The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this legislation" and argues against allowing transgender students in bathrooms/locker rooms, calling it a "huge loophole" and saying it removes "rights, privacy and safety". The comment clearly urges maintaining sex-segregated facilities and rejects the proposed policy.


The commenter says "Strongly disagree!" in response to the transgender student policies, indicating clear opposition to the regulation. The demand to "Bring bibles back to school!" and the religious appeal "God help us all!" suggest rejection of the policy on religious grounds rather than support with changes.


House Bill 145 - Senate Bill 161 Transgender In Schools

The commenter says, "I very strongly oppose the proposal transgender polices," which directly rejects adoption of the regulation. They also object to specific provisions, saying it violates parental rights and is "not appropriate" for a boy to use girls' facilities.


full support of equal rights for students

The commenter explicitly says they are "in full support of this legislation" and argues the policies protect "equal rights" and student safety. They frame adoption as necessary to avoid discrimination and to create "acceptance, allyship, and compassion" in schools.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am writing in support of the Model Policies" and repeatedly endorses the proposal as "an important step" and something that "will make Virginia schools a better place to learn." The comment argues the policies improve safety, inclusion, and learning conditions for transgender and nonbinary students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly against this bill" and urges, "Do not pass this bill!!!" This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation.


Model policies for the treatment of transgender students in public schools

The comment explicitly says "Strongly oppose!" which directly states rejection of the proposed policies. No qualifying language suggests support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly rejects the regulation, writing "No! Absolutely not" and "totally against." This is a clear statement opposing adoption of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this proposal," which directly states their position. They also argue it "seeks to eradicate any biological distinction between male and female" and "subverts parental rights and responsibilities," indicating rejection of the regulation on substantive grounds.


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


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly against" and calls the policy "completely wrong," which clearly indicates opposition to adopting the regulation. The appeal to "use your moral compass and correct judgment" reinforces that they want it rejected rather than approved.


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


The commenter explicitly states "strongly disagree," which clearly indicates opposition to the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided, but the stance is unambiguous.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly against it," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The statement that it is "hurting my children" indicates opposition based on perceived harm.


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "Strongly Opposed" and states, "This is not safe," which clearly rejects adoption of the regulation. No supporting or neutral language appears.


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "Oppose" and repeatedly rejects it as "complete overreach," "a power grab," and asks, "Please just stop." They argue the guidelines are unnecessary and should not continue, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Totally Against this!" and "Not in favor!", which clearly indicates opposition to adopting the regulation. There is no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and repeatedly urges, "Please support trans students." They frame the policies as helpful for "normalizing the existence of trans people" and creating safe environments, which clearly endorses adoption.


The commenter explicitly labels the policy "Strongly Opposed" and gives the reason "Unconstitutional," indicating rejection of the regulation. No supportive or neutral language appears.


In favor of students making their own choices

The commenter explicitly says, "We must have policies against transgender discrimination in our schools" and argues that school policies should allow trans students to be treated according to their gender identity. This is a clear endorsement of the proposed guidance and its protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly states, "Strongly against it!" and the title says "Not in Favor," which clearly indicates opposition to adopting the regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided.


The commenter explicitly says, "I object to this proposal," which directly rejects adoption. They also argue that issues of "sexual orientation and preference" belong to parents and that student privacy should not be overridden, indicating opposition to the policy's approach.


The commenter explicitly says "Whole-heartedly disagree" and argues the policies "support no one" and create "an uncomfortable environment" and "endangerment." They propose separate transgender facilities instead, indicating opposition to the regulation as written and a desire to substantially change it.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am totally against it!" which clearly rejects the proposed regulation. The title "Totally Against" reinforces that they want it not to be adopted.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this guidance" and gives a reason aligned with adoption: "for safety and inclusion of our transgender and non-binary students." This is a clear endorsement of the regulation as proposed.


The commenter explicitly states "Strongly opposed" and "Not in favor at all!" which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. There is no supporting or neutral language that would suggest otherwise.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose!!!" and argues that children should "ONLY be allowed to use the bathrooms and locker rooms" with their "biologically born sex." This directly rejects the proposed transgender student policies, especially on facility access and privacy.


The commenter explicitly says "FULL SUPPORT!" and states that "Equal treatment among all students is IMPERATIVE," which clearly endorses the regulation. The phrase "Trans liberation is human rights" further indicates approval of the policy's purpose and goals.


The commenter explicitly states, "Strongly oppose this bill," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. The title "Not in Favor" reinforces the opposing position.


Support for Model Treatment for Transgender Students

The commenter explicitly says, "I am writing in support of this" and frames the policy as necessary "to protect youth who are transgender." They also endorse equal treatment for all students, indicating approval of the regulation as proposed.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose!" and argues against the policy by asserting that "A person’s gender is determined at conception" and that disagreement with "God’s creation" should not change treatment. This indicates rejection of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY oppossed" and argues the policy would encourage children to "mutilate themselves," which is a clear rejection of the regulation. The request to "prevent them from falling into this" indicates they want the policy rejected or substantially weakened.


The commenter explicitly says, "I DO NOT support" key parts of the policy, including not telling parents, CPS referrals, and "the whole bathroom/locker room thing." They also reject treating transgender students as their identified sex and argue to "Use that pronoun, use that bathroom" based on biology, indicating opposition to the regulation as written.


Basic Human Rights Are Not A Lot Ask For

The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support any and all efforts to permanantly secure these rights" and asks to expand trans youth's ability to use the bathroom that affirms their gender. The comment clearly endorses adopting the policy and strengthening it, not rejecting it.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy goals, saying "We MUST provide a safe environment for ALL students" and that students should be treated "with respect." They also describe discrimination against trans students and argue current policies cause harm, which supports adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and states "I want to keep it like God created it... Male and Female," indicating rejection of the transgender student policies. The comment argues for a binary sex framework and against the regulation's premise.


The commenter explicitly says, "Full support for this policy," which directly endorses adoption. They also urge officials to "Please review the science" and invoke nondiscrimination and separation of church and state arguments in favor of the policy.


The commenter rejects the policy’s premise, saying "Parents nor their underage children should be making decisions about gender" and that this "should not be forced upon other children." The title "Protect ALL Children not just a few" frames the regulation as harmful and something to resist rather than adopt.


The comment rejects the premise of the policy by insisting that "DNA science tells us the sex of a person" and that disagreement should be handled with "psychological counseling," which implies opposition to recognizing transgender students under the proposed guidance. The phrase "Follow the science" is used to argue against the regulation rather than support it.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this initiative" and argues that all students deserve respectful treatment and an "inclusive learning environment." The rest of the comment rebuts common objections and defends the policy rather than opposing it.


The commenter explicitly states, "Strongly Against" and "Certainly Opposed to this bill," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting arguments or qualifications are provided.


The commenter explicitly says, "I absolutely support the guidance document" and asks officials to "Support trans kids." The rest of the comment reinforces approval of the policy’s goals, including "education and gender inclusion" and protecting transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this. All of this," which directly rejects the proposed policies. They also object that the policies "completely removes parents" from decisions involving "their children’s safety and mental well being," indicating opposition to the regulation’s approach.


The commenter explicitly titles the remark "Strongly Against" and says the policy "scares me," indicating opposition to the regulation. The reference to having "granddaughters in school" suggests concern about the policy's impact on students, but no support for adoption is expressed.


The comment provides no substantive content beyond the title "Strongly Oppose" and the body "No comments." Because there is no actual explanation or position statement to evaluate, the stance is too vague to classify reliably from the text alone.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and argues that "Trans kids should all have the same protections" and that the policy is "the first step towards the end of their wrongful discrimination." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly labels the comment "Strongly Support" and says they want "any and all protections there can be in place" for their non-binary stepdaughter. The body emphasizes safety, anti-bullying protections, and support for transgender/non-binary students, which aligns with adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidance," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. The additional statement, "Trans rights are human rights," reinforces approval of the transgender student protections in the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this bill" and repeatedly urges, "Please support our students, all of our students!" The rest of the comment reinforces approval of the regulation as a way to protect transgender students and provide them "love and support."


The commenter explicitly says "100% fully support" and adds "Trans rights are human rights," which clearly endorses the proposed transgender student policies. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and states "It goes against all common sense," indicating rejection of the regulation. The offer to "pay for them to go to christian school personally if this goes through" further shows opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with "NO NO NO" and says "THIS IS TERRIFYING TO ME," warning that harm will occur if "you let this law pass." The comment argues against adoption based on fear of bathroom safety and sexual assault concerns.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am in full support of this Bill" and argues that "ALL students, including Trans students deserve to feel safe, protected, and equal." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support!" and repeatedly advocates for the policy as a way to provide "respect and support" and create "a more inclusive generation." The comment clearly endorses the regulation's goals of inclusion and transgender student support.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed" and reinforces it with "Against this!". This is a clear rejection of the proposed transgender student model policies.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support inclusion and safety of children" and urges, "Protect the children and give them the safe environment they have the right to have!" They also frame the policy as a "Next step to a more inclusive environment," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Oppose" and argues against allowing transgender students into "locker rooms with opposite sex" and against related school policies. Phrases like "This is ridiculous" and "our tax dollars are being spent on the wrong things" show clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fervently oppose adopting this policy" and "I am not in favor of any of these actions." They repeatedly argue the policies are harmful, citing concerns about privacy, parental rights, and normalization of transgender identity.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly disagree with these policies" and "I vote NO," indicating clear opposition to adoption. They also argue the policy is "morally and ethical wrong" and would put children "at risk," which reinforces rejection rather than support with changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the protection and equal treatment of all students," which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose. The title "Strongly support" reinforces that the commenter wants the policy adopted.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support any guidelines that help to protect Virginia’s trans and nonbinary kids." They frame the regulation as necessary for safety and protection from "bullying, violence, abuse and hate," which indicates clear support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this policy" and explains the reason is "to make the lives of trans kids easier." This is a clear endorsement of adoption of the regulation.


The commenter rejects the premise of the transgender student policies, calling them "anti science" and asserting that sex is fixed by chromosomes. The statement that "no ammount of mutilation or hormones will change this" indicates opposition to the regulation's treatment of transgender students.


God help us oppose these radical and tyrannical mandates

The commenter explicitly says, "oppose these radical and tyrannical mandates," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The rest of the comment is a prayer and does not soften that opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this bill," and argues against school involvement in transgender issues. They object to pronoun-related intervention, oppose opposite-sex bathroom access, and prefer separate bathrooms instead of the proposed policy.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY AGAINST THIS," which clearly opposes the proposed policies. The body attacks transgender people and the regulation's subject matter, indicating rejection rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support these guidelines" and repeatedly argues that the policies are needed to "create and adopt policy guidelines like the ones we are presented with today." The comment endorses protections such as chosen names/pronouns, bathroom access by gender identity, anti-bullying policies, and inclusive school environments.


The commenter explicitly says "I strongly support these policies" and repeatedly endorses them as necessary for children to "be safe and supported in school" and receive "an equitable education." They also reject discrimination, stating "We cannot allow discrimination on the basis of gender identity."


The comment explicitly says "Oppose!!", which directly indicates the commenter wants the regulation rejected. No additional context or qualifications are provided.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues that the policy would "exclud[e] parents from the lives of their children," indicating rejection of the regulation. The statement frames the guidance as improperly shifting authority away from parents and toward schools.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongest Oppose!" and argues the state should "definitely not encourage delusions" or accommodate transgender students. They also object to "biological men" in women's sports, indicating rejection of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly labels the policy "Oppose" and says it is "highly offensive," indicating rejection of the regulation. The statement "Gender is biological, not self-determined" directly disputes the policy’s premise regarding transgender students.


The comment explicitly endorses transgender inclusion, stating "Trans rights are human rights" and that "All transgender children deserve to feel safe and accepted in public spaces." This aligns with support for the proposed policies protecting transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support policies being developed" and explains the reason is so transgender students can "feel safe and accepted in schools." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I 100% support this" and argues that "There should be rules set in place to protect them." The rest of the comment reinforces approval of protections for transgender students and opposition to discrimination.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose," which directly states opposition to the proposed policies. The additional phrase "I do not think this is a wise decision" reinforces that they want the regulation rejected.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support any legislation" that protects transgender/non-binary students. They argue the policies are needed to prevent bullying and support students' "mental and physical well-being," which clearly favors adoption.


Strong support for implementation of these policies

The commenter explicitly states "my strong support for implementation" and urges, "Please implement them broadly and post-haste." They also describe the policies as "good, evidence-based measures" and say the support for transgender students is "critical."


The commenter explicitly labels the title as "Support" and says the model policy is "absolutely necessary". They argue it would improve treatment of transgender students and create a school environment "free of harassment," which clearly endorses adoption.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying "I say we stop this now" and mocking the regulation throughout. The comment argues against allowing transgender students' accommodations and calls the policy "this ridiculous act of unconditional love."


The comment explicitly says "Strongly oppose," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed policies. No additional context suggests any support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY Oppose" and repeatedly asks to "Please stop" and says "I'm ?? % Oppose." They argue the policy will "make them more confused" and "lead kids to depression and suicide," indicating rejection of the regulation.


I Support the Virginia Department of Education Model Policies.

The commenter explicitly says, "I support the Virginia Department of Education model policies" and argues they are "an important element" in ensuring students' right to a safe education. The comment praises the policies as protecting transgender students from violence and discrimination.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and adds "This will save lives!" which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. The language is affirmative and expresses strong approval of the policy's purpose.


The commenter explicitly says, "Totally oppose this document and its 'guidance'." This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation with no qualifying support or request for changes.


Oppose - and the bathroom is the LEAST of my concern

The commenter explicitly says "Oppose" and urges "Stop," indicating they do not want the regulation adopted. They object to "Removing parents rights" and "forcing language," which shows opposition to the policy's substance rather than a request for minor changes.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Strongly Support" and repeatedly argues in favor of protecting transgender students, saying they should be able to be "who they truly feel they are without bullying, attack, or exclusion." They also reject objections based on religion, bathrooms, and sports, indicating support for the regulation as written or in principle.


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


The comment explicitly rejects the regulation: "ABSOLUTELY NOT" and the title "NO NO NO" leave no ambiguity. It provides no supporting reasons, only a clear call for rejection.


Strongly opposed ,school system should not engage in social issues

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed" and argues that the school system should not engage in "social and political agendas." They also object to the policy on religious and fairness grounds, saying separate bathrooms are needed or it is "discrimination against herto- sexual and those of Christian faith."


Everyone deserves a safe learning environment.

The comment states, "Everyone deserves a safe learning environment," which aligns with the regulation’s goal of creating a "safe and supportive learning environment" for transgender students. It offers a general endorsement rather than criticism or a request to weaken the policy.


Support of Inclusive GuidanceI support the guidance

The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidance" and adds that "Trans and non-binary students should be treated equally and with respect in public schools." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly argues that "anything that helps marginalized people feel safe and supported will benefit society at large" and says trans people want "the same respect afforded to cis people," which supports adopting the policy. The title also frames rejection as harmful: "Rejecting trans people alienates LGBT+ people and allies."


The commenter explicitly says "Full support for trans students!" and urges, "Support trans students now and forever." They describe the guidelines as "the beginning of making the lives of trans students more bearable" and argue schools should "treat trans people like people," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am writing to express support for these policies" and titles the comment "Strongly Support!" They also praise the policy as something that will "remind trans students that they are perfect as they are, and supported."


This is the opposite of protecting the children!!! Vote NO!!!

The commenter explicitly says "Vote NO!!!" and repeatedly argues the policy "has no place in schools" and "STOP SEXUALIZING CHILDREN!!!". They frame the regulation as harmful, illegal, and contrary to parental rights and religious freedom, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this call for equality" and frames the policy as necessary for "a safe experience for all students." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I disagree with the proposal" and argues that gender-related policies "don't belong in a public school setting." They also say these issues should be left to parents and that the proposal would add "more regulations" and distract from education, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support these measures," which directly endorses the regulation. The phrase "Trans equality now" reinforces approval of the policy's transgender protections.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE!!" and urges officials to "don't pass this policy." The body argues the policy would expose girls and women to harm in bathrooms and locker rooms, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter says the policy "seems to be one sided" and implies it should be revised through broader input, stating "a better policy could be produced if other voices were included." Although they begin with a general statement about dignity, the overall thrust is opposition to the proposed policy as written.


The commenter explicitly says they "very strongly supports" the policy and argues it is "cruel and psychologically damaging" to deny students the ability to express their identity. They also state that "All children deserve to experience safe and nurturing environments," which aligns with adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support transgender and gender non confirming kids, teens and adults!" This is a clear endorsement of the policy’s purpose and protections for transgender students.


The commenter says "Strongly oppose" and objects to the policy as "political exploitation" and "overstepping your boundaries," indicating clear rejection of the regulation. The statement that "VDOE is for Math, Language, etc. Not parenting" further shows opposition to the department's role in this area.


The commenter says the policy "should not be brought to the school place" and calls it "ABSURD," which clearly rejects the regulation. The reference to "Having children removed from homes" suggests alarm about consequences of the policy, reinforcing opposition.


The commenter explicitly says "Protect trans kids" and argues that "it is our job as a community" to ensure children have "safe environments," which aligns with supporting the proposed transgender student policies. The comment expresses approval of protections for trans students rather than opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly states "Strongly oppose" and "Do not support," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Disagree" and asks to "Protect our children" by preventing transgender-inclusive bathroom access. They argue that allowing a "male, who thinks he’s a girl" in the girls' bathroom violates privacy and security, indicating opposition to the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am in support of the new guidance for transgender protections." They further reinforce approval by stating, "We need to support all of our students and be inclusive and understanding."


If 99% oppose and 1% approve, who will you listen to?

The commenter explicitly condemns the policy as a "radical agenda" being "ramm[ed]... down the throats of citizens" and asks rhetorically whether officials will follow the 99% who "oppose" it. The comment argues against transgender recognition by asserting only "XX and XY" are valid and calling anything else "a mental illness," indicating rejection of the regulation.


School is an Infrastructure of Learning  not Care Facility

The commenter rejects the transgender student policies by arguing that "Biological Female is Protected Class needing separate Facility/Team" and that schools should keep sex-separated facilities. The statement that "Biological Male Facility/Team can Accommodate non-binary" and that school should "get out of Sex Education" indicates opposition to the proposed guidance as written.


Full support of the policies for the treatment of transgender students

The commenter explicitly states, "I am in full support of the Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in Virginia’s Public Schools." They also endorse the goal of protecting transgender students from "harrasment and discrimination" and keeping schools "a safe environment for them."


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with the title "Absolutely not" and says "This would be unsafe." They argue that allowing children to change identities "can create confusion," indicating opposition to adopting the transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose this," which directly rejects the proposed regulation. They also argue that "sexual identity needs to be addressed at home" and that it is "a distraction to the learning process," indicating opposition to the policy's inclusion in schools.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose," which directly states opposition to the regulation. The religious statement "God created a man and a woman not a transgender" indicates disagreement with the policy's recognition of transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and states that "Transgender kids deserve the same rights and support as all other children in public school." This clearly endorses adoption of the proposed policies.


The commenter says they are "completely opposed to this proposal" and repeatedly argues against adoption, claiming it "takes the rights of parents" away, "does NOT protect the vulnerable," and creates risks in bathrooms and locker rooms. They also state it "does not allow for religious freedom," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The comment explicitly states "opposed," which directly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No qualifying language or request for modification is provided.


I strongly support the passage of this bill. Protect our trans youth.

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the passage of this bill" and urges officials to "Do the right thing and protect your constituents." The comment argues for "equal protections for all students" and against discrimination, clearly endorsing adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says they are "vehemently opposed to this guidance" and argues the VDOE is "way overstepping their bounds." They also object to the policy as "catering to a miniscule percentage of the population," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly urges protection for trans children and says schools should "support the identities of these students." They frame the policy as necessary to help vulnerable youth and state there is "no harm" in supporting them, indicating clear approval of the regulation's purpose.


Strongly support for my Newport News student

The commenter explicitly says, "I am very supportive of these policies" and calls them "well worth it" to better support transgender students. They also favor "consistent guidance to schools" and describe trans students as "some of the most vulnerable students," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly frames the issue as one of rights and anti-discrimination, saying "Supporting Trans Rights as Human Rights" and arguing it is "past time" to stop treating people as "other." This clearly endorses the proposed transgender student protections rather than opposing them.


The commenter says they "Strongly disagree with the proposal" and argues that pronoun decisions should be deferred until students are older. They also criticize the policy as an inappropriate "agenda for elementary children," indicating opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose!!" and urges, "Stop imposing your will and indoctrination," which clearly rejects the regulation. The statement that it is "not natural" further indicates opposition to the policy's treatment of transgender students.


How can we teach youth order if they can change who they are whenever they choose? Oppose

The commenter explicitly says "Oppose" in the title and states, "This should not be something children have to deal with in school," indicating they do not want the policy adopted. The opening rhetorical question also rejects the idea of transgender identity being recognized in schools.


Please support transgender individuals receiving and/or providing public school services

The commenter explicitly asks to "support transgender and gender non conforming students" and to "protect them" with policies that "combat the hatred and misunderstanding". This clearly endorses adopting the regulation to protect transgender individuals in public schools.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose" and "Please do not support," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. The statement "My family strongly opposes" reinforces that position.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and objects to "support pushing the gender identity agenda," indicating they do not want the regulation adopted. The complaint that there are "aren’t even accommodations" reinforces rejection rather than a request for modification in support of the policy.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it "indoctrinating children" and saying "We cannot allow teachers to teach children that men can be women and women can be men." They also urge readers to "Stand up for truth" and describe the policy as "immoral," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, writing "Absolutely Not" and stating that the guidelines "are absolutely inappropriate and are not supported." This is a clear call against adoption rather than a request for changes.


The comment explicitly says "oppose," which directly states the commenter’s position on the regulation. The title "Please don’t" reinforces rejection of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this mesure," which directly rejects the proposed policies. They also object to bathroom access for transgender students, stating kids should be in bathrooms with peers of the "same biological sec," indicating opposition to the regulation's treatment of transgender students.


The comment explicitly says "Support trans students," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose of protecting transgender students in public schools. There is no language indicating opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support" and frames the policy as necessary to "protect trans kids" and ensure "non discriminatory practices." The comment endorses the regulation’s goals of belonging, respect, and protection for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "Completely OPPOSE transgender policies in PUBLIC schools!!" which is a direct rejection of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "Against transgender children going to bathroom in school," which rejects a key part of the proposed transgender student policies. The statement expresses opposition rather than a request for clarification or neutral input.


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

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the model policies as stated" and asks, "Please do not weaken the protections provided for transgender students." This clearly endorses adoption of the regulation without weakening it.


The commenter explicitly says "Strong support!!" and argues that "Trans and gnc students deserve equality and understanding in our schools." They also frame adoption as necessary, saying failing to do so would be "a monumental failure of our education system."


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly support protecting trans youth!" and argues that "We must protect trans youth!" This clearly endorses the regulation’s protective purpose and urges adoption of stronger protections.


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

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


Yes for Anti-Bullying. HARD NO for infringing on others rights.

The commenter explicitly says "HARD NO" and "do NOT push for COMPLETE inequality," indicating opposition to the regulation as written. While they support the anti-bullying portion, they argue the broader policies would infringe on rights and "do more harm than good," which is a rejection of the proposed model policies overall.


The commenter argues against the policy’s transgender accommodations, saying it creates "legal issues and safety concerns," that pronouns should not be "forced," and that schools should not be "so involved" in this issue. They explicitly reject school support for transgender identity, calling it "pushing gender disorders," while preferring single-user restrooms and parental notification.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose the policies put forth by the VDOE" and repeatedly argues the policies are harmful. They object to "placing a label on students," "hold secrets from families," and schools making decisions "without their parents’ involvement," all of which indicate rejection of the regulation.


Totally oppose. Goes against science psychiatry

The commenter explicitly says, "Totally oppose," and argues the policy is harmful: "It is destructive for them to think that simply changing their gender will solve their problems." The comment rejects the underlying transgender-supportive approach, including pronoun use and the idea that gender is "assigned."


The commenter explicitly says, "I wholeheartedly support the proposed policies," which is a clear endorsement of adoption. There is no qualifying language or criticism suggesting opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, writing "ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!!" and "Please just say NO!!" They argue it would be "terribly damaging to children" and accuse schools of "indoctrinating," which clearly indicates opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support!" and argues that "Transgender children deserve to be treated with dignity and respect," which clearly endorses adoption of the policy. The final sentence expresses frustration, but it does not change the supportive position.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and asks to "keep bathrooms and locker rooms separate," which rejects the proposed transgender student policies. They also argue the school should "leave parents and families" to handle sexuality issues, indicating opposition to the regulation's approach.


The commenter explicitly says "Do not consent" and argues the proposal is "taking away rights from some while empowering others." They propose an alternative approach—keeping separate male/female facilities and adding an "Other" option—indicating rejection of the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed" and argues against allowing transgender students to use girls' restrooms or exercise classes. They also ask to "Keep the schools out of this rulemaking" and say "No transgender education for students should be allowed," indicating rejection of the proposed policies.


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

The commenter explicitly says, "Reject the Model Policies" and states they are "harmful to children" and "undermine the rights of parents and families." This is a clear request to reject the regulation rather than adopt it with changes.


The comment says "Absolutely not!!", which is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation. It provides no supporting reasons or nuance, but the intent to oppose adoption is unmistakable.


The commenter explicitly says "Protect trans kids" and argues that "Protect all children...especially the vulnerable," which clearly endorses the regulation’s goal of protecting transgender students. The comment expresses support for the policy’s safety and inclusion aims rather than opposing or questioning them.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and asks, "Please don’t do this to our children," indicating rejection of the proposed policies. The statement that the policies do not protect "the rights of ALL students, the teachers and administrators and the parents" is presented as a reason for opposing adoption.


The commenter says "STRONGLY DISAGREE!" in response to the proposed policies, which clearly indicates opposition. The additional remark about voting "the idiots in Richmond out of office" and targeting the Loudoun County school board reinforces rejection of the regulation and its supporters.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support!" and urges the state to "set a good example of acceptance and inclusion" through the policy. This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly states "Oppose 100%", which is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation. The title "Negative" reinforces that the comment is ضد the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly disagree with this!" and the title "Vehemently Disagree" indicates clear rejection of the proposed policies. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please say no and oppose this bill," which directly rejects the proposed policy. The rest of the comment reinforces opposition by calling it a "crazy idea" and a "ludicrous ideology" that would harm children.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Opposed" and calls the policy "abhorrent in principle." They argue against transgender students using shared facilities and participating in female sports, saying it is "a recipe for abuse and unfair athletic outcomes" and that it is "not fair" to non-trans females.


The commenter explicitly says, "Transgender kids are at risk for anxiety, depression and suicide" and that "They need to be protected and treated with care," which clearly endorses the policy’s protective purpose. The title, "All kids should be treated with dignity and respect," also aligns with support for the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose the new transgender guidance!" and further states the guidelines "should be discarded," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. The criticism that they are "anti science and highly subjective" reinforces opposition rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly thanks the agency for the "comprehensive guidelines" and says they help "implement this important law" to provide "safe, inclusive spaces." This is clear approval of the regulation as proposed.


The commenter explicitly states, "I am 100% opposed to this policy," which is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation. The title "Completely Opposed" reinforces that position.


The commenter explicitly says "Support and needed" and argues that protecting one group means "all students will be protected." This clearly endorses adopting the regulation as beneficial and necessary.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly disagree with this," which clearly indicates opposition to the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or requests for modification are provided, but the stance is unambiguous.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and adds, "Of course we should support trans kids," which clearly endorses the regulation. The final question is rhetorical and reinforces approval rather than raising concerns.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose!!!" and repeatedly rejects the policy as "appalling and shocking" and "extreme proposals." They argue it is being "forced upon impressionable children," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


Opposed to the proposed draft of transgender policies.

The commenter explicitly says they are "Opposed to the proposed draft of transgender policies" and repeatedly argues against adoption, calling it a "radical violation of religious freedom" and "child abuse." They also demand that "religious rights and deeply held beliefs be respected," indicating they want the policy rejected or substantially changed.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose these new recommendations," and argues that "special accommodations, rules, policies for this special group should not even be considered." They also say public schools should not be "forced" to address these policies and suggest an alternative school option if Virginia adopts them.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose VDOE transgender guidelines" and repeatedly argues the guidelines "will do great harm" and "should not be permitted." They object to transgender participation in sports, criticize the science behind the policies, and say the schools have "no right" to override parental authority.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policies, saying "These policies will help families and educators" and "We need this." They also argue the policies are a "minimum set of guidelines" to ensure transgender students are not excluded from public schools.


Support need for physical/emotional safety for all/Disagree with application

The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support how VA proposes to apply these goals" and repeatedly argues against key parts of the policy, including bathroom access, pronoun discipline, and lack of parental notification. They also state the policy is "diametrically opposite to providing a physically and emotionally safe environment" and criticize the public process as biased.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed to this" and repeatedly states disagreement with the proposed policies on gender identity, bathroom access, dress code, and parental notification. They also conclude that the policies are "unnecessary" and would "violate those people of religious faiths and beliefs."


The comment title says "Strongly oppose," but the body contains only "Ok," which does not provide substantive support for that position or any specific concerns. Because the text is too minimal and internally uninformative, the stance cannot be reliably classified from the comment body alone.


Trans Kids Deserve Equal Rights, Support

The commenter explicitly says, "I support trans people having the right to use the restroom without harassment or discrimination," which aligns with supporting the regulation’s protections for transgender students. The rest of the comment reinforces approval by describing this as "decent, humane, and just."


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy: "I do Not consent to this! It’s a hard pass!" and "STOP pushing their ideology on others." They also argue against the underlying transgender guidance by saying "god gave us two genders," indicating opposition to adoption of the regulation.


This issue is not for schools, this is a parent /family issue for home.

The commenter argues that this issue is "not for schools" and that schools should "only teach the basic academic subjects," indicating opposition to the proposed transgender student policies in schools. They also say it is "not the jobs of strangers" and that such matters are for "Mom, Dad, and immediate family," which rejects school involvement in this area.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and argues the policy "breaks the parent- teacher partnership" and should not be in schools' hands. They state that "any conversation about gender" and other major decisions "should always be in the parents’ hands—not the schools," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


TRANS RIGHTS ARE HUMAN RIGHTS - STRONG SUPPORT

The commenter explicitly endorses the policy, calling it "STRONG SUPPORT" and stating that the measures are "minimum basic rights and protections" that will "SAVE LIVES." They also directly urge, "Protect and support our trans students!"


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not agree with the proposed transgender policies for Va. schools" and repeatedly argues that "This is not the role of the public school." They also warn the policies would burden teachers and threaten "parental rights and privacy," indicating opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support the guidance for trans student policies and protections," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. The title also says "Support," reinforcing the same position.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this policy" and argues it "goes well beyond" anti-bullying protections. They also say it should "not be encouraged," citing religious objections, parental rights concerns, and fears about harassment and exploitation.


The commenter explicitly says "strong PASS" and adds "not a matter for schools," indicating they want the policy rejected or kept out of schools. The comment provides no support for adoption and clearly objects to the regulation's subject matter.


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

The commenter explicitly says, "Please reject these 'model' policies," and repeatedly argues they are harmful, deceptive, and coercive. The comment frames the policies as exposing children to "harmful ideology" and school officials to lawsuits, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


Strongly stand against this! Not morally acceptable!

The commenter explicitly says they "strongly stand against this" and asks, "Please don’t do this!" This is a clear rejection of the proposed policies, framed as a safety and moral objection: "Not morally acceptable" and "I will not feel safe with my child going to a public school system like this."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Agree" and states that "this is a step in the right direction," which clearly endorses the proposed policies. The comment frames the regulation as helping "provide a safe place for everyone to learn and grow in."


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and states that "Trans students in elementary and secondary schools deserve to be treated the same as trans high school students," which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose. There is no opposing language or request to weaken the policy.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy’s approach, arguing that allowing transgender students to choose which bathroom to use is not harmful and that it better protects them. Phrases like "maximizing support and safety for ALL students would be a no-brainer" and "This shouldn’t even be an issue" clearly support adoption.


As a parent and educator, strongly support! All students deserve to be accepted and protected!

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support these policies" and repeatedly endorses the regulation as protecting students. They argue that "Schools should be a safe place for ALL students" and that trans youth should be treated with dignity and safety.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and asks, "Please do not push an agenda" regarding the policy. They also argue against the underlying transgender guidance by saying children are "born male or female" and that it is "unhealthy for the students."


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Strongly Oppose" and argues against the policy by saying adults should guide children so they do not go "screw minded," implying rejection of the transgender student policies. The quoted religious reference reinforces opposition to the regulation's approach.


As an elementary school teacher  I STRONGLY oppose these policies!!

The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY oppose these policies!!!" and frames them as adding "confusion" for children and teachers. This is a clear rejection of the proposed transgender student policies.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly oppose." twice, which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The commenter explicitly endorses equal treatment by saying, "You have the right to be treated according to your gender identity" and argues for a "space that should be safe for all students." They also cite Title IX and other laws protecting transgender students, indicating support for the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Strongly Oppose" and states, "If these policies are passed, my children will not be attending public schools," which clearly rejects adoption of the regulation. The comment expresses a conditional withdrawal from public schools if the policies are implemented.


Oppose Transgenderism being Pushed - Respect children please

The commenter explicitly says "Oppose Transgenderism being Pushed" and argues that schools are "doing them a disservice" by encouraging pronoun changes and transgender identity. They also warn about alleged harms from hormones and say adults should have encouraged "gender embracement" instead of celebrating transition, indicating opposition to the regulation's transgender-student protections.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it an "outright attack on the family unit" and stating, "This guidance document is NOT what Virginians want." They argue it should not be adopted because it undermines parental rights and sex-specific environments.


The commenter explicitly says "support" and repeatedly argues in favor of protecting trans students, asking "why wouldn't you support trans kids???" They endorse making "the environment safer for trans people" and reject objections based on religion or politics.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly Oppose Transgender Guidelines" and repeatedly argues that "These ideas should never be school policies." They also state the policies "will do more harm than good" and object to pronoun use, parental authority limits, bathroom access, and school involvement.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "OPPOSED STRONGLY" and says "Keep it out of schools!!!!!" This is a clear rejection of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says the proposed policies are a "misguided overreaction," "defy common sense," and hopes VDOE will "revise this policy document accordingly." Although they express support for compassionate treatment of transgender/gender-dysphoric children, they clearly object to the model policy as written and argue that "the cure may be worse than the problem."


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" the Model Policies and asks officials to "reject the Model Policies." They argue the policies contradict science, religion, and parental authority, indicating clear opposition rather than a request for modification.


Absolutely, strongly, enthusiastically, SUPPORT

The commenter explicitly says, "I support these proposals in their ENTIRETY" and repeats that they "NEED these proposals NOW" and gives "full support." The comment argues the policies will help transgender students and counter hatred in schools, indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and argues that "Trans kids must be protected" and that officials have a responsibility to protect LGBT+ citizens. This clearly endorses adopting the regulation as a protective measure for transgender students.


Trans youth need community & school support

The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly and passionately in favor of these guidelines," and urges adoption by asking officials to consider the students' quality of life. The comment also defends inclusion of trans students in sports and broader school support, indicating clear support for the regulation.


VA. Dept. Of Transgender Education's Transgender Policies

The commenter explicitly says, "I am TOTALLY AGAINST ANY PARTS OF IT!" and objects to schools "counseling with students without the parents consent." This indicates clear opposition to the proposed transgender student policies, especially around parental consent and school involvement.


The commenter explicitly says "strongly disagree" and argues against transgender accommodations, including bathroom access and sex-specific activities. They call the policy "nuts" and say it is "way out of touch with reality," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "FULL SUPPORT!" and urges officials to "Allow students to be equally accepted and embraced and feel safe at your school." They argue that trans and non-binary students deserve respect and that supporting them does not threaten cisgender students, which clearly endorses adoption of the policy.


Virginia Dept of Education Transgender policies.

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly OPPOSE these draft policies" and repeatedly argues they are a "bad idea." They object to the policies on religious, parental-rights, and safety grounds, including concern about "males... in the same changing facilities as girls."


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "STRONGLY OPPOSED" and says "Enough already!" in response to the regulation. The appeal to "protect our children from all evil" indicates rejection of the transgender student policies rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed" to "transgender curriculum being added in K-12 schools," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. They also argue it would "do more harm than good" and object to children being exposed to an "agenda," indicating opposition rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly asks, "Please do not ignore the crucial role parents play" and says excluding parents is "blatantly wrong," indicating opposition to the policy. The comment also rejects transgender identity on religious grounds and objects to treating parents who oppose it as abusive, which aligns with rejecting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose!!" and argues "Let the parents raise their children, not the state!!" indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The comment frames the regulation as improper state interference in parenting.


Support for protections and guidelines for transgender students.

The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidelines for transgender students" and argues they "provide great benefit" to schools and communities. The comment consistently endorses the protections and welcoming environment described in the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and objects to transgender students using "female bathrooms, locker rooms, showers and in sports." They argue the policy would create safety risks and unfairness, indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support for it.


The commenter explicitly says, "I dont agree with any type of special treatment for transgenders," which rejects the policy’s protections and accommodations. The statement that "School is about getting an education, everything else is a bonus" further signals opposition to the regulation’s broader support measures.


The commenter explicitly says "Vehemently OPPOSE!!!" and "I STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS TRAVESTY," leaving no ambiguity about their position. They also call the policy "awful," "child abuse," and an "agenda," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and argues that the policy is needed to protect "a vulnerable group of people" and create "a safe learning environment for all students." The final sentence, "All children should feel safe and respected when they are at school," clearly endorses the regulation's goals.


Disgusting.  No way!  what sick mid came up with this.

The commenter clearly rejects the policy, opening with "Disgusting. No way!" and repeatedly attacking it as dangerous and immoral. They argue it will "only make it worst" and invoke fears about sex crimes and inappropriate access to students, indicating opposition to adoption.


For the well-being of students and families I oppose this guidance

The commenter explicitly says, "I must oppose this guidance." They also argue it should be rejected because it relies on politicized advocacy-group evidence and claim it will "obliterate girls’ sports," both of which indicate opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Support transgender students!" and calls the policy "an important step" toward a "positive, safe, and nurturing learning environment for all students." They also urge, "Protect and support transgender students," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly opens with "An unconditional NO!!!!" and repeatedly argues against the policy, calling it "wrong" and "utterly reprehensible." They object to transgender students using facilities, privacy concerns, and what they describe as an infringement on "parental rights" and religious beliefs.


Former resident thrilled to see these policies!

The commenter explicitly praises the proposal as "such an inclusive bill" and says "Policies like these will help schools become a safe learning environment for all students." This is clear approval of the regulation and its goals.


Policies for the treatment of transgender students in Virginia’s public schools

The commenter explicitly says, "Supporting this guidance would create a welcoming environment for everyone to thrive," which clearly endorses adoption of the policy. They also describe bullying and lack of protections as reasons the guidance is needed, indicating support for the regulation.


Strongly support advocacy for ALL people in schools! Great step forward!

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and calls it "a great step forward," which clearly endorses the regulation. The comment also praises "protection and acceptance" and "teaching tolerance and open-mindedness," indicating approval of the policy's goals.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support this," which directly endorses adoption of the proposed regulation. The title also says "Support," reinforcing the same position.


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "Opposed" and repeatedly criticizes key provisions as "absurdity" and "criminal." They argue against restroom guidance, pronoun-related rules, sports participation, and state involvement in family decisions, saying the policy should not "squelch parental rights."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and asks, "Please do not do this," indicating rejection of the proposed policies. The statement that the policy is a "very dangerous precedent" further confirms opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the rights of transgender students!" and calls the policy "an important step" toward a "positive, safe, and nurturing learning environment for all students." They also urge, "Protect and support transgender students," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and urges action: "To not make strides in this area... is to have blood on our hands." The comment argues the policies are needed to protect transgender children and reduce suicide risk.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly oppose!!!" which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" the policy and argues it is "highly inappropriate". They object to the state "undermin[ing] parent's rights and religious beliefs," indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "I support those of you who are trans, non-binary, gender non-conforming, etc." and frames the policy as necessary because transgender teens are bullied and threatened. They also reject opposition to the policy, saying "There's no fascist agenda here" and urging people to accept transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support!!" and argues that "trans students deserve to feel safe and validated in their schools." They also urge Virginia to "stand up to protect" transgender people, indicating clear approval of the regulation's purpose.


Stop the Madness, including this Ill-Conceived & Dangerous Policy

The commenter explicitly calls the policy "dangerous," "anti-science," and "an abomination," and repeatedly argues it should not be implemented. They object to specific provisions such as transgender-affirming curriculum, privacy from parents, and bathroom/locker room access, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Support Women’s Rights by Opposing This" and argues that the policy would let "a man who thinks he is a woman" enter women's locker rooms and play in women's sports. These statements clearly reject the proposed transgender student policies on privacy and sports grounds.


The commenter explicitly says, "I’m favor! Trans rights are human rights!" which clearly endorses the regulation. The rest of the comment reinforces support by arguing that teaching children now will reduce hate in the future.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this policy" and argues that transgender students "deserve to live and learn in a safe, supportive environment." They also say policies are needed to protect transgender students from discrimination and harassment, which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and argues that all children, especially transgender students, should have "safe space, resources, and social support" and an "inclusive and impartial education." This clearly endorses adoption of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT!!!" and argues that "Trans rights are human right" and should not be discriminated against in school. This clearly endorses adoption of the regulation protecting transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed" and rejects the policy's premise by stating "There are only two genders" and that suggesting otherwise is "child abuse." This is a clear call against adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support measures to protect trans youth" and argues Virginia "should begin by ensuring all students have the right to be respected for their gender and presentation." The comment endorses the regulation’s protective purpose and frames it as necessary for student safety and well-being.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the proposed policies" and gives a reason aligned with adoption: "to create school environments where all students - including those are transgender - are safe." This is a clear endorsement of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the regulation, calling it "absurd and evil" and saying "This regulation, if instituted, will create further division" and "It would be an atrocity." The religious framing (“God... makes the rules”) is used to argue against adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support legislation to promote the health and well-being of transgender youth in learning environments and beyond." The rest of the comment provides reasons for that support, emphasizing safety, homelessness, and suicide risk among trans youth.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy’s underlying goal by saying, "Let kids be themselves," which aligns with supporting protections for transgender students. The phrase "Their bodies are none of your business" rejects interference and implies approval of the regulation’s privacy and identity protections.


The comment explicitly says, "I STRONGLY support this measure by the Virginia government" and ends with "Keep Virginia blue!" indicating approval of the regulation. Although the body is highly sarcastic and abusive, the stated position is clearly in favor of adoption.


STRONGLY SUPPORT FOR A BETTER SCHOOL COMMUNITY

The commenter explicitly says, "Please pass this policy" and repeatedly argues that it should be adopted to support transgender students and create "a safe and fair education." The comment frames the regulation as beneficial for the whole school community and does not express any opposition to it.


The comment explicitly says "Support amendment," which indicates approval of the regulation with changes rather than rejection. No opposing language or substantive criticism is provided.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose," which directly states opposition to the proposed regulation. The phrase "God help us!" reinforces a negative reaction rather than support or neutrality.


Look at ALL THE DATA, not just one sided studies included in the Model Policies re: transgender

The commenter argues the Model Policies are based on "faulty, limited information" and "erroneous information," and says the VDOE should "look at ALL the data" instead of the current recommendations. This is a clear rejection of the proposed policies as written, even though the comment frames the objection as a call for broader evidence review.


The commenter explicitly says, "Absolutely do NOT support this," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The follow-up, "This is wrong on so many levels," reinforces opposition rather than offering neutral feedback or a request for changes.


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


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy, saying "Anyone who supports this is POGGGGGGG" and that "the benefits MASSIVELY outweigh the downsides." They also call it "ABSURD that this is even being debated," which clearly indicates approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and repeatedly argues it should not be adopted, saying "It is not up to the state" and urging that local communities handle it case by case. They also object that the policy puts "everyone else at risk" and raises concerns about privacy, rights, and cost.


OPPOSE strongly, medical science does not support, antibullying already in place

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this transgender policy" and repeats "Opposed!!". They argue the policy lacks "reputable medical evidence" and would "harm" children, indicating clear rejection of adoption.


How is this “protecting the youth” it’s NOT. It’s wrong on so many levels !

The commenter explicitly says the policy "should not be allowed" and rejects its premise as "wrong on so many levels." The request to "Keep the 2 genders in their own separate bathrooms" indicates opposition to the regulation’s transgender-inclusive guidance, especially around facility access.


The commenter explicitly says, "I'm writing in support of any effort to make transgender students feel more included and safe in their schools" and praises "policies to equip school administrators with clear and consistent guidelines." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


Seek to love your neighbor - oppose this policy

The commenter explicitly says "oppose this policy" and argues that it is "abusive" and a harmful "novel social agenda." They also warn that policies like this should be held accountable for future LGBTQ suicides, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the proposed protections," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. They further justify this by stating that students should be protected from "bigotry, bullying, and harm," indicating support for the policy's goals.


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "Opposed" and repeatedly says the policies are an "agenda" that should be left out of schools. They argue that "Alternative lifestyle instruction has no place in the educational system" and that lawmakers have "no right to push your personal agenda in Virginia's schools."


Protective legislation for Trans and non-binary students

The commenter explicitly says, "I'm writing to support protections for transgender and non-binary students in all of Virginia's public schools." They further endorse the policy by stating it will "help facilitate a positive learning environment for everyone."


The commenter explicitly says the proposals "flies in the face of common sense," calls them a "logistical nightmare," and ends with repeated demands to "vote 'No!'" and "Stop the madness." The comment argues the policy would unfairly favor transgender students and burden schools, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am in complete support of this policy proposal" and praises it as benefiting "queer youth." They also endorse it as an "awesome example for schools in states everywhere," indicating clear approval of adoption.


STRONGLY SUPPORT TRANS RIGHTS ARE HUMAN RIGHTS

The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and frames the policy as necessary because "Trans people, especially trans youth need to be protected." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation, with no opposing language.


Strongly support protecting trans youth!

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support trans youth" and supports "any measure which will help protect and include them in school activities." This clearly endorses adoption of the proposed policies, especially their protective and inclusive aims.


The Ungodly Grooming of Children to be Exploited by the Sick and Evil

The commenter explicitly says "The movement to sexualize our children by the State must be stopped!" and frames the policy as harmful, calling it "progress in the wrong direction." This is a clear rejection of the transgender student policies rather than support or neutral feedback.


The commenter explicitly says "YES to safe, supportive, and non-discriminatory schools" and urges, "Do the right thing and pass this bill." They also argue the policy protects "equal rights" and supports "transgender students," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and argues that supporting trans and non-binary students is "the only good and moral option." The body endorses the regulation’s protective purpose and rejects efforts to exclude or force conformity on trans kids.


Model Policies for Treatment of Transgender Students--Oppose

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the Model Policy as currently formulated" and repeatedly argues it "must be altered" or cannot be adopted as written. The body lists multiple objections to secrecy from parents, bathroom/facility access, and lack of protections for conscience/religious objections, all indicating rejection of the regulation in its current form.


The commenter explicitly titles the comment "Support" and says it is "incredibly important" to see trans kids supported more by the school system. They argue that schools should make childhood less difficult for trans kids and that "starting the support young makes such a big difference," which clearly endorses adoption of the policy.


“Protecting Trans kids” doesn’t mean anyone is forcing your kids to be trans

The commenter explicitly endorses the policy’s purpose of “protecting and supporting children who identify as trans or non binary” and says people “should support putting an infrastructure in place with counseling and resources.” The only caveat is procedural—“trained staff should be handling these matters”—which indicates support with implementation concerns rather than opposition.


The commenter explicitly says "Fully Support" and argues that the policies are "a crucial step" to create "a safe and supportive environment for all students." They also emphasize responding to "discrimination and violence" against trans and nonbinary youth, indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly states "Strongly agree," which indicates clear approval of the proposed regulation. No contrary language or qualifications are present.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Oppose" and says the policy is "wrong on so many levels." They object to "Keeping parents in the dark" and claim it "should not be forced by the government on to students," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The comment is an emphatic rejection of the regulation, with repeated phrases like "Nope" and "No no no no no!" indicating clear opposition. It offers no supporting reasons or questions, only a strong negative response to the proposed policies.


The comment explicitly endorses transgender rights with the title "trans rights are human rights" and then quotes the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to argue for equal rights and protection. This clearly supports adopting policies that recognize and protect transgender students.


The commenter explicitly labels the comment "SUPPORT" and says the protections are "necessary and a bare minimum." They also urge the state to "protect trans youth" and endorse respecting pronouns and gender identity, which clearly supports adoption of the regulation.


In support of this important legislation

The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this legislation," which directly endorses adoption. They also provide supportive reasons, noting the "life long impacts" of bullying and violence and that school should be "a safe place for all youth."


The commenter explicitly titles the note "Support protection of Trans rights" and says it is "imperative that we make the students feel safe, supported, and heard by offering them protections." They also argue Virginia should not "falling behind," indicating clear approval of the proposed transgender student protections.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose" and "I am very opposed to this proposal on many fronts." They also argue against the policy on parental authority and religious grounds, saying parents should decide what children are exposed to and that they "do not support the belief that gender is decided upon by the individual."


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this measure" and explains that it is important to "provide a safe place for children no matter how they identify." The final sentence reinforces approval by expressing a desire for the child to be protected at school.


The commenter explicitly says, "This type of legislation is dangerous" and argues against allowing transgender students to use bathrooms, locker rooms, or participate in sports according to gender identity. They frame the policy as "pandering" and say it "amplifies the problem," which clearly indicates opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly gives "STRONG SUPPORT of trans youth" and says "trans youth needs protection and to be treated properly," which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose. The final sentence attacks opponents, but the overall position is unambiguously in favor of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY approve" and gives a reason in favor of adoption: "We need to keep individuals safe in our schools." This indicates clear support for the regulation.


The commenter explicitly urges action in favor of the policy: "you must do everything you can to protect them." The title "trans rights are human rights" and the affirmation that "gay and trans kids have existed" indicate clear support for protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and urges, "Pass this measure!" They also state the policy goal directly: "Protect trans and nonbinary students in Virginia!"


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose transgenders in biologically opposite gender sports, locker rooms, showers" and argues that "Biological males should not be allowed to compete in women's sports." They also object to bathroom, shower, and locker room access for transgender students, indicating opposition to the regulation's protections and accommodations.


The comment says, "Parents must always be consulted," which implies the commenter believes the policy should require stronger parental involvement than the proposed guidance provides. It does not explicitly reject the regulation, but it signals opposition to the policy as written unless changed to prioritize parents.


The commenter explicitly rejects school involvement in the policy, saying "This is an area the schools should not be involved in!" and objects to students sharing facilities with transgender peers. The phrase "No Way" and the request not to have "my normal kids" share bathrooms or locker rooms indicate opposition to adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and argues that we should "defend the safety and civil rights of all transgender young people." The comment criticizes opposition to transgender acceptance and clearly endorses the regulation's purpose.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Support" and says the guidance is "so over needed". They further state that without it, students may face "prejudice and hate unnecessarily," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Oppose" and says "DO NOT TAKE YOUR PENIS INTO MY DAUGHTER'S BATHROOM!!!" They argue the policy is unnecessary and object to transgender students using bathrooms aligned with their gender identity, saying officials are "making this out to be a bigger problem than it is."


The commenter explicitly says "Fully support" and adds "Support the LGBTQ+ community and its youth," which clearly endorses the regulation. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the document entitled 'Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students.'" They also endorse the policy’s goals of safety, protection, and inclusion for transgender students and ask decision-makers to adopt the experts’ recommendations.


The commenter explicitly rejects the regulation with "absolutely not" and the title "Strongly apposed" indicates clear opposition. There is no language suggesting support or a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this policy" and repeatedly endorses it as making students feel safe. They also state that "Discrimination against trans students is harmful and should not be a part of our schools," which clearly favors adoption.


Equal Protection for Trans/Non-Binary Students!

The commenter explicitly says they are "writing to support equal protections for transgender and non-binary students" and states that "These protections will help facilitate a positive learning environment." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


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


K-12 Teacher and Mom Who FULLY Supports This Guidance!!

The commenter explicitly says they "fully support" the guidance and wants to "protect ALL students and not discriminate." They frame the policy as helping "vulnerable youth," which indicates approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose!" and reinforces it with "My family and I strongly oppose!" This is a clear rejection of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support the model policy protecting transgender students." This is a direct endorsement of the proposed regulation with no qualifying objections or requested changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "In support of this document" and states that "The protection of transgender students in schools is a must." They further endorse the policy by saying every student should be treated fairly and protected by their school.


The commenter explicitly states "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and repeats "Strongly support." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly states, "I am in support of trans rights in Virginia," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose. The title "In Support" reinforces that the commenter wants the policy adopted.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" and calls the proposal "an outrage," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. The statement "I will not send my children to public school if this is passed" reinforces opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly praises the policy with "Finally!" and says it is "an important step towards making Virginia more welcoming and inclusive of all." They also endorse the underlying protections, stating transgender and non-binary students "thrive" and that this is "about basic human rights."


The commenter explicitly says, "I support ours students... being allowed to be their true selves" and urges schools to "Keep places of learning supportive and encouraging." This clearly endorses the regulation’s goal of protecting transgender students from discrimination and supporting them in school.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY STRONGLY OPPOSE" and calls the policy "OUTRAGEOUS." They also state they "WILL NOT SEND MY CHILDREN TO PUBLIC SHCOOLS IF THIS IS PASSED," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


Adoption of transgender policies in VA public schools

The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose transgender policies being adopted in VA public schools." They also argue the policies create "Confusing standards" and reject the underlying premise that sex can be self-defined, indicating opposition to adoption.


Protections for Transgender Youth and all students in VA schools

The commenter explicitly says they "support protections for transgender and non-binary youth" and urges the Commonwealth to "protect all LGBT student[s]" in Virginia public schools. The comment frames the regulation as necessary for safety, inclusion, and a positive learning environment, indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "SUPPORT TRANS KIDS!" and urges that policies be put into place "to protect and support trans kids." They also ask to "make this happen," indicating clear approval of the proposed regulation.


The commenter explicitly states, "Not in support of this Bil," which clearly indicates opposition to the proposed regulation. There is no additional context suggesting support or neutrality.


The comment explicitly states "Opposed," which directly indicates the commenter wants the regulation rejected. The title also says "Oppose," reinforcing the same position.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with "NO!" and says "This goes against so many rights" and "If this law passes I will be taking my child out of the school system," indicating clear opposition. The comment argues that schools should not "force beliefs or values on children" and frames the policy as harmful.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose the Model Policies" and repeatedly argues against adopting them, saying it is "not appropriate" and that it would "do more harm than good." They also frame the policy as unnecessary and a misuse of resources, asking to spend time on "better drug abuse prevention efforts" instead.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed" and argues against "allowing any type of transgender actions" in schools. They object to bathroom/locker room access, gender expression, and the policy generally, saying it is "absolutely not ok!!!"


Strongly support; trans students have a right to a fulfilling and safe education

The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly support" and calls it "a great policy" that "should serve as a model for other schools and school districts." They also argue that transgender, nonbinary, and LGBTQ+ students "deserve to feel affirmed," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says they "strongly support these changes" and calls the regulations "an important step" toward making schools "accessible and welcoming spaces for all." The comment also praises the Department's "open and inclusive process," indicating clear approval of the guidance.


Strongly Oppose!!! Stick to Teaching Reading, Writing, and Arithmetic!!!

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose!!!" and rejects the policy as "complete insanity." The demand to "Stick to Teaching Reading, Writing, and Arithmetic" indicates opposition to adopting this transgender student policy guidance.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this well-researched and evidence-based proposal" and argues that the policy would "protect previously vulnerable students" and create "safer, more inclusive learning environments." These statements clearly endorse adoption of the regulation.


The comment explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" and labels the subject "Transgender School Policy," indicating clear rejection of the proposed regulation. No qualifying language suggests support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this proposal" and urges, "Protect trans youth!" They also give reasons for approval, saying the policy would "protect some of our most vulnerable students" and improve safety and outcomes.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this," indicating clear rejection of the proposed policies. The rest of the comment argues against allowing transgender students in restrooms, saying she would not want "a man in the restroom" or "a boy in the restroom with my daughters and granddaughter," which reinforces opposition.


The commenter explicitly rejects the regulation, saying "This is disgusting" and "This needs to stop." The statement "These policies are wrong" clearly indicates opposition to adopting the transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly OPPOSE" to the proposed policies. The title "TransGender indoctrination" also signals rejection of the regulation rather than support or a neutral inquiry.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and repeatedly argues against the policy, saying it "undermines our role as parents" and that the policy should be changed because "parents will not know and will lose their child." They also call it "infuriating and frightening," indicating clear rejection rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am in strong support of this initiative," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. The reference to providing "safety and understanding to ALL children" reinforces approval of the policy's goals.


The comment describes a law that "protects transgender individuals against discrimination" and "recognizes the gender identity of the individual," which aligns with the proposed regulation's purpose. It provides supportive factual context rather than criticism or opposition.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed!!!" and adds "Will not send my children to public school!" indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The comment provides no support or neutral inquiry, only opposition tied to school enrollment.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Oppose" and argues against adoption, citing "Too many safety issues for children" and urging, "Please, use common sense not wokeness for the children." The comment also rejects the policy's premise by calling it "transgenderism" and saying it should not be addressed by the DOE or government.


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


The commenter explicitly says "Support Trans Students" and argues that schools should "keep them safe" and supported. The comment criticizes opponents of the policy, indicating approval of the proposed transgender student guidance.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed to this proposed legislation," and repeatedly argues against the policy on parental consent, bathroom/locker room access, and religious freedom grounds. The request is to reject or substantially weaken the regulation rather than adopt it as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I absolutely support this" and argues the policy will help transgender students feel "more respected." They also reject concerns about harm, stating it "will not infringe on the rights of other students."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support!!" twice, which clearly indicates approval of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism suggesting any opposition or ambivalence.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy with the title "Absolute Support" and says "It is well past time for these kinds of changes to take place." They also state that "All students deserve to feel safe" and that "Trans lives are valid and need to be protected in policy," which clearly supports adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and argues that "Trans and non-binary kids" deserve to feel "safe and validated" at school. This clearly endorses adopting the proposed policies to protect and include transgender students.


Oppose the VDOE model policy for treatment of transgender students

The commenter explicitly states, "I oppose the VDOE model policies for the treatment of transgender students." This is a direct rejection of the proposed regulation with no qualifying language suggesting support or modification.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am writing in strong support of this bill" and explains that it will "help ensure the safety and well-being of trans and non-binary students." They also endorse the policy goals of protection against "bullying, harassment, discrimination, and victimization."


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSED" and calls the policy "a disgrace to humanity," indicating clear rejection of the regulation. The statement that it will "result in a collapse of the public education system" further shows opposition rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed!" which directly states opposition to the proposed policies. The phrase "This is sheer lunacy!" reinforces that they want the regulation rejected rather than adopted.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose to this" and argues against transgender students using bathrooms and participating in sports. They state they do not want "a man walk in" and that transgender students "should not be allowed" in school bathrooms or sports, indicating clear opposition to the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I heartily support these guidelines," and describes the proposal as an "Excellent Step Forward!" They also praise recognizing students' gender identity so they can feel "accepted and supported."


The commenter explicitly says "I am in strong support" and endorses "equality and protections for trans, non binary, gender non confirming youth." This clearly supports adoption of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this initiative!" and frames the policy as necessary to "protect our communities kids." They also endorse the underlying purpose by stating, "Supporting children includes supporting trans children."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Opposed" and states "I do not agree that the public schools should have the right to enter into gender issues with children." They argue this is a matter for parents and that schools should not "dictate what teachers need to teach concerning sexual issues," indicating rejection of the policy.


The commenter explicitly states "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and repeats "I oppose this!" with no qualifying support or suggested revisions. This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation.


The commenter explicitly states, "I do not support this bill," and the title says "OPPOSE!" This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the policies outlined in the proposal" and calls for schools to be "clear and unwavering" in protecting LGBTQ+ students. The comment also urges adoption by framing the policies as necessary to prevent discrimination and violence.


STRONGLY OPPSE AND WILL REMOVE MY KIDS FROM SCHOOL SYSTEM

The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPSE" and threatens to "REMOVE MY KIDS FROM SCHOOL SYSTEM," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed policies. There is no supporting language or request for modification, only opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "Vote NO," which directly opposes adoption of the regulation. The stated reason, "I want to protect my children," indicates concern about the policy’s impact and supports an oppositional stance.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Strong Support" and argues that the policies would "help immensely" transgender students and "improve the lives of all students." They also endorse "Acknowledging and support transgender students in their identity," which clearly favors adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this bill," which directly states opposition to adoption. The follow-up claim that it is not the government's or school's job "to tell us what to believe or how to live" reinforces rejection of the policy.


Highly Oppose!! From the Hispanic Community

The commenter explicitly says, "Please do not support this bill" and "I am highly opposed to this bill," which clearly indicates opposition. They also argue it gives "more power to teachers than to the child’s very own parents" and will cause "confusion to children’s minds," reinforcing a negative position toward adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed to this" and calls the policy "child abuse," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. There is no request for modification or support for adoption.