Supreme Court rejects COPA appeal

Peter G. 21 Jan, 2009 at 2:12pm ET Article published in Tech

Comments

1. 
   21 Jan 2009 ~ 2:44pm Thrax Hell yeah por-- er, good.
2. 
   21 Jan 2009 ~ 2:56pm Linc /me sticks fork in Bush years
3. 
   21 Jan 2009 ~ 11:26pm Komete Call me a stick in the mud but something must be done to make it harder for children to get porn, period. And don't say better parenting. I'm a freaking fantastic parent.
   
   With a little bit of ingenuity and the right amount of hormones/testosterone, any net-nannie type software can be bypassed.
   
   I'd like my children to browse and read online till their hearts content, but the way things are now, I have to be watching over them constantly.
   
   And for anyone that says, well sooner or later they are going to see something so I should just accept it, well I wouldn't accept them seeing their teachers pr!ck in real life nor online.
   
   Grant it, they have woman teachers who seem to be the best at their game. But you get the point.
   
   /me takes the bush years from Keebler and throws them in the trash.
4. 
   21 Jan 2009 ~ 11:33pm Thrax Come up with a way that doesn't violate the first amendment, and I'm sure your lawmakers would love to hear from you.
5. 
   21 Jan 2009 ~ 11:42pm Komete

   Thrax wrote:

   Come up with a way that doesn't violate the first amendment, and I'm sure your lawmakers would love to hear from you.

   
   That is why I pay taxes. To protect my liberties, freedoms, and family's walefare. It's not my responsibility to pay goverment saleries and make the laws for them.
   
   But it wouldn't be hard to imagine an anonymous embedded chip on a DL/identity card that says I'm over 18 and a laws mandating that every keyboard must have a scanner. I can regulate my wallet 24/7.
   
   But porn is a multi-billion dollar industry and their lobbyist pockets are deeeep.
   
   And don't get me wrong, I wouldn't even care if prostitution was legal in all 50 states, as long as it happens behind closed doors.
6. 
   22 Jan 2009 ~ 1:01am MiracleManS No matter what you do hardware wise, there will always be a work around, just like with software. The fight is useless without proper education on the part of parents.
   
   I know that's not what you WANTED to hear, but its the truth. You can try the whole ID/Chip thing, but just like any other technology any enterprising teen/child can get around it (just like any adult).
   
   so unless you want to make it so difficult to access that its absurd (which is again, a first amendment thing), you're without recourse.
7. 
   22 Jan 2009 ~ 2:11am Komete If intel and AMD can lock there multipliers trust me, porn can be locked out too...lol
   
   Proper education in these matters does not work. It isn't an issue of don't touch the hot flame here. Children, in general, do not have the mental capabilities to use proper judgment in the capacity that an adult can. They simply can not control themselves to that degree and nor should they in some respects.
   
   Doing nothing is not an option. And asking a question are you over 18 and a click yes or no is not enough. You can't buy alcohol or tabaco with a click here or no answer. You can't buy a porn magazine without proper ID either.
   
   We already live in a world where we can't let our kids go out and play without 1 out of ten chance that a boy will get molested and a 3 out of ten chance that a girl will get molested.
   
   So now we have to keep them inside when we can't be outside with them, then we have to lock up the internet from them also?
   
   Here's a statistic
   
   "According to Charles Keating of Citizens for Decency Through Law, research reveals that 77% of child molesters of boys and 87% of child molesters of girls admitted imitating the sexual behavior they had seen in pornography they had watched. Roughly 33% of girls and 14% of boys are molested before the age of 18, according to the U.S. Justice Department. *Nearly 2/3 of all sexual assaults reported involved minors and roughly 1/3 involved children under the age of 12.* In most cases, however, child molestation goes unreported. Estimates are that only 35% of sexual abuse is reported. Kids can be frightened or embarrassed and many times do not say anything." .. So 2/3's of molestation involves minors watching pornography.
   
   Now I know this conversation is a little out of tune with what you find on a tech site. But we can't simply say hooray for porn and leave out the ones who used to come first, our children.
8. 
   22 Jan 2009 ~ 2:15am Komete PS I can't believe I sound like such a conservative here.lol Trust me, I'm very liberal. But having children, I do everything I can to give them the most from life and to protect them as well as I can.
9. 
   22 Jan 2009 ~ 4:29am shwaip how are you going to stop them from getting porn from their friends who stole it from their parents?
   
   where this porn could be store-bought magazines/movies, or downloaded pics/movies. I think that no matter what the government legislates, or how many programs/hardware blockers you install, your kids will be able to get porn.
   
   1) Charles Keating is a douchebag (he's the Keating of the Keating 5). Also, he thinks that mail-order porn is "part of the Communist conspiracy".
   
   -> 77% of child molesters of boys and 87% of child molesters of girls admitted imitating the sexual behavior they had seen in pornography they had watched
   
   so? 100% of adults who have sex are imitating some sort of porn. the only reason i'm not a complete idiot in bed is that i've seen porn.
   
   Also:
   "According to Charles Keating of Citizens for Decency Through Law, research reveals that 77% of child molesters of boys and 87% of child molesters of girls admitted imitating the sexual behavior they had seen in pornography they had watched. Roughly 33% of girls and 14% of boys are molested before the age of 18, according to the U.S. Justice Department. *Nearly 2/3 of all sexual assaults reported involved minors and roughly 1/3 involved children under the age of 12.* In most cases, however, child molestation goes unreported. Estimates are that only 35% of sexual abuse is reported. Kids can be frightened or embarrassed and many times do not say anything." .. So 2/3's of molestation involves minors watching pornography.
   
   NOWHERE in this quote is supporting evidence for your conclusion.
10. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 9:31am Komete 2/3rds of molestation is child on child. Out of those 2/3's 80% is reenactment of porn that has been watched.
    
    I can control what is brought into my house and friends to a degree. But I don't like the idea of the of over the shoulder control of the internet.
    
    Also I'm not saying adults shouldn't have access to porn. I am saying that, like in stores, only adults should be able to gain access to it. Of course their will be exceptions where children gain access to some sort of porn. but just because it may happen it doesn't mean we should do nothing.
    
    Also despite where I copied the figures from they are true and are from U.S. Justice Department.
11. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 2:27pm shwaip

    Komete wrote:

    I can control what is brought into my house and friends to a degree. But I don't like the idea of the of over the shoulder control of the internet.

    
    so you think it's your responsibility to stop your children from getting/seeing porn that they got illegally through one source, but not through the internet?
    
    There is no guaranteed way to have one computer that can both access porn for an adult whenever they want to and also have it stop a child from seeing porn. The reason that someone in this thread asked you if you had any suggestions and to contact your representative is that there isn't a way to do it yet.
    
    Lastly, who defines porn? Is seeing a pair of breasts porn? How about when the shirt is wet and you can see the nips? Or if there's a picture of a completely nude woman, does it become porn then? Do you need penetration? If you want to be able to define it, that means that every single image / etc needs to be tagged (correctly) with exactly what it is.
12. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 7:36pm Komete It is my responsibility to provide opportunities and a safe home for my children to thrive in. Part of my civic duty is to ensure I elect officials that help me meet those needs where I cannot. And I’m telling you, as someone who works in IT, I cannot control the internet. But we have become a society where internet access is embedded into our lives. And why shouldn’t it be? It is freaking awesome. (thank you Al Gore… lol just joking).
    
    There are plenty of ways to lock porn out of a home if technology is developed for that purpose. I’ve already gave one Idea with a DL/ID card. Really, once you start thinking what can be done to stop children from seeing porn, answers will stat flooding to you. You could do a facial recognition system embedded with a webcam on and a hardware solution embedded in the monitor. That way, it would be up to the adult who sees what. And yes it can be done cheaply. Hell if you did it that way you could physically block porn images pixel by pixel.
    
    What is and isn’t porn has already been defined. We have a rating system of G, PG, PG13, nc17 and X. And yes, every image or video of elicit material should be tagged and why shouldn’t it? The porn industry is regulated despite how cheesily spontaneous the Bang Bus Bros and Girls Gone Wild looks.
    
    There are plenty of horrible and lazy parents out there. But that doesn’t mean if they had a simple to solution to hinder their children from viewing porn they wouldn’t.
    
    In conclusion, you should ask yourself, is it acceptable for children to view porn . Because really, today, that is where we are at.
13. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 8:00pm BlackHawk All of that is assuming the internet is controlled by the United States. It's not. Doubt some pr0n tgp in Germany is going to care what is mandated in the US. Simply put, it's not going to work.
14. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 8:06pm Komete

    Black Hawk wrote:

    All of that is assuming the internet is controlled by the United States. It's not. Doubt some pr0n tgp in Germany is going to care what is mandated in the US. Simply put, it's not going to work.

    
    Trust me, if they want to do business in the US, and everyone does, they will care.
15. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 8:24pm BlackHawk Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but that's not how the internet works. Unless the US implements some sort of filter/firewall, which I doubt because most liberals and conservatives can somewhat agree on the first amendment, if the site content is legal in the host country, there's not a thing the US can do about it.
16. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 8:59pm Komete Trust me, I understand how the internet works. I also understand how foreign diplomacy works. I ask you one favor, instead of thinking nothing can be done, think something should be done. That small change in thinking will change something from impossible to it could be possible, and from there who knows.
17. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 9:16pm shwaip what if we don't think anything should be done, and that deploying a massive age-verification network would be a waste of money and international political capital?
18. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 9:33pm Thrax I'm not interested in making a national ID system (which have been universally panned by civil rights and security groups) or undertaking massive age verification system just so we can PROTECT TEH CHILDRENS from the porn that is already illegal for them to see and obtain.
19. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 9:44pm Komete

    shwaip wrote:

    what if we don't think anything should be done, and that deploying a massive age-verification network would be a waste of money and international political capital?

    
    Is the idea of having a 7 year old child, daughter or niece, viewing a scene of an 18-year-old gagging on a @ock while his buddy pops her brown cherry in the rear that acceptable to you? If so, then nothing. The current Over 18 yes/no system is enough for you.
    
    If that is not acceptable to you, then you should at least come to the conclusion that something should be done.
    
    And it wouldn't be an economy drain. It would be the other way around. It would mean more jobs all around at the cost of the highly lucrative porn industry.
    
    Look man, I'm not trying to stop you or even myself from viewing porn, I just want something to be done to stop children from having easy access to it. It is not impossible and the positive benefits are many.
20. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 9:46pm Thrax I think you're missing the point that it would be possible to see that anyhow. You can't make a system that will stop it. At all. Ever. Other countries won't care. At all. Not only that, any law you make in this regard is going to get struck down as a violation of the first amendment.
21. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 9:47pm Komete

    Thrax wrote:

    I'm not interested in making a national ID system (which have been universally panned by civil rights and security groups) or undertaking massive age verification system just so we can PROTECT TEH CHILDRENS from the porn that is already illegal for them to see and obtain.

    
    I never said a national ID. All I said was an anonymous chip that says I'm over 18 in every state issued. Or better, using a face recognition system embedded in displays where an owner could setup who could view porn and who couldn't.
22. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 10:02pm Komete

    Thrax wrote:

    I think you're missing the point that it would be possible to see that anyhow. You can't make a system that will stop it. At all. Ever. Other countries won't care. At all. Not only that, any law you make in this regard is going to get struck down as a violation of the first amendment.

    
    Porn is a business man. If foreign companies want to sell porn in the US then they need to abide by our laws. Just like Google has had to appease India and China.
    
    How often do you come by child pornography or snuff films on the internet? Yes they exist if you know where to look but for most we will probably never see one in our lives. Why, because they are illegal. If you make it harder for foreign porn companies to sell in the US, the majority will get inline real quick. But right now with services like Youporn it is a free for all where porn and children are concerned. Besides, if it is only foreign countries producing and hosting untagged porn, hell I don't have a problem blocking my child's access to out of country IP's. But please, give me that option at least.
    
    The current state is children can easily get porn. Should something be done to make it harder, of course. The what and how is what we should be discussing and not the why or where.
    
    Well actually we should be discussing tech stuff but I do like to use my freedom of speech every now and then.
23. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 10:17pm BlackHawk OK, I'm gonna try and make this simple. Foreign sites aren't selling anything in the US. People in the US are accessing the foreign sites. The US can't stop someone from accessing a site unless they block it. Simple as that.
    
    Google had to appease India and China because those countries will probably block the sites if they don't comply and that's too many customers to lose. The US isn't Turkey, China or Australia to be blocking sites (see Freedom of Speech).
    
    You don't see child porn and snuff films on the internet not because it's illegal in the US, but because it's also illegal in the host country.
    
    Only way you're gonna protect your children from pr0n is by good parenting. At 7yrs old you're supposed to be observing your kids web habits. Unless they're prodigies, it's going to be a bit hard to get past web filters. After that, just teach them where to browse and what to avoid. If they do find pr0n, teach them why you think it's wrong to view it. After that they're probably 12 or 13 and you're screwed anyways. They're friends probably already found their dad's stash of Playboy's.
24. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 10:21pm Komete Black Hawk, I hear ya man. We can at least limit what is hosted here, within our borders. I can block foreign IP's if they don't get inline. Simple as that.
25. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 10:22pm Snarkasm "Children can easily get porn" if you don't teach them, watch out for them, and do your due diligence as a parent. YOU can block these things, you know. Your parenting duties should not be taken over by the government.
26. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 10:34pm Komete

    Snarkasm wrote:

    "Children can easily get porn" if you don't teach them, watch out for them, and do your due diligence as a parent. YOU can block these things, you know. Your parenting duties should not be taken over by the government.

    
    A democratic government is nothing but an extension of its people. In essence, a democratic body is the government. We the people indirectly make the laws. But somewhere along the lines we have become very pessimistic about our own abilities as a democratic nation.
    
    I'm not asking anyone to do my parenting for me. I'm saying, greater hardware and software tools need to be developed so parents can better exercise control over one of the most influential and greatest achievements to come out of the 20th century, the internet. If you read the thread you will see I've pointed out that net nanny type software is too easily bypassed.
27. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 10:35pm Thrax You know, you can already block out-of-country IPs with a copy of smoothwall and a $200 pentium II box. Case closed.
    
    //EDIT: I'm not interested in spending tax revenue to solve a problem the private sector is already working on for parents such as yourself. There is no need to do so. Adding layer after layer of protocol and bureaucracy will not negate the fact that they can steal an ID, use a proxy to bypass your IP blocks, get it from out of country, or get it from a friend who has a cool older brother.
28. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 10:37pm Komete

    Thrax wrote:

    You know, you can already block out-of-country IPs with a copy of smoothwall and a $200 pentium II box. Case closed.

    
    LOL and how do I block all the stuff with a high success rate from within the US, like Youporn? Case opened.
29. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 10:39pm Snarkasm

    Komete wrote:

    A democratic government is nothing but an extension of its people. In essence, a democratic body is the government. We the people indirectly make the laws. But somewhere along the lines we have become very pessimistic about our own abilities as a democratic nation.

    What.
    
    What's pessimistic about preserving freedom of speech and expression?
    

    Komete wrote:

    I'm not asking anyone to do my parenting for me. I'm saying, greater hardware and software tools need to be developed so parents can better exercise control over one of the most influential and greatest achievements to come out of the 20th century, the internet. If you read the thread you will see I've pointed out that net nanny type software is too easily bypassed.

    
    So write some better ones. Put in a firewall. Filter the sites you know exist, and watch his or her history for the other ones you didn't know about. The tools exist, and the government certainly isn't going to suddenly come up with better ones if you're convinced the ones we have now aren't satisfactory.
30. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 10:41pm BuddyJ

    Komete wrote:

    LOL and how do I block all the stuff with a high success rate from within the US, like Youporn? Case opened.

    
    Again, smoothwall.
31. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 10:57pm Komete

    Snarkasm wrote:

    What.
    
    What's pessimistic about preserving freedom of speech and expression?
    
    
    
    So write some better ones. Put in a firewall. Filter the sites you know exist, and watch his or her history for the other ones you didn't know about. The tools exist, and the government certainly isn't going to suddenly come up with better ones if you're convinced the ones we have now aren't satisfactory.

    Buddy J wrote:

    Again, smoothwall.

    
    Smoothwall is only as effective as the IP's it has or ones it knows to block. It isn't the IP's that need to be blocked but the content on them. That is what I'm saying, pornography should be tagged if only within our borders. Once that is done, then you can easily block it.
    
    Please enlighten me if I'm wrong about smooth wall.
    
    Snarkasm, there is absouloutly nothing wrong with freedom of speech or expression of said freedoms, it is when it can cause irrecoverable damage to a minor that it becomes a crime. Children cannot handle porn. It plants seeds that sticks with them.
    
    If you look for studies that show the effect porn has on children and adolescents, you'll quickly come to the conclusion that children need be kept away from it because the odds of things like molestation and others become too high.
    
    If you guys don't mind, the kids are asleep and the wife and I have some porn to make before bed.
    
    Catch ya l8r.
32. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 11:04pm Snarkasm No, kids that watch porn and don't have the parenting to teach them that it's only for diversion and they're not allowed to rape or molest are the ones that rape and molest.
    
    Personal responsibility.
    
    Let me put it this way. Everybody's walked in on their parents doing it. By your logic, at least, what, 4 billion of the 6.5 billion of us should be pedo molesters and rapists. Sometimes it's not just the sex.
33. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 11:05pm shwaip

    Komete wrote:

    Is the idea of having a 7 year old child, daughter or niece, viewing a scene of an 18-year-old gagging on a @ock while his buddy pops her brown cherry in the rear that acceptable to you? If so, then nothing. The current Over 18 yes/no system is enough for you.
    
    If that is not acceptable to you, then you should at least come to the conclusion that something should be done.

    
    1) Don't let a 7 y/o have access to internet without supervision.
    2) ???
    3) profit.
    
    or
    
    1) block *porn*.com (among other obvious filternig)
    2) supervise child on internet
    3) ???
    4) Profit.
    
    none of these require uniquely identifying myself, requiring tagged porn, or anything more than a time commitment and interest in what my 7 year old child is doing on the internet.
34. 
    22 Jan 2009 ~ 11:33pm Komete Man I had to come back for one last peek. There is one good thing about our current situation that does play into my best interest. The voice of this country is largely controlled by an active minority. And I'm not talking Black or White. I'm talking those with political involvement vs those that don't. Right now you have the porn industry, putting tons of money into lobbying against any sort of tagging or filtration suggestions. But in the end, I do believe porn will be tagged. I mean it's not like I'm suggesting we elect a black president or anything.
    
    And trust me guys, I wouldn't be having this conversation if I wasn't a good and very observant parent. At least, I hope I am. I do want my kids to be able to google till their hearts content. There is so much good that can be gained from the internet.
35. 
    23 Jan 2009 ~ 12:31am shwaip I think that we can probably divide "the children" into two groups.
    
    Children who we are worried about accidentally stumbling into porn. This is the type that netnanny and those other programs / hardware solutions will protect. They're not old enough, not interested enough in porn to circumvent what you've put in place. They're also of the age where you should probably be supervising them.
    
    Teens who are actively trying to find porn. They've had sex ed at school. They know what sex is. Their friend jimbo showed them some porn, and it was awesome. Now, they're gonna try to get to it. By this time, you should have talked to them about what sex is. What porn is. Why a lot of porn is disgusting or debasing to women. These kids are going to get porn. They're net savvy, they have friends with porn. They're going (or have gone) through puberty. They're horny and jacking it feels ****ing awesome. These kids are of the age where, after talking to them about sex and porn, I have no problem letting them loose on the internet.
    
    There's obviously a continuum there, not a hard break. When I talk about a "kid" being able to bypass whatever you put in place, I mean the latter group. A 7yo isn't after porn, so netnanny-type protection is adequate. A 14 or 15 yo who is after porn is going to get it. Somewhere in between (lets say around when they have sex ed (i had it at 12/13)), you should talk to your kids about sex and porn.
    
    If your goal is to keep porn out of your child's life until they are 18, you are going to fail. Any measure put in place will fail. I was in _college_ when I turned 18.
36. 
    23 Jan 2009 ~ 1:41am primesuspect Woops. Can't believe I missed this conversation.
    
    Some background for those who don't know: I have two kids. Both boys, they are currently age 9 and 11.
    
    I am extremely socially liberal. I believe many problems at the core of our national culture stem from our general vilification of sex and the remnants of Victorian culture that we adhere to.
    
    I think it is deep shame that porn is considered by mainstream culture to be "negative" and "harmful" to children, while at the same time we glorify toughness, violence, and murder. I'd much rather my nine year old accidentally see a blowjob video than one of those "soldier gets beheaded" videos.
    
    I could spend hours talking about how screwed up our idiotic culture is in this respect, but I'll keep it topical.
    
    I agree 100% with shwaip. First of all, we arbitrarily determined that "18" was the magic number of when it was okay to see nudity and sex. This is completely moronic. It's like this: Kids are going to WANT to see porn after they hit puberty. This is a biological urge. Kids who are not interested in porn do NOT want to see it, therefore they will not go looking for it, and it will be "ewww gross!" if they accidentally see it. You can easily prevent the "ewwww gross!" moments with current technology.
    
    You cannot, under any circumstances, prevent a 12,13, 14 year old who has hit puberty and is furiously whacking it at every opportunity, from seeing porn. They will find it. Whether it be on the internet, or from Shwaip's friend Jimbo, they'll find it.
    
    It is our job Komete, as dads, to make sure that our kids have the right ideas about respect, kindness, love, sexiness, and maturity BEFORE they hit puberty, so that when they do become interested in sex, it's not some insane, alien, uncharted world.
    
    Now, if you take the idea that the government should "protect" your kids, you are going down a dark path of information control that you probably don't _really_ want to go down. What we really should be asking is this: What are we afraid of? What do we want to be protected from? What's so bad about sex?
37. 
    23 Jan 2009 ~ 1:46am BuddyJ What's so bad about violence.
38. 
    23 Jan 2009 ~ 2:05am airbornflght I agree with prime 100%. Even though I don't have any kids when the day comes that I do have kids I don't want to portray sex as something taboo. instead I'd rather it be something two loving adults engage in.
    
    As for porn, young kids could care less (except for maybe some boob action) , but trust me, I'm basically the first generation that grew up with the internet as it is today from a young age and as soon as I figured out their were pictures (no videos when I was young, damn) of girls getting railed by O.G. mudbone I was on that like a college student is on beer on drown night.
    
    And yeh, I'm all about not letting the gov't regulate me any more. cause I don't want the gov't telling me how I should raise my future kid.
39. 
    23 Jan 2009 ~ 2:26am Komete I'm sorry guys but the data and research conducted says otherwise. Look for studies and it is overwhelmingly negative for children to be exposed to pornography. Every boy is not going to molest a younger girl because of porn. Neither will every 11-year-old girl will allow herself to be raped by some 25-year-old gym teacher because she saw porn either. But when exposed, more will become sexually active younger, even at the point where they are not emotionally or mentally ready for sex. Also it does feed into non sociably acceptable behavior in teens including rape.
    
    I'm not about regulating pornography. I'm about making it so that it is easier to block out when it needs to be. We have the technology, we just need the implementation.
    
    The common argument is where are the parents in all this. Well frankly, a lot of parents are lazy idiots but because of a bad parent a child should not have to go through psychological issues when they don't need to.
40. 
    23 Jan 2009 ~ 2:29am Komete And primesuspect, you havn't missed anything. It is just me getting slammed...lol
41. 
    23 Jan 2009 ~ 3:01am GnomeQueen I would argue that those statistics could be misleading. For example- are the kids seeing this porn ones that sought it out? I would argue that if the children are looking for this porn then they are already interested in sex, and hence, are more likely to have it earlier than students that do not seek out porn. There's no way that any study about kids watching porn could be controlled, and hence, a variety of variables could have factored into the situation. Kids that want to find porn will, and kids that want to have sex will. The best thing that parents and schools can do is teach kids about sex, how it works, the ramifications of it, how protection works, and then keep the lines of communication open.
42. 
    23 Jan 2009 ~ 5:04am mondi

    Komete wrote:

    The common argument is where are the parents in all this. Well frankly, a lot of parents are lazy idiots but because of a bad parent a child should not have to go through psychological issues when they don't need to.

    
    Regulate parenting then. People should need to pass a rigorous battery of physical and psychological tests to get a breeding license. It should be expensive and paid for entirely by the prospective parent, that way we know that they are financially able and more importantly willing to care for the child.
    
    I'm not going to argue the morality of porn one way or the other. What I AM going to argue, is legislation that puts the burden of parenting on other tax payers, when the cost should be borne by the parent.
    
    You gave the example of alcohol and tobacco earlier. Those industries are indeed regulated, and there are laws in place to make sure children do not access them, much like porn you buy in the shops. However, once they are inside your house - is it not YOUR responsibility to make sure that your kids don't have access to it? There is no government mandated age verification system on the liquor cabinet, nor should there be. Yes, there is a key, and that key is about as effective as the encrypted chip / tags / whatever system - once someone finds a way around it, it's useless. You can fortify the cabinet, build a cage round it, bury it in a concrete bunker if you want. What's important though, is that the rest of the populace, aren't made financially or morally responsible when you decide your level of protection.
43. 
    23 Jan 2009 ~ 8:10am primesuspect I highly question the validity of a lot of those "studies" that gauge reaction to porn. First of all, there are often religious institutions behind many of them, or other organizations with an agenda to "protect the children". Second of all, the term "molest" is thrown around and highly misused. Any of us who has made out with a boyfriend or girlfriend when we were under 18 have participated in molestation. A 17 year old kid who fingerbangs his 17 year old girlfriend has just "molested" her, even when she put his hand there and kissed him the whole time.
    
    One of the major problems in vilifying sex is that kids who have sex (and many will, no matter what you tell them or show them—again, see "biology") are doin' it rong: they're having unprotected, clumsy, idiotic sex because they've never been talked to about it or shown the right way or been encouraged to use birth control.
    
    And regarding teen pregnancies: Here's an idea: Teach girls about masturbation in middle school, or at least permit the encouragement of masturbation in our culture. Girls who masturbate after puberty and become confident and comfortable with their own bodies (You mean I DON'T have to stick a dick in there to have an orgasm?!) learn to be a bit smarter about what goes on down there, and are less likely to "just lay there" when their dumb idiot 16 year old boyfriend tries to convince her that it "just feels better" without a condom before he humps her for 30 seconds and dumps his load in her. Who should teach this stuff? Parents.
44. 
    23 Jan 2009 ~ 8:16am Thrax THE MORE YOU KNOW.
45. 
    23 Jan 2009 ~ 9:23am the_technocrat You're looking for a technological solution to a sociological problem.
    These types of cross-solutions never work, and never will. People
    will continue to try, however, because they'll have a point of
    influence in one area, and feel this enables them to control all other
    areas with their advantage. The problem is every area has their
    influencers, and they're all trying to do the same thing.
    
    Unfortunately, by the time kids become curious enough to want to find
    content online or otherwise, it is the parents responsibility to
    instill a sense of morality in them so they make decisions that are
    healthy for themselves.
    
    The reason this doesn't happen for the most part is because parents,
    despite the illusion of 'doing everything they can to protect kids'
    are typically trying to limit their kids' exposure to reality in an
    effort to make parenting easy. Unfortunately, parenting by this
    walled garden approach only works until the kids leave the walled
    garden woefully unprepared for the world. Even more unfortunately,
    most parents take a 'not my problem' approach to this, since 'their
    adults now and can make their own decisions'. ...but they were never
    taught to do so...
46. 
    23 Jan 2009 ~ 9:53am cambrose First off..why not use openDNS to block what is accessed on your home network? The federal government has enough problems without having to worry about trying to regulate something on the internet. While many porn companies do operate in the US and could fall victim to this if it occurred, just as many or more sites are operated outside of the US, and would not fall to any US regulation about the internet.
    
    Secondly, who really pays for their porn/adult entertainment? Most of the stuff that is accessed can be easily accessed via streaming video sites/boards that are free sites.
    
    If you find that your children seeing pornography is deplorable, why not create a home where women aren't objectified. Remove all such material from your home. That would be the best place to start.