The commenter explicitly says, "I Fully support!" and repeats, "I fully support," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this positive change," which directly endorses the regulation. They also state that "No one should be discriminated against based on their gender identity," aligning with the policy's protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly states, "Fully support!!" which directly endorses the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism suggesting opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "support!!" and argues that the policy should apply to "all students, including those of the LGBTQ+ community." This clearly endorses adoption of the regulation as a way to make school a safe space.


The commenter explicitly states "SUPPORT" and "STRONGLY SUPPORT," which clearly indicates approval of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism suggesting any opposition or modification request.


The commenter explicitly says "Fully, emphatically support" and thanks the policy for "recognizing the value in affirming every child," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. There is no language indicating opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "Fully Support Transrights!" and adds that "Everyone one should have the same rights, regardless of gender," which clearly endorses the regulation’s protections for transgender students. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


Protect Trans Youth (and all trans people)

The commenter explicitly says, "I fully and 100% give my support to this proposal" and argues that the policies will "increase the livelihood of many people." They also state that trans people "must be protected and be given full and equal support," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "i 10000% support this" and "i fully support all of these policies." They also argue the policies would make trans students "much more comfortable at school" and should be adopted to help students feel "comfortable and accepted."


The commenter explicitly says, "I FULLY SUPPORT!!" and adds, "I fully support trans students," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose. There is no opposing language or request to weaken the policy.


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


The commenter explicitly says "Fully support" and adds "Protect and support all trans people," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose. There is no language indicating opposition or reservation.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support!" and repeats "I support," which directly indicates approval of the proposed regulation. No contrary language or qualifications are included.


The commenter explicitly says, "Fully Support" and "I offer my full support." They also praise the proposal as "an incredible step forward" for protecting transgender students and helping them feel "accepted and embraced."


The commenter explicitly says, "I 100% support this" and argues that "Everyone deserves to feel protected" in the learning environment. The final sentence reinforces approval of protections for transgender students despite opposition.


The comment is derogatory toward transgender identity, calling it "an illness" and saying "down with the sickness," which signals rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. It does not offer any support or constructive changes; it expresses contempt for the regulation's subject matter.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this document" and the title reads "Strongly Support." They also endorse the policy goals, saying students should be "affirmed, respected, and able to learn safely in schools."


The commenter explicitly titles the remark "Strongly Support" and argues that gender identity "should not impact one's right to learn in a safe learning environment." They also say "Protecting students is not 'radical'" and criticize Virginia schools for lacking "more inclusive policies," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this proposal" and describes it as "a step in the right direction." They also endorse "a more inclusive, supportive environment for all," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support these guidelines," which directly endorses adoption. The phrase "Trans rights are human rights" further signals affirmative support for the regulation's purpose.


The commenter explicitly says, "I full support the protection of trans students," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose. The title "I Support" reinforces that they want the policy adopted.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "Schools should not adopt these or any transgender policies" and argues schools should not help students explore gender identity. They also object to bathroom/locker room access and say the topic is "best left at home," indicating clear opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues that "schools should focus on academics," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The phrase "let parents focus on social issues" suggests they do not want schools involved in this area.


Dignity for all and equity under the law starts with education - I support wholeheartedly!

The commenter explicitly says, "I support wholeheartedly!" and thanks the agency for "finally addressing this issue." They also argue that the regulation is needed to end discrimination against transgender students through education.


The commenter explicitly says, "I absolutely support this!!" and uses the slogan "TRANS RIGHTS ARE HUMAN RIGHTS!!" indicating clear approval of the proposed policies. There is no language suggesting opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "In full support of this," which directly endorses the proposed regulation. The follow-up urging others to "put yourself in someone else’s shoes" reinforces support for the policy’s purpose.


The commenter explicitly says "I STRONGLY OPPOSE" the policies and urges the Department to "drop the proposed transgender policies." The rationale centers on parental rights and family authority, arguing the policies "exclude the parents" and "violate the rights of parents."


The commenter explicitly urges adoption: "Please implement this policy" and frames it as protective, saying it will "help protect all children." The statement "Trans rights are human rights" and the appeal to kindness indicate clear approval of the regulation's goals.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support!" and endorses the goal that "schools should create safe spaces for students in general." They further connect this to students who may be "treated unequally," which aligns with approving the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says the guidance "should receive full support and implementation." They also praise it as "meaningful ways to create more inclusive school environments for trans students," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "This teacher strongly supports" and argues that "Every child deserves to be treated equally" and that schools should "love, support, and educate them." These statements clearly endorse the policy’s goal of protecting and supporting transgender students rather than opposing it.


The commenter explicitly says, "Fully support!" and "Definitely a yes from me." They also argue the policy is needed "for their emotional and mental well-being," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly states, "All students need and deserve our support," which aligns with the regulation’s goal of supporting transgender students and maintaining a safe, supportive environment. There is no language opposing the policy or asking for weakening changes.


choose to show love and not hate— protect trans rights

The commenter explicitly says, "Protect trans rights," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose and implementation. The phrase "choose to show love and not hate" and "notice those who need support" further indicate approval of protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this legislation," and frames the policy as harmful, claiming it "steals a child's innocence" and contributes to "confusion, depression, and suicide." The comment clearly rejects the proposed transgender student policies rather than supporting them with changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY SUPPORT TRANS YOUTH!" and "I support the LGBTQ+ community," which clearly endorses the proposed policies. The comment argues for supporting trans students and does not express any opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "FULLY SUPPORT AND STRONGLY ENDORSE!" and repeatedly argues for "protective and inclusive policy" for transgender youth. They emphasize preventing "bullying and discrimination" and ask readers to imagine wanting their child protected from such treatment, which clearly supports adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not want to see transgender education come to Loudon county" and calls it "totally inappropriate" for elementary students. They also reject the policy’s premise by saying they do not want educators telling children "that a person can change their gender," while only endorsing limited anti-bullying training instead.


The commenter explicitly says they are "in FULL support of these guidelines" and repeatedly endorses the policy as "a huge step in the right direction." They also argue it will help create "a safe and welcoming environment for ALL of our students," indicating clear approval of adoption.


If you are a parent or teacher please read and SUPPORT this policy

The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this policy" and repeatedly urges readers to "SUPPORT this policy." They argue it is needed to "protect our trans youth" and promote "safety" and "support," which clearly endorses adoption.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support" and reinforces it with "I support!!". There is no qualifying language or objection to any part of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "FULLY SUPPORT!!!!" and urges to "Protect all trans youth!!!!" This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies and the protections they provide.


The commenter explicitly says "FULLY SUPPORT" and adds "There is absolutely NO reason to not support this," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. The rest of the comment reinforces approval by arguing schools "NEED to change" and should not be "regressing."


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy’s purpose, saying "Protect trans kids!" and "Trans rights are human rights." This is a clear call for adoption of protections and equitable resources for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly states "I SUPPORT!" and adds that "no one should be discriminated for their identity!!!" This clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose of protecting transgender students from discrimination.


The commenter explicitly says, "I cannot support these purposed policies" and the title reads "Strongly oppose." They argue the policies would be harmful, stating they are "very concerned" they will "cause more children to question" gender identity, which indicates rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "i support" and "I FULLY SUPPORT THIS!" which clearly indicates approval of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism suggesting opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "SUPPORTING 100%" and "Happy to support!", which clearly indicates approval of the regulation. There is no contrary language or request for weakening the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "Support our trans kids!!" and repeats "Support our trans kids!" This is a clear endorsement of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says "SUPPORT!!" and adds, "We HAVE to support and protect LGBTQ+ children," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "There’s absolutely no reason not to fully support this" and frames the policy as necessary to protect trans children. They also argue schools should make accommodations so LGBTQ+ students are "safe and comfortable" and can receive their education.


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


Oppose New Gender Policy from both Natural and practical reasons.

The commenter explicitly says "Oppose New Gender Policy" and "I strongly argue that EVERY IDENTITY be give their own restroom," which is a rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. They also argue the policy is unjustified and criticize it as "self-declarative" and something "anyone could make up," indicating clear opposition rather than a request for modification.


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


Policies for treatment of transgender students

The commenter explicitly states "STRONGLY OPPOSE!" in response to the proposed policies, which is a clear rejection of adoption. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided.


The commenter explicitly states, "I SUPPORT!" and repeats "I support!!" with no qualifying language. This is a clear endorsement of the proposed regulation.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy’s goals, arguing that "respecting transgender rights in school" is beneficial and telling transgender people they are "valid, valued, and loved." The comment rejects opposition to the regulation and frames it as promoting tolerance and respect.


The commenter explicitly says they are "in full support of trans children" and argues for treating them "with respect and dignity," which aligns with adopting the policy. They frame the regulation as necessary to prevent harm, stating they prefer the option that doesn't result in "dead children."


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose!" and states, "I do not agree with the proposed guidelines for transgender students." They also argue the policies are part of an agenda that would "take parental control away," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Absolutely fully support!!" and argues that students should be "safe, but also accepted and supported" in school environments. They also endorse prioritizing protections over staff or peer beliefs, indicating clear approval of the proposed policies.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support" and adds "happy to support this brilliant cause!" This is a clear endorsement of the proposed regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Opposed" and states "These policies have gone too far," indicating rejection of the regulation. They also argue that "The school system cannot take the place of the family" and criticize "radical policies," which shows opposition to adoption rather than support for changes.


The commenter explicitly states "i support!!!" twice, which directly indicates approval of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism suggesting otherwise.


Trans rights are human rights, fully support.

The commenter explicitly says, "fully support," indicating approval of the proposed policies. The phrase "Trans rights are human rights" further signals endorsement of protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support!" and adds, "Happy to support this!" This is a clear endorsement of the proposed regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support LGBT+ Rights fully" and asks to "Make trans people feel comfortable in our state please," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose. The comment does not raise objections or request weakening of the policy.


The commenter explicitly states, "I SUPPORT" and "I strongly support," which clearly indicates approval of the proposed regulation. No contrary language or qualifications are included.


The commenter explicitly says, "i fully support!" and adds that "Trans youth must be protected," which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose. The request for "more measures in place" indicates support for adoption, possibly even stronger protections.


Opposing the Public Schools Approach to Transgender Students

The commenter explicitly says, "I am very opposed to the radical agenda" and rejects the policy's premise by stating, "There is no other gender." They argue schools should instead help children "accept their gender," which indicates opposition to adopting the regulation.


I support securing the natural, inalienable rights of lqbtqia+ students.

The commenter explicitly says, "I support securing the natural, inalienable rights of lqbtqia+ students" and adds that these students "deserve the same rights as cis-gender, heterosexual students." This clearly endorses the regulation’s protective purpose for transgender/LGBTQIA+ students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose transgender policies" and argues they should not "limit or exclude parents' rights." They also reject shared facilities by stating, "No child or teen should be subjected to using bathrooms, dressing rooms, etc. with others of the opposite biological sex."


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


The commenter explicitly says "strongly oppose" and repeatedly argues the policies are "harmful," "terrifying," and beyond what the General Assembly prescribed. They also object to schools supporting "gender transitions" and to shared facilities, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly states, "I fully support this" and repeats "I fully support!!!!" with no qualifying concerns or objections. This is a clear endorsement of the proposed regulation.


The commenter explicitly states "strongly oppose," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No additional context or qualifications are provided.


The commenter explicitly says "I Fully Support!" and asks the VDOE to "protect[] and support[] ALL students," ending with "SUPPORT LGBT STUDENTS!" This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it "based on lies" and saying it "subvert[s] parental authority" and is "harmful to ALL children." The opening question about "what ever happened to science??" and the claim that humans are "either male or female at birth" indicate opposition to the transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I wholeheartedly support" and "I absolutely agree with helping the students in our community feel safe and supported." This clearly endorses the proposed policies rather than opposing or questioning them.


The commenter explicitly states, "I do not support," which directly indicates opposition to the proposed regulation. No qualifying language or request for modification is provided, so the stance is clearly opposed.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support clear and compassionate directives for transgender and non-binary students" and asks to "Please move forward on state-wide clear directives." The comment endorses the regulation and even suggests strengthening it through staff professional development.


The commenter says the model regulations "infringe the First Amendment rights of parents to raise and care for their children," which clearly اعتراضs to the policy. The language indicates they want the regulation rejected or at least not adopted in its current form.


oppose; do not disregard the role of parents in public education

The commenter explicitly says "oppose" and frames the issue as "do not disregard the role of parents in public education," indicating rejection of the proposed policies. No language suggests support or a neutral question.


The comment "Good bye public schools" is a dismissive rejection of the proposed transgender student policies and implies the commenter is withdrawing support from public schools because of the regulation. It does not ask a question or offer neutral input; it signals opposition to adoption.


Parents cannot be ignored wrt to transgender issues

The commenter says transgender policies are "damaging to our vulnerable youth" and criticizes implementation "without regard to the parents," indicating opposition to the proposed guidance. They also reject a key premise in the policy description, calling the gender-identity claim "not based on any scientific study."


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose these measures," which directly rejects the proposed regulation. The follow-up sentence asking to "come up with some better solutions" reinforces opposition rather than support for the policy as written.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "opposed" and argues against allowing transgender students to use facilities with the opposite sex, calling it "imprudent, immoral and criminally dangerous." They ask to "find another solution" such as an "other" bathroom or locker room, which indicates rejection of the policy as written.


The commenter explicitly says "Object to gender policies in schools" and argues "No way should a young person" be exposed to these policies. They frame the regulation as "confusing kids," "taking the power away from the parents," and creating danger in restrooms/locker rooms, which indicates clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly labels the policies "Transgender Policies - Opposed" and says the VDOE "has gone far beyond the path the General Assembly prescribed." They repeatedly argue the policies should not be adopted, citing privacy, parental rights, and objections to "encouraging... irreversible 'gender transitions'."


Oppose these regulations. Parents have authority over their children, not schools

The commenter explicitly says, "Oppose these regulations" and repeatedly asks that Virginia "do not enact these transgender policies." They argue the policies should "NOT be pushed in our VA schools" and frame them as harmful to parents' authority and children's rights.


The commenter explicitly says "DO NOT SUPPORT ON ANY LEVEL" and argues the policy is "abhorrent" and an effort to "undermine parents and indoctrinate children." They also call the policy's treatment of transgender students "child abuse" and say it would create unsafe environments, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter says it is "outrageous" that schools are teaching "such controversial and scientifically unsupportable positions" and argues that this should not be controlled by "a committee with such an agenda." They emphasize that parents should decide, indicating opposition to the proposed transgender student policies.


Preserve Our Parental Rights to Monitor and Guide Our Children's Education

The commenter rejects the policy’s approach, saying parental guidance "must not be subverted" by the "vogue" of transgender-ism. The title, "Preserve Our Parental Rights," also signals opposition to the regulation as written.


Transgender Regulations by VA Dept of Education Are An Illegal Intrusion Into Every Child's Identity

The commenter explicitly says the proposed regulations are "an illegal intrusion" and states that "No governmental organization has the right to intrude" on a child's identity. They argue the rules violate privacy and self-identity, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


Virginia Dept. of Education transgender policies

The commenter explicitly states "OPPOSED" and says they are opposed to the VDOE or legislature "making any policy advocating or attempting to describe or promote transgender education of any kind." They also argue this should be left to family members, indicating rejection of the proposed policies.


The comment says, "Parents must have the right to decide !" which implies opposition to the proposed transgender student policies by asserting parental control over decisions the guidance would address at school. It does not offer support or a neutral question, but rather signals resistance to the regulation's approach.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am opposed to having this subject part of the curriculum" and argues VDOE "should not disregard the role of parents in public education." They also describe the policies as "harmful" and claim they "infringe the First Amendment rights of parents," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The comment says, "Parents must have the right to decide !" which implies opposition to the regulation’s approach and a preference for parental control over transgender student policies. It does not offer support for the proposed guidance and instead signals that the policy should not override parents' decisions.


The commenter explicitly titles the submission "Support" and says the guidance is "necessary" and "vital." They argue that educating school staff to support children who are "not heteronormative" will prevent harmful experiences, indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the humane and equal treatment of transgender and non-binary students" and describes the policy as helping create "safe, and empathetic learning environments." They also endorse specific provisions like chosen names/pronouns, dress according to gender identity, participation in activities, and anti-bullying protections.


The commenter explicitly urges officials to "resist" the policy and calls it a "Forced Transgender Policies" scheme. They object to "allowing biological males into the locker rooms and bathrooms of biological females" and say the regulation should not be adopted.


VDOE has gone far beyond the path prescribed by General Assembly--strongly oppose

The commenter explicitly says "strongly oppose" and argues the policies "go far beyond" what the General Assembly prescribed. They object to the guidance as endorsing disputed views and claim it would "infringe the First Amendment Rights of parents," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says the policy "should not be imposed on the classroom teacher or applied in the school setting" and calls it "craziness," indicating rejection of the regulation. They also argue it is "a personal family matter" and that the role of parents should not be disregarded, which supports opposition to school implementation.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "SUPPORT" and repeats "sUPPORT," indicating clear approval of the proposed regulation. No contrary language or qualifications are present.


Model policies disregard role of parents

The commenter says, "The VDOE should not disregard the role of parents in public education," which اعتراضs to the policy framework as written and implies it should not be adopted in its current form. The comment does not offer support or a neutral question; it objects on parental-rights grounds.


The comment explicitly states "Opposed" and repeats "Opposed" as the body, indicating clear rejection of the proposed regulation. No qualifying language suggests support or neutrality.


The comment explicitly states "Opposed" and repeats "Opposed," indicating clear rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting or qualifying language is provided.


The commenter explicitly says, "Totally opposed to this lie" and "I oppose our state jumping into this bandwagon of lies," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The comment argues against the underlying premise of transgender recognition, stating "There are only two sexes: male and female."


Parents are in charge of the children, NOT THE STATE! More reason to homeschool!

The commenter rejects the policy’s approach to transgender students and argues that "No child should be forced to share showers, locker rooms, hotel rooms or other intimate settings" with transgender peers. The statement "Parents should be in charge of the children NOT THE STATE!!!" and "More reason to homeschool!" indicate opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly asks, "Please don’t disregard the parents role in public schools" and says schools should not expose children to "transgender beliefs," indicating opposition to the proposed transgender student policies. They also state that it "deeply troubles" them that the school system would do this, reinforcing rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says they "firmly and strongly oppose the imposition of this ideology" and calls the policy "harmful" and having "no place in the education of our children." Although they begin by saying students should be treated with compassion and respect, the overall thrust is rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support protecting trans students" and asks to "make them safer at school" and "allow them the same rights to participate as other students." This clearly endorses adoption of the regulation’s protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose transgender policies proposed by the Virginia Department of Education" and argues the VDOE has "gone far beyond" what the General Assembly prescribed. They also state the policies "infringe the First Amendment rights of parents" and should not encourage "gender transitions," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly states "I OPPOSE THIS PROPOSAL," which directly indicates rejection of the regulation. The follow-up phrase "CAN'T WE JUST HAVE COMMEN SENSE AND JUST GET ALONG" reinforces dissatisfaction with the proposal rather than support for it.


VDOE should not disregard the role of parents in public education.

The title says, "VDOE should not disregard the role of parents in public education," which اعتراضs to the proposed transgender student policies as written and implies they diminish parental involvement. With no body text, the comment still clearly signals opposition to the regulation's approach.


The commenter explicitly states, "I OPPOSE THIS," which directly indicates rejection of the regulation. They further argue that it "endangers all students," showing a clear substantive objection rather than a neutral or informational remark.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the VDOE's approval of the draft policies" and argues the policies "undercut parents' involvement" and "endanger the bodily privacy and safety of all students." They also object to shared intimate spaces, saying no child should be forced to share "showers, locker rooms, hotel rooms" with someone of the "opposite biological sex."


NO-This is Parent's Domain    Transgender Inst.   Guidance Survey  Va. Town Hall

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with "NO-This is Parent's Domain," indicating opposition to the proposed transgender student guidance. The title also frames the issue as a parental अधिकार/authority concern rather than support for adoption.


I oppose this action.  Parents should be informed.

The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this action," which directly states opposition to the proposed regulation. The follow-up, "Parents should be informed," suggests a concern that the policy does not adequately notify parents, reinforcing opposition rather than support.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am opposed to the proposed transgender policy," which directly states opposition to adoption. The follow-up, "Parent view needs to be honored," reinforces that they want the policy rejected or changed to prioritize parental authority.


The commenter says they "vehemently oppose the proposed transgender 'policies'" and repeatedly argues against them, calling them a "political minority's views" and saying "No forced imperatives or practices regarding gender politics should prevail." They also object to shared facilities and parental authority concerns, indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support or neutrality.


Guidance Document (Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in VA Public School)

The commenter explicitly says, "Oppose because only Parents have the right TO DECIDE. NOT STATE OR SCHOOL," which clearly rejects the proposed guidance. The statement argues against state/school authority over transgender student policies and favors parental control instead.


This bill is a danger to children, physically, mentally and emotionally

The commenter explicitly says the policy is "a danger to children" and argues that the VDOE has "lost all sense of reality." They repeatedly call for rejecting the model policies by claiming they threaten privacy, safety, parental rights, and encourage harmful "gender transitions."


I oppose.  The role of parents in  public education should not be disregarded.

The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose," which directly states their position against the regulation. Their reason, "The role of parents in public education should not be disregarded," indicates objection to the policy on parental rights grounds.


oppose mixed-gender toilet/shower/changing facilities in schools

The commenter explicitly rejects mixed-gender facilities, stating "No child should be forced to share showers, locker rooms, and the like with a member of the opposite biological sex." While they say "Private (one-person-at-a-time), unisex facilities are acceptable," that is a proposed alternative to the policy rather than support for it as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I Oppose This Legislation," and argues the policy should not be adopted. They describe it as "a travesty" and claim it will lead to "child abuse" and "violation of privacy," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly states, "I am opposed to this breach of parental rights by the VDOE," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The phrase "breach of parental rights" indicates opposition to the regulation on substantive grounds rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "Opposed" and argues the VDOE has "gone far beyond the path the General Assembly prescribed." They ask schools not to adopt policies that would allow shared facilities and say the model regulations "infringe the First Amendment rights of parents," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter rejects policies that would “ignor[e] or dismiss[] parents” and argues that “parents should be fully informed at all times,” which directly opposes the proposed transgender student guidance. They also object to “young children” sharing “restrooms, locker rooms, and overnight accommodations” with students of the “opposite biological sex,” indicating opposition to the regulation’s facility and privacy provisions.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy’s approach to transgender identity in schools, saying there is "no business pushing children to identify as the opposite sex" and urging to "keep sex out of it." The title, "Gender identity doesn't belong in elementary school," also signals opposition to the regulation as applied to young students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I completely support making our schools more inclusive and supportive of LBGT youth," which directly endorses the regulation. They also argue that schools should be "a safe place where kindness and understanding lead," reinforcing approval of the policy's goals.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and calls the policy "utter nonsense." They argue against allowing transgender students to use facilities aligned with their gender identity and frame the policy as harmful to "the family structure."


Oppose transgender policy from VA Department of Education

The commenter explicitly says, "I urge the VA Department of Education not to enact transgender policies" and calls for the issue to be handled "case by case" instead of "imposing it on everyone." Although they express compassion toward transgender people, the overall position is clearly against adopting the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says "opposed!" and adds "this hurts children," indicating they want the regulation rejected. There is no supporting language or request for modification, only a clear negative judgment of the policy.


I oppose any legislation that lessens parental power

The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose any laws that diminish parental power," which indicates rejection of the proposed policies. The statement frames the regulation as reducing parental decision-making authority over children.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy’s premise, saying "Stop facilitating the denial of sexual reality" and arguing that transgender identity should be treated as mental illness rather than accommodated. The language is directed against the regulation’s support for transgender students, indicating opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this legislation," which directly states opposition to adoption. The additional statement that "The government has no right to override this duty" reinforces rejection of the policy on parental-rights grounds.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support inclusive schools," which clearly endorses the regulation’s inclusive approach toward transgender students. No opposing or qualifying language is present.


These bills pre-suppose an ideology that is not shared by the majority of americans

The commenter explicitly says the policy "should be rejected wholeheartedly" and argues it "forces an ideology" that should not be adopted. They also claim the bills are unnecessary and harmful, calling it "nothing short of child abuse."


The commenter explicitly says the VDOE has "gone far beyond the path the General Assembly prescribed" and argues schools "should not be accommodating" these policies. They also claim the model regulations "infringe the First Amendment rights of parents" and would "pit children against their parents," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I commend Virginia’s efforts to protect trans students" and praises the "evidence-based approach." They also argue that current policies "do not do enough" and imply the regulation should be strengthened to better protect LGBTQ+ students.


The commenter explicitly rejects transgender protections, calling them "nonsense about transgender 'rights'" and urging to "stop this nonsense". They ask to rely on the "original, unaltered birth certificate" and say to "protect all our children" by ending these policies, which indicates opposition to adoption.


Transgender Regulations by the VA Dept of Education

The commenter argues that "Parents or the legal guardians of children should have input and in some cases the final say" on transgender-related issues, which signals opposition to the regulation’s approach to school handling of transgender students. The emphasis that parents are "legally and morally responsible" suggests the commenter wants greater parental control and likely weaker school authority under the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this," referring to the transgender policies. They also object that "Intrusive Government rules undercutting parents’ rights and involvement are not acceptable," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation.


A few reasons why I oppose the transgender policies proposed by the VDOE

The commenter explicitly says they "strongly oppose the transgender policies proposed by the Virginia Department of Education." They also argue the policies "infringe the First Amendment rights of parents" and should not encourage "irreversible 'gender transitions'," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose any effort" by Virginia to "undercut the role of parents" in this area, which directly rejects the proposed transgender student policies. They also argue against the underlying premise by asserting that sex is genetically fixed and citing negative effects of transgender surgery, reinforcing opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not approve of the proposed guidelines" and titles the comment "Strongly Oppose." They argue the policies are "totally unworkable" and would "force all students, faculty and administrators to comply" with views they reject, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter says, "I am firmly opposed to this proposal," which directly states opposition to adoption. They also criticize it for disregarding "parents’ role" and harming "Virginia’s public school system," reinforcing that they want the regulation rejected.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the efforts to protect trans students!" and praises Virginia's "evidence-based approach." They also argue current policies "do not do enough," indicating they want the regulation adopted and strengthened rather than rejected.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "OPPOSED" and says the VDOE has "gone far beyond its mandate." They argue the guidance infringes parents' rights and object to shared facilities with transgender students, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I write in opposition to proposed changes to transgender policy language" and asks that it "should not occur." They also argue it "oversteps the Department’s role" and conflicts with "deeply-held parental convictions," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this guidance" and argues it is "protecting transgender students' right to the same educational experience as everyone else." They also reject the idea that it is "imposing" anything, indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter rejects the policy’s premise, stating that a person’s “sexual preference and or identity does NOT give them the right” to expose children to those views. This indicates opposition to the transgender student guidance rather than support for it.


Oppose Transgender policies that aren't allowing parent involvement in a the life of their children

The commenter explicitly says "Oppose Transgender policies" and argues that schools "shouldn't encourage talks about transgender issues" or "promot[e] approval in any way." The comment rejects the policy's approach to bathrooms, locker rooms, and overnight rooms, indicating opposition to adoption.


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

The commenter says the proposed policies would "pit children against their parents" and calls it "another action" that will "further diminish support for public schools," which clearly rejects the regulation. There is no language suggesting approval or a request for modification in support of adoption.


Oppose, science shows that children have not yet developed consequential thinking at this age

The commenter explicitly says, "This does not protect children" and argues that "parents need to have a role" in preventing "rash decisions that have lifetime consequences," which indicates opposition to the proposed policies. The title also begins with "Oppose," reinforcing the negative position.


OPPOSE Transgender policies proposed by the VDOE

The commenter explicitly states, "I OPPOSE Transgender policies proposed by the Virginia Department of Education" and repeatedly argues the VDOE "should not" approve them. The comment asks the policies be rejected because they allegedly undermine parental rights, privacy, and safety.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not approve of the proposed VDOE guidelines" and calls the policies "totally unworkable." They also argue the guidelines would force compliance with a view of sex and gender that conflicts with their beliefs, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "SUPPORT THE EQUITABLE TREATMENT OF TRANS STUDENTS" and states that the proposed model policies "are in comportment" with professional ethical standards. This is clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter says, "I strongly oppse the transgender mandate" and argues it is "not the role of VDOE to get involved in such matters." They also threaten to withdraw their child from the school system if it passes, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly asks, "Please do not disregard the role of parents in public education," and criticizes the proposal as encouraging youth to adopt "transgender ideology." This indicates opposition to the regulation as written and a preference for weakening or rejecting it.


The commenter explicitly says the policy is "Opposed to cutting out parents" and argues that policies allowing schools to ignore parents "runs counter to schools' mission." They also reject key transgender-student provisions, objecting to restroom/locker room access and saying children should not be encouraged toward a different gender identity.


The commenter argues the regulation would create discomfort in gendered facilities and overnight trips and explicitly says, "This regulation would go against the First Amendment rights of parents." That language indicates they want the policy rejected or at least substantially weakened.


Absolutely OPPOSE to this! Parents should have and responsibility overall in regards to their kids

The commenter explicitly says "Absolutely OPPOSE to this!" and argues that "Parents should have... responsibility overall" for their children and education, indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The comment does not request modifications; it opposes adoption outright.


Protect Biological Women from Adverse Effects of Transgender Dogma

The commenter explicitly argues the Department has "gone far beyond" what the General Assembly prescribed and says schools should not accommodate the policies as written. They object to shared facilities, "irreversible 'gender transitions,'" and claim the proposal infringes parents' First Amendment rights, indicating clear opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly states, "Strongly oppose this legislation," which directly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The commenter explicitly says the rules "should never be enforced" and calls them "corrupt and evil," indicating clear rejection of the regulation. They also object that "parents should be the ones to make these decisions," showing opposition to the policy framework.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and objects to "eliminating parental involvement at all levels." They also criticize "restrooms open to all eliminating privacy," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies.


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

The commenter calls the policy effort "millions of wasted dollars" and says it is "parents business, not the school," indicating opposition to the regulation and its implementation. They further dismiss it as "this clearly first world problem," reinforcing that they do not want these policies adopted.


The commenter explicitly says they are "Opposed to proposed policies" and argues the VDOE has "gone far beyond the path the General Assembly prescribed." They also state the policies "infringe the First Amendment rights of parents" and should not accommodate gender transitions, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Oppose" and says the policy "infringes upon our parental rights". They object to "intentionally excluding communication with parents," indicating rejection of the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "We strongly support this policy," which directly endorses adoption. The statement that "All children must be nurtured, cared for, and protected" further reinforces approval of the regulation's goals.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission as "Opposition" and says "This document must be opposed." They argue the policy is "irresponsible and unfair" and object to sharing "a room/shower/bathroom with a member of the biologically opposite sex," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


Strongly OPPOSE these transgender policies

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose these transgender policies" and repeats that position at the end. They argue the policies are "absurd," "not safe for children," and that the Department has gone "far beyond" what the General Assembly prescribed, all of which indicates clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Oppose transgender policies proposed by the Virginia Department of Education" and repeatedly argues the policies are "misguided and gravely harmful." They call for schools not to accommodate these policies and say the model regulations "infringe the First Amendment rights of parents," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


Schools would be prohibited from notifying parents if a biological male is using the same changing f

The commenter objects to the policy allowing access to restrooms and locker rooms based on gender identity, asking "Where are my rights?" and arguing it should be changed to "Give trans and nonbinary their own bathroom." Although they express support for trans students' safety, the overall position is against the proposed access rule as written and favors a substantially different approach.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy by saying children should not be subjected to "newly created so called (gender ideology) theory," which indicates opposition to the transgender student guidance. The title, "Stop experimenting with the innocence of our young children," further signals a desire to block adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "Oppose the proposed transgender policies," and argues the changes are "in direct opposition" to most parents. The question "What about the rights of the 95+% of the students?" indicates they do not want the regulation adopted as proposed.


The commenter explicitly says, "The VDOE should not disregard the role of parents" and warns that approving the draft policies would "undercut parents’ involvement" and "endanger the bodily privacy and safety of all students." They conclude by urging VDOE to "respect the role of parents," indicating opposition to adoption of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly calls the policies "harmful" and asks, "Why mess with young minds," indicating they do not want the regulation adopted. They also argue the model regulations "infringe the First Amendment rights of parents," which is a direct objection to the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" and argues the VDOE has "gone far beyond the path the General Assembly prescribed." They repeatedly reject the policy’s accommodations for transgender students, calling them a threat to parental rights, privacy, and children’s wellbeing.