Youngkin Bans State Endorsements of Websites Targeted at Kids’ Sexuality That Do Not Require Parental Consent — WAPO Oobjects

by James C. SherlockThe Washington Post

editorial board, like its news pages, has stubbornly and selectively ignored a lot of big news:

  • the ongoing emergence of testimony under oath of whistleblowers recounting the IRS and Justice Department’s handling of all things Biden;
  • evidence like strings of single-purpose bank accounts used by and for current residents of the White House to launder and distribute to the family a great deal of foreign money; and
  • the collapse of Hunter Biden’s plea deal.

Such things do not rise to be the subjects of editorials. Except one on June 20 that was not a proud moment. The title:

Why Hunter Biden’s plea deal is justified

A quote from that editorial:

The outcome appears similar to what other defendants might have gotten for similar violations of the law.

Another

editorial praised the Justice Department as “steeped in a tradition of political noninterference.” Seriously. They wrote that.

But the same board is in full dudgeon today about Glenn Youngkin taking “vital resources away from LGBTQ+ youth.” So, did he cut funding to some important program? Did he ban something?

No, he:

quietly authorized the removal of a resource page for LGBTQ+ youths on the Virginia Department of Health website.

“Quietly”? Clearly not.

But for very good reasons.

Of the 11 “resources” removed from state sponsorship when the page was taken down, at least two of them, Queer Kid Stuff and Q Chat Space, do not require parental permission to use.

No mention is made of compliance or lack of compliance of those websites with the Children’s Online Privacy Act (COPPA) or the FTC rule that enforces it.

But one thing is undeniably true.

Nothing about those websites indicates that the Virginia Department of Health, not having control of content, should offer them its ongoing endorsement.

The editorial board is clear that it is sad or outraged or something by the removal from state sponsorship of eleven websites. It dismisses as strange any gubernatorial concern about the parental permission issue.

It cites:

the unfortunate reality is that parents are not always nurturing of their LGBTQ+ children.

It opines that:

LGBTQ+ kids who are not supported by their families are extremely vulnerable to experiencing homelessness.

Thus the removal of the state web page, and the governor, are linked by the WAPO to homelessness. Nice touch.

They manage simultaneously:

  • to deplore kids going online to get their information; and
  • to deplore the Virginia government for no longer endorsing a specific collection of websites for the convenience of kids going online to get their information about sex.

They write that “LGBTQ+ youths need these resources,” pretending for purposes of outrage that young people cannot find them with a browser if the Commonwealth of Virginia does not offer a list on its Department of Health web page.

It is perhaps necessary to the outrage for the WAPO to offer an unspoken assumption that youth would even know to look on the Virginia Department of Health website to find their “resources.”

It would be interesting to know, which The Washington Post either did not discover in its FOIA request or chose not to publish the results, how many hits that web page had in its history.

Most importantly, the editorial board ignores the COPPA rule on obtaining verifiable parental consent:

Obtaining verifiable consent means making any reasonable effort (taking into consideration available technology) to ensure that before personal information is collected from a child, a parent of the child

(1) Receives notice of the operator’s personal information collection, use, and disclosure practices; and

(2) Authorizes any collection, use, and/or disclosure of the personal information.

That rule is there in acknowledgement of the fact that cookies exist to track users and that email addresses are marketed on the dark web.

So questions arise:

  1. Did the Virginia Department of Health know that the websites it endorsed were in COPPA compliance when it posted them on its website?
  2. Did it monitor them to know that they remain in compliance?

The answer to at least the second question is almost assuredly no.

Finally, the WAPO ignores the fact that the state is potentially liable, in fact if not in law, for any bad outcomes from child engagement with commercial websites the state recommends.

Bottom line. The governor did the right thing.

It is stupid and dangerous for a state to lend its credibility to any commercial website, especially for children. For the simple reason that the state does not control content or policy.

Any other commercial website browsing recommendations, especially for children, should be purged from the all of the Commonwealth’s web pages.

I will waste some advice to The Washington Post: Selective outrage should be more selective.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

36 responses to “Youngkin Bans State Endorsements of Websites Targeted at Kids’ Sexuality That Do Not Require Parental Consent — WAPO Oobjects”

  1. Lefty665 Avatar
    Lefty665

    No comment from the editorial board on DoJ letting the statute of limitations run out on tax charges from 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016. No comment either that the proposed dismissal of the gun charge involved the judge in an unconstitutional manner, or the judge’s question about how you could dismiss a charge that was never filed and that there was no DoJ precedent for the deal. Also no comment on the defense’s understanding with at least tacit agreement by DoJ until specifically questioned that the plea deal protected Hunter from any future prosecution.

    But Youngkin took down a web page, the horror.

    ps: Here’s Turley today on 70% of Dems approving censorship. Guess it only applies to deleting things they want gone.
    https://jonathanturley.org/2023/07/27/pew-seventy-percent-of-democrats-and-democratic-leaning-independents-support-speech-limits/

  2. M. Purdy Avatar
    M. Purdy

    What is the connection between gender dysmorphia in Virginia and the Hunter Biden story?

    1. I could be wrong, but I believe Lefty665 is trying to show that there were better things the WaPo could have covered and chose not to.

      1. Matt Adams Avatar
        Matt Adams

        Oh he can’t see Lefty’s post, he’s to fragile and blocked him.

        1. Charles D'Aulnais Avatar
          Charles D’Aulnais

          Now that’s FUNNY,

      2. M. Purdy Avatar
        M. Purdy

        I was under the impression that there had to be a Virginia hook to stories. I’ve been told this by the author of this story, I believe.

        1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
          James C. Sherlock

          Virginia hook? The WAPO editorial was about Virginia’s governor. And Virginia’s Department of Health.

          Try to keep up.

    2. WayneS Avatar

      Dysmorphia? Perhaps dysphoria is what you meant?

      I hope so, because I’d hate to think Virginia was over-represented in the gender dysmorphia department.

  3. M. Purdy Avatar
    M. Purdy

    Bova, I see you’re selectively removing posts again and failing to apply your own rules consistently. With that, I’m taking a break.

    1. WayneS Avatar

      During your break I recommend you relax and enjoy a nice long gin and tonic – a tasty and refreshing beverage on a hot day like today.

      Hope to see you again soon.

      1. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
        James Wyatt Whitehead

        Frank and Ed believe that a hot day like this demands a refreshing Bartles and Jaymes. They thank you for your support.

        1. WayneS Avatar

          I had forgotten how awful that stuff was. Thanks for the reminder.

  4. DJRippert Avatar
    DJRippert

    I’ll give the General Assembly some credit – they have been consistent. SB 1515 required age verification by anybody in Virginia trying to access a porn site. It went into effect July 1 after having been passed almost unanimously by the General Assembly.

    https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?231+sum+SB1515

    Interesting that the Democrats apparently understand the need to verify age when watching porn on the internet but not when seeing it in school libraries.

    Take a look at what is in one of those supposedly controversial books, GenderQueer. Scroll down to the 8th page from the book.

    https://theiowastandard.com/shocking-images-from-book-gender-queer-which-is-stocked-in-school-libraries-across-iowa/

    So, children should be blocked from seeing porn on the internet but should have free access to porn in school libraries?

    Gotta love the liberal “thought” process.

    1. The one fallacy in your writing is “the liberal “thought” process.”

    2. Lefty665 Avatar
      Lefty665

      What have you got against underage homosexual fellatio? You a prude or something?

  5. walter smith Avatar
    walter smith

    Not trying to be mean…but…
    ” about Glenn Youngkin taking “vital resources away from LGBTQ+ youth.”…
    Like the genitalia they were born with? Those seem like vital resources to me…
    Besides a lifetime of hormone “therapy”

  6. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Speaking of parents, chillins, and Hunter Biden…

    “Barricades went up outside the Fulton County courthouse on Thursday as District Attorney Fani Willis reportedly nears a decision on whether to indict Donald Trump over allegations the former president tried to undermine the results of Georgia’s 2020 election, New Yorker staff writer Charles Bethea reported from Atlanta.”

    Guess they’re going to indict the Biden crime family again…

    1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
      James C. Sherlock

      All of the principals in this multi-sided drama should be facing jail.

      Americans would be freed from the prison of only two possibilities that is of the media’s making – “There are only two possible candidates, and Trump is worse”.

      We, and I think I can speak for the majority of the people, do not look forward to a campaign whose defining slogan is “Trump is worse.”

      1. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        Well actually, it’s “Trump is a whole lot worse.”

        1. James C. Sherlock Avatar
          James C. Sherlock

          How about “Trump is alive and sentient”

          1. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Like I said.

          2. WayneS Avatar

            sentient SEN-shee-unt adjective. 1 : responsive to or conscious of sense impressions. 2 : having or showing realization, perception, or knowledge : aware.

            Okay. Clearly, Mr. Biden is out. But I also think it’s a stretch to argue that Mr. Trump fits that definition…

            😉

  7. Kathleen Smith Avatar
    Kathleen Smith

    It appears to me, and I know I am old, that we have been doing what the Governor is changing for awhile, and we have increased the need for mental health needs. It also seems to me, that issues like this relate to the family. Let’s try something different and give parents more control. It may not help, but then we can say it didn’t work.

    These issues perplex me. What do others think? When I side with the right, I get a little concerned. However, as a parent, I have a right to know what my kid is engaged with on-line.

    1. Our society is built on the bedrock assumption that kids are the parents’ responsibility to hous, feed, educate and protect until (1) they reach maturity (as defined by the State), or (2) someone demonstrates (to the satisfaction of the State) that the child is in an unsafe or abusive home — where “the State” is the entire apparatus of the police, family services and family courts. That said, it seems to me that everything about (1) and (2) is a judgment call. When is “maturity” — is it a specific age like 18, or is it up to a court or legislature to decide that a younger adult can be mature enough to reject parental strictures or run away when younger? What is an “unsafe” or “abusive” home — and whom do we trust to make that call; and is a foster home appointed by the State really a solution?

      I don’t think there is a bright-line answer to these questions. We struggle to do the best we can. I’m all on the side of the parent, except, there are situations when I’m not. The school nurse confronted with a kid with bruises and broken bones from physical abuse. The kid who runs to my home and begs my child and me to hide him so his parents can’t send him away to “gay re-education camp.” The kid who shows up at school unfed in dirty clothes and confesses that his single mother is passed out with drugs most mornings.

      Where does a kid fit, on that spectrum, when he identifies with the opposite sex but receives hostility rather than empathy from one or both of his rigid parents about it? I don’t envy the parent or the neighbor or the kid involved in such a situation. Do you?

      1. The Virginia Code defines adult as a person 18 years of age or older. Section 1-203. It defines child as a person less than 18 years of age. Section 1-207 and Section 66-12. It also defines the age of majority as being when a person becomes 18 years of age. 1-204. Any Virginia court is likely to apply those statutory definitions and not substitute its judgment for that of the General Assembly.

        1. Not Today Avatar
          Not Today

          We have CPS for this reason. All parents aren’t good parents, not objectively, and not objectively for the child they have.

        2. Not Today Avatar
          Not Today

          We have CPS for this reason. All parents aren’t good parents, not objectively, and not objectively for the child they have.

      2. Kathleen Smith Avatar
        Kathleen Smith

        Not at all

      3. Kathleen Smith Avatar
        Kathleen Smith

        I think error on the side of a kid is justified. I would think that even if one situation could cause a suicide or injury to a child, then we have to protect kids. Thanks for your comment.

      4. James C. Sherlock Avatar
        James C. Sherlock

        My initial response was rash. I apologize.

        You pose questions in a personal internal debate you have shared with us.

        The subject of this article has an answer. No state website should offer endorsements to any commercial website. Ever. It is a stupid thing to do.

        As for parental rights and responsibilities, be for them or against them but not selectively. Selectivity turns objective principle subjective. It’s all downhill from there.

        Their are appropriate state limits to actions on both sides of the debate.

        Parental abuse is proscribed in law.

        As for what is offered in the way of medical treatment to children presenting with gender dysphoria, that, like all medical practice, is subject to state regulation to prevent procedures society will not tolerate.

    2. James C. Sherlock Avatar
      James C. Sherlock

      The WAPO, as a self-designated spokesperson for progressives, ignores the applicable federal law, COPPA, because if they bring it up, they will have to deal with it.

      The editorial that I pillory here brought up the fact that some of the web pages left over from the Northam Department of Health endorse commercial websites designed for children that address children’s sexuality. The content of which, by definition, the government does not control.

      The endorsed websites, as admitted by the editorial, do not require parental permission to visit.

      Which appears to violate federal law requiring parental permission.

      Ignoring the law, which the WAPO is happy to do, one has to ask “what could possibly go wrong with an open-ended government endorsement of websites whose content and even ownership it does not control?”.

      This is abject craziness that the WAPO attempts in its editorial to normalize.

      Normalizing abhorrent behavior is the path to realizing the progressive nirvana. For which even progressives have not figured out the end state.

      I just don’t happen to intend to let it go unchallenged.

    3. Not Today Avatar
      Not Today

      You exercise parental control by controlling your CHILD not the internet.

      1. WayneS Avatar

        I agree. So it’s a good thing Governor Youngkin is not trying to control the internet.

  8. Lefty665 Avatar
    Lefty665

    No comment from the editorial board on DoJ letting the statute of limitations run out on tax charges from 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016. No comment either that the proposed dismissal of the gun charge involved the judge in an unconstitutional manner, or the judge’s question about how you could dismiss a charge that was never filed and that there was no DoJ precedent for the deal. Also no comment on the defense’s understanding with at least tacit agreement by DoJ until specifically questioned that the plea deal protected Hunter from any future prosecution.

    But Youngkin took down a web page, the horror.

    Here’s commentary in a different Washington newspaper: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/why-the-hunter-biden-plea-smells-fishy

    ps: Here’s Turley today on 70% of Dems approving censorship. Guess it only applies to deleting things they want gone.
    https://jonathanturley.org/2023/07/27/pew-seventy-percent-of-democrats-and-democratic-leaning-independents-support-speech-limits/

  9. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
    f/k/a_tmtfairfax

    If an earthquake occurred and swallowed up 1301 K Street, West Tower, journalism in America would improve by 1000%. It would also save Bezos a lot of money, as the Post lost $100 million last year.

    1. WayneS Avatar

      Could the earthquake also swallow up 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and Mar-a-Lago while it’s at it?

Leave a Reply