Judge Strikes Down Internet Porn Law Allegedly Passed “for the Children”

Its the ONE THING fundie-neof**ups have in common with leftie Hollywood types – want to stop people from picking their noses? – arm amputation!

DOWN WITH THE MIRRORS!

Why are we so fixated on it?

Because we are a country of prudes.

Wait!! You mean parents have to now monitor their own children, and teach them how to discern what is proper for their view of the world versus other people? Bravo to this Judge!! “It takes a village to raise a child…” only goes so far in a democracy.

1. Parents should supervise their children, but stuff happens. That is why we have child safety caps on medicines, electric outlet covers and fences around pools. KB – do we want to get rid of ALL protection for children under the guise that they should be completely monitored and supervised 24×7?

2. As #6 says, for most people it is *not* about naked bodies, but the extreme stuff. I can’t believe anyone would agree that there is NO such thing as a harmful image to a young child (violent, sexual, or whatever). The question, as always, is where to draw the line.

3. I truly believe that the internet can be made “safe” (to the majority of parents, educators, etc), It would require a “white” list type system, where a web site “applies” to be on the white list, and pledges that all pages follow the rules. A particular computer (or user) can be easily set to only allow access to web pages from the white list. Think of it like “Underwriter’s Laboratory” certification. Yes, it will limit the sites kids can access, but I think lots of content providers would go along, with more and more being added to. Think of it like school libraries, where librarians filter content to some extent (ie: I remember HighLights magazine and *not* Playboy in my school library, even though Playboy did/does have some valuable interviews, ie: think Jimmy Carter’s, lust in his heart).

Would it be perfect? No, but nothing is. Would people argue about it? Sure, but just like school libraries (think the Huck Finn debate).

And to counter another argument I’d probably get, I don’t think it would affect adult’s access to the content they want.

Frankly, I’m tired of children having access to internet porn. They’re getting to be a huge bottleneck on my bandwidth when I’m downloading my own porn!

(with apologies to those who are taking this discussion seriously and making some good points)

#12, I’d love to have the cartoon for my collection, but your description is perfect. I can’t stop laughing.

#14 – TJG

I’m pretty sure she was charged and convicted under state law – this one is/was a Federal statute.

I would tend to think that invalidation of the Federal law might be usable in an action seeking to overturn the state law… It’s a good question.

Maybe DU’s answer to Perry Mason, SN, would be able to shed some light on the issue…

You there, SN?

The internet by its very nature is not safe, and can never be made safe, for children. I disagree with those who think it can. Children require supervision. So why don’t parents want to supervise their children? Why do they keep looking for a magic bullet?

You’re on the correct track. Supervision and being involved in your child’s life gets you far in terms of keeping them away from some of the shit in this world.

Some parents are too busy entertaining themselves and “don’t have the time” for their kids. I’ve seen it all too often.

#16 – This is what happens when you don’t spank your child.

Big time bullshit.

>>Children require supervision. So why don’t parents want to supervise their children?

Man, this drips of condescension. Will you at least concede that monitoring is super-hard if all your kid has to do is click on one single link after the door-bell rings and suddenly he’s in Bestiality World?

>> The internet by its very nature is not safe, and can never be made safe, for children.

If that’s the case, then shouldn’t responsible parents totally deny their kids access to the internet? If they did so, they’d be flamed as control-freak fundies!

Technically I agree with you — it can not be made absolutely safe.

But can it be made safer? Especially for younger kids? Clearly yes. It’s being done right now on a large scale in several countries.

My country — the UAE — is working proof that the vast majority of pornography can be blocked. It is very hard to get around the filters — certainly too hard for younger kids.

Some system like that would at least slow down kids’ access to porn enough that parents could answer the phone or maybe even cook some dinner!

But — it must be a voluntary system. Voluntary self-restriction is no violation of the First Amendment. Everybody self-restricts, all the time.

Being a parent comes with much responciblity and this is just part of it.
Plenty of child safe surfing filtering software installed that prevents children from accessing the adult content.
MSN and AOL have parental controls built in that also creates a report that the child visited.
The problem is not the adult content instead the parents and how they deal with issue.
Children do not perceive a naked woman the same as an adult would.
Children are taught that an image of a nude person is bad bad bad except in a museum where its art art art….
Growing up we have all been exposed to adult issues and it was the obligation of our parents to discuss it with us as well as drugs etc.
In my school in 5th grade the school system had the class watch a clip called the birds and the bees. That removed the mystique associated with sex and everyone moved on. All the kids laughted and said this was silly. It didn’t take long and we where playing spin the bottle.

Parents will monitor their kids anyway in a few years when they’ll be hooked up to the VR set in the same room as the child throughout most of the day.

our way of life already becomes increasingly multi-tasked while in the next decade our geographical location will become quite fixed by virtual reality. at the end of the day, it’s just another routine sporadic child-rearing task.

#16

I knew you’d say that