Adamantly against Model Policies/Transgender Students

The commenter explicitly says, "Please DO NOT implement your Model Policies" and repeatedly argues the state is "overreaching" and that the policies should not be adopted. They object to parental notification, transgender student accommodations, and bathroom/locker room access, indicating clear opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly asks, "Please do not disregard the rights of parents" and argues that parents "must have the final say as to what their children are taught," which indicates opposition to the proposed transgender student policies. The reference to government removing this parental role as "tyranny" further shows rejection of the regulation.


Support This Bill "Treatment of Trans Students in Virginia Schools"

The commenter explicitly says, "I am in full support of this bill" and calls it "a critically important bill" to affirm transgender students' "right to safety and inclusion." The rest of the comment reinforces approval and urges condemnation of opposition efforts.


The commenter explicitly says, "I urge support of HB 145 and SB 161" and repeats, "Please support these two bills." The comment argues the policies should extend protections for trans children and be used to protect them from discrimination and hate.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Strongly Oppose" and says "This is an overreach of government." They also argue the policy "is infringing on the rights of children who are not transgender," indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support for it.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and repeats that they are "strongly oppose to this forum." They argue the policy is inappropriate for schools and say "there has to be a better way to handle this," indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support for it.


Supporting transgender and gender nonconforming youth

The commenter explicitly says, "I support all efforts to make Arlington and va schools trans friendly and supportive" and asks Virginia to "step up to support trans and gender nonconforming youth." Although they describe negative experiences with current policies, the overall position is clearly in favor of adopting supportive transgender student policies.


The commenter says they are "STRONGLY opposed" to schools teaching "any of this" to elementary and middle school children, and frames the policy as "indoctrinate"-ing children. They also argue the school should not help a child "figure out their identity," indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support with changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am writing to express my support" for the guidance and praises "creating inclusive learning environments for transgender and non-binary youth." They also argue it should be "our common goal" and describe the policy as promoting safety, respect, and better outcomes.


The commenter explicitly says, "I believe it is essential for school to be a safe place for all students" and calls the guidance "an important step towards not only protecting and supporting LGBTQ students." The title also states "In support of the guidance," making the pro-adoption position clear.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support" and repeats that "ALL our kids have a right to a safe education." This clearly endorses adoption of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says they are "Strongly Support" the guidance and "deeply encourage the Virginia General Assembly to adopt these protections." They also describe the document as "critical" and "thoughtful and inspiring," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and states the proposal "would [not] infringe on others' rights." They further endorse it as a way to "protect the rights of this very vulnerable and valuable population," which clearly supports adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and urges schools to "implement policies" that affirm transgender students. They also call for government action to "protect and encourage those policies" and penalize schools that discriminate, indicating clear support for adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I very strongly oppose" and argues the policy should not be adopted because it would "promote Radical Gender Theory" and "go around parents." The comment frames the policy as morally wrong and contrary to religious beliefs, indicating clear opposition rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying it would "promote Radical Gender Theory" and "go around parents" without consent. They also state that the advocacy is "wrong," indicating clear opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I definitely do NOT support any of this" and "This is not okay and shouldn’t even be an option." They also argue against shared bathrooms/locker rooms and the policy generally, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidance," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. The rest of the comment reinforces approval by arguing for protections for everyone: "We all do."


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this" and repeatedly argues against the policy as "supporting the lie." They object to parental notification limits, pronoun/name provisions, and school staff being unable to intervene, framing the regulation as harmful and contrary to their beliefs.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and "proudly support this guidance document." They also praise the drafters and say it will make "VA schools a better place to learn and grow for all students," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support Model Policy," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism suggesting opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly titles the comment "Full support" and argues that transgender students "need this supporting document" to access education fairly. They clearly endorse adopting the policy and criticize those who oppose it, saying it should "write[] bigotry out of their bathrooms and locker rooms."


The commenter explicitly says, "I do NOT support the DOE transgender policies," which directly rejects the regulation. They argue the policies are unsafe and raise concerns about restroom and locker room access, saying students may use them "just to view persons of a particular sex."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and urges moving toward policies that provide privacy in restrooms and changing areas. They frame the change as beneficial for "safety" and for reducing "assault or bully" opportunities, which aligns with supporting the regulation's goals.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the VDOE model student policies" and argues the guidance will help schools "provide a safe and inclusive educational experience for all students." The comment endorses the regulation as a needed framework for transgender and non-binary students.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY, STRONGLY OPPOSE" and urges officials to "STOP the INSANITY" and "STOP the CONFUSION" of the policy. They reject the underlying premise of transgender recognition, stating that the "Natural Order" is male/female only and calling for psychiatric help instead of gender transition support.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues the policy is "taking authority away from parents" and "infringing on religious rights and convictions." They also call it a "dangerous precedent," indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter says the draft policies are "in need of correction" and repeatedly objects to specific provisions, including not notifying parents of gender identity requests and allowing access to changing facilities. They conclude, "As written, I would seek alternatives instead of sending my children to public school," indicating opposition to the regulation as drafted.


Guidance Document (Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in Virginia’s Public Sch

The commenter explicitly begins with "Opposed" and says that if approved, the policy would be "a huge injustice and threat to students (especially girls), parents and teachers." This clearly indicates they want the regulation rejected.


I strongly object to the proposal of HR 145 and SB 161

The commenter explicitly says the proposal "should be rejected immediately" and calls it "criminally negligent and incompetent." Although they suggest it be "extensively rewritten," the overall position is clearly against adopting the regulation as proposed.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly OPPOSE 100%" and argues against allowing transgender students access to facilities and privacy protections, stating "I do not want my children subjected to the genitals of the opposite sex" and calling the policy an "infringement on religious beliefs" and "American freedoms." These statements clearly reject the regulation rather than support it with changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose these regulations" and argues they are "inappropriate for public education here in Virginia." They also object that the policies "overrule the authority of the family" and "can actually endanger children," indicating clear rejection of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please do not support this transgender policy," which directly opposes adoption. They further argue the policy is harmful to minors, calling it "life altering" and "confusing," and warn that some treatments "cannot be reversed."


Model policy for transgender students VA public schools

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose this baseless proposal" and urges officials to "vote no." They also argue it is harmful and "an attack on family itself," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Against" and argues that no one should "influence a child" in the way the policy "represents," calling it "harmful and abusive." They also reject the policy as "ridiculous power" and say they would not allow their children to be subjected to it.


The title explicitly says "Strongly support," which directly states approval of the regulation. The body, "A person is a person and that's that," reinforces a supportive stance toward equal treatment without raising objections or conditions.


The commenter is explicitly "strongly strongly against!" the proposed policies and argues that "God made the decision" rather than people or children, indicating rejection of the regulation. The language about "those who are confused" and insisting the decision is already "Done" shows opposition to transgender student protections.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support these policies," which directly indicates approval of the regulation. They also justify this support by emphasizing that children and youth should "feel safe in their learning environment."


The commenter explicitly says, "I strong oppose this action" and asks, "please do not create more situations" that would cause problems. They argue the policy would be "harmful to students" and create a "very dangerous, unsettled environment," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am vehemently opposed to DOE proposed transgender school policy," which directly rejects the regulation. The follow-up statement, "Parents, not the school system, are responsible for their children," reinforces opposition to school involvement in this policy area.


Supporting all youth- including ?????? Gender Queer students

The commenter explicitly says, "I support any policies that will provide a safe place and environment for ALL students" and argues that "Healthcare has no place for discrimination and neither does education." This clearly endorses adopting the regulation to protect transgender and gender queer students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do no support Virginia's unwise elevation of any times of childhood gender confusion" and argues the policy would "only elevate that situation, not lower it or protect it." They also reject school involvement in bathroom choice and gender designation, urging that youth be guided privately instead.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the bill" and repeatedly rejects "anything related to transgender or LGBT." They also call the proposal "absolutely absurd" and say it "perpetuates further division," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly labels the comment "Support" and states, "Every student deserves to feel safe and included!" This clearly endorses the proposed policies and their goals of safety and inclusion.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am STRONGLY opposed to the school policies," which directly rejects the regulation. The religious justification, "God created them male and female," reinforces opposition to transgender-inclusive policies.


Totally against Radical Gender Theory.  .

The commenter says they are "Totally against Radical Gender Theory!!!!" which clearly rejects the proposed transgender student policies. The statement "Parents should be involved with their own children’s upbringing!!!" also signals opposition to the regulation’s approach.


Model Policies for Treatment of Transgender Students in Virginia Public School

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and repeatedly argues against the proposed policies, claiming they "subvert parental authority" and should not be adopted. The final sentence also criticizes teachers being required to use a student's selected gender, indicating rejection of the regulation's core provisions.


The comment explicitly says "Definitely Oppose!!!" and argues that "Parents should be responsible for their children’s values," which indicates rejection of the transgender student policies on parental-rights grounds. It does not offer support or neutral feedback.


The commenter explicitly says, "DO NOT support this!!!" which clearly rejects the proposed transgender student policy. There is no qualifying language or request for amendments, just a direct call against adoption.


Re  VDOE Reject the Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in Virginia's Pu

The commenter explicitly says, "I do not approve of your proposed guidelines" and urges VDOE to "Reject the Model Policies." They also object that the policies would "eradicate distinctions between male and female" and "disregard the role of parents," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "DO NOT support this policy!!!" which clearly rejects adoption of the regulation. The follow-up "this is absurd!!!" reinforces a negative position rather than offering neutral feedback or a question.


The commenter explicitly says "Totally against!" and rejects the policy by asserting that "Parents are responsible for their children’s values NOT the unchristian liberals!!!" This indicates opposition to the proposed transgender student policies rather than support or a neutral inquiry.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support these necessary measures" and repeatedly argues the guidelines are needed to protect trans students. They also reject objections to the policy, calling it "supporting basic humanity, not governmental overreach."


Model policies for the treatment of Transgender Students i

The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support the proposed changes," which directly rejects the regulation. The stated reasons—"disregard parental rights" and "the First Amendment rights of teachers and administrators"—indicate opposition to adoption as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support transgender rights," which clearly endorses the regulation. They also argue that allowing students to be supported in their gender identity "does not harm other students," indicating approval of the policy's goals.


Support of the Model Policies on the Treatment of Transgender Students

The commenter explicitly says they are "in support of the Model Policies" and argues the proposed rule will "enhance Virginia schools" and create a "better learning environment." They also thank the agency for "ensuring safe and welcoming schools for all Virginia students," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support!" and endorses "inclusive policies for all students including our most vulnerable and transgender students." This is a clear affirmative position in favor of adopting the regulation.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose and DO NOT SUPPORT THE PROPOSED CHANGES," which clearly rejects the regulation. They also argue it "disregard[s] parental rights" and "students' privacy rights," reinforcing opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly urge all schools to adopt the guidance outlined by the Virginia Department of Education concerning transgender and non-binary students." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policy.


The commenter says they are "strongly in support of this language and action" and explicitly wants it to "protect trans children from discrimination in schools." The rest of the comment criticizes opponents, indicating clear approval of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose schools promoting gender dysphoria" and calls the proposal an "outrageous proposal." They argue against school involvement in gender issues, object to bathroom access, and say the policy should not be "imposed from Richmond," all indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am against this" and "Strongly Against," indicating opposition to the regulation. They argue it would make their daughter "uncomfortable" and suggest transgender students should have "their own personal bathroom," which rejects the policy as written.


Model "Transgender" Policies Threaten Student Safety, Parental Authority and Freedom of Speech

The commenter states their "strongest objections" to the proposed policies and repeatedly argues they should not be adopted, calling them a "biased viewpoint" that will cause harm and be impossible to implement. They also say the policies "undermine the ability of parents" and create "compelled speech," indicating clear opposition rather than a request for modification.


Oppose Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students

The commenter explicitly says they are "opposed Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender students." This is a direct rejection of the proposed regulation with no qualifying language suggesting support or modification.


The commenter explicitly gives "Full Support for these students" and argues that "all students in Virginia public schools are entitled to equal rights and privileges." The final sentence, "Let's make sure our schools are providing these essential freedoms," clearly endorses the proposed policies' protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly in favor!" which directly supports adoption of the regulation. The additional statement "Trans rights are human rights. Protect our children" reinforces approval of the policy's protective aims.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose your policies" and objects to "allowing this type of policy." They also state it "will not and does not protect our children," indicating clear rejection of the proposed regulation.


fully support - TRANS RIGHTS ARE HUMAN RIGHTS

The commenter explicitly says "fully support" and "I vehemently support any action taken to support this marginalized community." They also frame the policies as "a step in the right direction," indicating approval of adoption even if imperfect.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and argues that people should be able to "express your true self," which aligns with adopting the transgender student policies. The comment also endorses educating those who harass others, reinforcing support for protections against discrimination and bullying.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY AGREE AND SUPPORT THIS!!!!!!" which directly endorses the regulation. The phrase "This is about keeping all of our kids safe!!!" reinforces approval of the policy's purpose.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" the policy and frames it as protecting "HUMAN rights" for trans people. They also endorse bathroom access and say the policy is "purely about making sure that trans people get what they need," which clearly supports adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and repeatedly urges adoption of the guidance, stating "This guidance is critical" and "Thank you for proposing this model policy." The comment argues the policy will improve safety and well-being for transgender and gender non-conforming students.


The commenter explicitly asks to "keep moving ahead with legislation that supports transgender and LGBTQ+ youth in schools and in our communities." They also state that this group "needs support, acceptance, and love," which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose.


The commenter explicitly says they are "ABSOLUTELY AGAINST" the policy and states they are "totally against this LGBT nonsense" being "forced on EVERY CHILD." They also argue the government has no right to override "parental rights," indicating clear opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly states, "I fully support this!" which directly endorses adoption of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism.


The commenter explicitly says "FULL support" and urges policymakers to "think about the developing minds of these kids" and what is best for their safety and peace of mind. Although they mention bathroom concerns, they frame them as manageable and still favor the policy's protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says they "strongly support the information proposed in this guidance document" and repeatedly endorses its purpose, stating it "provides gender-expansive and transgender youth with the support and rights that they deserve." They also argue it will help schools create a "caring and supportive school environment" and improve student mental health.


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

The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY OPPOSE THE PROPOSED TRANSGENDER POLICIES." They object to transgender inclusion in "sports and changing rooms" and suggest transgender students should be supported "in different ways," indicating rejection of the policy as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support legislation promoting the health and well-being of transgender children" and adds that "No restrictions or discrimination should be in their way especially in education." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the guidelines in this legislation" and the title reads "100% Support." They also argue the policies help trans students feel safe and reject "religious intolerance," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and argues the rules "rely on pseudoscience" and would "open our kids to abuse," which clearly rejects adoption of the regulation. The statement "Parenting is the role of parents. Not school administrators" further indicates opposition to the policy's school involvement.


Strongly Against -- Are You Being Bribed, Blackmailed, or Brainwashed to Betray the Public?

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Against" and repeatedly urges officials to "Stop it" and says "You are destroying the family and the community with this crap." The body rejects the transgender student policies as "woke" and claims they should not be adopted.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly disagree with the changes this policy will bring forward," which indicates opposition to adoption. The statement that it will not "make school a safe place for children" reinforces a negative view of the regulation's effects.


The commenter explicitly says, "Absolutely not in favor!" and "I DO NOT SUPPORT ANYTHING IN THIS BILL!" They also argue against the premise of transgender identity and call for "biblical teachings" instead, indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly labels the policy "Strongly Oppose" and argues it would force Christian teachers to violate their faith, make schools unsafe, and keep parents uninformed. They object to "allowing students to choose whichever locker room they want" and say the policies are "wrong," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the legislation" and frames it as "protecting the rights, health, and wellbeing of transgender youth." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter states, "I am completely opposed to this change," which directly rejects the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided, but the opposition is explicit and unambiguous.


The commenter explicitly states, "Completely opposed to this change," and the title "NO. NO. NO." reinforces rejection of the proposed regulation. There is no indication of support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "I strongly oppose a mandated transgender policy" and urges officials to "oppose this." They argue the policy would "jeopardize the bodily privacy and safety" of children and be "detrimental to all students," indicating clear rejection of adoption.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy as "Another waste of tax dollars" and says "Stop making sex an issue," indicating opposition to the transgender student guidance. They also argue it "DOES NOT serve education" and complain about "one community demanding special privileges," which supports a clear anti-adoption stance.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the Board of Election’s policies/guidances regarding transgender and non-binary students." They also endorse protecting these students from mistreatment, saying schools should "make sure that neither school personnel nor other students are given any kind of a green light to make things difficult."


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Opposed" and says "Strongly Disagree!!!" about the proposed policies. The phrase "This is wrong on some many levels" indicates clear rejection rather than a request for changes or a neutral observation.


The commenter explicitly says "Fully support" and calls the policy "a crucial start." They also endorse the underlying purpose, saying it would make school safer and that "Trans rights are human rights!"


Proposal is flawed. Court cases will interpret the policy at financial risk to VA Dept of Education

The commenter explicitly calls the proposal "flawed" and argues it should not proceed as written, citing "extreme financial risk" and lack of safeguards. They also raise concerns that the privacy provisions could "protect predatory adults," indicating rejection rather than support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and "I fully support legislation to promote the health and wellbeing of trans youth," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. No opposing language is present.


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


The commenter explicitly opens with "Strongly Support!" and repeatedly urges adoption of the policy, saying they "implore our representatives" to "ensure protection for transgender children in our schools." The body frames the regulation as necessary legal safeguards for student safety and rights.


SUPPORT - granting rights to others will not infringe on yours

The commenter explicitly labels the comment "SUPPORT" and repeatedly endorses the policy, stating that "Trans rights are human rights" and that "Granting safety and acceptance to our state's youth can be nothing but good." The comment argues for supporting transgender students and rejects opposition to the policies.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "I am writing to strongly oppose these potential changes" and repeatedly argues the policies should not be adopted, saying schools should not be "pushing controversial policies without parents consent." They also conclude that the state should seek "other avenues" and that these policies should not be "pushed down upon schools and students."


The commenter explicitly says "Yes! Strongly Support!" and states they are "very glad" the legislation can be passed. They also express hope that it is adopted so "all students can start to get the educational experience they're entitled to."


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


The commenter explicitly says they are "in support of the Model Policies" and repeatedly argues the rule will help transgender students. They praise the policies for preventing "name calling and bullying" and say it will make schools "a better place to learn."


The commenter explicitly says, "Please do not impose this transgender policy" and titles the comment "Fully oppose transgender policy." They argue it is a "very dangerous mandate" and ask to "leave these topics out," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the mandated transgender policy" and repeats, "I urge you to oppose this policy." They also argue it would be "harmful to my child and all children" and "jeopardize the safety of our children," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed to new legislation" and argues the policies set a "dangerous precedent". They object to "limiting parents' rights" and to transgender students' bathroom/locker room access, saying it puts "the rights and privacy of every non-transgender youth in jeopardy."


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the Model Policies" and reiterates agreement with the guidelines. They also argue the policies create "a safer and more inclusive environment for all students," which clearly endorses adoption.


Protect Trans people and help the young trans community flourish in our public schools ??

The commenter explicitly urges action in favor of the policy: "Protect trans people" and "Protect trans children <3." This clearly supports adopting the regulation to protect transgender students in public schools.


As a school counselor, I fully support the draft guidance provided by the VDOE.

The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the draft guidance provided by the VDOE" and repeats that support at the end. They also argue that "Supporting transgender students hurts nobody" and that not supporting them could "hurt many children," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support new policy" and urges implementation: "now is the time to implement it" and "let's start with this." They also affirm the policy's purpose and transgender students' dignity, saying "Trans kids are born who they are" and "we need to have respect and love for them."


I don't think you've thought this thru...

The commenter begins with general support for equal rights and safety, but the core message warns against adoption because it could let "a boy decide[] to enter a girls locker room or bathroom" and says "I'm not reading anything that would limit this." The closing plea to "Think this thru to the end before passing a law" indicates opposition unless stronger restrictions are added.


The commenter explicitly says the policy "should be strongly supported" and frames the issue as one of "fairness and goodness." The final sentence, "the least that anyone can ask is to be able to live it as they are," clearly endorses the regulation's purpose.


The commenter explicitly says, "I full support this legislation" and "I support this legislation wholeheartedly," which clearly indicates approval of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism suggesting opposition or neutrality.


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 "Full Support!" reinforces that they want it adopted.


The commenter explicitly says, "Do not support!" and "Strongly oppose this legislation!" This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "SUPPORT TRANS LIVES" and argues that "We need to support Trans children," which clearly endorses the regulation’s protective approach. The comment frames the policy as allowing children to "live their own truth" and reducing suffering, indicating approval rather than opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly states, "i strongly oppose this proposal," which directly indicates rejection of the regulation. No additional details or qualifications are provided.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this policy" and frames it as "the protection of our transgender youth," indicating clear approval of adoption. There is no opposing language or ambiguity.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly Oppose," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. No supporting or qualifying language is provided.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE!" and repeatedly argues against the policy, saying it "infringes on the parents rights" and that they are "strongly opposed to allowing a school to participate or lead a child to question the gender" of the child. The comment frames the rule as harmful and illegitimate, not as something to adopt with changes.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose transgender bill" and argues to "Leave sex education to the parents," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The suggestion that students questioning identity should be directed to "psychological help" further shows opposition to the regulation's approach.


Fully Support the VDOE Policy Guidelines for Transgender Youth

The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the policy planned by the VDOE" and praises its provisions, including using students' preferred names and pronouns. The comment argues the policy helps students feel "safe and secure" and frames it as basic respect and support for transgender youth.


The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY support this guidance document!" and praises it as "well-written." They also endorse its purpose by stating that "Trans rights are basic human rights" and that all kids need to be safe and secure.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly oppose!" which directly states rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. No supporting or neutral language appears.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this effort" and argues the policy is "harmful" and should not be adopted. They also object to schools withholding information from parents and call the proposal "social experimentation," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly labels the comment "Support" and says "I’m happy to see this introduced." They also ask to "ensure" the policies are connected with community organizations and resources for trans youth, which indicates approval with suggestions for strengthening implementation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am against your policy" and objects to transgender students being allowed "special privileges." They also oppose participation in sports and bathroom access for transgender students, indicating rejection of the policy's core provisions.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the implementation of the Model Policies" and "strongly support HB145 & SB161." They also argue the policies would create a "supportive" school environment and provide "respect, freedom from bullying and harassment, physical and emotional safety, and access" for transgender and nonbinary students.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and argues the model "has nothing to do with providing... an excellent education". They also object that it "uses the sexual identity agenda to erode parental rights" and calls on VDOE to "Stop using identity politics to overreach," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly titles the comment "Full support" and repeatedly endorses the policy, saying "Hate will not win" and condemning opposition as "discrimination." The final sentence, "they deserve to be happy," clearly supports protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "We strongly oppose the proposed changes to educational policy," which directly rejects the regulation. They also cite concerns about "parental rights," "students' privacy rights," and "teachers' and administrators' First Amendment rights" as reasons for opposition.


Stop the gender confusion--protect the children

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy’s premise, saying people are "den[ying] gender" and "pushing this on our children in our schools." The closing call to give children "true values and correct basic knowledge, not confusion" indicates opposition to adopting the transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the VDOE in developing The Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in Virginia’s Public Schools." They also endorse the purpose of the guidance, saying children should "feel safe and secure" and that the policies do not replace parents' role.


The commenter explicitly titles the remark "Full Support" and states that "providing necessary accommodations for transgender students" will improve safety. They also endorse the regulation’s rationale by saying it is supported by "scientific proof" and will help prevent suicide rates.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the potential transgender mandate policy" and argues it is a "dangerous precedent" that limits parents' rights. They also object to bathroom/locker room access and say the policy puts "the rights and privacy of every non-transgender student in jeopardy," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly states, "I fully oppose this proposal for transgender policies - FULLY oppose." This is a clear rejection of the regulation with no qualifying support or request for changes.


Strong disapproval of DOE’s proposed gender guidelines.

The commenter explicitly gives "Strong disapproval" of the proposed gender guidelines and says the Department of Education is "overstepping by far." They argue that schools should not make these decisions "without our consent" and that it is "a PARENT'S business," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


As an educator and parent, I fully support the adoption of policies to protect & support TransYouth

The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the adoption of the Model Policies" and repeatedly endorses the policies as a way to "protect & support TransYouth." The comment argues the policies will affirm dignity, prevent discrimination, and improve student well-being, indicating clear support for adoption.


I Support of the Model Policies on the Treatment of Transgender Students

The commenter explicitly says, "I am writing in support of the Model Policies" and repeatedly endorses the proposal as beneficial. They argue it will "enhance Virginia schools" and create a "safe environment for all," which clearly indicates approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Do not support" and ends with "I am against this legislation," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The body also argues the regulation gives "special rights" and is harmful to children, indicating opposition rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSED" and concludes that "The legislation shold therefore be discarded." They object to the policy because it would affect children without "parents involvement" and "express consent."


I strongly oppose the guidelines that are being proposed.

The commenter explicitly states, "I strongly oppose the proposed guidelines" and repeats that they "strongly oppose the guidelines that are being proposed." This is a clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Fully support" and argues that transgender students deserve "the same respect and protections" as others. They also state that anything else would be "a failure" to create a safe learning environment, indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly titles the comment "Strongly support" and praises the policy’s underlying goals of protecting transgender and non-binary youth from "bullying and residual trauma" and "intolerance and discrimination." The final sentences argue that children should not be "targeted and traumatized," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter strongly endorses the regulation, stating "THIS PROP IS FOR THE KIDS NOT YOU" and criticizing those who oppose it as "bigots." The comment argues the policy helps trans kids and frames opposition as prejudice rather than a substantive policy objection.


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


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support!" and argues the policies are needed for "basic human decency and respect for everyone's identity." They also criticize discriminatory treatment and say we should be "standing up for everyone's rights," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "100% STRONGLY OPPOSE" and argues the policy is "a direct violation of parental rights and 1st amendment rights." They also say they will "never let our children back into public schools again," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


I oppose “Model Treatment for Transgender” school policies

The commenter explicitly says, "I vehemently oppose" the policies and argues the school system is "beyond the scope of your authority with these mandates." They want transgender-related discussions handled at home and object to the policies as an interference with parental rights and family values.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this step" and urges adoption of the policies. They also endorse the regulation’s goals, including "a safe and supportive learning environment" and "evidence-based practices."


Read the guidance before you post - it's terrible!

The commenter explicitly says, "I am completely against this" and urges, "terrible, stop this right now," which clearly rejects the proposed guidance. The title and body both express strong disapproval of the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose any special treatment" and rejects the policy for transgender students. They also argue against implementation in schools, saying "No need to indoctrinate other children," which indicates opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly states "Strongly opposed!" and repeats "Very concerned!" without offering any support for adoption. This is a clear rejection of the proposed transgender student policies.


Strongly support; hate has no place in our schools

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support" the policy and urges officials to "enact[] policies that will protect them from harassment and bullying." They also argue that "ALL students deserve to feel safe in our schools," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose!" and calls the policy "an absolute overreach" that would "steal parents ability to take care of our kids." The comment argues from parental rights and religious grounds against the regulation's approach to transgender students.


The commenter argues that “God designed male and female differently” and that “to deny this gift and be someone different would be denying God’s will,” which directly rejects the premise of affirming transgender students. Although they briefly acknowledge rare intersex/biological exceptions, the overall message frames transgender identity as sinful and in need of correction rather than support.


as a mental health and student affairs practitioner. I STRONGLY SUPPORT

The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY SUPPORT," which directly indicates approval of the proposed policies. The opening phrase, "as a mental health and student affairs practitioner," provides professional context but does not change the clear supportive stance.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" and urges the district not to go in "this direction," indicating clear rejection of the proposed policies. The rest of the comment argues the policies are harmful and cites alleged medical and legal consequences to support opposition.


The commenter explicitly labels the comment "motion to support" and repeatedly endorses the policy, saying "Supporting ALL our students is essential" and that "Giving trans people the opportunities to become their best selves" will improve school safety. The comment argues in favor of the regulation’s goals rather than opposing or questioning them.


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


strongly approve, trans people are still human

The commenter explicitly says "I wholeheartedly approve of this action" and calls it "a step in the right direction," which clearly supports adoption of the regulation. The rest of the comment reinforces support by defending transgender students and the LGBTQ+ community.


The commenter criticizes parts of the policy as "a bit harsh" and asks for clarification, but ultimately endorses a key accommodation by saying "each school should be required to have a gender-neutral bathroom" to reduce harassment. The closing statement that "This legislation does not see both sides" suggests concern about implementation, not rejection of the regulation itself.


The commenter explicitly says "Emphatically oppose" and "I refuse to support nonsense," which clearly rejects the regulation. They also argue it would "infringe on parent's rights" and "jeopardiz[e] their safety," indicating opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly states "Oppose" and adds "Opposed to allowing this!" indicating clear rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. No qualifying language suggests support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose such teaching," which directly rejects the proposed policies. The additional language calling it "very offensive and completely unacceptable" and urging a return to "the basics of morality" reinforces opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidelines proposed by the VA Department of Education for Trans and NonBinary Students." They also affirm the policy goal by stating, "All youth deserve safe and supportive school environments."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed" and "Please do not pass this," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. "Concerned parent!" reinforces opposition but does not add a specific policy argument.


The commenter explicitly says, "I VERY STRONGLY OPPOSE THE TRANSGENDER POLICY IN VA SCHOOLS!" This is a clear rejection of the proposed regulation with no qualifying language or request for changes.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and argues that schools should have "more God" rather than "more gender confusion," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The language is clearly directed against the regulation's subject matter rather than offering neutral input.


The commenter explicitly says, "We are strongly opposed to this" and repeatedly argues against the policy, saying it "takes rights from parents" and objecting to transgender students using bathrooms and sports teams aligned with their gender identity. The comment calls the policy "perverted evilness" and urges a return to older social norms, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this being mandated in the school system" and repeatedly argues against the policy as written. They frame it as undermining "the role of a parent," crossing "SERIOUS BOUNDARIES," and say the VDOE should "STAY IN THEIR LANE," all of which indicate clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says the policies "would be a welcome and refreshing change" and expresses hope that the guidelines "can help to establish a welcoming environment for trans students." This is clear approval of adopting the model policies.


The commenter says that "once you start naming a certain group and trying to help you end up making that group singled out" and concludes that "You don't need to single out a group to do this." This indicates opposition to the specific transgender-focused policy, while still endorsing general respectful treatment for all students.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it "absolutely appalling" and saying "We... will not stand for this." The body attacks the regulation as a "disgusting sexual agenda," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "I fully support legislation" and frames the policy as protecting "the health and well-being of trans youth in school." They also endorse equal treatment, stating trans students deserve "the same uplifting treatment and support as cisgender students."


Without borders and rules you will have mayhem

The commenter argues that if the policy passes it will create "mayhem" and "NO borders" for children, and says it is "a path of poor foundation that is trying to pass." These statements clearly reject the regulation and frame it as harmful to school discipline and child development.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose to this idea" and argues it is "very unsafe for children," indicating clear rejection of the proposed policies. The closing phrase, "Yes love everyone but not doing it this way," reinforces opposition while expressing a general sentiment of acceptance.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly disagree with pushing this agenda," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The phrase "instead of listening to your constituents" indicates opposition to adoption as written or in principle.


The commenter explicitly says, "I very strongly oppose any legislation" related to the policy. The statement objects to the regulation on the grounds that it "teaches sexual gender or orientation as a choice," indicating rejection rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "School transgender policies - strongly oppose" and repeatedly argues against the policies, saying they are "hypocritical," would increase harm, and that "parents should be leading their children through this." They also state they would withdraw their daughter from public school if the policies are adopted, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


I oppose this is againt my religios beliefs and cannot be healthy nor helpful to children.

The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose" and argues the policy "cannot be healthy nor helpful to any child." They also object on religious and parental-rights grounds, saying it is "against my religios beliefs" and should not "supersede anything that we do as parents."


I full Support the legislation and to promote the health and well beings of transgendered humans.

The commenter explicitly says, "I full Support the legislation" and adds "Support your peers," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. The stated reason is to "promote the health and well beings of transgendered humans."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Disagree!" and argues against allowing transgender students access to bathrooms, locker rooms, and girls' sports. Phrases like "I would hate to think" and "should not have to choose to be anything else" show clear opposition to the proposed policies.


The commenter says, "Transgender issues should not be exposed to kids," which clearly rejects the proposed policies addressing transgender students in schools. This indicates opposition to adopting the regulation as written or in any form that involves student exposure to transgender topics.


The commenter explicitly says, "This is unacceptable!" and "Strongly disagree!" which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supportive or neutral language is present.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support helping trans youth," which clearly endorses the policy’s purpose and adoption. There is no language indicating opposition, neutrality, or a request for changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this legislation" and argues that "Gender identity should not be a barrier to quality education and a safe school environment." They also frame the policy as necessary to protect students and enable learning.


The commenter explicitly says, "If you let this bill pass," indicating opposition to adoption. The statement also frames the policy as harmful and invokes fear about bathrooms, reinforcing a clear anti-policy stance.


The commenter explicitly says, "This needs to be thrown out" and "will oppose this regulation," which clearly rejects adoption. They also argue the policy is "very threatening regarding their safety" in bathrooms and locker rooms, indicating substantive opposition rather than a request for changes.


Schools are morally obliged to provide a safe learning environment for ALL students, no exceptions

The commenter explicitly says the school system "must provide safety for transgender students" and that "The school system must provide a safe environment for trans students," which clearly endorses the regulation’s goal. They also reject objections to transgender inclusion, stating trans students "must be treated equally" and "No exceptions."


The commenter says, "I strongly disagree with these new rule changes," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. They also express concern that the changes "will affect my children’s psyche," indicating opposition based on perceived harm.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with the title "Absolutely Not" and says they would "pull every child" and grandchild from public school if it is adopted. They describe it as forcing "agendas" on children, indicating clear opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "OPPOSE!!!!!!" and calls the policy "Horrible horrible horrible," indicating clear rejection of the regulation. The rest of the comment argues it will cause "sex and other issues occurring in restrooms," reinforcing opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says they are "STRONGLY opposed" and states they "cannot and will not" comply with key elements of the policy, including using a student's pronouns or affirming gender fluidity. They frame the policy as violating "Freedom of Religion," indicating rejection of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and states that "This policy is one step closer to a safer school experience for trans children," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. The comment offers no objections or qualifications.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and adds "I do not agree with this," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed policies. No supporting reasons or requests for modification are provided, but the stance is unambiguous.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly disagree with these new policies" and states they are "morally wrong," which clearly rejects adoption. The threat that "my children will not be attending public schools" if it passes further confirms opposition.


The commenter clearly rejects the policy, saying it is "giving in to the few" and asking "are you kidding me," which signals opposition. The reference to "We can not continue to enable a derelict society" further indicates they want the regulation rejected or not adopted.


The commenter explicitly says "I strongly appose this legislation" and calls it "over reach of government," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The religious statement about being created "Male and Female" reinforces opposition to transgender student guidance.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose transgender policies," which clearly rejects the proposed regulation. No qualifying language suggests support or neutrality.


Strongly agree. No one should be discriminated against due to their race, gender, or sexuality.

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly agree with this" and endorses the underlying principle of nondiscrimination. Phrases like "Trans rights are human rights" and "We need to progress as a society" indicate clear support for the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this," and argues the policy is "against God’s intended purpose" and that people should "honor" fixed male/female roles. This is a clear rejection of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly titles the comment "oppose" and argues against the policy by saying children should not be made to feel scared in the bathroom because of transgender students. The phrase "sexually confused and need mental assistance" shows rejection of the regulation’s protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "Totally opposed," indicating clear rejection of the proposed transgender student policy. The phrase "this is so wrong!" reinforces that they want it rejected rather than adopted.


The commenter explicitly says the mandates "go too far" and ends with "Please do not implement them," which is a clear rejection of the proposed policy. Although they support safety for transgender children, they argue it should be done through less extreme means and express concern about parental guidance and comfort for young women.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose transgenders of any kind" and argues against allowing children to "mix in bathrooms or shower areas," which clearly rejects the proposed transgender student policies. The religious justification does not change the overall opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with "Absolutely NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" and says "Stop re-writing it," indicating they do not want the regulation adopted. They also characterize it as "social engineering" and "brainwashing," which shows strong opposition to the transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and repeatedly asks to "leave it out of the public schools system." They argue the policy is harmful, citing concerns about children's mental health, classroom distractions, bullying, and safety, and urge that these issues be handled privately at home.


In support -- Do to others as you would have them do to you

The commenter explicitly says "In support" and argues the policies "serve to create a more supportive environments" and "keep them safe." They also reject opposition based on religion and ask readers to "Please" support the amendments, indicating clear approval of adoption.


Those who support this are sick in the head

The commenter explicitly says the measure is "wrong on so many levels" and attacks supporters of it, indicating clear opposition to adoption. The statement "Anyone who supports this measure likely needs therapy" reinforces a strongly negative rejection of the regulation.


Strongly Oppose to the proposed Transgender policy!!!

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the proposed transgender policy" and argues against allowing transgender students to use bathrooms and locker rooms aligned with their gender identity. They also say they are "prepared to fight against this policy," indicating clear rejection rather than a request for changes.


Virginia Public Schools proposed guidelines regarding transgender students

The commenter says they "strongly and adamantly disagree with the proposed guidelines" and explicitly rejects restroom/locker room accommodations, pronoun guidance, and school involvement. They also argue the policy is harmful and should not be transferred to schools, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "totally opposed" and calls the policy "child abuse," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. There is no language suggesting support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with "Absolutely not" and says she would not send her children to a school operating this way. Her concern that she does not want her sons "sharing restrooms with opposite gender" indicates opposition to the regulation's transgender student accommodations.


The commenter explicitly says, "We are strongly opposed!" and argues to "Let the parents determine when/if it is appropriate," which indicates rejection of the proposed policies. The comment does not request modifications; it opposes adoption as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not approve of these proposed guidelines" and frames them as harmful, saying they are based on "radical theories" that "eradicate all distinctions between male and female." This is a clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "FULLY SUPPORT" and states they "fully believe that transgender students should have all rights, opportunity and protections". This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies and their protections for transgender students.


The commenter says they are "very concerned" about girls "changing for PE or using the bathroom with boys" and concludes, "This certainly doesn't protect all our children." That language indicates opposition to the proposed transgender student policies, especially around facilities and privacy.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "STRONGLY OPPOSE" and says "I believe this law is an overreach of our constitutional rights." They argue the policy would "encourag[e]" bullying and exclusion of students and parents who "believe in two genders," indicating rejection of the regulation as written.


Strongly support! Students learn best when they can be themselves!!

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support!" and "just support people being themselves," which clearly endorses the regulation. The comment also frames the policy as the "right thing," indicating approval rather than criticism.


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "OPPOSE" and says it is "so wrong" and a "travesty to actually consider this." They argue against allowing children to "pretend to be of opposite sex," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


Strongly support protections for trans children

The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly in support" and describes the policy as "a step in that direction" toward safer schools for trans students. They also endorse schools providing a "SUPPORTIVE learning environment for all children," indicating approval of the regulation's purpose.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly disagree" and calls the proposal "an abomination" that "should never have even been allowed to become a bill." They also say they would remove their children from public school if it passes, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


Boys and girls are separate for a reason

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying "if this passes, that will happen" and expressing that they do not want their children subjected to it. The language about "boys and girls are separate for a reason" and calling it a "dumb decision" indicates clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support!" and endorses the policy’s purpose by stating that "All children must be supported and protected in school." This is a clear affirmative position on adopting the regulation.


Schools MUST reflect the Will of the People! RE: "Policies for Treatment of Transgender Students"

The commenter explicitly rejects the proposal, saying the policies "do not serve the good people of our community" and urging that schools "MUST reflect the WILL of the PEOPLE." This is a clear call against adopting the transgender student policies as written.


Trans people I see you! I hear you! YOU ARE LOVED AND 110% ACCEPTED. translivesmatter #BLM #LOVEwins

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly SUPPORT the protection of trans students in Virginia public school." The rest of the comment is affirming and reinforces approval of the proposed policies.


read the document in full - most of you missing how this takes away rights from non trans students!

The commenter repeatedly argues against the policy, saying it "takes away rights from non trans students," that it "goes much further" than existing policies, and urging VDOE to "WAKE UP" and "Stop trying push an agenda on our kids." Although they offer a limited alternative (non-gender bathrooms/locker rooms), the overall message is to reject the proposed guidance as written.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and "Strongly disagree with this," indicating rejection of the proposed policies. The rest of the comment argues against affirming transgender identities, saying "you can’t trick their minds" and that adults should "correct them," which supports opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this initiative by the DOE strongly" and asks, "Please do not put our kids through this." They argue the policy is an "overstep of religious liberties" and raise objections to restroom access and transgender inclusion, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support any measures to increase protection, education, and resources for trans students" and argues that the policies will help transgender youth feel "much safer" in schools. This is a clear endorsement of the regulation's goals and implementation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this initiative in the strongest form possible" and argues it should not be adopted. They also warn it "will be challenged in litigation," reinforcing clear opposition rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the policies" and argues against allowing students to use bathrooms and locker rooms based on their "gender identity." They also object to privacy, parental notification, and compelled compliance with beliefs, concluding, "This is wrong!"


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support legislation promoting the well-being of trans individuals," which directly endorses the regulation. They also argue that trans children deserve "a safe space to learn," reinforcing support for the policy's goals of protection and inclusion.


Strongly oppose this being forced on our students/children.

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this being forced on our children" and asks, "Please do not force our children down this road." They frame the policy as an unwanted "agenda" and argue against it being imposed on students statewide.


The comment title, "TRANS STUDENTS MATTER," and the body, "all students matter," indicate approval of the policy’s inclusive treatment of transgender students. It does not raise objections or request weakening of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed to this policy" and repeatedly argues against adoption, urging that trans youth use staff/admin bathrooms instead. The comment frames the policy as harmful and "poor and misguided," indicating rejection rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the transgender bill being introduced for public schools," which clearly rejects the proposed policy. The title, "Strongly oppose transgender bill," reinforces the same position.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy’s purpose by saying "protect trans kids!" and that "trans kids deserve to have love and support from their community, especially in schools." This is a clear call for supportive school policies for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "FULLY SUPPORT!!!!" and states they "fully believe that transgender students should have all rights, opportunities, and protections". This clearly endorses adopting the regulation and its protections for transgender students.


The commenter calls the proposal a "misguided" set of "proposals and policies" and urges officials to "listen to the concerned parents and citizens," indicating opposition to adoption. The statement that it is an "inappropriate subject for classroom" and fear that great-grandchildren may have to "go elsewhere" further shows rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly states "Full support of inclusive policies!" and repeatedly endorses protecting transgender youth and embracing gender diversity. The comment argues that the policies are needed to create "a safe space" and to "protect these young trans citizens," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter calls the proposal a "misguided" set of "policies re: transgender education" and says it is an "inappropriate subject for classroom," indicating rejection of the regulation. They also urge officials to "listen to the concerned parents and citizens" and express fear that children may be affected, which supports opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose indoctrination of any gender issues in public education," which indicates rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The wording targets the regulation’s subject matter rather than asking for clarification or offering neutral input.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support any measures to increase protection, education, and resources for trans students" and adds that allowing schools more options will help trans youth "feel much safer." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully and unequivocally support" the policy and describes it as "critically necessary". They frame it as protecting "the health and well-being of transgender students" and creating "equitable, safe, non-discriminatory, and fair environments."


The commenter explicitly says "Hugely Support!!!" and adds "Trans lives always matter!!," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose and treatment of transgender students. There is no opposing language or ambiguity.


The commenter explicitly states, "I SUPPORT!!!!!!" which directly endorses adoption of the proposed policies. The title, "Transgender Student Inclusiveness," also aligns with approval of the regulation.


Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students

The commenter rejects the policy as "crazy" and questions its basis: "Where is the science behind this crazy set of rules?" They also argue that the accommodations are inadequate and imply the regulation should not be adopted as written, saying it "does not meet even the minimum standard of 'help.'"


The commenter explicitly says, "I support LGBTQIA+ rights" and urges adoption of the plan by asking opponents to "come up with an alternative" that can provide the same protections. The final line, "progressive ideas that help everyone!" further indicates clear support for the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this policy GUIDANCE," which directly endorses adoption. They also frame it as helpful direction for schools to "best support each and every one of their students," reinforcing approval.


The commenter explicitly urges officials to "Stop and modify this policy" and condemns it as "evil, insane" and "totalitarian," indicating clear opposition to adoption as written. They only endorse a narrow anti-bullying component, while rejecting the broader transgender policy and claiming it harms children and excludes parents.


The commenter explicitly says, "Oppose this policy!" and argues the proposal is harmful, calling transgender identity "a lie" and "abuse." They also claim it violates First Amendment rights, indicating they want the policy rejected rather than adopted.


The commenter explicitly says they are "in support of the guidance laid out" and thanks those who worked on it. They also reject opposition arguments and affirm that "Trans rights are human rights," indicating clear approval of adoption.


Strongly support trans/non-binary student rights

The commenter explicitly says they "fully support the rights of transgender and non-binary students" and endorses protections against "discrimination, harassment or bullying." They also state that every student should feel "acceptance, support, encouragement, and safety," which aligns with adopting the policy.


Mostly Support DOE guidance for trans students

The commenter explicitly says, "overall, I support this guidance" and adds that the policy "does a good job of covering" treatment by teachers, administrators, and other students. The only reservation is a limited concern about schools mediating parent-child relationships, but it does not outweigh the clear endorsement of the guidance.


The commenter explicitly says "strongly support!" and urges, "Protect students!!" This clearly endorses adoption of the transgender student policies as a way to protect all students' rights and safety.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSE!!" and "PLEASE VOTE NO," making their position clear. They also call the policy "a horrible idea" and argue it threatens "the privacy and rights of all the kids who aren’t trans," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the protection of the health and well-being of transgender students in Virginia public schools." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies and their purpose.


The commenter explicitly urges approval with "SUPPORT!!!!!" and says "PROTECT TRANS STUDENTS!!!" indicating clear endorsement of the regulation. The body frames the policy as necessary to "keep a student safe," which aligns with supporting adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this bill!" and frames the policy as helping students "feel safe and supported to be whoever they are." This is a clear endorsement of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "VERY STRONGLY SUPPORT" and urges, "TRANS STUDENTS ARE STILL STUDENTS LET THEM LEARN ! Protect them!!!" This clearly endorses the regulation and its protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and repeatedly argues the policy "should not be allowed" and "is not a decision to even be considered." They frame the regulation as harmful, claiming it "promotes division," "discriminates against the core beliefs," and will have a "far more negative effect on society than positive."


The commenter explicitly says "strongly support" and "Please adopt the model." They also endorse the policy’s purpose, stating it will "provide transgender children the guidance and support needed" and that "All children deserve to be respected and included."


The commenter explicitly says "SUPPORT SUPPORT SUPPORT" and urges to "PROTECT trans students!" This clearly endorses adoption of the regulation and its protections for transgender students.


Bigotry Doesn’t Belong in Schools - Trans Rights are Human Rights

The commenter explicitly endorses the policy’s protections for transgender students, arguing there is "no rational reason" to deny their needs and that trans children are "entitled to the same amount of care as cisgender children." This is a clear call for support of the regulation’s goals around restroom access and staff support.


The commenter explicitly says "Absolutely support the model policies for transgender students" and the title states "ADAMANTLY AND STRONGLY SUPPORT TRANS STUDENTS." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter says transgender students “should not be bullied or mistreated,” but then argues that “other children” should not be exposed to “upsetting and confusing situations” and says they may move grandchildren to private schools “to protect them.” The closing complaint, “Where is the common sense?”, signals disapproval of the proposed policies as written.


Trans rights are human rights. They deserve to feel safe, protected, and loved.

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support a bill that seeks to protect and support our transgender community and youth." The rest of the comment reinforces approval of protections for transgender students and argues they "deserve the same protected rights."


The commenter explicitly says "Support trans kids" and calls for "Equal rights for all," which clearly endorses the regulation’s protective approach toward transgender students. The phrase "End hatred" further indicates approval of policies that reduce discrimination and support inclusion.


I am opposed to this bill. Just one more distraction to take pupils from their studies.

The commenter explicitly says, "I am opposed to this bill" and concludes that "this should not be an issue for schools at all." They argue the policy is a "distraction" and object to bathroom/locker room access and gender-related accommodations for minors.


The commenter explicitly says, "I disagree with this" and the title is "Strongly oppose," indicating rejection of the regulation. The reference to "how God created male and female" shows opposition to the transgender student policies on religious grounds, even while expressing personal kindness.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly in support of an inclusive policy that protects the well being of all children," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. The second sentence is also supportive of the policy's inclusion of transgender students, despite criticizing opponents.


The comment explicitly says "TRANS RIGHTS ARE HUMAN RIGHTS" twice, which strongly signals approval of the transgender student policies and support for protections for trans students. There is no language opposing or questioning the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and frames the policy as protecting children: "Our children deserve protection and respect." The phrase "trans rights are human rights" clearly endorses the regulation's purpose.


100% Against This. Parents need to know and be aware of what is happening to their children.

The commenter is explicitly "100% Against This" and argues that "Hiding things from them would just create distrust," indicating opposition to the transgender student policies. The statement that they "would not put my child in public schools if that was the case" reinforces rejection of the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this!" which directly endorses adoption of the policy. The follow-up, "Please protect our children!" reinforces support for the regulation’s protective aims.


The commenter explicitly says, "i strongly support this" and argues there is "no reason not to have policies that support all types of students." They also defend the policy against criticism by saying it does not "encourage transgenderedness and LGBTQ+ behavior."


The title "TRANS RIGHTS ARE HUMAN RIGHTS" is a clear endorsement of protections for transgender students and, by implication, support for the proposed policies. There is no language opposing the regulation or asking for changes that would weaken it.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly oppose," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No additional context is provided to suggest any nuance or support for modifications.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and argues that "Every child deserves to be free of harassment and discrimination in schools." They further state that "Trans children need protection" and criticize those who oppose the policy, indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this fully" and asks, "Please move to approve this guidance." They also endorse the policy’s purpose by stating that "Trans children, and all children, deserve to learn in an environment where they are fully respected and safe."


Trans Rights are Human Rights and there’s scientific backing/proof that being Trans is natural.

The commenter explicitly endorses transgender rights and non-discrimination, saying "They should not be discriminated against for who they are" and concluding "Trans Rights are Human Rights." This clearly supports adopting the regulation’s protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose those measures," indicating rejection of the proposed policies. Although they add that "Transgenders must be respected," the statement "but not promoted" shows opposition to the regulation’s supportive treatment framework.


The comment explicitly says "VOTE NO!", which is a direct call to reject the regulation. The phrase "Science deniers believe in more than 2 genders!" is derogatory and indicates opposition to the transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and adds that they "will defend trans/ human rights," which clearly endorses adoption of the policy. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support!!!" and defends the policies as protecting children and transgender students. They argue against opponents and justify withholding information from parents in cases where parents may be violent or reject a trans child.


The commenter explicitly says, "We should highly support trans children" and argues that children should "feel comfortable and accepted." The comment endorses education and acceptance, which aligns with adopting the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose these guidelines for Transgender students." Although they acknowledge that "transgender students have rights," the overall position is against adoption because they question "the rights of other students who will be affected."


The commenter explicitly says "Support support support" and adds "Schools should too," indicating clear approval of the proposed transgender student policies. The statement "Science and medicine support trans people" provides a brief justification for adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this!" and adds, "We need to support Trans youth," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


SUPPORT TRANS KIDS - (reference: American Academy of Pediatrics)

The commenter explicitly says "Support trans children!" and urges adoption of "gender affirming schools and communities". They also state that a "safer, more supportive, and evidence-based environment in schools will benefit all children," which clearly endorses the regulation's goals.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose!!!" and states that the policy is "an infringement on the rights and safety of our children," which clearly rejects adoption of the regulation. The language indicates opposition rather than a request for modification or a neutral observation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I DO NOT support the upcoming policy" and argues schools should "stop this nonsense," indicating clear opposition to adoption. They also frame the policy as government overreach that would "take our rights away when it comes to our children."


Support students' rights to safe learning environments

The commenter explicitly says, "I support this guidance" and "encourage further learning, teaching, and understanding" of trans and gender-diverse students' needs. The comment frames the policy as helping create a "safe(r) learning environment" and protecting students from abuse and mistreatment.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Opposed" and argues against "encouraging children to change their sex altogether." They prefer a broader acceptance of gender-nonconforming children without transgender-specific policies, asking why not support them as their birth sex instead of a path to "hormones and surgeries and sterility."


The commenter explicitly rejects the proposal, saying "There is no way this can be allowed" and calling the ideas "way to[o] extreme." They also frame it as an unwanted "liberal agenda," indicating opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and reinforces it with "Trans rights are human rights," indicating clear approval of the proposed policies. There is no language suggesting opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly argues the policy should be delayed and rejected, saying the State should "get this drivel out of our laws and policies" and that the government has "no business in this arena." They also criticize the document as scientifically flawed and accuse it of overstepping into parental authority, indicating clear opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this bill," which directly indicates approval of the regulation. The rest of the comment reinforces that position by arguing trans students should receive "the same basic respect" and rejecting opposition to it.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose" and argues the policy is "misguided" and will "all it will do" is cause harm. They list multiple objections, including privacy, parental rights, and safety concerns, indicating they do not want the regulation adopted.


The commenter explicitly says the policy is "a wonderful start" and states "I am in FULL SUPPORT of this policy!" They also argue it is "necessary for students," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The comment explicitly says "SUPPORT TRANS STUDENTS" and the title "Trans Rights are Human Rights" clearly endorses the proposed transgender student policies. There is no language opposing or questioning the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose!" and "I TOTALLY DISAGREE WITH ALL THIS!" They object to a transgender student using shared facilities, saying their daughter should not have to "see a boy in a locker room or restroom" and that this is "a parent choice PERIOD."


Strongly Support - Trans rights are human rights

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and urges officials to "do what is right" and "give all children the same treatment" in favor of transgender youth. They frame opposition as harmful and advocate for the regulation as a means to protect transgender children and their rights.


The commenter explicitly states "Full support" and adds the reason "protect trans kids," which clearly endorses adopting the regulation. There is no opposing language or ambiguity.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with the title "Absolutely Not" and the body "Way the extreme," indicating they want the regulation rejected or substantially weakened. No supportive language or request for modification is present.


Support the model policies to help schools support every student

The commenter explicitly says "Support the model policies" and praises them as "thoughtful" guidance that helps schools comply with nondiscrimination law and create a "safe and supportive learning environment." They also state the policy will "make a concrete difference in improving the lives of young people," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not agree with the model policies for transgender students in VA schools," and argues against bathroom access and participation in female sports. They frame the policies as harmful and a "slippery slope," indicating opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I firmly disagree with this policy" and argues against it as "not the solution". They object to perceived effects such as overriding parental consent and dividing or ostracizing those with different religious or cultural views.


Trans rights are human rights and opposing this is pro discrimination

The commenter explicitly says that "passing legislation to protect transgender youth" is "extremely necessary" and concludes that "legislation to protect transgender youth against discrimination is so important." The comment argues against opposition to the policy and in favor of protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly argues that "we must protect them and support them" and says "Supporting transgender students' rights will protect their safety." The comment endorses the policy’s purpose of protecting trans youth from bullying, misgendering, and harm in schools.


The commenter explicitly says, "We kindly oppose these policies" and calls the draft "really extreme." They also argue the policies could lead to "sexual violence and bullying" and insist that "Parents should always know" how schools are influencing children, indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "Oppose this extreme policy" and asks to "stop trying to inject controversial political viewpoints into the school," which clearly rejects adoption of the regulation. The reference to it "confusing and hurting children" reinforces opposition rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the right of all students to go to school without fear of persecution" and "I also support the right of students to transition and identify however they feel at school," which clearly endorses the policy's protections. The closing plea, "Please do not let transphobes run this discussion," further indicates approval of the regulation's transgender protections.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Strongly Support" and says it is the school's duty to protect "all of its students". They also endorse naming protections for "trans/queer students" and state that students deserve to be safe being themselves, which clearly supports adoption of the policy.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, writing "Absolutely not! NO to the new transgender policy." This is a clear call against adoption with no qualifying support or alternative proposal.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not approve of the proposed guidelines" and opens with "Strongly Oppose." They argue the policies would erase sex distinctions and create privacy and bathroom/locker room problems, indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support for it.


The title "Absolutely Not" strongly signals rejection of the proposed policies. The body adds "There needs to be other ideas considered," which implies the commenter does not want these regulations adopted as written and prefers alternatives.


The commenter explicitly says, "I Support This Guidance" and "I fully stand by protecting our trans students and gender non-conforming students with everything we can." The body repeatedly endorses the policy goals of respect, self-expression, and protection from harm, indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly Disagree with this!" and rejects the policy. The statement "We as parents have this right to say no!" indicates opposition to adopting the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says "SUPPORT!" and argues that "It is essential to support all students" and respect "everyone's identity." This clearly endorses adoption of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not agree with this at all" and "STRONGLY DISAGREE!!" They argue against shared bathrooms/changing rooms for transgender students and say, "Kids DO NOT need transgender polices," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "strongly oppose" and rejects the premise of the policy by stating "there are only 2 sexes." The mention of privacy and protection appears as a general objection rather than support for the regulation.


The commenter argues that schools and the state do not have the right to exclude parents from decisions about children and says parental authority is "the sole prerogative of their parents," which directly conflicts with guidance that may limit parental involvement in transgender-related decisions. The language about rights being "abused" and foundations being weakened indicates opposition to the policy as written.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "SUPPORT" and says it is "very important" that youth are sent to "a safe and inclusive environment for all." This clearly endorses adopting the regulation as written or in principle.


The commenter explicitly says, "I disagree with this policy" and titles the comment "Do not support." They argue it infringes on "the rights of Parents," oppose shared facilities, and say transgender accommodation "should not be forced," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY SUPPORT any efforts to protect transgender and gender diverse persons" and hopes Virginia "continues to support and reinforce safety for these communities." The comment endorses the regulation’s purpose and cites medical evidence in favor of it.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY AGREE," which clearly supports the regulation. The body reinforces approval by stating that transgender people "are no different from us" and that "gender is a social construct," aligning with the policy's inclusive treatment of transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says they are "in STRONG support of any and all laws pertaining to the protection of transgender people" and says they hope lawmakers adopt these protections. The comment repeatedly endorses the proposed protections as necessary for transgender students' safety and rights.


Strongly Support As A Transgender Virginian

The commenter explicitly says, "I am in strong support of these efforts" and repeatedly urges protection for "transgender/non-binary and gender non-conforming students." The comment asks to "protect these shining children," indicating clear approval of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy, saying "This bill could help save lives" and "This bill is just the beginning" of reducing suicide rates for trans individuals. They describe personal experiences of harassment and assault to argue for stronger protections for transgender students.


Strongly Oppose! Vote NO on transgender policy changes!

The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly Oppose! Vote NO" and repeats "Vote NO on the proposed transgender policy changes." They argue the changes "undermine the rights of parents, teachers, and school administrators" and "harm our children," indicating clear rejection of adoption.


The comment explicitly says "Support transgender people," which clearly endorses the policy direction. The statement that "Transgendered people are no different from us" and that "gender is a social construct" further signals agreement with the regulation's inclusive treatment of transgender students.


The commenter explicitly states, "I do not support," which directly indicates opposition to the proposed regulation. No additional context suggests any nuance or conditional support.


The commenter explicitly says "OPPOSED!" and repeatedly urges rejection of the policy, calling it "insanity," "criminal," and "tripe" that should not be "foisting this ... on our children." The comment clearly argues against adopting the transgender student policies and demands the authors be fired.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the rights of transgender youth in our schools!" and argues that schools and the state should "protect the vulnerable" through these policies. The comment rejects opposing arguments and endorses the regulation's purpose of supporting transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this measure," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. The explanation that "Trans children need the support and validation that every other child gets" reinforces approval of the policy's purpose.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support the guidance." This is a direct endorsement of the proposed regulation with no qualifications or objections.


The commenter explicitly begins with "Opposed" and repeatedly argues the bill should not proceed, saying "this bill should be tabled" unless accommodations are changed. They object to transgender students' access to shared facilities and frame the policy as a safety risk and "slippery slope" for predators.


The commenter explicitly says it is "inappropriate to mandate certain behaviors in schools K-12" and argues the proposed policies "will, in effect, force" students to disclose gender identity too early. They conclude that the policies are not wisely tailored and that implementation "will invite more harm than good," indicating opposition to adoption.


The commenter clearly rejects the policy, calling it "absolutely ridiculous" and saying "No!!" multiple times. They also object to "allowing this in schools of children" and express resistance to anyone trying to "take my kids for this," indicating opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the regulation with "Absolutely NO!!!" and "Absolutely No!". The statement "This shouldn’t even be a topic!" indicates they do not want the policy considered or adopted.


The commenter explicitly says, "I think this policy definitely oversteps parental rights" and refers to "many disturbing proposed policies within the draft," indicating opposition to adoption. Although they state support for transgender people and children's wellbeing, the overall position is against the policy because of concerns about school authority and withholding information from parents.