment explains why trans students need support and improved treatment in schools.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and argues that "Transgender students should feel safe at school," indicating clear approval of the proposed policies. The comment endorses the regulation’s goals of dignity, respect, and safety for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose this abuse of children" and argues the policy is "attempting to brainwash vulnerable children," which clearly rejects adoption of the regulation. The statement that parents, not government, should handle these topics further indicates opposition to the proposed guidance.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this policy," which directly endorses adoption. They also explain the reason as enabling "a safe learning environment for transgender students," reinforcing clear support for the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and repeatedly rejects the proposal, arguing it would "remove a parent's ability to raise their children" and "subject ALL children to your mind games." The closing "Leave our children alone!" and criticism of the education system show clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "STONGLY OPPOSE" and "Do not implement this!!!," which clearly rejects the proposed regulation. There is no indication of support or a request for modification; the comment is a direct call to reject it.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly do NOT support" and argues that the policy "threatens the privacy of our own children." Although they affirm anti-bullying principles, the overall message rejects the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and adds "Everyone should be treated equally," which clearly endorses adoption of the policy. The phrase "This is a no brainer" reinforces a positive, approving position.


Revisions needed to project religious freedom

The commenters explicitly “urge you to make significant changes” to the draft guidelines and say they are “troubled” by policy that would “suppress and impede the free exercise of religion.” They argue the draft is harmful and ask for language that would weaken or alter the transgender student policies to protect religious objections.


Addendum: In support & gender-specific programming is still needed

The commenter says they are in "general support" of the policy document and reiterates that they "continue to be in general support." Their only criticism is a request to amend one policy so that gender-specific extracurricular activities can still exist, not to reject the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose!" and criticizes multiple provisions of the policy as "Not functional," "Not sustainable," and "So dangerous!" They object to the bullying/harassment language and the parent-notification process, indicating they do not want the regulation adopted as written.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and "I fully support" the policy goals of helping children feel safe and be themselves. The comment endorses transgender students being able to "feel safe in school" and being supported as trans, indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do NOT support the proposed changes," which is a direct rejection of the regulation. They also object that it "disregard[s] parental rights, students’ privacy rights, and the First Amendment rights of teachers and administrators," indicating substantive opposition rather than a request for minor edits.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am opposed to the Transgender agenda in schools" and asks schools to "Stick to traditional subject matter," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. Although they acknowledge that transgender people "have rights as anyone else does," the overall message is that these policies should not be "forced upon families."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support transgender students, their safety, and equality in our schools," which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose. There is no language opposing or questioning the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do NOT support the proposed changes," which directly rejects the regulation. They also object to it on substantive grounds, citing "parental rights," "students’ privacy rights," and "the First Amendment rights of teachers and administrators."


Fully Support/Terese Colling, concerned parent and human being

The commenter explicitly says "Fully Support" and thanks the authors for "this excellent guidance document." Phrases like "Stay the course" and "Great work" clearly endorse adoption of the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this legislation" and urges that "We must support them with every effort possible." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this!" and argues the policies are "idiotic" and would "endanger[]" students. They object to bathroom/locker room access provisions and say the regulation would force families to homeschool or use private school.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this policy," which directly states their position. They also argue it is "causing confusion and endangering our children without parental knowledge," indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support with changes.


The commenter explicitly says "SUPPORT 100%" and "I fully support children being who they are and feeling safe as trans." They also endorse the policy goals of comfort, safety, and support in school and public spaces.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please do not approve the transgender guidelines" and titles the comment "Strongly Oppose." They argue the guidelines would harm children and "do the complete opposite" of protecting them, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support legislation" and frames the policy as promoting "the health and well-being of trans youth." This is a clear endorsement of adoption.


Revisions needed to protect religious freedom

The commenters explicitly ask for "significant changes" to the draft guidelines and say they "urge you to make this change" because the policies "as written would suppress and impede the free exercise of religion." They also argue the guidelines are "harmful to children" and would "disadvantage parents" with religious beliefs, indicating opposition to adoption in its current form.


Strong support for transgender protection!

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this document" and repeatedly argues for "additional protections" for transgender students. They frame the policy as necessary to reduce bullying, discrimination, and mental health harms, and ask that schools "put these protections in place."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues the guidances are "far too broad and general." They also reject the underlying premise, calling it "child abuse" and saying the policies should instead "embrace your God given gender," which indicates clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly writes "Strongly oppose" and repeatedly argues against the policy as "extreme" and "absurd." They say it would "take rights away from parents and adults" and expose teachers to lawsuits over pronoun mistakes, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


Strongly Support Safety & Well being of Trans Students

The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support legislation needed to promote the health and well-being of trans youth" and repeatedly urges schools to create "inclusive, supportive environments." The comment endorses the regulation’s goals of protecting transgender students from bullying and discrimination.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this," which directly endorses the regulation. They also justify it by saying "Bullying has no place in school" and express support for "my trans, non-binary, and genderfluid friends," indicating approval of the policy's protections.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and argues that "Hate has no business being in our schools," indicating approval of the regulation’s protective aims. The rest of the comment reinforces support for inclusion and against discrimination, with no indication of opposition to the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support policies that support and protect transgender students." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation as proposed.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the suggested policy guidelines" and argues they are "not in the best interest of the majority of school students." They also object to specific provisions on locker rooms and sports, indicating they want the regulation rejected rather than adopted.


The commenter explicitly says they are "strongly opposed to transgender policy in public school". They also cite concerns about "lack of privacy" and "lack of parental notification," indicating rejection of the proposed policy rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy’s inclusive purpose, saying school must be "a safe place for all students" and that students should feel "welcomed and respected." This language supports adoption of the transgender student model policies rather than opposing them.


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


Strongly oppose these misdirected policies which exclude diverse approaches and freedom of speech

The commenter explicitly says they "strongly oppose" the policies and repeatedly argues they are "heavily biased and one-sided" and should not be adopted as written. They criticize the document for limiting parental authority, free speech, and religious freedom, and for allowing restroom access and pronoun policies they reject.


The commenter explicitly says "Emphatically SUPPORT" and urges officials to "support our transgender and non-binary youth" and adopt "this new code". They also ask, "Please don't let a loud group of discriminatory people block this forward progress," which clearly favors adoption of the regulation.


Agree - please disregard any past opposing votes. we all got together and changed our minds

The commenter explicitly says they "now want to change our old, embarrassing comments" and asks to "disregard any past opposing votes," which indicates a reversal toward supporting the regulation. The title also begins with "Agree," reinforcing approval of the proposed policies.


Trans rights are human rights- strongly support this measure

The commenter explicitly says "strongly support this measure" and frames it as protective, stating it "protects trans children from bullying and discrimination." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE!" and asks, "Please do not force this upon our children," indicating rejection of the proposed policies. The suggestion to "Provide a single user bathroom for gender confused children" shows opposition to the regulation as written, with a preference for a narrower alternative.


Support the guidance on creating inclusive learning environments for transgender and non-binary kids

The commenter explicitly says, "It's time to recognize them and provide them a supportive learning environment" and urges, "Let's move forward," which clearly endorses the guidance. The title also states support for "creating inclusive learning environments for transgender and non-binary kids."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and calls the proposal "dangerous" and something that will "hurt our nation and young people." They argue against the policy's premise, saying it is "Not factual. Not scientific," and urge leaders to reject it by saying "Lead well."


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "Strongly Oppose" and repeatedly says "STOP! This is not okay." They argue the policy is "sickening," object to transgender students using facilities, and say the education system should not "encourage this type of behavior."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and urges schools to "do more to protect their transgender students." They endorse key elements of the policy such as letting kids use the bathroom matching their gender identity and degendering dress codes.


The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY OPPOSE" the draft policy and asks that it not be adopted. They argue it infringes on parental rights and would make public schools "not... a safe place" for their children, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not agree with this policy" and titles the comment "Strongly Oppose." They also argue it "puts more children at risk," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies.


STRONGLY APPOSE - Have you lost your minds?

The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY APPOSE," which clearly indicates opposition to the regulation. The phrase "Have you lost your minds?" reinforces that they want it rejected and are expressing strong disapproval.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Strongly Support" and says the policy "advocates for the basic rights" of students. They further praise it as "nurturing and supporting students" and encouraging schools to "open their minds," which clearly endorses adoption.


Please vote NO on VDOE Transgender Policies

The commenter explicitly says, "I urge you to reject the proposed policies" and "vote no." They argue the policies would harm students, threaten "parental rights," and oppose allowing transgender students to use restrooms and locker rooms with the opposite sex.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am against the bathroom policy" and argues the policy should be replaced with separate unisex facilities instead. They frame the current policy as creating safety risks and say it should not allow students to "use whichever bathroom they choose," indicating opposition to the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says they are "in support" and concludes, "we must protect everyone," which aligns with adopting the policies. They also endorse protections against "bullying or discrimination" for children who do not conform to norms.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this guidance" and expresses approval of its impact. The phrase "making ALL of our kids feel safe in schools" indicates endorsement of the regulation's goals.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and states they are "Strongly opposed to this." They argue the policy would "deny parents information about their own child’s developmental issues," indicating rejection of the regulation on parental-rights grounds.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support these guidelines" and frames them as protecting transgender students from discrimination. They also state the policies will help create "a safe environment for learning and growth," indicating clear approval of adoption.


STRONGLY OPPOSE the Va. Dept. of  Education Transgender Policies

The commenter explicitly says, "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and "I strongly object to this entire draft," which clearly rejects the regulation. They also argue it lacks "exceptions or accommodations" for religious conscience and that it "pull[s] families apart" by not involving parents, indicating opposition to adoption as written.


STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS RECKLESS POLITICAL ACTIVISM & PSEUDOSCIENCE

The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and repeatedly calls the proposal "reckless," "outrageous," and "irresponsible." They argue it is "pseudoscientific overreach" and say it should not be adopted because it undermines parents, religion, and federal law.


The commenter explicitly says, "Vote Yes," which clearly supports adopting the regulation. The title and opening statement, "Transgender Rights are Human Rights," further affirm approval of the policy's purpose.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and adds "I support other human beings and this!!!!" indicating clear approval of the regulation. The comment offers no objections or qualifications.


Transgender rights policies in public schools

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose!!!!!!" in response to the transgender student policies, which is a clear rejection of the regulation. No supporting or neutral language appears in the comment.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose!" and argues the policy would have "detrimental effects to children." They object to shared restroom/changing access and claim it violates "the right of parents" to teach their beliefs and morals, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


I SUPPORT a safe learning environment for trans youth

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support policy that protects trans youth in public schools" and calls the guidance "absolutely essential." This clearly endorses adoption of the regulation as a means to protect transgender students and create a safe learning environment.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am highly opposed to passing this into our school systems" and repeatedly urges officials to "Leave our children alone" and "Stop trying to fit in with the world." The comment rejects the policy on parental rights, religious, and sex-binary grounds, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Absolutely Not approving of this" and argues against transgender participation in women’s sports. They frame the policy as unfair to "born females" and say athletes should compete in the sex they were "Born" as, indicating clear opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Strongly Oppose" and says, "Schools should educate, not indoctrinate, their students!" This clearly rejects the proposed transgender student policies rather than supporting them.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose!" and repeatedly urges to "keep this away from Virginia schools," indicating clear rejection of the regulation. They argue the policies are "totally unworkable" and claim they violate religious freedoms and force compliance with a view they call "empirically false."


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY DISAGREE!" and "PLEASE NO!" in response to the transgender student policies, indicating clear opposition to adoption. The phrase "Crazy for even thinking this!" reinforces rejection rather than support or a neutral inquiry.


STRONGLY SUPPORT MOVING FORWARD! Not back!

The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT MOVING FORWARD!" and repeatedly praises the policy as something that "has been needed" and is "monumental to these kids." They also endorse giving teachers "information and tools" to implement it, indicating clear approval of adoption.


Protect, support, and defend transgender students and transgender people

The commenter explicitly urges the state to "focus on protecting, supporting, and defending transgender students" and says to "provide protective factors for transgender people" through changes to restrooms, dress code, and learning materials. This is a clear endorsement of the proposed transgender student protections, with no request to weaken or reject them.


objection to transgender policy proposal from VDOE

The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this proposal" and argues it "goes way too far." They object to privacy impacts, parental notification concerns, and compelled compliance with views on sex and gender, while only offering a limited caveat to "Protect kids who are gender confused."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose Transgender" and argues the policy "goes way beyond prevention" and amounts to "mandatory promotion" of the policy's subject matter. They also call it "irresponsible" and "damaging to kids," indicating clear rejection of adoption.


The comment strongly endorses respectful treatment of transgender people, stating that "PEOPLE DESERVE TO BE TREATED LIKE PEOPLE." Given the regulation concerns transgender students' treatment and protections, this is a clear expression of support for the policy's goals.


The commenter explicitly says "I STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS DOCUMENT" and repeatedly argues against its core provisions, including gender identity recognition, pronoun use, bathroom access, and parent notification. They frame the policy as harmful to children and schools, asking "Why punish 99% of a school to accommodate" these policies.


STRONGLY OPPOSE - STOP CIRCUMVENTING PARENTAL RIGHTS

The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and argues the policy "circumvent[s] parental rights" and "usurp[s] parents authority and responsibility." They object to schools using a student's affirmed name/pronouns without parental notification, calling it potentially deceptive.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE!" and asks to "PLEASE STOP THE HARRASMENT OF NON TRANSGENDER YOUTH!" This indicates opposition to the proposed transgender student policies, framed as harmful to non-transgender youth.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and endorses equal treatment: "All human beings deserves rights and to be treated fairly." The phrase "Trans lives matter!" directly supports the regulation’s protections for transgender students.


Strongly oppose proposed transgender policies

The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed" to the proposed policy and objects to allowing students to use "any bathroom or locker room they choose." They frame the policy as harming "privacy and safety of students in states of undress," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "strongly oppose these initiatives" and repeatedly argues against the policies on parental rights, restroom access, and sports participation. They call the proposal "completely absurd" and ask to "make actual education the focus" instead of these policies, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose these policies" and objects to "allowing biological boys into girl’s private bathrooms and changing spaces." She also argues the schools should not "trespass on the family and home," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Strongly Support" and argues that "These policies will not limit the rights of cis kids or their families" while saying they "promote the health and wellness of trans kids." The comment clearly endorses adoption of the regulation as a protection for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and says they "would wholeheartedly like to see it passed." They argue the policy should protect "LGBTQ+, specifically Transgender, youth" and provide guidance for schools, even if it is "not perfect."


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


The comment explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. No supporting reasons are provided, but the stance is unambiguous.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed" and adds "Strongly opposed to the transgender stuff," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support Transgender rights" and adds that "The rights of transgender people need to be protected." This clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose of protecting transgender students.


Strongly disagree with the transgender agenda

The commenter explicitly says, "I urge everyone to vote against this mockery of humanity," and describes the policy as a "transgender agenda" that should be rejected. The body repeatedly condemns the regulation as unnatural and a "gross perversion," indicating clear opposition rather than a request for changes.


The comment does not clearly address the proposed transgender student policies or indicate whether they should be adopted. It instead shifts to unrelated concerns about schools being closed and claims that "Suicides and drug overdoses are skyrocketing," without connecting those points to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "This document cannot be passed" and labels the title "Oppose." They argue the policy would harm children psychologically and physically and object to allowing transgender students' preferences to determine sex-based access, especially "boys to enter a girls locker room."


The commenter explicitly says, "Oppose— doesn’t belong in public schools" and adds, "This should not be in our schools, period." This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and states "I strongly support." They also endorse the policy’s purpose, saying trans students deserve school without discrimination and that the document "has the ability to save LIVES."


The comment explicitly says "Strongly Oppose!!!" and the title reads "Transgender rights, Strongly Oppose," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed policies. No supporting or neutral language is present.


Trans policy guidance for K-12 public schools in VA

The commenter explicitly endorses the policy goals, saying it is "time to create welcoming and inclusive environments in our schools for ALL students" and that "Everybody deserves complete acceptance and equality." They also support related implementation by stating that "gender diversity education should be part of K-12 curriculum in VA."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly OPPOSE" and repeats "Oppose this bill," indicating clear rejection of the proposed policies. The rationale centers on parental authority in education, stating that parents should have the "primary role" and objecting to the regulation's approach.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support this in school systems," which directly endorses the proposed policies. There is no qualifying language or criticism suggesting opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I’m in support" and "I believe this is a step in the right direction." They also endorse specific elements of the proposal, including less gender-specific dress codes and supporting transgender students and families in a "safe, and private manner."


I strongly support the effort to provide a healthy learning environment for transgender students

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support any and all efforts" to create an equitable environment for transgender students. They also argue the policies are needed so students feel "safe and valued," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and calls the recommendations "radical and scientifically flawed." They also reject the policy as government overreach, saying parents will not allow officials to "dictate" and "indoctrinate" children.


The commenter explicitly says "strongly oppose this" and objects to "the opposite sex coming into the bathroom" with their children, indicating rejection of the policy. The concern is specifically about bathroom access for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support these model policies for LGBTQ students" and argues that "These policies will help the safety of students" and ensure equal access to education. The comment consistently endorses adoption of the regulation and provides reasons for doing so.


The commenter argues that God created only "one man and one woman" and that there is "no other" beyond "male and female," which directly rejects the premise of policies supporting transgender students. The biblical quotation is used to reinforce opposition rather than to suggest any modification or support.


The commenter explicitly rejects state/school involvement in transgender-related discussions, saying the issue is "for the parent's to discuss" and that the school and state "HAVE NO LEGAL RIGHT" to dictate it. They also warn that the policy would place children "in the care and custody of the state," indicating clear opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and rejects the policy by asserting "GOD CREATED MEN AND WOMEN, NOT TRANSGENDAR." This is a clear call against adopting the transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE!" and calls the policy "absolutely absurd." They argue that the policy is wrong because it does not require parental consent, stating "you are denying parental consent," which indicates opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support guidance that protects the rights of transgender students in Virginia." They also justify approval by arguing the policy would help students be "safe while in school."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and states that "all youth are able to learn without harassment, discrimination or fear of violence," which aligns with adopting the proposed policies. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not approve of your proposed guidelines" and ends with "Please STOP this transgender initiative," which clearly rejects adoption. They also argue the policies are harmful and inappropriate for children, calling them "a terrible idea" and saying schools are "forcing these radical beliefs."


The commenter explicitly states "Strongly oppose" and repeats "String oppose!" (likely meaning strong oppose), which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The commenter explicitly endorses protecting transgender students, saying Virginians are "long overdue in protecting all of our children whether they be cis- or transgender" and concluding that "Pro-life means we also have to protect the lives of trans-people." The comment cites harm statistics to argue for adoption of the policy.


Open Forum-Article by Christine Wingard on Transgender Policies

The commenter explicitly says they do not believe these "model policies" help achieve constitutional goals and adds that they "certainly WOULD NOT" bring blessings of liberty. This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation, framed as harmful rather than beneficial.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and urges, "Stop this nonsense and leave our kids alone!" This is a clear rejection of the proposed transgender student policies.


"Treatment of Trans Students in Virginia Schools"

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support policies" that create "a safe and equitable learning environment for Trans students." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed regulation's purpose and direction.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this" and explains that they want transgender people "to be able to feel safe" and "belong." The final sentences also affirm transgender identity and equality, indicating approval of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY, STRONGLY OPPOSE" and argues the policy would be "exploited" and lead to "sexual assault," urging officials not to pass it. The comment frames the regulation as a "gross overreach" and calls for parents to sue if it is adopted.


The commenter explicitly says "Totally against this!!!" and asks to "stop it," indicating clear opposition to the proposed transgender student policies. The language about wanting to "leave our kids alone" and rejecting this as "wrong bilogically and sexually" reinforces that they do not want the regulation adopted.


I support transgender policy guidance for K-12 public schools in Virginia

The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support legislation needed to promote the health and well-being of trans youth," which clearly endorses the proposed transgender student policy guidance. There is no opposing language or request to weaken the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and adds that "Trans youth need respect and support and deserve to feel safe at school," which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says they are "glad the Virginia Department of Education is working to protect all of its students" and calls it "the right thing to do." They also urge readers to "protect all students" and praise the policy with "Bravo!"


The comment explicitly states "VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED," which is a clear rejection of the proposed transgender school policy. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided, but the stance is unambiguous.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and argues that schools should "Stick to teaching Math, Language Arts, Science, and history," indicating rejection of the transgender student policies. The statement "THE SCHOOLS ARE NOT THE CHILD'S PARENTS!!!!" reflects opposition to school involvement in this area.


against this - big time! this is terrible...

The commenter explicitly says "against this - big time!" and urges officials to "leave our children alone" and "stop trying to force this," which clearly rejects the proposed transgender student policies. The language about "indoctrination" and "non-biological crap" indicates opposition rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says the policies would "help me and some of my friends so much" and repeatedly praises specific provisions, including privacy around "dead naming," bathroom access, dress code enforcement, and teacher training. The closing "Thank you for getting all of these things started" clearly indicates approval of the regulation.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose transgender and gender confusion policies to be implemented in our schools" and adds, "This is not appropriate." They also argue the policies "have no place in the curriculum," indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support or neutrality.


I fully support legislation which furthers the positive health and wellbeing of trans youth

The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support legislation" and frames it as helping "the positive health and wellbeing of trans youth." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies rather than a question or neutral observation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this," which directly states opposition to the regulation. Although they acknowledge that "students should be able to explore their identity," the main position is that "parents 100% should know about it," indicating disagreement with the policy’s privacy/confidentiality approach.


Opposed- Whatever Happened to Women's Rights?

The commenter explicitly says they are "Opposed" and argues against allowing "biological boys" into "girls locker-rooms, bathrooms, and sports." They frame the policy as harmful to women's rights and warn that it will lead to misuse, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says the proposal is "bad bad bad" and argues public schools should not "interfere in the students' sexuality" or expose children to "nonsense gender crap." This is a clear rejection of the regulation and its underlying transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying it is "wrong to foist sex and gender identity issues" on students and that "A school is to provide academic learning not gender identity." They also argue it is "not right for the school to act as loco parentis," indicating opposition to the regulation's approach to transgender students.


I wholeheartedly and fully support legislation to promote the health and well-being of trans youth.

The commenter explicitly says, "I wholeheartedly and fully support legislation to promote the health and well-being of trans youth," which clearly endorses the regulation. There is no opposing language or qualification.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support Protecting Trans Youth" and argues that trans youth "deserve the same protections afforded to all people." The statement that it takes "a few simple steps to make their lives 100% better" clearly endorses adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support protecting transgender and non-binary students," which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose. The title "Fully Support" reinforces that the commenter wants the policy adopted.


The commenter explicitly voices "advocacy for guidelines and legislation to offer full support of the transgender community in our schools." They further state that transgender students and staff "deserve protection of their dignity and rights," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


The comment explicitly states "Strongly Opposed," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No additional text is provided to suggest any nuance or support for specific provisions.


The commenter explicitly says, "I write in support of these policies" and repeatedly praises the model policies as helping "support all students" and keep "the focus on education." She also thanks the Department for its work and urges expanded training, indicating approval with constructive suggestions rather than opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this policy" and argues that it is "not the answer." They further state it is "harmful and destructive" and that the policy "promulgates lies," indicating clear rejection of adoption.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy: "In no way, shape or form is this ok" and says schools should not "push policies" supporting transgender students. They also argue that "The science doesn't support Transgenderism and neither should schools," indicating opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly disagree with the majority of this proposal" and objects to "change any existing statutes" in favor of the transgender-related policies. This is a clear rejection of the regulation as proposed.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed" and calls the policy "ridiculous." They also argue it "opens up more opportunities for rape etc.," indicating they want the regulation rejected rather than adopted.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy by saying, "Trans rights are human rights!" and states that trans students should have "all the protections cis students do." This clearly supports adoption of the regulation’s protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "i am opposed to this bill," which directly states opposition to the regulation. They also argue that it is "the parents job, not the school’s or government’s," indicating they do not want the policy adopted in schools.


The commenter explicitly states, "I strongly oppose this legislation," which directly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. The title "STRONGLY OPPOSE" reinforces that position.


The commenter explicitly says "I Oppose" and states "I do not think schools are the place to blur the lines," indicating rejection of the transgender student policies. Although they also say "Bullying should not be tolerated for anyone," the overall message argues against the regulation's approach to transgender identity in schools.


The commenter explicitly says it is the state's duty to "protect trans students and citizens" and affirms that "Trans rights are human rights." This clearly supports adopting the regulation as a means of preventing discrimination based on gender identity or sexual orientation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it "absolutely 100% wrong" and saying they "do not agree" with it. They argue that gender identity and sexual orientation should be left out of K-12 education and object to withholding information from parents.


The comment explicitly states "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 commenter explicitly says "In STRONG SUPPORT of trans lives" and argues that "Without this guidance trans kids will continue to suffer," which clearly endorses adopting the policy. The final sentence, "I wish this were around when I was going to school here," further indicates approval and personal support for the guidance.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support any measures put into place to support and protect trans students in our schools." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies, and "Trans rights are human rights" reinforces support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly states, "I strongly oppose this bill," which directly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. The title, "Strongy oppose," reinforces the same position.


The commenter explicitly states "100% OPPOSED," which is a clear rejection of the proposed policies. The follow-up "This is not ok" reinforces opposition rather than offering support or neutral feedback.


The commenter explicitly says "Support Trans students" and praises the guidance as "beneficial to the entire community." They also endorse its message that students "belong" and deserve "respect and affirmation," indicating clear support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly Oppose" and asks, "Please do not pass this bill." The religious quotation, "Male and Female He created them," is used to reject the policy on substantive grounds.


The commenter explicitly urges adoption of stronger protections, saying "We need to be doing a better job of supporting these students" and calling for respect for identity, dress, privacy, and autonomy. They also endorse enforcement measures and protections against harassment, which aligns with supporting the regulation's purpose.


The commenter explicitly asks, "Please don’t pass the Bill on transgender in our schools," which clearly rejects the regulation. Phrases like "This is the worst bill imaginable" reinforce that they want it rejected rather than adopted.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and argues the policy "contradicts science," "strips parental rights," and should not let schools decide bathroom and locker room use. They also say it "should" go to the Supreme Court, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


We must support each and every student, I fully support!!!

The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support!!!" and "I fully support all legislation that protects EACH and EVERY student," which clearly endorses the regulation. The comment also praises equal rights, fairness, and a safe learning environment, all consistent with support for the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY AGREE" and states "If passed, this legislation will ensure the safety of LGBTQ+ students across the state." They also argue it is needed to prevent bullying and harm to trans students, indicating clear support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this legislation" and argues it is "an assault on truth itself." They reject the premise of transgender identity, calling it "a lie" and saying Virginia should "stand up for the truth, not lies."


The commenter explicitly titles the comment "Support" and states, "This will protect children. It is needed," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. There is no opposing language or request to weaken it.


The commenter explicitly labels the comment "Support" and says they are "proud to see the commitment" of VDOE to create a "positive, safe, and nurturing learning environment for all students." They also praise "inclusive learning environments" and the right to learn "free from discrimination and harassment," which clearly endorses the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support trans rights and will vote accordingly" and argues that schools should make accommodations for trans students under anti-discrimination principles. They frame such protections as "the point of why we have any protected legal statuses and anti-discrimination laws," indicating clear support for adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Absolutely Oppose" and urges, "Do not allow lies and propaganda" to prevail, which clearly rejects the regulation. The statement that it will "undermine core family values" and "demoralize all students" indicates opposition to adoption.


In support of transgender children and their right to an education

The commenter explicitly says, "This guidance will be a critical step" and is "looking forward to seeing these protections implemented," which clearly endorses adoption. They also praise the policy goals of protecting transgender children from "bullying and harassment," safeguarding privacy, and enabling full participation in school activities.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose this digusting bill," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. The title "Stop Calling Opposition Bigotry" also signals opposition to the policy and defensiveness about criticism of that opposition.


The commenter explicitly says "PLEASE REJECT THIS BILL" and labels the comment "OPPOSED." They argue the policy could let "predators" access bathrooms and locker rooms and say it could "cause students to be violated," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues against the policy by stating, "We don't need to teach our kids that this is ok." The rest of the comment rejects transgender identity on religious and biological grounds, indicating opposition to adopting the regulation.


Support Students, support anti-discrimination, and support bullying prevention

The commenter explicitly says, "I support the development of guidance for schools in supporting transgender students" and endorses "anti-discrimination laws and practices" as well as support for bullying prevention. The truncated ending does not change the clear overall approval of the regulation.


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

The commenter explicitly states "100 percent Standing to Oppose," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed policies. No supporting or neutral language is present.


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

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose these policies," which directly states rejection of the regulation. The added phrase "I follow science" reinforces opposition but does not change the clear stance.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and twice urges "Please reject!" and "Please REJECT!". The stated reason is concern that "Children will be placed in situations where they can be more easily victimized," indicating opposition to adoption of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the model" and praises it for "protecting the dignity and ability to learn safely for trans students." The comment advocates adoption of the policy as a way to create a "healthy, safe learning environment."


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this resolution," which directly indicates approval of the proposed regulation. The statement is clear and unambiguous, with no qualifying concerns or objections.


The commenter explicitly says "100% absolutely oppose," which directly states rejection of the regulation. The additional language calling the proposal "disgusting and disturbing for our children" reinforces a strongly negative position.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and endorses "better policies and support for trans students." The rest of the comment is an emotional attack on opponents, which reinforces support for adoption rather than opposition.


The commenter explicitly urges approval with phrases like "PLEASE SUPPORT TRANS RIGHTS" and praises "inclusive policies" and "affirming trans identities." The comment argues the regulation protects trans children and should be adopted to prevent harm.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support this policy," which directly indicates approval of the regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism suggesting otherwise.


Opposition is not bigotry... those who think so have not read the entire policy.

The commenter explicitly says the policy should be revised to "remove much of the current policy" and asks VDOE to "rethink" it, indicating opposition to adoption as written. They object to restroom/locker room access and parental notification provisions, calling it "a dangerous path" and urging changes before approval.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and argues the policy "does far more harm than good." They frame the regulation as a threat to "girls" and "natural privacy and safety," and object to children being "pushed in a certain direction," indicating clear rejection of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says "support & protect trans kids in schools!" which clearly endorses the proposed policies and their protective purpose. There is no language opposing or questioning the regulation.


The commenter explicitly states, "I strongly support the model policy," which directly indicates approval of the regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism suggesting opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and argues the policies are important to "protect our children, meaning all of them." They also endorse protections for trans youth by noting their higher risk of "victimization, bullying, suicide" and stating "Trans rights are human rights."


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT!" and calls the policy "an amazing step for transgender students and the LGBTQ community." They also argue it will reduce judgment and bigotry, indicating clear approval of adoption.


What about students with ill willed intension entering bathroom and locker room? with no ques. asked

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it "ludicrous and truly harmful" and saying "Current policy can endanger children." The warning to "Be prepared for lawsuits" further indicates opposition rather than a request for modification.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support these new policies," and argues against key elements of the proposal, including bathroom access and confidentiality from parents. They also object to staff/admin keeping information from parents and frame the policies as unfair and unsafe.


The commenter explicitly says "Stop pushing pseudo-science on our kids" and "Get back to education not social engineering," which clearly rejects the proposed transgender student policies. The language is directed against the regulation itself rather than asking for changes.


The commenter explicitly says they "absolutely cannot support" the policy and asks, "Please do not, under any circumstances, adopt these policies." They also describe the policies as "harmful to our children overall," indicating clear opposition rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with "Absolutely not!" and "Stop with the social engineering." They argue against transgender-related school policies and describe them as harmful, saying schools should be investigating parents instead.


There are only two sexes - Male and Female

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy and transgender inclusion in schools, saying "No trans in schools" and calling school support for it "WRONG." They also oppose participation in girls' sports and use of bathrooms/locker rooms by transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this proposal" and repeats approval of equal treatment for transgender people. The rest of the comment reinforces support by stating they "deserve the same rights and respect."


The commenter says "I strongly disagree with this" and frames the policy as dangerous, claiming it "opens us a door for rape and assault." They also reject school instruction on the topic, saying "I don't want my child learn this" and that it should be kept "in the home not in the school."


The commenter explicitly says, "I’m voicing my opposition to the transgender policy" and "Strongly Oppose." They argue the policy should not be required for schools and object to what they call "promotion of gender confusion," indicating clear rejection of adoption.


The commenter explicitly endorses the regulation with "Absolutely" and the title "YES." The phrase "Trans rights are human rights" signals clear support for policies protecting transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS BILL," which directly rejects the proposed regulation. The phrase "STOP PLAYING GOD AND LET OUR CHILDREN BE CHILDREN" reinforces a clear desire to block the policy rather than amend it.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Strongly Agree" and adds "Well written document," which indicates approval of the proposed regulation. There is no criticism, question, or request for changes.


The commenter explicitly says "Cannot support" and argues against the policy on privacy and safety grounds, warning about "a Male dressed in woman's clothes" entering restrooms/locker rooms. The comment frames the regulation as enabling harmful access and asks legislators to consider their daughters' privacy, indicating rejection of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE!!!!!" and calls the proposal "entirely immoral," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. The statement "I can't wait to vote you people out of office" reinforces opposition to the policymakers behind it.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the Virginia Department of Education’s guidance" and argues that "Transgender and non-binary students need our support." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation as written or in its current direction.


The commenter explicitly says, "Do not support" and "Please, please don't put this through," which clearly rejects the regulation. They object to schools helping students with gender identity without parental knowledge, stating that "Nothing should be done without the parent knowing" and that this is a boundary that belongs to parents.


The title explicitly says "In support," which directly indicates approval of the regulation. The body, "Children deserve protection," reinforces a favorable view of policies aimed at student safety and support.


The commenter explicitly says, "Fully support" and "I fully support the Virginia Department of Education’s guidance." They also endorse the policy goal of "creating inclusive learning environments for transgender and non-binary youth," indicating approval of the regulation as proposed.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the Model Policies on the Treatment of Transgender Students" and "strongly support these policies being enacted." They also explain that the policies promote "safety, equality, and respect" and protect students from bullying and discrimination.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the Virginia Department of Education’s guidance" and calls for inclusive learning environments for transgender and non-binary youth. The opening phrase, "In support," reinforces clear approval of the regulation.


Sewing confusion, pushing agendas on our children

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it "abusive" and saying they are "tired of having it shoved down my throat." They argue it is an "agenda" and say it does not "necessitate instituting policies," indicating opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "I fully support the Virginia Department of Education’s guidance" and calls for "creating inclusive learning environments for transgender and non-binary youth." The repeated affirmations that "Transgender and non-binary students need our support" and "Help these kids!" indicate clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support" and "I fully support the Virginia Department of Education’s guidance." They also endorse the policy goals by stating that transgender and non-binary students "need our support" and that Virginia should be "a place for all youth to thrive."


The commenter explicitly says, "I am opposed to this proposition" and repeatedly argues the policy is "broad" and "stripped the majority of their rights." They object to bathroom privacy, parental notification, and what they describe as encouraging a "transgender agenda," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "In support" and says, "Just let them live their lives comfortably and without fear," which clearly endorses the policy’s protective intent for transgender students. There is no language opposing or questioning the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please don't confuse children" and calls the policies "way over the top," which indicates opposition to adoption. The opening appeal to "respect parents' right" is used to argue against the proposed transgender policies rather than support them.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly in favor" and "I support people's right to be their true self," which clearly endorses the regulation's protections for transgender students. They also argue to "accept and protect" trans people and children, indicating support for adoption rather than rejection or weakening.


With true love and respect for ALL of our children I am opposed to this policy

The commenter explicitly says, "I am opposed to this policy" and argues it is "erroneous and misleading." They also say the policy would "furthering the confusion" and that blanket adoption is "wrong," while suggesting a different policy be drafted instead.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and states "I cannot advocate this," indicating rejection of the proposed policies. The criticism centers on "blatant disrespect for parents" and lack of regard for families, despite a general desire for children to feel safe.


The commenter says, "I am against transgender curriculum" and tells the government to "stop usurping parental roles," which clearly rejects the proposed transgender student policies. Although they mention support for LGBTQ individuals' First Amendment rights, the overall thrust is opposition to the regulation's school-based guidance.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the proposed policy," which directly states their position. They also give reasons for opposition, claiming it "limits religious freedom," "curtails students' privacy in rest rooms and locker rooms," and "deceives parents."


The commenter explicitly states "strongly opposed!!", which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. There is no additional context suggesting any nuance or support for modifications.


Strongly oppose transgender school policies

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the transgender guidelines for public schools" and repeats that conclusion at the end. They argue the policies are "wrong," "unconstitutional," and harmful to parental rights and religious freedom, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I approve of this" and "Strongly approve," indicating clear support for the regulation. They also argue it provides "safe spaces" and helps prevent "devastating loss," which aligns with endorsing adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose!" and argues the policies are "not truth," would create "confusion," and invite "perversion," all of which indicate rejection of the regulation. They also object to allowing transgender identification and related school accommodations, showing opposition to adoption of the model policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose bill 145 and 161," which directly rejects the legislation underlying the proposed regulation. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The commenter explicitly says they are in "emphatic support" of the law and "strongly support its enaction." They also explain that inclusion and support for transgender children is "vital" and would "substantially improve the lives of trans young people," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "100% SUPPORT for the Model Policies" and asks the agency to "support the Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students." They also give a reason in favor of adoption, saying a supportive environment will help students' "learning and emotional health."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose," which directly indicates rejection of the proposed policies. The follow-up statement, "Not good for the future of our families," reinforces a negative view of the regulation's impact.


No To "Gender Identity"... Stick with the Biological facts. Do not let boys in girls private spaces!

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with phrases like "No To 'Gender Identity'" and "Do not let boys in girls private spaces!" They also oppose the underlying LGBTQ-related guidance, saying "Do not indocterinate my child with the LGBT agenda," which indicates they want the regulation rejected or substantially weakened.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and praises the policies as having "such a positive impact on students." They also endorse the substance of the regulation, saying it is "based on facts" and supports removing "gendered constrictions on things like dress code and restrooms."


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSED!!!!!" and objects to the policy as overreach, stating "you are now the parents of my kids!!" This clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation.


Absolutely oppose this Bill. If passed, this will exploit and endanger innocent children.

The commenter explicitly says, "I absolutely oppose this Bill" and repeatedly urges officials to "vote against it" and "reconsider your actions." The body argues the policy would "endanger and exploit innocent young children" and objects to bathroom, dressing room, and parental secrecy provisions.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and describes the rules as "basic protections to keep trans youth safe." They also argue that "all children are treated equitably" should be a school tenet, which clearly endorses adoption of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "Do not support this bill please!" and argues the policy is an "over-reach of government" that would harm families and students. They object to specific provisions such as "cross gender locker rooms" and "cross gender sports participation," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly in support" and argues that "we protect transgender students that are in school." They frame the policy as necessary because it is "unfair to treat these students like their rights do not matter," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "I strongly oppose" and argues the policy discriminates against "biological females" by allowing "biological males" to compete on girls' teams. They also urge officials to be "voted out," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the regulation, calling it "absolutely in acceptable" and saying "I will not tolerate it." This is a clear expression of opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly endorses transgender rights and says Virginia laws "should not be limiting the rights of its marginalized people," which supports adopting the model policies. The title "TRANS RIGHTS ARE HUMAN RIGHTS" is also clearly affirmative toward the regulation's purpose.


The commenter explicitly labels the comment "Support" and says schools must "create safe and inclusive environments for all youth". They also endorse "education for their parents on the effects of implicit bias," which aligns with adopting the policy's protections and inclusion goals.


The commenter explicitly argues for protecting transgender students and says it is "imperative" to adopt the proposal, calling exclusion "much more detrimental" and saying "This isn't endangering students, this is helping students." They also urge action to prevent "school sanctioned bullying" and to let these students "flourish," which clearly supports the regulation.


Oppose gender confusion in educating our children & everywhere

The commenter explicitly frames the proposal as something to reject, with the title "Oppose gender confusion" and repeated claims that the policies would harm parents, students, and teachers. The body lists objections to pronouns, privacy, bathroom access, dress codes, parental notification, and religious accommodations, all arguing against adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly states, "I strongly opposed to this policy," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose to transgender changes" and states "this change would be wrong and disturbing". They also argue it would "take away control to Parents," indicating rejection of the proposed policies rather than support for them.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the proposed transgender agenda" and repeatedly argues against the policy, including objections to bathroom access, privacy, and parental consent. They also state the school system should "stick to teaching fact" and reject the policy as contrary to science and religious freedom.


Proposed Bill is a Pandora's Box Fraught With Negative Consequences

The commenter explicitly calls the proposal an "over-reaching draconian response" and says they are "appalled" by it, indicating clear opposition. They argue it should not force pronoun use or an "agenda" and suggest accommodations should be made without negatively impacting others, which weakens support for the regulation as written.


The commenter says they are "Strongly opposed to this policy change," which directly rejects the proposed guidance. The statement that children are "too young to be exposed to this type of behavior" indicates opposition to adopting the policy.


The commenter explicitly says "SUPPORT OUR TRANS YOUTH" and endorses "people's autonomy and identity," which clearly favors adopting the transgender student policies. The language is affirmative and aligned with the regulation's purpose.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the draft guidance provided by the VDOE" and adds that it is "long overdue," which clearly endorses adoption. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY SUPPORT our Transgender Youth" and urges officials to "support the guidance in this document." The comment clearly endorses adoption of the proposed policies and frames them as necessary protection for transgender students.


Support for VDOE's Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students

The commenter explicitly says, "I support the draft guidance provided by the VDOE" and urges readers not to vote against it. They frame the policies as necessary to protect transgender students' "rights," safety, and well-being, and argue that opposing them would increase health and safety risks.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support these students" and thanks the agency for "moving forward with this plan." They also state they want "all students to feel safe in schools," which aligns with adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "OPPOSE this psychosis!" and repeatedly rejects the policy as "child abuse" and "toxic poison." They argue against the underlying transgender guidance, stating "There are only 2 biologic genders" and that the regulation is "amoral and sadistic."


The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY support this policy for all my students," which directly endorses adoption. They further argue that peers "deserve to be supported and protected" and that the policy is needed to counter "anger and hatred," reinforcing clear support.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support this" and asks, "Please do not make these changes," which clearly opposes adoption of the regulation. The religious justification that it is "against the Bible" reinforces that they want the policy rejected.


The commenter explicitly says "VERY Strongly Support" and expresses hope that "this lack of support comes to an end." They frame the policy as a responsibility to "protect the youth," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly encourage Virginia schools" to be proactive and frames the policy as protecting transgender students. The title, "Strongly support these students' right to be treated with dignity!" makes clear approval of the regulation's purpose and adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do NOT support this" and "I strongly oppose" the policy. They object to schools having authority over children and argue the rules are "complicated and impossible to uphold and enforce," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I SUPPORT our transgender youth!" and argues that schools should provide "support and protections" and make students feel "safe, secure, welcome, and protected." They also state that failing to help transgender youth "goes against everything a school should stand for," indicating clear approval of the regulation's goals.


The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY SUPPORT OUR TRANSGENDER YOUTH!!" and argues that schools should be a place where "ALL children feel safe." The repeated statements that "We need to do better" and "We must do better for our transgender youth" indicate clear support for the proposed protections and guidance.