The title is completely misleading! If you ONLY read the TITLE, do NOT support this!

The commenter explicitly says "do NOT support this" and repeatedly urges rejection, arguing the policy would create a "totalitarianism environment" and make teachers "judge and jury" in family matters. They also state "Do NOT MAKE OUR JOB MORE DIFFICULT!" and that transgender issues are "not a problem to be solved in SCHOOL," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am in support of Transgender rights" and supports "any policies made that benefit their well being and quality of life." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I completely support" and adds that it is "a necessary legislation for every school to have." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "We need protections for all LGBT students within the school system" and supports the policy as "a good place to start." The comment argues the regulation is necessary to prevent bullying, outing, and harm to transgender students, indicating clear approval of stronger protections.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am opposed to presenting such options to pre-adolescent children," and argues that students are "too young to decide to change their genders." This clearly rejects the proposed transgender student policies rather than supporting them with changes.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Opposed" and argues the policy is government overreach, calling it "a slippery slope" and "bordering on Communist." They also say sharing it with younger students is "cruel" and liken it to potential abuse, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying "Enough" and "Just teach core curriculum" while criticizing the guidance as "Orwell's 1984" and accusing it of protecting a child from their parent. The quoted passage about not notifying parents is used as evidence against the regulation, indicating they want it stopped rather than adopted.


Strongly Oppose VDOE proposed policy re Transgender Issues

The commenter explicitly states "strong opposition to the proposed VDOE rule changes" and argues that transgender-related decisions should be left to families rather than schools. They also say school-aged children should not make this "life-changing decision" and frame the policy as inappropriate for school administrators to handle.


The commenter explicitly argues the policies will "cause immeasurable harm" and says the state would be "much better advised to wait" rather than implement them. They object to privacy, parental rights, pronoun use, athletics, and legality concerns, all indicating opposition to adoption.


In full support - ALL students deserve to be safe!

The commenter explicitly says "In full support" and argues that "The policies outlined here will ensure" students are safe and supported. They endorse the regulation as a way to protect trans and non-binary students from bullying and harassment.


The commenter explicitly says they "appreciate" the document, found it "well written and inclusive," and asks for additions and refinements rather than rejection. Their suggestions aim to strengthen implementation, such as "professional development for educators" and "safe spaces within schools."


The commenter explicitly says, "I commend the Department of Education on taking this step" and praises the guidelines as making schools "welcoming, safe, and supportive for all students." The comment argues the policies align with pediatric recommendations and improve child mental health, indicating clear approval of adoption.


I oppose your plan for transgender students.  I applaud your efforts to help these students but this

The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose your plan for transgender students" and states, "I do not support this laissez faire approach." Although they briefly say, "I applaud your efforts to help these students," the overall position is clearly against the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am writing in support of the Model Policies" and repeatedly endorses the rule as making schools "a better place to learn" and "safe and welcoming" for transgender and nonbinary students. The comment argues the policy promotes equal access, dignity, and protection from bullying and discrimination.


The commenter explicitly endorses protections for transgender students, saying schools should be "a safe space" and that there are "necessary steps to take in order to protect transgender persons." The closing plea, "Please protect our adolescent population," supports adopting the policy.


The commenter explicitly titles the remark "Strong Support" and says protective measures like those suggested by VDOE "are a step towards creating safe and inclusive spaces." The comment endorses the regulation as a response to discrimination and mental health harms faced by trans youth.


The comment explicitly says "Reject Totalitarian Policy Proposals," which is a direct call to reject the regulation. It provides no supporting details or suggested amendments, only opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this unbalanced approach to transgender," indicating clear rejection of the proposed policy. The rest of the comment argues against accommodating transgender students and says, "The government cannot protect everyone and every feeling," reinforcing opposition rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly argues that "making school a safer space" is beneficial and says trans students "deserve to live," indicating clear support for the policy's protections. They also state that "a more inclusive environment can improve life for all students," which endorses adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly argues that transgender students should be protected, saying "Trans students are students" and that failing to protect them "would be disgraceful." They also state the policy "would help change students lives, and even save lives," which clearly supports adoption of the regulation.


Delete entire section. (Promote tolerance is fine, but this policy and entirely different goal)

The commenter explicitly says, "Delete entire section" and "Remove delete this section," indicating they want the policy rejected or removed. They also object that "In no way should parents be questioned in raising their children," which directly opposes the guidance on handling transgender students and parental acceptance issues.


Stop transgender.. it is morally wrong and child abuse

The commenter explicitly says, "Stop Transgender" and calls it "morally wrong and child abuse," which clearly rejects the proposed transgender student policies. There is no indication of support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support any move toward leveling the playing field for students" and frames the regulation as helping transgender youth feel safer and supported. The comment consistently endorses the policy's goals of support, safety, and affirmation for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support transgender rights" and frames the policy as a "human rights issue." They also express approval of providing "all our children a place to thrive," which aligns with adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support these guidelines" and argues they "strengthen and broaden protections" for transgender youth. They also call the guidelines "commonsensical and long overdue," indicating clear approval of adoption.


Support in order to protect Virginia's Youth

The commenter explicitly says, "I support these guidelines" and urges that Virginia "should adopt [them] as soon as possible." They also frame the policy as necessary to protect LGBTQ youth, prevent harassment and discrimination, and provide a safe learning environment.


The commenter explicitly says, "This should be a given" and that "this policy will help" protect transgender students from bullying and harassment. They also reject efforts to weaken it, stating that any attempt to invalidate rights or identities "has no place in a school."


The commenter explicitly says, "I am opposed to the guidelines being suggested dealing with transgender students" and argues the proposal will "lead to further discrimination." They also reject "special circumstances for one group of students" and suggest a different approach instead, indicating opposition to adoption as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose the policies being pushed forward," which directly rejects adoption of the regulation. The statement that they are "pulling my child out of public school in part due to policies like this" reinforces opposition to the policy direction.


Oppose - Unequal Consideration of all students

The commenter explicitly says, "Please please please remove this requirement" and frames the policy as harmful to "a majority of students." They object to transgender students using shared facilities and argue it creates discomfort and safety risks for girls.


A long needed proposal, I heavily support

The commenter explicitly says, "I heavily support" the proposal and calls it "A long needed proposal." They also endorse equal care for all children and support for children who have experienced bias, which aligns with the regulation's anti-discrimination and supportive-environment goals.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support legislation needed to promote the health and well-being of trans youth," which clearly endorses the regulation. The title "Fully Support" reinforces that the commenter wants the policy adopted.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this" and describes it as "a great step in the right direction." The statement that "EVERYONE deserves to feel safe" indicates approval of the regulation's purpose and adoption.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying it is "NOT the role of the schools" and that supporting transgender students' wishes is "criminal." They object to restroom/locker room access, parental notification limits, and the inclusion of "LGBT ideology" in schools.


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

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues the policies "will not help" and "will harm" most students. They also reject removing sex-segregated bathrooms, stating that "girls/female only and boys/male only bathrooms must not be removed."


The commenter explicitly says "cutting off parental knowledge and input is unacceptable" and that the policy "appears to aim to cut parents out of decisions" with "life altering effects." Although they affirm that transgender children should be treated "with compassion and understanding" and that bullying should not be tolerated, the overall thrust is opposition to the policy as written because of parental rights concerns.


The comment explicitly says "OPPOSE" in both the title and body, indicating clear rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose the proposed legislation" and repeatedly argues against it on safety, fairness, parental consent, and liability grounds. They call it "a lawsuit waiting to happen" and say they would not support officials who promote it.


The commenter explicitly labels the comment "SUPPORT" and repeatedly affirms the policy goals by saying students "deserve to feel safe and included" and that they "support you, I love you, and I believe in you." This is clear endorsement of the regulation’s intent to protect transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "Very strong support" and argues the policy should be implemented because it would "provide a more supportive and productive environment" and "help save children’s lives." The comment clearly endorses the regulation’s adoption and its protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly OPPOSE this" and repeats "I STRONGLY OPPOSE." They argue the policy will "cause confusion," create "abuse in bathrooms and locker rooms," and is "a sexual agenda," all of which indicate rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this bill" and endorses its anti-bullying purpose. The phrase "support stopping any kind of bullying in our school system" indicates approval of the regulation's goals.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Strong support" and says "This type of policy is necessary". They argue it will reduce mental health harms and bullying and that parents are informed, which clearly endorses adoption of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says "I Strongly Support" and argues that "all youth have a human right to feel safe in schools." They further endorse policies that promote safety and justice, indicating clear approval of the regulation.


I disapprove of this radical push to eliminate differences between females and

The commenter explicitly says, "I disapprove of this radical push," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The reference to "brainwashing of our children and grandchildren" further shows opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this" and repeatedly endorses the policy’s goals of safety and support for trans students. They argue against objections to restroom/locker room access and conclude that "all trans kids deserve love and support and to feel safe in school and at home."


Parent Opposes this policy as  it is written

The commenter explicitly says, "Oppose" and states they "Oppose lack of Privacy and Endangerment" in the policy. They argue the policy is "not a just or fair solution" and object to bathroom access, saying it is "ridiculous that anyone can enter the girl's bathroom without being questioned."


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly OPPOSE this" and repeats "I STRONGLY OPPOSE." They argue the policy will "cause confusion," create "abuse in bathrooms and locker rooms," and should not be implemented in schools.


Strongly oppose forcing parents to accept this agenda

The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose forcing... everyone to accept this draconian agenda" and objects to boys using girls' bathrooms and pronoun enforcement. These statements clearly reject the proposed transgender student policies rather than support or neutrally discuss them.


The commenter says, "I strongly object to this bill" and argues the state has "no right to indoctrinate and confuse our children with this gender lie." They explicitly reject the premise of the policy by insisting "There are two genders" and that any DOE bill saying otherwise "will not change the truth."


In Full Support of Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in VA's Public Schools

The commenter explicitly says they are "in full support" of the policies and urges VDOE to "implement this essential policy guidance." They also argue the policies will protect students and help educators support them, which clearly favors adoption.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "I object to change of policy," which indicates opposition to adopting or revising the proposed policy. No supporting reasons or requests for modification are provided, but the plain objection is enough to classify the stance as oppose.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Opposed" and argues that schools and the state should "stay out of the business of sexual orientation." They also say it is "ridiculous" to think elementary school children can make "life long decisions," indicating rejection of the transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "Protect trans kids" and states that they "deserve equal rights," which clearly supports the regulation’s goal of protecting transgender students. The comment offers no criticism or request to weaken the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "Opposed to these policies," which directly states rejection of the regulation. The added claim that they "will create unsafe conditions for students" reinforces opposition rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Support" and states, "It is our obligation to support, educate and value ALL our young people." They further emphasize inclusion by saying, "Transgender students are included in ALL!"


Absolutely Necessary to Support our Transgender Peers

The commenter explicitly says the proposal is "absolutely necessary" and "wholeheartedly believe[s] this proposal is a necessity." They also endorse its purpose of helping transgender peers feel "more welcomed" and preventing "unfair discrimination."


Virginia High School Valedictorian in Support of Bill

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this bill" and argues it is "essential" for protecting transgender students from mistreatment and discrimination. They also endorse guidance on restroom and gender-related facility use, saying students should feel safe using facilities that match their gender identity.


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "Strongly Opposed" and adds a hostile rejection: "those who are for it can leave the country." This clearly indicates they want the regulation rejected rather than adopted.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying "this document is not going to help children" and repeatedly arguing it is "dangerous for all school children." They object to privacy/confidentiality provisions, bathroom access, and sports participation, and warn it would create "chaos" and be "detrimental" to education.


The commenter says they "completely object" to the proposed policies and argues they "supersede the rightful authority and responsibility of parents." They also oppose bathroom/locker room access and criticize the policies as "politically motivated nonsense," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I applaud the state of Virginia for addressing the safety of its gender-diverse students" and argues that supportive schools "will go a long way to preserving life and mental health." The comment clearly endorses the proposed policies and frames them as necessary protection for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "strong support for this!" and describes the policies as "a wonderful step the right direction." They also affirm the underlying purpose by stating that "everyone’s identities should be respected."


In support of evidence-based protections

The commenter explicitly says, "I wholeheartedly support these model policies," and frames them as "protections" that are medically and legally justified. The comment argues the policies are needed to prevent harm to transgender youth and align with federal law and medical recommendations.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this document" and calls it "a meaningful first step toward protecting the rights of transgender students." This is a clear endorsement of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this bill," which directly indicates approval of the regulation. The title also says "strongly support," reinforcing the same position.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE THIS POLICY" and repeatedly urges, "Do not approve this horrible policy." They argue it is "extreme and scary," unnecessary, and harmful to children, parents, and female athletes.


The commenter explicitly says "Strong support for this" and praises it as a "Great step in the right direction." They also express support for "our trans students," indicating approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "Do not approve the draft policies" and argues the VDOE has "gone far beyond" what the General Assembly prescribed. They also state the policies "infringe the First Amendment rights of parents" and should not accommodate gender transitions, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support these policies" and "urgently encourage the VDOE to implement this essential policy guidance." They also argue the policies would protect transgender students from bullying and support their mental health, indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support" and "hope these policies are implemented immediately." They also frame the regulation as a needed response to discrimination against transgender and LGBTQ youth, indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this guidance" and explains that they want "all of the LGBTQ youth" to be in a "safe and welcoming" school environment. The comment clearly endorses adoption of the policy as a means of protecting transgender and LGBTQ students.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly opposed to this policy," which directly states opposition to adoption. The body reinforces this with negative claims that it is "anti-God and anti-family" and will "destroy children."


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support these policies" and "urgently encourage the VDOE to implement this essential policy guidance." The body repeatedly argues the policies would protect transgender and LGBTQ+ students from bullying and support their mental health, indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the equitable treatment of all Virginia youth," and includes "trans youth and other LGBQIA+" in schools. This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies' goals and adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please oppose," which clearly indicates they do not want the regulation adopted. The title also says "Opposed," reinforcing the same position.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support these changes," and frames the regulation as necessary for "safety and health." The comment endorses protections for transgender students and argues against discrimination, indicating clear support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Fully Support!" and argues that "Protecting children needs to include ALL children" and that "Supporting the rights of these children is essential." These statements clearly endorse adopting the transgender student policies, with no opposing language.


OPPOSE the insanity and lies; 2+2 = 4 (otherwise, why learn math?)

The commenter explicitly says "OPPOSE the insanity and lies" and argues the proposals are harmful, claiming they will "encourage the increase of suicide and depression." This is a clear rejection of the regulation rather than a request for changes or neutral input.


fully in support because anything otherwise is ludicrous

The commenter explicitly says they "fully support ANY implementation of new policies" and urges, "give us that" and "Do not let these kids suffer anymore." The comment frames the policies as life-saving and beneficial for trans and GNC students, indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly titles the comment "Strongly Support" and states that "This policy will help increase equity" and provide needed support for transgender students. The final sentence criticizes opposition to the policy, reinforcing clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Oppose" and says the policy "undercut parents’ involvement" and "endanger the bodily privacy and safety of all students." This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation rather than support or a neutral inquiry.


Trans rules are lunacy against commonsense destroying our young women

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with hostile language, calling the "Trans rules" "lunacy" and saying they are "destroying our young women." This indicates opposition to adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this law," which directly rejects the proposed regulation. The rest of the comment argues against transgender recognition, saying "God made man... male and female" and expressing concern about children being exposed to "members of the opposite sex."


The commenter explicitly says, "I do NOT approve of proposed guidelines" and asks to "do not approve" them. They argue the policies are based on "radical theories" and call them "controversial and unscientific," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am writing to oppose the proposed VDOE policy" and repeatedly argues against key provisions such as preferred pronouns, restroom/locker room access, and privacy accommodations. Although the comment opens by affirming anti-discrimination principles, the overall position is clearly to reject the proposed policy as written.


The comment explicitly says "Stronglyoppose!", which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed transgender student policy. No supporting or qualifying language is provided.


Transgender policies - Moderation please!

The commenter says policies should let administrators handle these issues, but insists that "parents should absolutely remain the decision makers" and criticizes "transgender in elementary school." The reference to sticking to "the basics of biology" and leaving "gender identity issues" to families indicates opposition to the proposed guidance as written, or at least a desire to substantially weaken it.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this" and adds "Not safe for students," indicating rejection of the regulation. The statement "Stop using our tax dollars for anything other than education" further argues against adoption or funding of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the proposed guidelines" and gives a reason: to ensure transgender students have "a safe and supportive learning environment." This is a clear endorsement of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and calls the proposal "a terrible proposal." They argue against transgender-inclusive bathroom and locker room access and claim it will erode "parents' rights," indicating rejection of the regulation.


COMPLETELY OPPOSE VDOE Draft Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender

The commenter explicitly says they "completely oppose the VDOEs draft model policies" and asks to "leave the rest to parents," indicating they do not want the regulation adopted. The reference to "biological truth to gender" and that it is "in no way the responsibility of any school" reinforces opposition to the policy's purpose.


DO NOT SUPPORT these completely unacceptable and dangerous policies!  You are not the parents

The commenter explicitly says "DO NOT SUPPORT these completely unacceptable and dangerous policies" and calls them "in appropriate in every way." They also object to restroom and locker room access, saying their children will not share those spaces and that they may withdraw from public school if the policies are accepted.


The commenter explicitly states, "I strongly oppose the Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in Virginia’s Public Schools." This is a direct rejection of the regulation with no qualifying support or suggested revisions.


Heaven help our girls and women- they are the ones who stand to lose and be victims if this passes

The commenter clearly argues against the regulation, warning that if it "passes" it will harm girls and women and claiming it will lead to boys "crossing over" into girls' sports and erase Title IX protections. They frame the policy as an imposition by the "far left" and say it is not "real love," indicating rejection of the proposed guidance.


The commenter says, "Absolutely against it!" which is a direct rejection of the proposed policies. They also object that the policies are "taking over the parents' role," indicating opposition to adoption of the regulation.


A doctor in support of this much needed document

The commenter explicitly says, "I support this proposal" and describes it as "much needed." They also endorse "equal, kind and fair treatment towards children regardless of their gender identity," which clearly favors adoption of the regulation.


Strongly Support. This is good for all children, regardless of their gender or sexuality.

The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly Support" and calls the policy "good for all children, regardless of their gender or sexuality." They also argue that medical and educational experts support these policies, indicating approval of adoption.


Strongly Opposed -  This is institutionalized abuse of all students

The commenter explicitly states "Strongly Opposed," which directly indicates rejection of the regulation. The phrase "institutionalized abuse of all students" is a clear condemnation rather than a request for modification.


Strongly oppose this far-left insanity. It has no place in our schools.

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and repeatedly argues the policy should be rejected, calling it "far-left insanity" and concluding that schools "must reject unscientific, irrational policies like the one proposed." The body also lists multiple objections to transgender-inclusive policies in schools, including bathrooms, sports, and pronouns.


The comment rejects the proposed policies in highly hostile terms, saying Virginia's children need to "take their state back" and attacking the "malicious left." This indicates opposition to the regulation rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "We do not support" and calls it "Bad policy." They also argue it "undermines family unity and parental involvement" and "endangers young women's opportunities," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy approach, saying that "putting the school in this role... and in some instances inbetween parents and children, is unacceptable." They also object to teaching children about gender identity concepts, stating that "not everyone agrees" with that aspect of the guidance, while only endorsing general anti-bullying efforts.


Strongly Support / Protect Trans Kids!!!!

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and argues the policy is needed so kids can "feel safe and accepted" and not be "outcasted/treated differently for their gender identity." This is clear approval of the regulation's purpose and protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose these transgender policies," which directly states rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting or neutral qualifications are provided.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly opposed," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed policies. The title "Trans gender crap" adds a contemptuous dismissal of the regulation.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly Opposed" and dismisses the proposal as "Bad ideas," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. There is no indication of support or neutrality.


The commenter states plainly, "I oppose these transgender policies," which directly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No qualifying language suggests support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly disagree!!" in response to the proposed transgender student policies, which indicates opposition to adoption. No supporting reasons or requests for modification are provided, but the stance is clear from the wording.


It isn't about equality or fairness, it's about the core of education.

The commenter rejects the policy’s pronoun requirements, saying it is "not an issue of fairness or justice" and objecting to teachers being forced to use preferred pronouns "under penalty of disciplinary action." They explicitly ask that any policy be only "suggested" rather than mandatory, indicating opposition to the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support this legislation," which directly rejects the proposed policy. They also argue it is a "violation of my constitutionally protected religious freedom" and claim it would "put our children in more danger," both of which indicate opposition rather than a request for modification.


You can help Trans students WITHOUT taking away parental rights and choices.

The commenter explicitly writes "Oppose." and frames the policy as "taking away parental rights and choices," indicating they do not want the regulation adopted as written. The title suggests support for trans students in general, but the stated objection is to this policy approach.


The commenter explicitly states "Strongly oppose," which directly indicates rejection of the proposed policies. The title references "restrooms/locker rooms," suggesting opposition is tied to transgender student access to school facilities.


The commenter gives "wholehearted support for any guidelines" that "support vulnerable children and respect their pronouns and their individuality." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed transgender student policies rather than a request for changes or criticism.


The comment title, "Absolutely not ok," clearly rejects the proposed policies. The body, "Very sad it has come to this," expresses disapproval of the regulation rather than support or a neutral question.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Strongly opposed" and argues that "Gender is decided by God and not for us to choose," which rejects the premise of the transgender student policies. The comment provides a religious objection rather than support or neutral feedback.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support these guidelines," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. The title also states "Comment in Support," reinforcing the same position.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and adds "Please support LGBTQIA+ students," which clearly endorses adoption of the policy. The phrase "I love this" reinforces a positive approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly states "Strongly against," which clearly indicates opposition to adopting the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons are provided, but the stance is unambiguous.


The comment only says "Be kind." and does not explicitly support or oppose the proposed policies. It reads as a general moral appeal rather than a position on adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with the title "Absolutely not" and argues against allowing "any bathroom/locker room they choose." They express concern that it would let "a male" enter girls' spaces and make females uncomfortable, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY SUPPORT THIS ACTION!!!" and expresses hope that the proposed policy "passes." The rest of the comment explains personal reasons for supporting protections for a transgender child.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Opposed" and repeatedly asks, "Please do Not pass this 'guidance'!" They argue it conflicts with their religious beliefs and parental rights, and say they would homeschool or move to a private Christian school if it passes.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose this policy" and repeats that they are "Extremely opposed" to the policy's implications. They object to transgender student accommodations, especially "boys in girls bathrooms and vise versa," indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support or neutrality.


The comment explicitly says "oppose" and provides no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality. It is a direct rejection of the proposed regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this document" and endorses "efforts put forth to ensure nondiscrimination practices for all students." They also specifically include "those who identify as transgender," indicating approval of the regulation's purpose and direction.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the guidance," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. The additional statement, "We are all equal and worthy of the same dignity and respect," reinforces support for the policy's inclusive intent.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support these proposals" and endorses the goal that "Every student deserves to feel safe and welcome in their school." The final sentence, "Trans rights are human rights," further confirms approval of the regulation's transgender student protections.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY, STRONGLY OPPOSE!!!" and calls the policy "highly immoral and unethical." They object to the regulation on the grounds that it would allow "a grow man being able to walk in on a little girl," indicating clear rejection of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY support!" and adds that the policy is "so necessary for our students." The rest of the comment praises "Inclusive language and education," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "this is a wrong approach to deal with these issues," which indicates opposition to the proposed policies. The opening phrase "I appreciate the concerns being addressed" softens the tone but does not change the overall rejection of the regulation's approach.


The only right these policies are about are the so-called 'right' to sexually abuse children.

The commenter clearly rejects the proposed policies, calling them "Pedophile policies" and saying the people behind them "support violence and the abuse of children." This is a direct denunciation of the regulation and its supporters.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this legislation," which directly states approval of the regulation. They also justify support by saying students deserve "a safe and supportive environment" and that this includes "recognizing who they are."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support!" and argues that "Trans rights need to be supported," indicating clear approval of the proposed policies. The comment frames the regulation as important for protecting transgender identities and health, not opposing or questioning it.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and argues that "Trans rights are Human rights" and that trans kids deserve acceptance and a "safe school experience." This clearly endorses adopting the regulation.


This is the institutional sexual abuse of children.

The commenter explicitly condemns the policy as "the institutional sexual abuse of children," which is a strong rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The language indicates they want the regulation rejected rather than adopted.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly OPPOSE VDOE Transgender Policy" and argues it "infringes on Parental Rights" and promotes a "politically motivated and abusive agenda." The final question is rhetorical and clearly frames the policy as harmful and undeserving of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the guidance," which directly endorses adoption. The additional statement, "We are all equal and worthy of the same dignity and respect," reinforces approval of the policy's inclusive intent.


Oppose “Model Policy on Treatment of Transgender Students"

The comment explicitly says, "Oppose 'Model Policy on Treatment of Transgender Students'," which directly states the writer's position. There is no additional nuance or qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality.


Strong support - ALL children should feel safe!

The commenter explicitly says "Strong support" and thanks the agency for "looking out for our most vulnerable children," which clearly endorses the regulation. The statement that "All children deserve to feel safe and respected at school" aligns with the policy's goals.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and argues that "gender affirmation and support from family and community is life saving for trans youth and adults." They also frame the policy as "the moral approach" and "good and common sense public health policy," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose," which directly states their position on the regulation. They also describe it as "an over reach of the public school system" and say it would "distance children from parents," indicating rejection of the policy's approach.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy’s underlying purpose by stating, "Trans rights are human rights," and adds that "trans kids need more protection than ever." This indicates clear support for adopting the regulation and its protections for transgender students.


Draft model policies for treatment of transgender students

The commenter says, "I am strongly opposed to any policies" and objects to policies that would "allow personal preferences to determine their sex." This clearly rejects the proposed transgender student policies rather than supporting them with changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am in complete support of this document" and argues that people "should be allowed to express their gender." The rest of the comment defends the policy against religious objections and ends with "Thank you," reinforcing clear approval.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy’s bathroom provisions, saying their daughter will "NOT share a bathroom with boys, transgender or not" and demanding, "Build a separate bathroom!" They also state their children will leave school early if the school cannot accommodate this, indicating opposition to the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Oppose" and argues the policy will "lead to the harassment and bullying of religious students" and be used to "force religious students to violate the teachings of their faith." They also raise objections to the lack of proof of transgender status and question how schools would handle sports participation, indicating rejection rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly states, "Strongly oppose" and repeats, "I am strongly opposed to this," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting arguments or qualifications are provided.


The commenter explicitly says "SUPPORT 100%" and urges the state to "Protect children. All children" while asking to "Make this your step forward," which clearly endorses the regulation. The language frames the policy as a way to keep students safe and supported.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and argues that "Trans rights are human rights" and that schools should not exclude trans students. This clearly endorses adoption of the regulation as a means of inclusion and protection.


The commenter explicitly says they are "Strongly Opposed" and argues against the policy as "ridiculous nonsense" that would "completely re-shape the rest of society." They also object to teacher requirements around pronouns and say they do not believe this group should receive "special treatment."


I think we should destroy all gender locker-rooms.

The commenter explicitly says, "We need to rewrite this bill to create one set of locker rooms," which indicates support for changing the policy in a way that expands access and reduces sex-segregated facilities. Although the opening line says "destroy all gender locker-rooms," the overall argument favors the regulation's transgender-inclusive direction rather than opposing it.


The commenter rejects the premise of the transgender student policies, stating "There is no confusion!" and invoking religious doctrine instead of supporting the regulation. The phrase "Bring back the 10 Commandments" suggests opposition to the policy and a preference for a different moral framework.


Child Abuse,  promoting sex trafficking and perversion!!!

The commenter clearly rejects the policy, calling it "Child Abuse" and accusing it of "promoting sex trafficking and perversion." They also say they will take it to the senate to fund alternatives, indicating they want the regulation rejected rather than adopted.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose this policy" and argues that the change would "seriously harm the religious and privacy rights" of children, parents, and employees. They also state that parents, not the state, have primary responsibility, indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter says they are "Very opposed to this policy" and objects to "not allowing male and female bathrooms." They also argue it would be a "safety issue for our children," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Most strongly opposed to this measure" and repeatedly argues against the policy, calling it "pandering nonsense" and saying schools should "leave matters of sexuality to parents." They object to bathroom/shower access and to recognizing transgender students' identities, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


I STRONGLY SUPPORT. Trans rights are human rights, and all children should be protected at school!

The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY SUPPORT" and "I fully support this policy!" They also endorse the policy’s goals of protecting students from "discrimination or bullying" and ensuring they can get an education safely.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this guidance" and argues it should not be implemented school-wide yet, stating it "needs more thinking and consideration before implementing." The suggestion to limit it only to students "classified as such by a doctor" also indicates rejection of the proposed policy as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I very much strongly disagree with this bill," indicating clear opposition to adoption. They argue that schools should not provide this guidance and invoke religious beliefs to reject the policy, saying "The Bible teaches that there are only 2 sexes."


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support addressing the needs of our transgender students," which clearly endorses the regulation. The statement that "All children should be treated with dignity and respect" reinforces approval of the policy's purpose.


Trans Students Matter and Should Be Treated With Respect

The commenter explicitly endorses protections for transgender students, saying legislation that "protects them and supports them" will help students and that schools should be "accepting and protecting the rights of trans minors." The comment argues against discrimination and in favor of the policy's purpose.


Highly Opposed- Please Reconsider ALL Students and Educators

The commenter says they are "highly opposed to the proposed policies" and repeatedly urges the panel to "reconsider" them. They argue the policies do not represent "ALL students," create safety risks, and conflict with their Christian beliefs and educator rights.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT!!! PROTECT TRANS YOUTH!!!" and states that "protections like these in school are essential for human rights." They also argue the policy is needed to support marginalized trans students and reduce bullying and violence.


Oppose bullying & loss of women's rights

The commenter explicitly says the policy "reflects flawed policies" and that trying to "eliminate gender-based activities is also wrong-headed," which indicates opposition to the regulation. Although they support respect for trans and cisgender kids and oppose bullying, the overall thrust is against the model policy as written.


The commenter explicitly labels the comment "Strongly Support" and adds "Protect trans kids," which clearly endorses the proposed transgender student policies. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy: "Absolutely not" and "I am completely against this petition." They object to transgender accommodations in bathrooms, sports, and dress codes, saying it is "against the bible" and "non Christian."


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this policy" and asks, "Do not take away the rights" of students, indicating rejection of the regulation. The reasons given focus on restroom/changing room privacy and "fair competition in sports," which are objections to the policy's treatment of transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose New Transgender Guidelines," which directly states opposition to the regulation. The body reinforces this by claiming the guidance "destroys the safety of young children," indicating a negative view of adoption.


The commenter explicitly endorses respecting gender identity and says that accepting trans people "strengthen[s] the protections of everyone." They also reference research on transgender health effects and provide a supporting citation, indicating approval of the proposed policies rather than opposition.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose VDOE proposed transgender policy" and argues the policy "would be detrimental" and "I would resign immediately" if passed. This is a clear rejection of adoption rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and states that the policies "go a long way in ensuring schools remain a safe environment for all people." They also argue that failing to pass the document "would send the wrong message," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The comment explicitly says "STRONGLY APPOSED!" twice, which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting or neutral language appears.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed!" and calls the policy "highly unethical." They object to being "forced to share restroom/locker room spaces" with transgender students, indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this policy" and thanks the agency for bringing it forward. They also frame the policy as promoting "equity" and "equality for all," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Strongly Strongly Oppose" and argues that schools "should not infringe" parental rights. The comment rejects the policy’s privacy/confidentiality approach, especially the idea that schools should not disclose a student’s gender identity to parents.


The commenter explicitly says "strongly support!" and argues that "trans rights are human rights" and that "everyone deserves to be able to receive equitable treatment in school." They also endorse creating "spaces in school for them to feel safe," which aligns with adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I could not be more opposed to this issue," and argues against allowing transgender students to question or change their identity. They also object to "the opposite gender in bathrooms and locker rooms," indicating rejection of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the inclusion of transgender inclusive policies in our public schools." They also urge action to "accept[] and protect[] all students," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


The comment explicitly says "STRONGLY APPOSED!!!" and provides no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality. This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this common sense legislation" and closes with "Please pass this legislation." They also praise it as using "best practices" to create a "positive inclusive learning experience" and to protect students of "all gender identities."


The commenter says, "The schools should not teach and decide for the students" and "It should not be taught in schools," which clearly rejects the proposed transgender student policies. They also emphasize parental control over school guidance, indicating opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues that "the less regulation we have in our schools from the government the better," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The statement "I also oppose this morally" reinforces opposition rather than offering a neutral or supportive view.


Thank you so much for looking out for Transrights!

The commenter explicitly asks policymakers to "be kind and considerate" and to "Protect our trans youth," which clearly supports adopting the regulation. The request to prevent students from being "ostracized or bullied" aligns with the policy’s goals of support and anti-discrimination.


Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender

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


The commenter explicitly endorses equal treatment for transgender students and says public schools should ensure they are not subjected to bullying or discrimination. Phrases like "Transgender rights are human rights" and "We need to allow students to be their most authentic selves" indicate clear support for the regulation's purpose.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please do not approve this," which directly rejects the regulation. The rest of the comment argues against transgender identity, stating there are "no alternatives" and that choosing otherwise is "going against yourself," reinforcing opposition.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support this" and repeats it, indicating clear approval of the proposed regulation. No contrary language or qualifications are present.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose" and argues the school should "stop bringing this into the classroom" and "stay in your lane," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The comment frames the regulation as inappropriate school intervention in family matters rather than support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am totally opposed to this policy," and argues against schools teaching "alternate choices of gender." They also object to shared facilities, warning that mixed-gender bathrooms and locker rooms would be "a dangerous situation."


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE!" and repeatedly asks "Please do not do this." They argue the policy would be unsafe in bathrooms/locker rooms and harmful to "women's sports," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy as a "travesty" and says to "stop brainwashing our kids," indicating they want the regulation rejected. They also object to transgender students participating in activities and facilities, calling the policy "insane" and "beyond evil."


Strongly support policies that ensure the rights of all youth

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this guidance" and argues it will "protect transgender students" and create "a safe environment to learn and grow." They also state it can "positively impact the mental health of trans youth," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the model policy." They also give a reason aligned with adoption: "All students need to feel safe and be free from discrimination and bullying at school."


The commenter explicitly says, "I absolutely disagree with this legislation" and "Please don't pass this," which clearly opposes adoption. The phrase "It is sick and it is crazy" reinforces rejection of the proposed policy.


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


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with the title "Absolutely NO" and says "My children will not go to public schools if this is passed," indicating they do not want it adopted. They argue it will "do harm to all CHILDREN" and "opens the door for sexual assault," which is a clear call against the regulation.


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 says, "I strongly support this legislation," which directly endorses adoption of the policy. The statement "Trans rights are human rights" and "by protecting trans kids we protect all kids" further indicate affirmative support for the regulation's goals.


The commenter explicitly states, "I oppose the transgender bill" and repeats, "I opposed this bill," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting or neutral language is present.


OPPOSE- Pitting kids against parents is not helping them.  Help struggling kids, include parents

The commenter explicitly labels the submission "OPPOSE" and argues against "secrecy from parents" and policies that would "take parents out of the debate." The comment rejects the regulation’s approach to transgender student privacy and parental notification, indicating opposition to adoption.


The comment explicitly rejects the proposal with "No thank you," which indicates the commenter does not want the regulation adopted. The title "No" reinforces the negative position, though no substantive reasons are provided.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support!!!" and endorses the guidance because "Trans and non-binary students deserve and need the measures outlined in this guidance." They also state that students should not feel discriminated against and should feel safe at school, which aligns with adoption of the regulation.


STRONGLY AGREE TRANS RIGHTS ARE HUMAN RIGHTS!

The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY AGREE" and urges, "RESPECT AND PROTECT DO NOT ALLOW DISCRIMINATION AGAINST TRANSGENDER STUDENTS," which clearly supports adopting the policy. The body also frames transgender rights as something to be protected, reinforcing approval of the regulation's purpose.


The commenter explicitly titles the post "Opposed to trans gender special treatment" and repeatedly argues against "special treatment" and "accommodations" for transgender students. They also object to bathroom access and say schools should not make such accommodations, indicating opposition to the proposed policies.


The comment explicitly says "Support" and adds "Support our transgender community," which clearly endorses the regulation. The request "Gender pronouns please" is consistent with backing transgender-inclusive policies rather than opposing them.


The comment states "absolutely not" twice and provides no supportive language, indicating clear rejection of the proposed regulation. There is no question or neutral information, only a blunt refusal.


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


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues the policy is a "violation of freedom of speech" and "freedom of religion." They also object that there are "no accommodations for families who do not want to participate," indicating rejection of the regulation.


Strongly support — Trans rights are human rights.

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and frames the policy as protecting "Trans children." The rhetorical question about treating others well reinforces approval of the regulation’s goals rather than opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I don’t agree that this law is necessary" and argues that existing anti-bullying laws already cover the issue. They also question bathroom and locker room access and say there needs to be "more discussion and research" before changing sex-based separation policies, indicating opposition to adoption as written.


The commenter explicitly calls the policy a "gross overreach" and says it "will not end well," indicating clear opposition to adoption. They also argue it is "forcing transgender agendas on the education system" and raise objections about "compelling speach" and enforcement.


The commenter argues against educators handling transgender-related decisions and says parents should be the ones "making the calls here," implying opposition to the policy’s school involvement. The rhetorical questions about whether it is a "good idea" for educators to assist and the emphasis on parental authority indicate a desire to reject or substantially weaken the regulation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying it "should never happen" and asking why it is being considered at all. They argue it is against "what the Bible stands for" and call it something "the left is trying to push through," which clearly opposes adoption.


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

The comment states "strongly disagree" in response to the proposed model policies, which clearly indicates opposition to adoption. No supporting reasons or requests for modification are provided, but the stance is unambiguous.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support Trans Lives" and argues that schools should "support all of its students" and "Advocating for and loving our youth... saves lives." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying "Stop being twisted and perverted" and "Don't make the majority of people accept warped people." This is a clear call against adopting the transgender student policies.


Socially constructed perverted Cult based on lies has no place in grade schools

The commenter strongly rejects the proposed transgender student policies, calling them an "EVIL agenda" and saying they have "no place in grade schools." They argue the policies endanger girls' privacy and safety and repeatedly frame the guidance as harmful and deceptive, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, writing "No on Transgender in Schools" and stating "I do not believe it is right for children to be exposed to transgenderism." They argue the regulation is "dangerous" and urge officials to "listen to those voicing opposition to this," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "I STRONGLY OPPOSE this" and argues there is "no need for this" policy. They also reject transgender inclusion in sports and restrooms, saying "I do not want my tax dollars being used for this" and "better not be allowed in womans restroom."


The commenter explicitly says, "Please don't do this! This is wrong!" and asks that the policy not be adopted. They argue it will "only create potential for strained or ruined relationships" rather than help students, indicating clear opposition to the regulation.


I have a grandchild who has been diagnosed as transgender.

The commenter asks the agency to "put you selves in their position" and to "help her sustain her successful life," which clearly supports policies accommodating the grandchild's transgender identity. The overall message is sympathetic to transgender students and does not request weakening or rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this" and endorses "any effort to create safe and inclusive spaces for trans students in Virginia public schools." This is a clear approval of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I whole heartedly oppose this new policy" and repeatedly urges, "Please don’t force us" to accept it. They argue the policy is "dangerous," "absurd and disgusting," and should not be normalized, which clearly indicates opposition to adoption.


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


Just get back to teaching and stay out of politics!

The commenter explicitly says "This has to stop" and "keep politics out of the schools," indicating opposition to the proposed transgender student policies. The reference to "immoral agendas" and rejecting children being required to be "accepting of their choice" further shows they want the regulation rejected or not implemented.


Strongly support! Support and protect trans kids!

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support!" and repeats "Support and protect trans kids!" indicating clear approval of the proposed policies. The final sentence, "Let's at least eliminate some bigotry at school," further shows support for the regulation's anti-discrimination goals.


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


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


This proposal is unconscionable. It would put children at risk for abuse and I strongly object.

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose it," and frames the proposal as harmful: "It would put children at risk for abuse." The language "divisive and evil" further indicates rejection of the regulation.


Trans Youth Deserve Better Treatment and Protections.

The commenter explicitly asks to "grant rights to fair treatment and allow for anti-discrimination policies in public schools," which aligns with adopting the proposed protections. They also argue that school should be a "safe haven for trans youth," indicating clear support for the regulation's purpose.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Disapprove" and argues against "special rules and policies" for transgender students. They also say "Get away from our kids!" and claim the policy is meant to "brainwash young children," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


I STRONGLY support transgender students.

The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY support transgender students" and repeats, "I strongly support transgender students in our schools." This is a clear endorsement of the regulation’s purpose and treatment of transgender students.


Gender is set at birth! No to transgender propaganda!

The commenter explicitly says, "Please do not allow transgender individuals in the school system" and "No to transgender propaganda!" which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The sports and child-confusion arguments are presented as reasons to oppose adoption rather than to modify it.


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "Strongly Opposed" and says "this is harmful to ALL kids, teachers and parents," which clearly rejects adoption of the regulation. No supportive or neutral language appears.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the language in this document" and "I oppose other parts of this document as well." They object to specific provisions on "preferred pronouns" and "preferred language among students and their parents," arguing the policy is too broad and harmful.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this measure" and describes the policies as "common sense". They also frame opposition as equivalent to allowing children to be "bullied or excluded," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly back legislation which supports our transgender students in Virginia" and repeatedly argues that "Transgender inclusion is key" to a safer, more welcoming environment. The comment endorses specific elements of the policy such as pronouns, inclusive curriculum, affirming facilities, and supportive counselors.


Strongly opposed!!  VA proposed model of transgender student policies.

The commenter explicitly says "OPPOSED!!!" and refers to the policy as an "abomination," indicating clear rejection of the regulation. The biblical reference is used as a reason for opposition rather than a request for changes or a neutral observation.


The commenter explicitly urges approval of the policy, saying "Protect trans kids" and "Support trans lives!" They also ask to "Do the right thing!" and advocate for equal rights and access, which clearly aligns with supporting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the model policies" and repeats that "This document needs revision." They argue the policies infringe on "girls'" privacy, "women’s sports," "conscience rights," and parental authority, concluding that "Kids don’t belong to the state."


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "OPPOSED" and describes it as "a direct attack on the traditional, nuclear stable family" and "an attack on schools," indicating rejection of the regulation. There is no language suggesting support or a request for modification.


Full Support - Protect and Support All Children

The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Full Support" and argues that "All people deserve protection from discrimination." They also endorse providing "proper education and resources" for transgender people, which aligns with adopting the regulation.


The commenter rejects the policy outright, opening with the title "No" and questioning whether the regulation creates an "enriched and adequate environment for education." The comment argues for "real boys and girls" and asks whether the policy is "discrimination or disinformation," indicating opposition to transgender-inclusive guidance.


I vehemently oppose!  This is child abuse and denies science.

The commenter explicitly says, "I vehemently oppose" and "I vehemently disagree with these 'transgender' rules," then urges officials to "decline these new rules." The comment argues the policy is harmful and calls it "child abuse" and a "travesty," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support these model policies" and reiterates that "All children have a right to learn, free from discrimination and harassment." They further clarify inclusion by stating "ALL children, including transgender students," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this transgender policy!" and calls it "child abuse," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. The phrase "anyone who supports this is complicit" further reinforces opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this bill," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. The title also reinforces this position by stating "Strongly support codifying protections for transgender."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed!" and argues against the policy by claiming it would let boys access girls' locker rooms. The comment is clearly rejecting the regulation rather than supporting it with changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support trans students" and endorses "access to equitable education and an environment free from bullies," which aligns with adopting the proposed policies. There is no language opposing or questioning the regulation.


The comment explicitly says "STRONGLY DISAGREE," which clearly indicates opposition to the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided, but the stance itself is unambiguous.


The commenter explicitly says they are "1000% opposed and against this policy" and repeatedly argues it should not be adopted, calling it "completely insane" and predicting "mass chaos and confusion." They also object to specific provisions like locker room access and pronoun use, indicating clear opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly objects to the policy, saying “don’t punish and restrict everyone else cause of it” and criticizing “special privileges” for transgender students. The phrase “Don’t shove your beliefs down others throats!!” further indicates rejection of the regulation rather than support or neutrality.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the proposition," which directly states opposition to the regulation. The additional claim that it will "start in schools and then move to churches" and "can ruin kids lives" reinforces a negative position rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "Support" and "We need to support our transgender students," which clearly endorses the regulation. The phrase "This is a step in the right directions" further indicates approval of the policy.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and states the policies "should absolutely be adopted ASAP." They also describe the guidance as "common sense practices" that help students and school divisions, indicating clear approval of adoption.


TRANS PEOPLE ARE HUMAN BEINGS! TREAT THEM AS SUCH! SUPPORT !!!!!

The commenter explicitly says "SUPPORT !!!!!" and "STRONGEST SUPPORT POSSIBLE!!!" in favor of the policy. They also criticize those opposing transgender inclusion, indicating clear approval of the regulation's purpose and protections for trans students.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSED!!!!" and "I will not go along with this," indicating clear rejection of the proposed policies. They also argue it "puts our kids in danger" and say their children will not attend public schools if it is allowed, which reinforces opposition.


The commenter says "a specific document is not needed" and that the writers should not "force this on children and families," which clearly rejects the proposed policy. They also argue existing bullying policies are sufficient and that the guidance is not appropriate for schools beyond being "an informative peice."


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, writing "Absolutely Not" and "Our family strongly disagrees with this action." This is a clear opposition to adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly in support of trans kids" and urges, "Protect trans kids," which clearly endorses the regulation’s protective purpose. There is no language opposing or questioning the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am in full support" and thanks the authors for "these thoughtful guidelines." They also state the policies will "support our Transgender and LGBTQ youth," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The comment opens with "Absolutely not," which strongly rejects the proposed policies. The rest of the comment emphasizes privacy and not wanting others to "force my views on others," suggesting opposition to the regulation’s treatment of transgender students and related school practices.


We must stop believing the LIES of that old serpent the devil. People are NOT transgender.

The commenter explicitly says to "vote vehemently against any legislation" that would "confuse and misguide" children, which directly rejects the proposed transgender student policies. The body also argues that "People are NOT transgender" and frames the regulation as morally wrong, reinforcing opposition.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and demands "Stop this nonsense immediately," which clearly rejects the regulation. The statement that transitioning a child is "absolutely child abuse" shows opposition to the policy's underlying treatment of transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "strongly oppose bathroom choice in Virginia," which clearly rejects a key part of the proposed transgender student policies. The title, "Oppose Gender Bathroom Choice- Strongly oppose," reinforces that they want this aspect of the regulation rejected.


The commenter explicitly says "strongly oppose" and characterizes the policy as "child abuse," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. There is no language suggesting support or neutrality.


This is radical social engineering and will hurt vulnerable kids

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy as "radical social engineering" and says it is "wrong," arguing that it would "force an agenda on everyone." This is a clear call against adopting the guidelines rather than a request for modification.


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


The commenter explicitly says they are in "strong support" and argues that schools should provide "a welcoming and safe environment for all students." They further endorse the policy’s purpose by stating that protecting trans students "literally saves lives" and expressing hope for Virginia schools to "do better for our trans and nonbinary students."


The commenter explicitly says, "Absolutely oppose" and "I am definitely against this," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. The question "What is happening in Virginia?" reinforces disapproval rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter criticizes the document’s framing, saying the terminology is "full of terms defined in the light of gender identity being separate from birth sex" and that the authors have "already chosen a side." This indicates opposition to the regulation as written rather than a neutral request for information.


OPPOSED!  Same as the abomination of desolation spoken in the temple of Jerusalem by Daniel

The commenter explicitly says "OPPOSED!" and "Opposed to VA proposal model of transgender student policies," which clearly rejects the regulation. The religious reference reinforces disapproval rather than support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly calls the policy "reckless" and asks, "Please put policies in place" that keep children comfortable in their birth sex instead of accepting transgender students. They object to restroom/locker room access and say "accepting them is not the way to do it," indicating clear opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly states "Strongly Opposed" and repeats "NO! NO! NO!", which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and "Do not support," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No qualifying language suggests support or neutrality.


Girls privacy isn’t yours to give away and Boys don’t have penis by accident

The commenter uses explicitly hostile language toward the policy, calling it a "CULT" and "LIES," and says it "should scare the hell out of everyone." The statement that it is "criminal" indicates they want the regulation rejected or viewed as harmful.


The commenter explicitly says they "strongly support these model policies" and describes the guidance as "sensible policy updates" that would benefit transgender students. They also state that implementing the guidance is "a step in the right direction," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and urges, "Stop with this nonsense." They object to transgender students using female restrooms, locker rooms, and sports, calling the policy "dangerous" and "abusive."


The commenter explicitly urges stronger protections for transgender students, saying "We have to do everything we can to increase basic human protections and rights" and that "Trans children are entitled to feel safe and respected." They condemn exclusionary policies as "despicable," indicating clear support for adopting the regulation.


SAFETY? SUPPORT? SECRECY? EVIDENCE-BASED??  LEGAL???

The commenter explicitly says the proposal is "not worthy of anything but rejection" and repeatedly argues it "tramples on the rights" of students. They also criticize it as unsafe, illegal, and lacking evidence, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


Opposed: It's non-inclusive to people of faith and will aid bullies and predators

The commenter explicitly says, "Please don't approve this proposal" and repeatedly argues it is "too subjective" and would "aid bullies and predators." They frame the policy as harmful to people of faith and unsafe for students, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


Strong Agreement - nobody cares where you go

The commenter explicitly says they "strongly believe" students should be able to use the bathroom they are most comfortable using, which aligns with supporting the proposed transgender student policies. They also endorse inclusive bathroom policies and argue they do not harm safety, indicating approval rather than opposition.


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "Strongly Oppose" and repeatedly argues against it, calling it "wasting taxpayer money" and saying "This legislation will not provide equity for all students." They also state that schools are not the place for gender identity issues and warn it would put cisgender students at risk and undermine staff authority.


The commenter explicitly says "Fully Support the Protection of Trans Children’s Rights" and argues that transgender children are "deserving of the same protections and rights that every other child receives." They also state that the policy "is needed and necessary now more than ever," indicating clear support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues the policy is "confusing to kids" and "unsafe for girls," indicating rejection of the regulation. The question about whether schools have time to deal with resulting problems further shows opposition rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly rejects the proposal multiple times, saying "Absolutely NOT. NO" and "I do not want these polices to be put into place." They also state they will "do everything in my power to prevent this from happening," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed" and calls the policy "an enormous overreach". They also argue it is "dangerous for children," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this initiative for trans and gender non-conforming students." This is a clear endorsement of the guidance as proposed.


The commenter explicitly says to "Stop" the policies and calls them "an abject abrogation of duty" and "ridiculous," indicating clear opposition to adoption. They also argue the document would be harmful and should not be implemented in schools.


The commenter explicitly says "Strong support" and asks the Virginia Department of Education to "protect transgender kids." They also endorse affirming treatment, saying "we need to protect them and celebrate them," which clearly supports adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this policy," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. The title "In Support" reinforces that the comment is favorable and not requesting rejection or weakening.


Middle School Science Teacher who Strongly Supports

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Supports" in the title and states "Supporting trans kids saves lives," which clearly endorses adoption of the policy. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


Parent of 3  and former PTA president at two schools, I strongly support these recommendations

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support these recommendations" and argues that the policies help "all students" feel safe and able to learn. They also criticize opposition to the policies, comparing it to resistance to school integration, which reinforces clear support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly argues that the "Model Policies are flawed" and says they "violate" parents' fundamental rights. The comment repeatedly criticizes the policies for allowing social transition without parental notice or consent and for permitting transgender-inclusive school practices, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this" and repeatedly argues the policy should not be adopted, urging schools to "Teach my kids academics and nothing else." They frame the policy as "indoctrination" and raise objections about safety and parental authority, indicating clear rejection rather than a request for modification.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and instructs to "Vote \"NO\"", which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting or neutral language is present.


Strongly oppose the Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students

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


The commenter says they are in "strong support of measures to uplift and protect trans kids" and explicitly endorses the policy goals. They also frame the regulation as important for "suicide and transphobic violence prevention," which indicates approval of adoption.


The commenter clearly rejects the policy, calling it "absolutely twisted," "very disgusting," and "Sickening," and asks, "How is this even being considered?" They argue it causes confusion and takes away one child's rights to give another more rights, which indicates opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly asks to "help protect our growing trans student population" and says they "deserve" equal opportunities, which clearly endorses the proposed transgender student policies. The comment expresses support for the regulation’s goals rather than opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly urges advocacy for trans rights and says, "It’s essential to protect them everywhere" and "We must protect our youth." The closing statement, "Trans rights are human rights," clearly supports adopting the policy’s protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this guidance and policy" and argues it will "make schools safer for transgender youth." They also frame it as extending nondiscrimination protections to transgender students and ask policymakers not to heed opposition.


The commenter explicitly says "Fully support" and argues that "Transgender children should be treated equally," which clearly endorses adoption of the policy. The statement also supports allowing children "to be who they want to be," indicating approval of the regulation's purpose.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly support!" and adds, "I am in full support of any legislation to promote the health and wellbeing of trans youth." This clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


Strongly oppose. Stop abusing the children.

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose," which directly states rejection of the proposed regulation. The phrase "Stop abusing the children" adds a hostile objection to the policy, reinforcing opposition.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support!" and argues that "there is protection for trans, non-binary and gender non-conforming students in Virginia." They further endorse the policy goal of creating "a safe and affirming environment" and a "truly inclusive school environment."


The commenter says they are "wholeheartedly opposed to these regulations" and repeatedly argues against them as "harmful to children" and a threat to parental authority. They also object to bathroom and locker room access, calling it "alarming for the safety particularly of girls," which shows clear opposition to the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly approve of these protections" and describes the policies as "life-changing and, quite literally, life-saving" for trans students. They also affirm that "All students deserve to have themselves and their identities respected," indicating clear support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose" and calls the policy "disastrous for children," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. There is no supporting language or request for modification, only opposition.


Policy reaches beyond protections for discrimination.

The commenter explicitly says the policies "reach far beyond such respect and acceptance" and calls them "a complete overreach." They argue the policy is problematic for redefining gender, hiding information from parents, and placing girls in traumatic situations, all of which indicate opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and states that "This proposal will create a safer and healthier learning environment" and that "It is time for Virginia to support and protect transgender students." These phrases clearly endorse adoption of the regulation.


Support protecting some of our most vulnerable youth!

The commenter explicitly says they "wholeheartedly endorse" the proposal and asks for the department's "approval of this proposal." They repeatedly frame it as beneficial and say it will "make such a tremendous and wonderful difference in trans students' lives."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support - protect trans children!" and repeatedly endorses the policy goals, including "giving kids a safe space to be themselves should be a priority in schools." The comment argues for affirming transgender students and does not express any opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the model policy protecting transgender students" and "Strongly Support." They also frame the policy as protecting "human rights, freedoms and safety" for transgender people, indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says the policy is "in direct conflict" with women's rights and argues it creates "inevitable and avoidable dangers," concluding that Virginia should "rework this policy". Although they acknowledge it is "well intentioned" and support private spaces for harassed students, the overall position is to reject or substantially change the regulation.


The commenter urges the state to be "extremely cautious before making widespread changes in policy" and argues against key elements of the guidance, saying "biological females and males should not share locker rooms or bathrooms" and that students may not change names/genders freely. Although the comment opens with appreciation for caring for transgender students, the overall message is to weaken or reject the policy as written.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and argues that students "receive our acceptance and support." As a middle school teacher, they frame the policy as important for students' identity development and well-being, indicating clear approval of the regulation.


STRONGLY SUPPORT! Trans people are still people! [PLEASE READ.]

The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT!" and repeatedly urges acceptance of transgender identities, including "Let people be whatever they think their gender is." The comment frames the policy as necessary to prevent harm and "transphobia," indicating clear approval of the regulation's goals.


The commenter explicitly says "*Strongly* support!" and urges officials to "make the extra effort to ensure trans people feel accepted." The rest of the comment defends transgender students and argues they "deserve the right to exist freely and safely," indicating clear approval of the regulation's purpose.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this wholeheartedly" and frames the policy as necessary to "create a safe and nurturing environment" for trans youth. The comment advocates for "protecting trans youth" and treating them with "dignity and equity," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this" and repeatedly argues for protecting transgender students. They condemn opposition as "bigotry" and conclude with "Protect trans kids forever," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


CHILD ABUSE—STOP THE GOVT INTRUSIONS!  THIS IS THE PARENTS’ BUSINESS

The commenter explicitly rejects government involvement, saying "STOP THE GOVT INTRUSIONS" and "LEAVE THE KIDS ALONE," which indicates opposition to the proposed transgender student policies. The title "THIS IS THE PARENTS’ BUSINESS" further signals that they do not want the regulation adopted.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose VDOE Transgender Policies" and argues that schools should not "help" students explore gender/sexual identity. They also say the policies "promote a totally false view of sexuality" and should not change rules for the majority to accommodate a minority, indicating rejection of the regulation.


Fully support this for the safety and well-being of all children

The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this," which directly endorses adoption of the policy. The stated reason, "for the safety and well-being of all children," reinforces approval rather than criticism or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSED" and argues against the policy's self-identification provisions, stating it is "not safe or fair" and that sports classification should be based on "biological gender." The comment clearly rejects the regulation as written rather than supporting it with changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "I stand in full support of legislation to protect the health and well being of Transgender youth in Virginia schools." They further argue that policies "must be implemented" to help transgender students "grow and thrive," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "Of course I support!" and argues that "trans people have the right to feel safe in their environment." They also reject opposition based on religion and call for "inclusivity," indicating clear support for adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says the proposal is "destructive and harmful" and twice asks to "Please reject these policies." They also state they have "no plans or intentions of cooperating" with the proposal, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


Strongly Support as a long overdue next step in civil rights and protections

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this movement" and calls the legislation "long overdue." They frame the policy as necessary for "civil rights and protections" and for helping trans students attend school "safely and comfortably."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose this bad policy!" and repeatedly urges officials to "Back off" and not persist with it. They argue the policy is "stupid" and an "agenda," and threaten withdrawal from public schools if it is adopted.


The commenter clearly rejects the policy, calling it a "Transgender mess" and saying "I, for one, do not want" a transgender student using the same bathroom. The comment also argues the policy would worsen safety and invokes a religious objection: "Give him some testosterone to help him be what God made him."


The commenter explicitly says, "STRONGLY SUPPORT!!!!" and repeats, "I STRONGLY SUPPORT THIS," which clearly indicates approval of the regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this guidance," which directly endorses adoption. They also justify it by saying it will make schools "safer, nondiscriminatory places for all students," indicating approval of the regulation's purpose and effects.


The commenter explicitly expresses "Immense support for Trans Students" and ends with "Support trans students." They also endorse core elements of the policy such as bathroom access and preferred name/pronoun use, indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy, saying it is "LONG overdue" and that "Putting policies in place for transgender individuals" is necessary. They frame it as "HUMAN RIGHTS" and reject opposition to it, indicating clear support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this guidance document" and states it will "protect trans and queer students in Virginia." They also affirm the policy goal by saying transgender students "deserve to be treated with respect and dignity."


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this" and gives multiple reasons against the policy, including "Religious views," concern about "my children possibly being exposed to the opposite sex at an inappropriate age," and the belief that schools should "stick to teaching the essentials." The comment also rejects transgender inclusion in sex-specific education by arguing that "men and women's bodily functions are different and that's the way God intended it to be."


The commenter explicitly says "Vehemently Oppose!" and repeatedly argues against the policy as "ABSURD," "absolutely nuts," and a threat to parental rights. They object to "preferred pronouns," privacy provisions, and any implication that parents could be reported for abuse, all of which shows clear opposition to adoption of the regulation.


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


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and urges the policy to "Protect trans kids from bullying and abuse." They further state that "This guidance could literally save lives," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly labels the comment "Oppose" and argues to "wait" before allowing changes, saying children's lives should not be "altered" until they are older. The reference to regret/change-of-mind statistics and comparisons to driving and voting indicate opposition to the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says "OPPOSED STRONGLY" and calls the policy "DISCRIMINATION," indicating clear rejection of the regulation. The statement "WE MUST HAVE FREEDOM TO TEACH OUR CHILDREN THE VALUES WE CHOOSE" argues against the policy on parental/religious grounds rather than supporting adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I'm writing to support protections for transgender and non-binary students in all of Virginia's public schools." They also state that these protections will "help facilitate a positive learning environment for everyone," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Highly oppose!!" and states "I feel allowing transgender in our public schools shouldnt be acceptable." They also reject transgender identity as "a form of abuse" and argue against allowing children to make this choice, indicating clear opposition to the regulation.


Every student should have a right to a safe and supportive environment at school.

The commenter explicitly says, "I support this," and the title endorses the policy goal of a "safe and supportive environment at school." There is no indication of opposition or qualification.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and adds that they "support any policy which would offer them protection." This clearly endorses adoption of the regulation as a protective measure for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the model guidelines" and urges lawmakers to "ensure these protections" for transgender and non-binary students. This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation as proposed.