in reply to Re^4: Proposed US ban on school/library access to 'social networking sites'
in thread Proposed US ban on school/library access to 'social networking sites'
I upvoted your node because I like the way you argue -- I appreciate your calm, reasoned approach. So many times these kind of discussions reach a least-common denominator darn quickly. :)
Believe me when I tell you that I am deeply concerned about parenting issues. I have five children, ages 4-12, and I am currently facilitating a parenting study through our local church. There are many, many people out there who have only the foggiest idea as to how to raise their children and how to keep them safe.
On some parts of my commute, there are no shoulders on the highway, and the tiniest inattention of a driver can result in an accident that brings the whole road to a halt. In other areas, there are wider lanes and wide shoulders, which are more forgiving areas. Without falling too much in love with my analogy, I think that the internet has pretty narrow 'safe' lanes and pretty small shoulders -- even a small amount of curiosity or naivete on the part of a child can result in them arriving at an obscene website or in contact with a predator. If they build bad roads, people get killed -- in the same way, I think that the government ought to try to protect children, even if parents don't.
Personally, I teach my children how to be safe, and I (mostly) don't let my little children out of my sight. None of my kids go to malls without me (or my wife) within eyesight, and none of them use the internet without one of us being in the same room. I don't see the government's involvment in this area as pre-empting my parental role -- I appreciate it the way I would appreciate a wider lane on the highway.
No good deed goes unpunished. -- (attributed to) Oscar Wilde