Strongly Oppose HB145, SB161 + Model Policies 4 Treatment of Transgender Student in Public Schools

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose HB145, SB161 + Model Policies" and asks to "re-do this document," indicating rejection of the regulation as written. They also object to specific provisions, including privacy/confidentiality and the treatment of transgender students, while urging that "Parents need to know."


I strongly oppose. Parents you are giving up your control of your Children.

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" and "This should not be allowed in school!" They also argue the policy would undermine parental control and object to students being "groomed at school to be able to choose their gender," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter states, "I am totally opposed to the proposed regulations concerning transgender students," which is a direct rejection of the regulation. No qualifying language suggests support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am opposed to this policy change" and closes with "Please do not pass this change." They argue the policy would create "confusion" and object to the terminology and lack of an opt-out, indicating rejection of the regulation as proposed.


Vehemently Oppose Transgender Guidelines

The commenter explicitly says they are "vehemently opposed" to the model policies and argues that adoption "will only lead to further confusion." They also reject recognition of transgender identities, stating there are "only two genders" and that it is wrong to recognize "a girl as a boy or vice-versa."


Regarding transgender policies proposed by the Virginia Department of Education

The commenter explicitly says, "Please do not approve these draft policies" and argues they would "severely undercut my involvement as a parent" and "endanger the bodily privacy of my children." The comment consistently criticizes the proposed policies as beyond the legislature's intent and harmful to children and parents.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and "Do not support." They argue the issue "should be handled at home" and that school involvement is "irresponsible & destructive," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" the draft model policies and asks that they "not be implemented." They also argue the policies would cause "further confusion" and reject recognition of transgender identities, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly states, "I fully support the thoughtful and comprehensive Model Policies" and later repeats, "I fully support the adoption of this policy." The comment argues the policy should be adopted to ensure schools are inclusive of "transgender and non-binary people" and aligned with district mission statements.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support it" and describes the policy as "a reason that schools should affirm a child's gender identity, protect their privacy as needed, educate school staff, and provide appropriate accommodations." The comment argues the bill "goes a long way" toward keeping students safe, indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues the policy would cause harm, "confusion," and undermine parents' authority. They also say the Department of Education should focus on academics "only," indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support with changes.


We Should Not Play Politics With the Serious Mental Illness of Gender Dysphoria

The commenter explicitly urges the state to "hold the line" against the policy and says it should "Not confuse or traumatize young, impressionable children" by "normalizing transgender behavior". They also oppose applying these policies to private and religious schools, calling it "gender identity politics" and a "latest fad," which indicates rejection of the regulation's approach.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidance" and adds that it "helps provide direction" for addressing transgender issues. The comment frames the policy as "safe and supportive for all," indicating approval of adoption.


Govt and Education should NOT be Meddling in Gender Identification

The commenter explicitly says the government and school have "NO business meddling" and concludes with "STAY OUT OF Gender Identification Education," which rejects the regulation’s involvement in transgender student policies. The comment frames the policy as improper interference in family guidance and school administration.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues the proposal "infringes on the rights of parents" and conflicts with "the scientific reality that biological sex means something." This is a clear rejection of the regulation's approach to transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this policy" and frames that support around creating "a safe environment for all students." The qualifier "to the extent it is focused on accomplishing that objective" suggests mild conditional support, not opposition.


The commenter rejects the guidance, saying it "clearly violete the rights of the non transgender" and implying it should be replaced by "a unit for the transgender" instead. This indicates opposition to the proposed policies as written, based on perceived rights violations.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support this policy," which directly indicates approval of the regulation. They also add that schools should provide "a safe environment for all students and teachers," reinforcing support for the policy's purpose.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy ideas in the title, saying "No to these ideas; Protect children." The body argues against affirming transgender identities in schools by framing them as childish pretending that should be outgrown, which indicates opposition to adoption of the regulation.


STRONGLY OPPOSE Proposed VDOE Transgender Policy

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly OPPOSE the proposed transgender policy" and argues that "The proposed policy goes to far." They object to shared facilities and to schools supporting transgender identity, saying children should not be "encouraged to be transgender."


The commenter says, "Not your place to teach vdoe to any kid," which appears to reject the regulation or the underlying transgender guidance in schools. The phrasing is dismissive and indicates opposition to the state education department's role in this area.


Opposed to forcing children of different genders into mixed settings without privacy rights

The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose" the policy and argues against "forcing children of different genders into mixed settings without privacy rights." They object to transgender-inclusive access to locker rooms, bathrooms, and other sex-segregated spaces, and say they would "happily leave the state" if the laws are changed.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this guidance" and "Strongly support." They also endorse the policy goals, stating it would help schools provide "a safe and inclusive educational experience for all students, especially our LGBT youth."


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose transgender regulations proposed by VA Department of Education" 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 be adopted because they would encourage "irreversible 'gender transitions'."


The commenter explicitly says, "I am opposed to this guidance document" and "I disapprove of the VDOE's proposed guidelines." They also object to the policy's purpose, claiming it is based on "radical theories" to "eliminate the distinction of male and female distinctions and indoctrinate children."


The commenter explicitly labels the comment "opposed" and says schools should not be "accommodating" these policies. They argue the model regulations "infringe the First Amendment rights of parents" and would "pit children against their parents," indicating rejection of the proposed guidance.


The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY OPPOSE THESE TRANSGENDER POLICIES PROPOSED BY THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION." They also argue the policies go "far beyond the path the General Assembly prescribed" and object to shared intimate spaces with transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidance" and adds that it "helps provide direction" in a way that is "safe and supportive for all." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


please be kind and supportive to transgender students


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully oppose the transgender policy" and asks, "Please do not enact this policy change." They argue it is "morally wrong" and harmful, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this policy" and asks to "please vote NO," which clearly indicates rejection of the regulation. The stated reason that it will "create chaos and confusion" reinforces opposition rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "These changes for protection of transgender students are critical," which clearly endorses the proposed policies. The rest of the comment reinforces support by arguing that more education is needed regarding transgender issues and dismissing opposition.


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

The commenter explicitly says they are "outraged and strongly object" and pleads, "PLEASE DO NOT APPROVE THESE UNFAIR POLICIES!" They also describe the policies as "destructive and divisive" and "harmful," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" and argues the policy is "overreaching" and would create "greater problems." They also say it "needs significant work," but the overall thrust is rejection of the policy as proposed rather than support with minor edits.


The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY OPPOSE the proposed model policies," which directly states opposition to adoption. The opening claim about supporting "each and every student and teacher" does not change the clear rejection of the regulation.


Support This Guidance and Trans Students

The commenter explicitly says, "I support this guidance" and argues that it will reduce bullying, harassment, and suicidal thinking for transgender students. They also state that the guidance will help schools provide "the best learning environment possible" and create "a truly equal Commonwealth."


The commenter explicitly says "Please Support" and states "This guidance will allow them to feel safe" in schools. The rest of the comment urges acceptance of the policy and empathy for transgender students, indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "please support this guidance" and frames the policy as beneficial, stating it "would have changed my life" and made them feel "more loved and accepted." The comment clearly endorses adoption of the guidance.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose these policies" and argues they are "a dangerous move toward state influence on children." They also say matters of gender and sexuality are "the purview of parents and families, not of public school teachers," indicating rejection of the regulation.


dangers of proposed transgender policies

The commenter explicitly argues the policies would have "a very harmful effect" and lists multiple reasons they should not be adopted, including harm to "girls sports," trauma in "bathrooms" and "sleeping arrangements," and negating benefits for girls and women. The overall thrust is rejection of the proposed transgender policies rather than support or a neutral request for information.


The commenter explicitly opens with "Absolutely oppose" and repeatedly argues against the policy, saying it is "going about it the wrong way" and asking "Why would parents ever trust teachers again?" They object to withholding information from parents and to penalties for teachers, indicating clear opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says they "strongly opposed any and all adoption" and repeatedly urges officials to "reject and/or dismiss implementation of these policies." They also threaten to withdraw their child and have their wife resign if the policies are adopted, indicating clear opposition rather than a request for modification.


Inclusion, safety, and support for all learners.

The commenter explicitly endorses the policy’s goals, stating that "A safe and inclusive Education for all learners is an essential foundation of public education." This language supports adoption of the transgender student policies rather than opposing them.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am totally opposed to this legislation on transgender identity," which clearly rejects the proposed policy. They also object that it is "bypassing parental authority" and "asking teachers and school personnel to forfeit their beliefs," indicating opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly states, "I strongly oppose!" which directly indicates rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. No supporting or neutral language is present.


The commenter explicitly says "DO NOT APPROVE," which is a direct rejection of the proposed policy. The title, "Do not approve VDOE draft model policy for transgenders," reinforces opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose these proposed transgender policies" and argues the policies would "encourag[e]" a harmful "craze" rather than discourage it. The body repeatedly frames transgender identification as dangerous and something schools should not support, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The comment rejects the premise underlying the proposed transgender student policies by asserting, "There are only two genders. Male and Female." This indicates opposition to adopting guidance that recognizes or accommodates transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do NOT approve of these proposed guidelines" and opens with "Absolutely reject to ALL of this!" This is a clear rejection of the regulation as a whole, not a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy as written, saying the “new rule makers are not seeing the forest for the trees” and arguing the rules would “not allow them privacy” and create “chaos” in bathrooms. They also oppose transgender participation in sports, calling it unfair and proposing separate categories instead of the proposed approach.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it "absolutely RIDICULOUS," urging officials to "BURN THIS PROPOSAL," and saying it would "create so many more" problems. They also argue for an alternative approach, asking for "mental health help" instead of the proposed policy.


Trans Educator Here. I Support this Document.

The commenter explicitly says, "I support this guidance document 100%" and describes the policies as "a step in the right direction" that help create "safe and supportive educational settings." The comment argues for protecting transgender students from discrimination and harassment, clearly endorsing adoption of the guidance.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly opposed" and asks to "Please rethink this approach." They argue the policy "removes all accountability" and raise objections about bathroom access and resource allocation, indicating they do not want the regulation adopted.


This is crazy! I do not support any of this

The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support any of this" and calls the policies "insane," indicating clear rejection of the regulation. They also argue it "undermine[s] parental rights" and that schools should not "go against parents," which shows opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "fully support" and adds that "trans students deserve safety and resources," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose and protections. There is no language indicating opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "we wholeheartedly support all positive guidelines for transgender students" and repeats, "We support wholeheartedly." This is a clear endorsement of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "OPPOSED" and says the policies would "do terrible damage" and should "not be countenanced." They argue against transgender recognition, school education on the topic, and mixed-sex sports/facilities access, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this policy" and frames it as protecting transgender students at school. The statement "Rights are rights and should not be argued against" further indicates approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly states, "I am in full support of these policies!" and opens with "Full Support." They also express approval with "This is an amazing idea" and a broad inclusive sentiment, "Respect EVERYONE!"


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose!" and argues that schools have "no right to do this," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. They also threaten to "remove our children from public school" if it occurs, reinforcing opposition.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose the proposed guidance document" and asks that any related legislation "should be held by statewide referendum," indicating rejection of the regulation and its use as a basis for future law. The comment does not offer support or neutral feedback.


The commenter explicitly says "strong support of the guidelines being put forth" and endorses them as protecting students. The statement "Every student should feel included and protected by our schools" clearly supports adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "FULLY SUPPORT" and urges legislators to "protect transgender students." The rest of the comment reinforces approval by framing the policy as consistent with "equality and fairness."


STRONGLY oppose - Let LEGAL GUARDIANS parent

The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY oppose" and states they are considering alternatives "BECAUSE of these proposed policies." They argue the policies are "TAKING AWAY PARENTAL RIGHTS" and object to schools not informing parents about a child's identity, indicating clear opposition to adoption of the regulation.


I strongly oppose these policies and guidance

The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed" to the proposed model policies and repeatedly argues they should not be enacted. They also say the guidelines "violate parental rights" and would impose a "conflicting ideology," which indicates rejection rather than support with modifications.


The commenter explicitly says, "I wanted to voice my strong support of the Virginia Transgender Policy guide." They also state it will "help protect trans students" and make schools "inclusive and welcoming," which clearly endorses adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I 100% oppose this subversion of truth" and urges officials to "reject the nonsense of gender identity and fluidity." They also ask to "back off" from the policy and "let the truth prevail," which clearly indicates opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and argues the policies "DO NOT provide fair or equal treatment." They object to bathroom/locker room access for transgender students and say it is "unfair" and "unconstitutional" to require compliance.


Antidote Treating Gender Confusion Known to NIH for Two Decades

The commenter argues it is "necessary to prevent non-reversible mutilation of a child's body" and frames the transgender policies as enabling harmful treatment. They urge schools to instead disseminate information about "Pimozide" as a "first time treatment" for "Gender Confusion," which indicates opposition to the proposed transgender student policies as written.


Draft model policies for the treatment of transgender students

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose any of these policy proposals," which directly rejects the regulation. The quoted scripture is used to justify that opposition rather than to ask a question or offer neutral input.


DO NOT PASS THIS.  God does not make mistakes!!!

The commenter explicitly says, "DO NOT PASS THIS" and calls the proposal "an abomination if passed," which clearly rejects adoption of the regulation. The religious framing (“God does not make mistakes!!!”) reinforces opposition rather than offering neutral input or support with changes.


I do not agree with this guidance.  This is not in the best interest of ALL of the students.

The commenter explicitly says, "I do not agree with this guidance" and argues it is "not in the best interest of ALL of the students." They object to the policy on privacy and family-rights grounds, citing "bathroom/locker room issue" and "a family’s right to not introduce their children to these topics at young ages."


The commenter explicitly says "100% against" the policy and ends with "a great big no on this policy." They object to transgender recognition in schools, oppose "multi-sex public restrooms," and reject allowing transgender students in classes or facilities.


The commenter explicitly says, "STRONGLY OPPOSED" and repeatedly rejects the policy, calling it "short-sighted" and "ultimately self-defeating." They object to it on parental rights and ideological grounds, saying it "usurps parental knowledge" and "forces ideologies upon others."


The commenter explicitly says, "I not approve of the proposed guidelines" and titles the comment "Strongly disagree with these policies." They argue the policies would "create chaos" and object to bathroom access and family rights, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "No way I will support this," which directly rejects the regulation. They also object to "forcing everyone to conform," indicating opposition to the policy approach rather than a request for minor changes.


Completely opposed to this rejection of basic biology

The commenter explicitly says they are "Completely opposed" and threatens to "remove my children and my tax money from the district if this passes," indicating they want the regulation rejected. The phrase "basic biology" and objection to "distort" their children's understanding further show opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the proposed gender policies," which directly states opposition to adoption. They further argue the policies "fall completely outside the mission and purview of public education" and that schools have "no business engaging in this level of social engineering," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Educator in full support!" and adds that "Schools should be a safe and inclusive place for all students," which clearly endorses the proposed policies. There is no language opposing or questioning the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the draft guidance provided by the VDOE" and repeatedly endorses the policy as beneficial. They argue it will "provide a safe and inclusive educational experience for EVERY student," especially "LGBTQ+ students," indicating clear approval of adoption.


Dress and address policy in regards to transgender people

The commenter says, "I strongly disapprove of these guidelines," which directly rejects the proposed regulation. They also argue it "put[s] an unfair burden on other students and staff," indicating opposition rather than a request for modification in support of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not approve of their proposed guidelines," which directly rejects the regulation. The rest of the comment criticizes the policy as "radical theories" and claims it would "eradicate all distinctions between male and female," reinforcing opposition.


I support a safe and inclusive environment for all of our children.

The commenter explicitly says, "I support a safe and inclusive environment for all of our children," which aligns with adopting the proposed policies. There is no language opposing or questioning the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the proposed guidance" and explains that inclusive school support helped their transgender student thrive and graduate with honors. They argue the policy is needed because some students lack supportive home environments and benefit from "supportive counselors, administration, and teachers/mentors."


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose" and states it would be "doubly wrong to put into place these proposed guidelines." They argue the guidelines would cause "tremendous confusion and chaos," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


Gender Transitioning Policies Harm Vulnerable Children who Deserve Educator Protection

The commenter explicitly says, "These new proposed policies should be opposed to protect children," and argues the policy lacks needed safeguards. They frame the guidance as harmful, warning it could "harm vulnerable children" and lead to "lawsuits like this one."


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the draft guidance provided from VDOE" and calls it "a step in the right direction." They also state that it will create "a safe environment for LGBTQ+ students" and prevent discrimination, indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Vehemently Oppose" and argues the policy is "to the detriment of the vast majority of students". They also say it "completely eliminates parents" and "DOES NOT protect all students," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "Oppose this very much!" and argues that schools should focus on "education only," implying the policy is a distraction from the primary mission of schools. The statement that we are "not to address one group of people as more important" suggests rejection of the transgender student policies as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not approve of the proposed guidelines" and the title reads "Strongly Oppose." They argue the policies are based on "radical theories," oppose "gender-based policies," and claim the guidelines would risk parents being reported for child abuse, all of which indicate rejection of the regulation.


This is pathetic.  STRONGLY STRONGLY OPPOSE

The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY STRONGLY OPPOSE" and argues the policy is "pathetic" and an "overstepping" of the department's role. They object to "compelled speech" and say the guidance should not be adopted because schools should "stick to a basic rule" instead.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support!" and urges the policy to be adopted: "Do it up!" They also praise it as "Comprehensive, kind, data-supported measures" with "positive outcomes for LGBTQ kids."


"I support the draft guidance provided by the VDOE

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the draft guidance provided by the VDOE" and repeats support for "this guidance." They also endorse the goal of making sure every student has a "safe education" in a "nurturing, safe and welcoming" environment.


I support a safe and inclusive environment for all of our students-fully support!

The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support a safe and inclusive environment for all of our students" and thanks the authors for the document and guidance. This is a clear endorsement of the proposed regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "I write to oppose these policies" and repeatedly argues they should not be adopted. They claim the policies violate "parental rights," threaten privacy and safety, and conflict with religious beliefs, all of which indicate strong opposition rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support" and "I fully support this," indicating clear approval of the proposed policies. They also argue that schools should be "a safe and welcoming space," which aligns with adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "DO NOT SUPPORT PROPOSED TRANSGENDER POLICIES IN VIRGINIA PUBLIC SCHOOLS," which directly rejects the regulation. They also argue for "Separate bathrooms, separate showers" and frame the policies as a "travesty," indicating opposition to adoption.


Pimozide: Dopamine Antagonist Reverses Feelings/Thoughts of Gender Confusion As First-line Treatment

The commenter argues schools should "discuss and offer" Pimozide as a "first-line treatment" and says children "should never move to Hormone replacements until they are over the age of Eighteen." This directly rejects the regulation’s transgender-supportive approach and seeks to substantially weaken it by replacing it with a pathologizing treatment model.


The commenter explicitly says, "I Strongly OPPOSE" and argues the policy "forces educators and students to accept an ideology" that conflicts with "religious beliefs." They also predict it "will not be upheld by the courts," indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support or neutrality.


Support for Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in VA Public Schools

The commenter explicitly states "strong support" for the model policies and says "I support this guidance". They also endorse the policies as creating a "safe and welcoming" environment for all children.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support the draft guidance" and urges officials to "support the VDOE guidance." They also describe the policy as granting "equal rights and protections" and improving the school environment, which clearly indicates approval of adoption.


STRONGLY OPPOSED-  DO NOT SUPPORT model policies for the treatment of transgender students in VA

The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY OPPOSED" and "Please opposed this dangerous policies," which clearly rejects adoption of the model policies. The phrase "dangerous policies" and reference to "degeneration of children" indicate a desire to block or weaken the regulation.


Support Evidence-Based Policy to Protect TGNC Youth

The commenter explicitly says they are "in support of implementing the policies outlined in this guidance document" and calls the policies "a step in the right direction." They also ask to "protect the rights of students" and create "safe and supportive educational settings" for TGNC youth, indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Please do not have guidance on this topic" and asks to "please remove this topic from needing a guidance document." They also criticize the document as "offensive" and argue against accepting transgender topics in public schools, indicating clear opposition to adoption of the guidance.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this" and gives a reason for adoption: "to create a safer and more equitable environment for ALL of our students." This is a clear endorsement of the regulation as proposed.


The commenter clearly rejects the policy, asking why schools are "pushing an ideology that is wrong" and stating they are "opposed to the direction this type of policy is headed." The reference to biology and Romans 1:18-32 indicates opposition to the regulation's transgender protections.


The commenter explicitly says "Absolutely Opposed!" and argues the policy reflects a "quack notion" that should be shut down. They call for removing transgender people from society and eliminating the organization promoting the policy, which clearly rejects adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I Strongly support" and "I 100% support this issue!" This is a clear endorsement of the proposed regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support having schools that ensure a positive, safe, and nurturing learning environment for all students" and thanks the agency for its "excellent work on this guidance document." The comment clearly endorses the regulation and its protections for transgender students' rights and dignity.


Model policies disregard role of parents

The commenter explicitly says it "urges the Department of Education to reject the proposed model regulations" and concludes, "the Conference, therefore, opposes the proposed 'Model Policies.'" The body repeatedly argues against the policies on parental rights, privacy, and religious grounds, showing clear opposition rather than a neutral or mixed view.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy as "Unnecessary" and says government and NGOs "have no business" to impose it. They argue it should not be "taught or promoted" and object to pronoun use, bathroom access, and any infringement on "parent's rights," all of which indicate opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly states, "I fully support this guidance document," which is a clear endorsement of adoption. The title "Full Support" reinforces that the commenter wants the regulation approved.


The commenter explicitly says, "Absolutely support" and states they "wholeheartedly support" their non-binary grandchild. The comment expresses approval of the underlying transgender-student policies through affirming language about love, kindness, and respect.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "OPPOSE" and says "schools should stay out of it," indicating rejection of the proposed policies. They also call the policies "insane" and say there is "no way to follow the rules proposed," which shows strong opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this protection in our schools," which directly endorses the regulation. They also justify it by saying no child or adult should be "harassed" or made to feel "inferior," indicating approval of the protections for transgender students.


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

The commenter explicitly rejects the proposal, calling the policies "outrageous" and saying, "I hope these policies are not accepted by our school district nor any school district in our state." This is a clear request to reject the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support," and frames the policy as important for being "welcoming to ALL students." As an educator, they are endorsing adoption of the regulation rather than questioning or opposing it.


The commenter explicitly says, "OF COURSE I support this policy" and the title reads "Strongly Support." They also criticize opposition to the policy, indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support these policies to be put in place" and repeatedly argues that the policies should protect children and prevent discrimination. They also conclude that "putting the policies in place will help aid the success of the public schools," which clearly endorses adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am fully in support of this motion" and urges officials to "do what is right and just for these individuals." The reference to needing "protection for our trans students" indicates clear approval of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says they are "in FULL SUPPORT of this policy" and states it will "protect transgender students." They also argue that students deserve "a safe accepting school" and that protections are needed to prevent harassment and bullying.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this policy" and endorses the document as protecting equal rights and safety. They also argue that students should "feel safe and respected," indicating approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "FULLY Support" and "I totally support any measures to ensure fairness and equality to ALL students!!!!" This clearly endorses the proposed policies rather than opposing or questioning them.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this!" and frames the regulation as aligned with treating "ALL children and ALL people" with kindness and respect. The rest of the comment criticizes opponents, reinforcing approval of the proposed policies.


Opposition to model policies for the treatment of transgender students

The commenter explicitly says, "I am totally opposed to these 'model policies'" and repeatedly argues against adoption of the guidance. They list multiple reasons for opposition, including "infringement on parental rights," "keeping information from parents," and "violation of the privacy rights of the majority of students."


The commenter explicitly says "Fully Support!" and explains that "every student deserves a safe and supportive environment" and should "be treated with respect," which aligns with adopting the regulation. There is no language opposing or questioning the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose," which directly states opposition to the regulation. They also argue that the policies leave "no room in these ideas for the rights of those who disagree," indicating they want the guidance rejected or substantially changed.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this policy," which directly endorses adoption. The follow-up, "All students should be treated equally," reinforces approval of the regulation's nondiscrimination goals.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this measure," which directly states opposition to the regulation. They also ask for "adequate provisions for the consciences of religious people" to be added, indicating they want the policy changed substantially before adoption.


VDOE Draft Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the VDOE Draft Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students." They also argue the policy would be "detrimental to the student," indicating they want it rejected rather than adopted.


100 % oppose - MALE and FEMALE created He them

The commenter explicitly says "100 % oppose" and argues the policy "violates the very created order of God." The biblical quotation about "MALE and FEMALE created He them" is used to reject the regulation rather than support or modify it.


The commenter rejects the policy’s implications, stating that "No child should be forced to share showers, locker rooms, hotel rooms, or other intimate settings with a member of the opposite biological sex." They call the policy "a gross violation" of privacy, indicating opposition to adoption as written.


Strongly oppose, our children need protection from people who have a flawed idea of gender.

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues the policy is "a ploy" and "bent on blowing a small situation into a totally outsized problem," indicating they want it rejected. They also object to the policy's underlying treatment of gender and claim it would take "parental control" away.


Fully Support this. We need to move the country forward on bringing equity to all students.

The commenter explicitly says, "Fully Support this," "should be fully supported," and "I fully support this as policies that should be implemented and approved." The comment argues the policy will "bring equity to all students" and make schools "more inclusive," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly opposed to the proposed transgender equality plan," which clearly rejects the regulation. No supporting or neutral language is present.


Respect Parental Rights for Their Children

The commenter asks the DOE to "respect the rights of parents" and says, "Let them make the decision to accept or reject the state's goals," which indicates opposition to the proposed transgender student policies. The request to "Do not compromise the modesty of children" and the reference to "religious beliefs" not coinciding with "your secular values" further show they want the regulation rejected or substantially weakened.


The comment does not explicitly support or oppose the regulation; it simply states that "Education is a partnership" and that "The role of parents should be heard and respected." This reads as a general value statement about parental involvement rather than a clear position on adopting the transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support this policy." There is no qualifying language or criticism, so the position is clearly in favor of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I completely oppose these policies," which directly rejects adoption of the regulation. They also object that the policies "rob parents of their God-given and legitimate rights," reinforcing opposition on parental-rights grounds.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this legislation," which directly states their position. They argue the policy conflicts with what they call the "biological reality" that humans are "binary" and say schools should not "teach otherwise."


The commenter explicitly says, "We vehemently oppose teaching any such content to children" and asks officials to "Please do not force your beliefs into our school system." The comment rejects the proposed transgender guidance as "not always age-appropriate" and "contrary to both their faith" and "scientific study."


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support these policies" and thanks the agency for "looking out for ALL students," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I'm in full support of this proposal" and closes with "Please pass and implement this guidance." They also endorse the policy’s purpose by arguing that trans youth deserve "dignified treatment" and that it "is proven to save lives."


Virginia Department of Education to draft model policies for the treatment of transgender students

The commenter explicitly says the draft policies would "undercut parents’ involvement," "endanger the bodily privacy and safety of all students," and "infringe the First Amendment rights of parents." They repeatedly argue schools "should not" adopt accommodations for transgender students and frame the policies as harmful, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


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


The title explicitly says "Strongly oppose draft model policies for the treatment of transgender students," which clearly rejects the regulation. The body’s reference to "Brave New World" becoming reality reinforces a negative view of the policy, even though it is brief and somewhat cryptic.


The commenter explicitly begins with "Oppose," indicating they do not want the regulation adopted. The reference to "Aldous Huxley's 'Brave New World'" suggests a negative judgment about the policy as dystopian or socially harmful.


The commenter does not directly endorse or reject the transgender-student policy. Instead, they urge "laser focused attention to classical world class education" and argue that school systems should spend no time on "anything unrelated to the core function" of education, which is an indirect but not explicit position on the regulation.


VA proposed adoption of transgender policies

The commenter explicitly says, "I do not approve" and concludes, "This is bad policy and must be rejected." They argue the proposal is an overreach and object to schools supporting gender transition without parental consent.


If you want mutilate the society, go for it

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it "absurdity," "evil," and "criminal," and urges educators to "focus on what schools are created for" instead of "body parts" and "sexual orientation." They also argue for handling such issues "in private," which indicates opposition to the regulation as written.


To all the people telling you that this hurts children, I promise it doesn't

The commenter explicitly urges approval: "You should support this" and "Give them the support they so desperately need." They also defend the policy as beneficial for trans kids in "supportive environments."


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose and do not approve" of the proposed guidelines. They further criticize the policies as "radical theories" that "confuse, not clarify sexuality," indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy changes, saying we should be helping children instead of "changing our policies on bathrooms, athletic participation, etc." to accommodate them. The phrase "Enough already!" and reference to "the detriment of the overwhelming majority" indicate opposition to the proposed transgender student policies.


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


The commenter explicitly says the policy is "unacceptable" and asks why schools are "putting so much pressure on children" in this way. They also warn that if it is approved it "WILL BE damaging to all children," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly labels the proposal "Strongly Opposed" and repeatedly argues against it, saying it is "taking the rights of parents away" and "harming children." They also warn it would expose children to "predators and unsafe situations," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly calls the policy "a dangerous policy" and says it "threatens to undermine chains of authority," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student guidance. They also argue it harms "the rights and morals of the majority" and propose an alternative to avoid the policy's effects, which shows opposition rather than support.


The commenter says, "I strongly disapprove of proposed guidelines," which is a direct rejection of the regulation. The rest of the comment criticizes the policies as "radical theories" that "eradicate all distinctions between male and female" and "indoctrinate our school children," reinforcing opposition.


The commenter explicitly rejects the proposal, saying "Please don't" and arguing the VDOE has "gone far beyond the path the General Assembly prescribed." They also say schools should not accommodate "irreversible 'gender transitions,'" indicating opposition to the regulation's transgender-student protections.


The commenter repeatedly argues the policies are "Not workable" and lists objections to pronoun requirements, parent notification limits, bathroom access, and gender-neutral dress codes. The comment frames the regulation as harmful and unacceptable, saying it would create "harassment," "privacy and safety" problems, and conflict with "religious faith" and biology.


The commenter explicitly says "I strongly disagree" and "strongly oppose," indicating rejection of the proposed policies. They argue against "affirmation" and say schools should "do not infringe upon the rights of parents," which shows opposition to the regulation's transgender-supportive approach.


I urge you to implement this guidance document.

The commenter explicitly says, "I urge you to implement this guidance document" and asks to "Please implement these measures." They also praise it as an "important document" that will support "the dignity and well-being of young people" and protect them from harm.


strongly opposed to transgender education in the school system

The commenter explicitly says, "I am opposed to Transgender education being a part of educational standards" and argues that "the school system should not be involved." This is a clear rejection of the proposed policies rather than support or a neutral inquiry.


The commenter explicitly opens with "Absolute OPPOSITION!" and repeatedly rejects the policy as "deceptive and degrading," "totally against our Constitutional right," and "absolute force thru policy." They also argue it takes away "parental input" and want schools to "Go back to education's real purpose," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly urges adoption of the protections, saying "Do not make mistakes that will harm further generations of LGBTQ youth" and "Provide equal protection in our schools!" They describe past bullying and lack of protections as harmful, which supports the regulation.


The commenter argues that the policies "would pit children against their parents," which is a clear criticism of the proposed guidance. By framing the policies as creating conflict over "important questions about sex and gender identity," the comment signals opposition rather than support or a neutral inquiry.


Definitions in the guidance are already outdated, inaccurate, incomplete and unsatisfactory.

The commenter repeatedly argues the draft is “scientifically, ethically, and operationally” flawed and says it “threaten[s] the dignity, safety, and well being” of students and parents. They also object to specific provisions, including claims that the guidance “may – or should - lie to parents/guardians” and that it is “ethically unsound,” indicating they want it rejected or substantially revised downward.


The commenter explicitly rejects the proposal with repeated emphatic language: "No, No, No, NO!!!" and argues the VDOE has "gone far beyond" what the General Assembly intended. They call for protecting privacy and say the policies "infringe the First Amendment rights of parents," indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter rejects the premise of the policy by asserting that sex is fixed by chromosomes and that "Preferences do not change science," which directly conflicts with transgender-inclusive guidance. Although they do not explicitly say "reject this regulation," the comment clearly argues against adopting policies based on gender identity or pronoun choice.


Sexual Preferences are personal and optional.  Biology is not.

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy’s core premise, saying they should not be “forced to pretend that a boy is a girl” and asking that their daughter not be required to share “restrooms/showers with your son.” They argue for “immutable biological differences” and against a teenager’s “sexual preference” overriding policy, which indicates opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose on countless levels," and argues to "stop forcing this conversation on children." They frame the policy as "an ideological move" and urge the state to spend time and tax dollars on other priorities instead of adopting these transgender student policies.


Forcing teachers to accept and teach empirical falsefhoods

The commenter explicitly says, "I do not approve of proposed guidelines" and urges, "Stop these policies in their tracks!" They argue the policies "eradicate all distinctions between male and female" and "force" compliance, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The comment explicitly says "Strongly Oppose," which clearly indicates rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. No additional qualifying language suggests support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly states "Strongly Oppose," which directly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided, but the stance is unambiguous.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy as a mandate, saying it "SHOULD NOT be the norm" and that these "radical measures" should not be "mandated legalities." They argue it would "confuse and divide" children and should be handled only as "special cases" rather than through the regulation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the proposal, calling it "an affront to the American family" and saying "This entire proposal" is harmful. They argue it should not expose children to these ideas and frame it as state overreach, indicating opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the initiative to protect our transgender students," which directly endorses the regulation. They also frame the policy as promoting safety and support for all students, indicating approval rather than criticism or neutrality.


Re: Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students in Public Elementary and Secondary Scho

The commenter says the draft "fails scientifically, ethically, and operationally" and repeatedly characterizes it as "ideological" and "indoctrinat[ing]," indicating rejection of the proposal. Although they acknowledge that examining treatment of transgender students is "a worthwhile endeavor," the overall thrust is that the model guidance is unsound and should not be adopted in its current form.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support This Proposal" and repeatedly endorses the policy, calling it "one step in the right direction" and saying "a lot needs to change on a policy level." They also praise specific provisions such as displaying a student's "chosen name" and "true gender" and supporting transgender students in school.


The commenter repeatedly questions why a separate transgender policy is needed and argues that existing bullying/harassment policies already cover everyone. They also warn that VDOE is "opening a door" to lawsuits and ask, "Why does VDOE spend time on things that are universally covered under two words: bullying and harassment," indicating opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "Do not let this pass!!" and calls it "a horrible policy," which clearly rejects adoption of the regulation. The statement that it "will add to the demise of our children" shows strong opposition rather than a request for changes.


All have the right to learn free from discrimination and harassment

The commenter explicitly endorses the policy by saying they "support" it and repeating that "all children have a right to learn, free from discrimination and harassment." The closing "Thank you!" reinforces approval rather than criticism or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and argues that "Everyone should feel safe in school" and that "Discrimination is wrong." They also endorse "nurturing environments" for students to be themselves, which aligns with adopting the policy.


The commenter explicitly says the document "should be dismissed and rejected" and repeats "Reject it, reject it, reject it." They argue the policy is "not science" and harmful, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and repeatedly argues that the policies are necessary to "protect our youth" from bullying, harassment, and discrimination. They also defend the proposed guidance as "evidence-based" and criticize opponents, indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says they "strongly support the adoption of this guidance" and describes it as "a meaningful step" toward a safe and supportive educational space. This is a clear endorsement of the regulation as proposed.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and urges the policy to be adopted: "Please set an example, today, that you stand with marginalized people." They argue the regulation would help trans children and reduce harm, including abuse and suicide risk.


The commenter explicitly says, "Support" and states that the policies "will provide a safe and inclusive educational experience for all students." They also endorse the measure for "our LGBT youth," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly support!" and "I strongly support providing support to all LGBT+ children in our state!" This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support!" and describes the policies as "a good starting point" for making students feel "comfortable and safe." They also argue it is "absolutely essential" to ensure transgender students feel accepted and understood, indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this guidance" and repeatedly endorses the policy as "critical" and "evidence based." They also argue that students should be able to use the bathroom corresponding to their gender identity and that educators need these guidelines.


The commenter explicitly says the comments opposing the guidance are hateful and concludes, "This only makes it more clear that students need school to be a refuge" where they can be supported. That language clearly endorses the proposed policy and its protections for transgender and gender-nonconforming students.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly support" and states, "We need to support LGBTQ+ students in the school systems." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly says "Absolutely support" and argues there is "no reason not to want to make our students... feel safe, supported and loved." They also criticize opposition to the policy and say we should "embrace differences," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


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


The commenter explicitly says, "I 100% support this!!!!" and the title "Pass This!" clearly indicates approval of the proposed regulation. There is no qualifying language or criticism.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this evidence-based policy" and "strongly encourage the VDOE" to adopt it. They also argue the policy "makes schools safer for our children," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The title explicitly says "Strongly Support," which is a clear endorsement of the regulation. The body "Stop playing around" reads as a forceful push to proceed rather than reject the policy.


The commenter explicitly says "strong opposition" to the proposed policies and repeatedly urges Virginia to "abandon" them and "return to the basics." They argue the policy is "social engineering," undermines "parental rights," and should not be adopted.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this guidance document" and argues that it will help provide "equal, respectful, and non-discriminatory treatment" and a "safe environment for ALL children." This is a clear endorsement of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and argues that "Transgender youth are deserving of the same support and respect". They also endorse the schools becoming "a supportive atmosphere" for these students, indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and "I strongly support these policies." They also argue that "All youth MUST be protected," indicating approval of the regulation as a protective measure.


The commenter explicitly titles the comment "FULL SUPPORT" and urges, "Do not let hate win. Let the kids be who they are," which clearly endorses adopting the policy. The language is affirmative and supportive of transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT" and argues that "Students need a space to feel safe to be themselves in school." The phrase "These are BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS" clearly endorses adoption of the policy.


The commenter explicitly states, "I support this," and the title says "Strongly Support." There is no indication of any reservations or requested changes.


The comment explicitly says "STRONGLY SUPPORT," which clearly indicates approval of the proposed regulation. No contrary language or qualifications are present.


The commenter explicitly says, "I cannot condone the policies" and asks, "Please avoid enacting the proposed policies," which clearly rejects adoption. They also argue the policies would create "more safety violations" and cause "harassment and discomfort," reinforcing opposition.


The commenter explicitly states "Full Support" and asks to "please protect our trans youth." They also endorse "the advancement of inclusion and ethical pedagogy," indicating approval of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly endorses inclusive treatment by saying, "I vow to be a teacher that teaches all" and criticizes discrimination: "Why are we still discriminating others?" This indicates support for the regulation’s nondiscrimination and inclusion goals.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support" the proposed policies. The statement "Basic human rights and protections are not a debate" further indicates approval of the regulation's protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says "Fully Support" and adds "This should not even be up for debate, change is needed," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. There is no indication of opposition or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says the guidelines are "highly concerning" and that "it must be rejected." Although they acknowledge the importance of safe spaces for students with gender dysphoria, their overall position is opposition because they object to excluding parents and to the proposed policy generally.


The commenter explicitly says "Fully Support" and adds that "This is a good and right thing for our schools to do." They also thank the policy makers for "protecting our students," indicating clear approval of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and praises the policy with "About time!". The phrase "Inclusion and safety for all" indicates approval of the regulation's goals and implementation.


The commenter explicitly says "FULLY SUPPORT" and adds that "All youth must be protected and feel safe in schools regardless of how they identify!" This clearly endorses the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this!" which directly endorses the proposed regulation. The title, "Strongly Support!," reinforces the same position.


The commenter explicitly says, "I STRONGLY OPPOSE the Model Policies" and argues the policies "exclude parents," "imposes behavior on teachers," and force conduct on children they and their families may oppose. These statements clearly reject adoption of the regulation and call it an unnecessary "extreme."


The commenter explicitly says "Fully endorse," calls the guidance "great" and "stellar," and thanks the authors for putting it together. They also ask for an expansion of protections for transgender student athletes, which indicates support for the regulation with a requested improvement rather than opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not agree with this, and strongly oppose" and states they do not want the policy involved in schools. They also object to the regulation as "radical" and say it would "confuse" children, indicating rejection of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and states that the policy is "vital in protecting the most vulnerable student populations." They also argue that transgender students "must be respected and protected by the school," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and urges, "Leave our children alone to learn," indicating rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The phrase "This social engineering is harming them" further shows opposition and a negative view of the regulation's effects.


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose transgender policies" and urges VDOE to "drop the proposed transgender policies." They argue the policies violate parents' rights and create stress in locker rooms, indicating clear rejection rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I absolutely support this!" and frames the policy as needed support for transgender students. They also express personal approval based on their own experience: "it means a LOT to me to see other kids like me get the support that they need."


The commenter explicitly says, "I support!" and "I fully support the transgender community," which clearly endorses the regulation’s purpose. The statement that "We shouldn't hate or shame these people" further indicates approval of protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this guidance" and adds that it "helps provide direction" in a way that is "safe and supportive for all." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the guidance" and adds that it "helps provide direction" in a way that is "safe and supportive for all." This is a clear endorsement of adopting the regulation.


The commenter does not explicitly reject the regulation, but asks to "recognize and respect the role of parents" in school policies affecting children, which signals concern that the proposed transgender policies may not sufficiently include parental authority. This is best read as opposition to the regulation as written or a request to weaken it in favor of parental control.


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

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this type of dangerous legislation," which is a clear rejection of the proposed policies. They also describe it as intended to "legislate immoral cultural movements," indicating substantive opposition rather than a request for changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the draft model policies," which directly states opposition to adoption. They also argue the document does not "sufficiently respect or protect the privacy rights of children," indicating a substantive objection rather than a request for minor changes.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support" and adds that "any and all should have equality, no exceptions," which clearly endorses the regulation. There is no language opposing or questioning the policy.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am 'for' equal treatment and non-discrimination" and "I agree that guidelines are needed," which supports adopting the regulation. They do raise concerns about classroom order, pronoun enforcement, and withholding information from parents, but these are framed as requests to improve the policy rather than reject it.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it "ludicrous," "insane," and saying schools should not "address" transgender identities. They also criticize schools for allegedly forcing "correct & rational pronouns," indicating opposition to the regulation's transgender student protections and related guidance.


The commenter explicitly endorses the policy, asking rhetorically, "Why would you not support this?" and describing it as "Evidence based" and grounded in "love and acceptance of others." This is a clear affirmative position on adoption.


Do NOT approve this inhumane, destructive and counterproductive policy!

The commenter explicitly says "Do NOT approve this" and "PLEASE DO NOT APPROVE THESE UNFAIR POLICIES!" They describe the policy as "inhumane, destructive and counterproductive" and argue it violates parents' rights and harms students, indicating clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter clearly rejects the proposal, calling it "so insane" and saying "Thank God for private schools," which signals disapproval of adoption. The claim that it would cause "uncontrolled voyeurism" and violate "an expected right to privacy" indicates opposition based on privacy concerns.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly OPPOSE this measure," which directly indicates rejection of the regulation. They also argue it is "harmful to society" and "DISCRIMINATORY," reinforcing opposition rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this as a parent and an educator," which directly states opposition to the regulation. They also object to school involvement in transgender-related issues and express concern about same-sex bathroom and locker room access, indicating they want the policy rejected rather than adopted.


Strongly Oppose VDOE's Transgender Guidelines

The commenter explicitly says they are "strongly AGAINST the VDOE transgender policies" and asks, "Please do not let this move forward!" This is a clear call to reject the regulation, framed as a warning that it is "extremely dangerous" and will cause harm.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am opposed to the Treatment of Transgender policies" and asks, "Please don’t pass these policies!" This is a clear rejection of the regulation as proposed. The phrase "more hurtful than helpful" further indicates opposition rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this policy" and repeatedly urges that it should not be taught or adopted, calling it "propaganda" and saying any attempt to bypass parents "should be immediately dismissed." The comment argues the policy is harmful to parental rights, religion, and science, which clearly indicates opposition to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support any and all efforts to improve transgender student rights, services and support." They also urge the state to "make Virginia a safer and welcoming place for transgender youth," which clearly endorses the regulation's purpose.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly Oppose!" and asks officials to reconsider the policy because it is "not good for our students, staff or community." They also frame it as benefiting "one small group," indicating rejection of the regulation rather than support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "Completely Against this policy!" which directly rejects adoption of the regulation. The phrase "This is an outrage!" reinforces a strongly negative opposition to the proposed policies.


I strongly oppose this public school policy initiative regarding self-declared transgender students

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose any and all Virginia Department of Education policy initiatives" and rejects "recognition and special treatment of self identified transgender students." They also argue the policy should be replaced with "mental health services," indicating opposition to the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says "IN FULL SUPPORT" and "I whole hardly support this initiative." They also endorse the policy’s premise by stating their child deserves a "supportive and caring environment" and that their child’s identified gender should not affect others' freedoms.


This policy endangers trans and non-trans students!

The commenter explicitly argues against the policies, saying they are "likely causing future harm," create "more problems than providing solutions," and that they "don't see how current policies fail to protect them." The comment repeatedly criticizes the guidance on bathrooms, pronouns, and discrimination protections rather than supporting adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do support the guidance" and gives a reason favoring adoption: "all people should be treated with respect, dignity and kindness." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies.


draft model policies for the treatment of transgender students

The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly oppose this guidance," which directly states opposition to adoption. They also argue it is "morally wrong" and will have harmful societal effects, reinforcing that they want the policy rejected.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully oppose this guidance," which directly states their position. They also criticize the policy’s pronoun provisions and gender-identity definitions, calling it "madness" to consider discipline under it.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose these transgender policies," which directly rejects adoption of the regulation. They also argue it will "endanger all students," create a hostile environment, and is "too difficult" and "not practical," reinforcing opposition.


ALL NOTIONS OF TRANSGENDER SUPPORT IN EDUCATION ARE UNCONSTITUTIONAL

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it "UNCONSTITUTIONAL" and "OUT OF SCOPE for VDOE." They argue it should not be instituted and say "No policy should be instituted" that forces these changes, which is clear opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not support this!" and adds "Oppose transgender student policies," which directly rejects the proposed regulation. There is no indication of support or neutrality.


all documents on self declaration of transgender and treatment of transgender .

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose these documents" and argues against "self declaration of transgender and treatment of transgender students." They also claim the policy will "endanger all students" and has "far reaching adverse consequences," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says the proposals are a "clear violation of parental rights" and concludes that "these proposals should be abandoned in their entirety." They repeatedly argue the policies are harmful, calling them "ludicrous," "devastatingly destructive," and a threat to student safety and family relationships.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying "don't confuse helpless children" and "do not demand that school employees lie about the sex of anyone." They argue for separate facilities and sports by sex and call the guidance harmful, "child abuse," indicating opposition to adoption of the transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support protections for trans students in Virginia!" This directly endorses the proposed policies and their protections for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support the proposed protections" and adds, "I am glad to see these proposals to protect our students in the LGBTQ+ community." This clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. The remark about "science community's views on gender" is supportive of the policy rather than opposing it.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, saying "STOP THE INDOCTRINATION NOW!" and "LEAVE OUR CHILDREN ALONE!" They argue the guidance is "child abuse," violates privacy and First Amendment rights, and should not be adopted because it would promote gender dysphoria and allow shared facilities/sports participation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose VDOE's Transgender Guidelines" and asks officials to "oppose this and do not let anything resembling it move forward at all." The body argues the policy is "extremely dangerous" and would cause harm, indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this guidance," which directly endorses adoption. They also praise the policy goals, saying schools should "accept" children and be "safe for them" and should "respect diversity and value equity."


The commenter explicitly says, "Please reject these transgender guidelines 100%," which is a direct call to not adopt the regulation. The title, "Reject these transgender guidelines," reinforces the same position.


The commenter explicitly says, "I support this guidance" and gives a reason favoring adoption: "every student deserves a school environment that is safe and welcoming for everyone." This is a clear endorsement of the regulation as proposed.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose" and asks the agency to "vote NO on this," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The language about "eradicate all distinctions between male and female" and "indoctrinate our school children" indicates opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Totally opposed to all" and "Stop this insanity," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The rest of the comment is abusive language directed at transgender people and the regulation's supporters, reinforcing opposition rather than support or neutrality.


I strongly oppose these proposed gender policies

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the proposed gender policies!" This is a clear rejection of the regulation with no qualifying support or suggested revisions.


The commenter explicitly says "Reject" and "Strongly oppose!", which clearly indicates they do not want the regulation adopted. There is no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality.


As a parent with public school students, I see so many issues with this policy. Please vote NO!

The commenter explicitly says, "Please vote NO!" and repeatedly argues the policy creates problems, including discomfort in "intimate spaces," objections to accommodations, and claims it is "not equitable." They also object to transgender-related assemblies and curriculum, saying it "should not be part of regular social studies curriculum."


The commenter explicitly says, "I am strongly opposed to this whole set of regulations," which clearly rejects the proposed policies. The phrase "re: transgender in our schools" indicates opposition to the regulation as a whole rather than a request for changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly disagree with schools adopting gender-neutral policies" and repeatedly argues schools should not adopt these policies. They call the proposal "outrageous" and say it should be handled by families rather than schools or government.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am in full support of these polices" and endorses them as helping transgender students feel "safe and included at school." They also frame the policies as consistent with their professional ethics and equal treatment for all students.


In Full Support of All Children Being Accepted and Safe

The commenter says they are "in full support of the Virginia Depart of Education’s guidelines" and explicitly endorses the guidance as helpful and protective. They also praise the effort, saying it will "provide consistent guidelines across the state" and "protect the future."


The commenter explicitly says "oppose" and argues the policy "could be easily abused" and lead to unfair disciplinary action over pronouns. They also suggest schools should focus on existing bullying problems instead of adopting this guidance, indicating rejection of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this as it is a step in the right direction," and frames the policy as protecting children and creating a "supportive environment." There is no indication of opposition; the comment endorses adoption of the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says, "We ABSOLUTELY need to support this policy" and urges adoption to "protect our young trans folx from bullying and harassment." The rest of the comment reinforces approval of the policy's inclusivity goals.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support our trans youth" and asks to "Please vote to support this legislation." They frame the policy as necessary to make students "feel safe & accepted at school," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly states "FULLY SUPPORT," which clearly endorses adoption of the guidance document. No objections, qualifications, or requests for changes are included.


The commenter explicitly states "FULLY SUPPORT" and repeats "Fully Support," leaving no ambiguity about their position on the regulation. There are no qualifying concerns or requests for changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "Our Transgender community needs to be supported" and urges schools to be "supportive of them" and "doing everything in their power" to help. This clearly endorses the regulation’s goal of supporting transgender students rather than opposing it.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support these common sense guidelines," which directly endorses adoption of the regulation. The phrase "making sure ALL students are safe and welcome at school" reinforces approval of the policy's goals.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly urge Virginia to adopt the guidance document change" and repeatedly endorses "non-discriminatory, inclusive" guidance. The comment argues the policy is needed to protect students from "bigotry, discrimination, bullying, and transphobia," indicating clear support for adoption.


Support of transgender student guidelines

The commenter explicitly says, "I am in full support of the proposed guidance" and closes with "Please pass the proposed guidance." They also frame the policy as protecting transgender students from discrimination and supporting their right to education.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this evidence-based, common sense guidance" and calls the policies "a necessary step in ensuring equity for all students across Virginia." The comment advocates adoption of the model policies to protect LGBTQ+ students and create a safer school environment.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose proposed Transgender Policies" and repeatedly argues the policy "would open up a Pandora's box of problems" and "is not in the best interests of our children." They also object that it "completely take[s] the parents out of the picture," indicating rejection of the regulation as written.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose!" and argues to "keep the distinctions between genders for our children," which indicates rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The comment does not request modifications; it opposes the regulation's underlying approach.


The commenter explicitly says "100% support" and urges the standards be "completely support[ed]." They frame the policy as providing "basic decency to transgender students" and say it is "long overdue," which clearly endorses adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support this common sense guidance" and gives a reason favoring adoption: "all students are entitled to a safe and non-discriminatory learning environment." This is a clear endorsement of the proposed policies.


The commenter explicitly states "100% support" and adds "This is necessary guidance," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. There is no indication of reservations or alternative requests.


INGSOC & Newspeak does not overwrite real definitions of male and female

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it "Orwellian BS" and saying "Stop indoctrinating the next generation." They also state that "This proposed change is designed to drive a wedge between Americans," which clearly indicates opposition to adoption.


The commenter explicitly states "Support, 100%" and argues that acceptance reduces harm, citing that "suicides decrease with acceptance." This clearly indicates approval of the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter rejects the policy outright, opening with "No way" and arguing to "fight to support our Christian values" against the regulation. They frame it as government overreach that would "stop government telling a parent how to parent" and claim the state is trying to "erase everything that we stand for," indicating opposition to adoption.


Transgender Proposal for VA school systems.

The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this current proposal of Transgender policies for VA school systems!!" This is a clear rejection of the regulation, and the statement that it "totally goes against our creator GOD" reinforces opposition on religious grounds.


The commenter explicitly says "SUPPORT" and states that the legislation is "very helpful." They also express approval of protections for transgender individuals, saying they "deserve the basic respect of everyone."


The commenter explicitly says, "I wholeheartedly support the guidance document" and argues that inclusive policies are appropriate for schools. They also state that schools should "be part of the solution, not part of the problem," which clearly endorses adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this piece of legislation" and praises it as "thoughtfully crafted." They also express hope that it will be "implemented with fidelity soon," indicating clear approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Whole heartedly approve" and repeats "Approve!" with no qualifications or objections. This is a clear endorsement of the proposed regulation.


The commenter explicitly says, "I am in FULL SUPPORT" and "I fully support the implementation of these Model Policies in every school in Virginia." They also argue the policies promote nondiscrimination and safety, indicating approval of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says "Support!" and states that "These policies will help make schools safe for our LGBTQ kids," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation. The comment offers a reason in favor of the policy rather than criticism or a question.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the VDOE's proposed guidelines" and the title reads "STRONGLY OPPOSE." This is a clear rejection of the regulation rather than a request for changes.


The commenter explicitly says, "I do not approve of the proposed guidelines" and calls for rejecting them as "nonsense." They also object to public funding for the policy, saying, "I don’t want our tax dollars supporting such nonsense."


The commenter explicitly states, "i Strongly Oppose this very much!" which directly indicates rejection of the proposed regulation. No supporting reasons or qualifications are provided, but the opposition is unambiguous.


Hold teachers and administrators accountable!

The commenter clearly endorses stronger protections for LGBTQ students and wants teachers held accountable for discriminatory behavior, stating that anti-LGBTQ beliefs are "a threat to LGBTQ students" and should be grounds for termination. This aligns with supporting the regulation’s goal of preventing discrimination and creating a safe environment for transgender students.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support" and "I'm fully in support" of the guidance. They also endorse specific provisions such as chosen names/pronouns, dress according to gender identity, participation in activities, and anti-bullying protections.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose Transgender Proposals" and calls the policies "very unreasonable." They argue the policies would cause harms such as "unfair sports competition," "sexual abuse caused by elimination of privacy," and "challenging of parental authority," indicating clear rejection of the regulation.


The commenter advocates for stronger protections for LGBTQ students and assumes the regulation should address their safety needs, stating that schools should have "an active safety plan for each LGBTQ student" and dedicated officers to prevent harassment and assault. Although the comment proposes additions beyond the current text, it clearly supports the underlying goal of protecting transgender/LGBTQ students rather than opposing the regulation.


The commenter says, "I strongly disapprove of these policies," which directly rejects the regulation. The rest of the comment argues that children are "not mature enough" to make such decisions, reinforcing opposition to the transgender student policies.


Create safe zones for LGBTQ students to go to, give representation for them in meetings

The commenter explicitly asks to "Create safe zones for LGBTQ students" and to "give representation for them in meetings," which aligns with supporting stronger protections and inclusion for transgender/LGBTQ students. The suggestion for a support association to advocate for policy changes indicates endorsement of the regulation's goals rather than opposition.


The commenter explicitly says, "I fully support the Model Policy" and describes it as "a step to help further bring people together and create a more inclusive culture." This is clear approval of the regulation as proposed.


The commenter explicitly says the proposal's language is "not strong enough" and asks for "stronger language requiring the changes and sanctions" to ensure inclusion. This indicates support for the regulation, but with amendments to make it more forceful.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Oppose" and repeatedly argues against the policy, calling it "ethically and morally unjust" and saying it "usurp[s] parent's rights." They question the policy's treatment of athletics, discipline, and parental input, indicating they do not want it adopted as written.


transgender policy changes for Loudoun schools

The commenter explicitly rejects the policy as "ridiculous" and calls it "social experiments on children," indicating they do not want it adopted. They also argue it is "distracting teachers" and "neglecting real education," which is a clear substantive objection to the regulation.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy, calling it "This LGBTQ AGENDA does NOT belong in our schools!" and warning that attempts to enforce it should lead to lawsuits. The body argues against transgender student accommodations by objecting to bathroom access, identity changes, and locker room participation.


The commenter repeatedly argues the policy "is not a priority" and says it "needs to be discussed" later, while directly challenging its core provisions. They object to parental notification limits, student identity recognition, and bathroom/locker room access, calling the proposal "big changes" that would "negatively impact" most students and urging "individual exceptions" instead.


STOP CONFUSING OUR CHILDREN-- TOTALLY DISAPPROVE TO THIS PROPOSAL!!!!

The commenter explicitly says "TOTALLY DISAPPROVE TO THIS PROPOSAL" and asks, "Please do not confuse our children," which clearly rejects the regulation. The argument is grounded in religious objections, stating that "The government does not have authority over GOD's authority" and citing Genesis to oppose the policy.


The commenter rejects the policy outright, saying "this is not the truth" and warning that "This leads to a dark future," which indicates opposition to adoption. No language suggests support or a neutral request for information.


The comment says, "This is just insane," which is a clear expression of disapproval toward the proposed policies. The title "Please wake up" also signals rejection rather than support or a neutral question.


Protect parental rights and religious freedom in the counseling of children

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose this bill," which directly rejects the proposed regulation. They also frame it as "nonsense bills" and argue for a different policy direction, indicating opposition rather than a request for modification.


Opposed - Don't disregard role of parents

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


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly oppose the VDOEs proposed guidelines" and identifies the subject as "transgender policies." This is a clear rejection of the regulation rather than a request for changes or a neutral observation.


I am against the Model Policies for the Treatment of Transgender Students

The commenter explicitly says, "I am against the Model Policies" and ends with "Please do not support these policies!" The body argues the policies would harm privacy, parental rights, and religious freedom, indicating clear opposition rather than a request for modification.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose this Strongly" and argues the policy would "undercut parental rights" and impose "non-science based beliefs" through law. They also reject the premise of more than two sexes, indicating clear opposition to adoption of the regulation.


The commenter rejects the policy’s implications for sex-segregated spaces, stating that "No child should be forced to share showers, locker rooms, hotel rooms or other intimate settings" with someone they describe as "the opposite biological sex." This is a clear objection to the regulation’s treatment of transgender students in facilities and accommodations.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and argues the policy "limit[s] teachers and counselors" and "entirely negating parental rights," which indicates rejection of the regulation. They also describe the approach as "misguided and scientifically ignorant," reinforcing opposition rather than support or neutrality.


Strongly oppose--protect parental rights and child safety and religious freedom

The commenter explicitly says "Strongly oppose" and asks to "protect child safety, parental rights, and religious freedom," indicating rejection of the proposed policies. No language suggests support or a request for modification in favor of adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I oppose this document," which directly states opposition to adoption. They further criticize the policy premise as "falsehood," indicating they want it rejected rather than amended.


The commenter explicitly rejects the policy with the title "No transgender teachings at all!" and argues that "You are disregarding parents when you make decisions." This indicates opposition to adopting the proposed transgender student policies.


The commenter explicitly says the VDOE has "gone far beyond the path the General Assembly prescribed" and argues the model regulations "infringe the First Amendment rights of parents." They also state schools should not accommodate "irreversible 'gender transitions,'" indicating clear opposition to adoption of the policies.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose" and argues against the policy by warning, "Don't make young children uncomfortable by forcing them to share bathrooms and other facilities with the opposite sex." This indicates they want the regulation rejected or substantially weakened, despite also mentioning that privacy should be respected.


The commenter explicitly says "Oppose" and argues against the policy by claiming "Child's brain not developed to make such judgments" and that "Parents, Doctors, and Psychologists need to be involved." This indicates they do not want the regulation adopted as written.


The commenter explicitly labels the submission "Opposed" and says "Strongly opposed." The phrase "Stop confusing the children" indicates they want the policy rejected rather than adopted.


The commenter explicitly rejects the proposal, saying the policies show policymakers have "lost their common sense" and that the Department has "gone far beyond the path the General Assembly prescribed." They argue the policies should not encourage "gender transitions" and claim the regulations infringe parental rights and threaten privacy and dignity.


Virginia DOE Transgender proposed policy

The commenter explicitly criticizes the proposal as "poorly thought out" and says it "creates a bigger one," while objecting to students sharing "bathrooms and showers with members of the opposite sex." Although they praise "some good ideas especially on bullying," the overall thrust is rejection of the policy as written.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support" and calls the policies "absolutely crucial for transgender students." They further endorse the policies as "excellent" and say they "respond to real issues impacting transgender youth's accessibility to learning."


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Support Transgender Student Policies" and thanks the agency for "codifying rights and protections". They also urge officials to "protect the rights of our transgender students," which clearly supports adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly support!!!!!!" and argues the policy is "extremely important for lgbtqia+ youth." They also state that children deserve to be "safe and protected," which clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.


The commenter explicitly says "strongly support!!!" and argues the policy would help children be accepted for who they are. They also endorse the policy’s educational value, saying it could "teach our kids to accept differences."


The commenter explicitly says, "Strongly Oppose!" and "Do not pass this!" which clearly indicates they want the regulation rejected. There is no qualifying language suggesting support or neutrality.


The commenter explicitly says, "I’m in favor of this being passed," which directly supports adoption of the regulation. They also argue that trans people should not be discriminated against at school and urge others not to oppose it.


The commenter explicitly says "Strongly Oppose" and asks to "Allow parents to make decisions" about their children's worldview and values, which indicates rejection of the proposed transgender student policies. The comment does not engage with specific provisions, but its clear intent is to resist the regulation as written.


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.


The commenter explicitly titles the comment "Complete Support" and says transgender students "110% deserve these rights and protections." They also argue the policy should remain in public schools and reject opposition as "bigoted and outdated," indicating clear support for adoption.


The commenter explicitly says, "I Fully support all transgender and binary students in Virginia schools," which clearly endorses the policy’s purpose. They also argue against forcing students to "hide their true identity," indicating approval of protections for transgender students.


Support for Model Policies for the Treatment for Transgender Students

The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support" and asks, "Please implement the model policies." They also frame the policies as "a critical step" toward dignity and respect for all students, indicating clear approval of adoption.


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


The comment consists only of "em," which provides no discernible opinion about the proposed policies. It does not express support, opposition, or any substantive concern.


The commenter explicitly says, "I strongly support this!!!" and praises the policy’s protective aims for LGBTQIA+ youth. They argue for safety, respect, and inclusion rather than exclusion, indicating clear approval of the regulation.


Policies for the treatment of transgender students

The commenter explicitly says, "I do not agree with the proposed guidelines regarding transgender students" and states that "These guidelines go way overboard and do not make common sense." They also object to parents being "blocked from what is happening" in school, indicating opposition to the policy as written.


I support this change. Thank you to those grueling to make schools a better, safer place.

The commenter explicitly says, "I support this change" and thanks those working to make schools "a better, safer place." This clearly endorses adoption of the regulation.