Comments on: Judge Puts Porn Access Burden On Parents

Tosses 1998 Federal Law That Put Onus On Web Site Operators To Keep Kids Away

[bellal-2009]

well, jimibear, I would have agreed with that 20 years ago. But we've got bigger problems now. New immigrants in the country have large families and the the kids are on their own most of the day. I ask you to visit your public library in the afternoon and see what kids are viewing on the internet. Where are the parents? Working, one two three jobs. How can we support those families? Welfare is one way and maybe it's time to bring it back so mom's can stay home with the kids. Or we can decide as a society that children are the most important resource and keep them from danger. And yes porn is dangerous for kids in many ways.

[jimibear]

BellaL, both parents do not need to work 40+ a week "to survive". They need to work that much to have all the stuff they think they are entitled to.

You can have your TiVo, your SUV, your house in the 'burbs and whatever else, or you can have a real family and be a parent to your kids. However, contrary to what our consumerist society tells you, unless you are exceptionally lucky and in the top couple of % of income, you can't have it all.

Sorry. Welcome to the real world, where in order to have something, you have to give up something else.

[jimibear]

Bellal, I am not sure what your point is. Are you saying that parents should not be the ones responsible for looking after their kids?

Don't you realize that the reason for the majority of problems you describe is the collapse of family structure and lack of discipline? That the "swamp our society has become" can be directly traced to parents who didn't care enough to raise their kids as decent people, but were so focused on themselves and their own pleasure that they said, "I should be able to have kids because that's my right, and a fulltime jobs for both parents because that's my right, and a lifestyle beyond my means that forces me into debt so that I have to work even longer and harder because that's my right ... "

It goes on and on. People talk about their rights, not their responsibilities.

Children are a privilege, not a right, a social expectation, a status symbol or anything else. With that privilege come sacrifice and responsibility, and it is your job as a parent to provide a safe environment for your kids. If you can't or won't do that, don't have children.

[bellal-2009]

Parents do need to step upto the plate and do their duty as it is a 24/7 everyday job.
Posted by MichelleM99 at 03:14 PM : Mar 22, 2007


Unfortunately, that is not possible in our society which requires both parents to be working 40 plus hours a week just to survive.

[passerby2]

jimibear,

you've said it dude.

[bellal-2009]

By constantly deferring regulation to the parent is unfair to the majority. The majority of people in this country want to be able to raise a decent human being. Our country has gone from nurturing to emotionally damaging to kids. There are predators lurking around every corner, drugs, depression. Kids are drowning in the swamp our society has become. The adults of this country with the help of the courts have become too narcissitic to support children and parents' efforts to raise them.

[jimibear]

"Whatever you do, do it YOURSELF in your home, with your kids and your computer and stop demanding the entire world and everyone in it revolve around YOU and your children!"

hear, hear, newster!!! I am heartily sick of parents who can't (or just can't be bothered to) look after their children properly trying to make it everyone else's job.

It's simple: if you aren't willing or able to put in the time and effort it takes to raise a kid, then keep your ***' pants on in the first place.

As I once said to a woman who objected when I asked her to keep her child away from my table in a restaurant (the little brat was pulling things off my table, running at me as if to hit me, screaming, etc.), "Look, lady ... I didn't and wouldn't f*ck you. Therefore, I don't have to put up with your horrid child's behavior."

You - not the government, not other people - are responsible for your child. End of story.

[anopinion1]

maybe you should stop smelling your farts, fartsniffer
Posted by cantshutup at 01:56 PM : Mar 22, 2007

good comeback dude.

you made laugh, thanks man, this day at work has been long!!

[michellem99-2009]

I am for filters on the computers in the home and it don't violate the 5TH.It is the duty of Mum/Dad to teach Jane/John Doe right from wrong. In my day there were no computer in the home but TV and printed matter was in the home. Children should be taught family rules. It would be nice if the porn sites were shut doww. I feel that porn sites should be flag/mark as they are trash and as a blind person I don't allow anyone to use my computer. Parents do need to step upto the plate and do their duty as it is a 24/7 everyday job.

[Renegade.Rivers]

Thankfully there are those in government that still feel the constitution is more important than the religious right, and their attempt to take our rights away, so that they don't have to be responsible for their own children. I don't necessarily like porn, but at the same time there are foods that I don't like, and many other things, but for me to try and force others to eat only what I like, and read what I like would never will be right. There are so many that want the government to control what we as individuals have to learn to control on our own, not take the rights away from everyone, just because we are to lazy to control them on or own. Seems to me that the only way we can do the right thing, is to practice self control, not, let the government do it for us.

[funkiwiteboy]

accepting responsiblity for your actions...there are a few decisions that the gov. should not be able to dictate, say like sending 18year olds to die so the oil barrons of this country can control another countries oil industry, even if the barrons are in the witehowse...duh

[nolalou]

The big problem with creating legal requirments for commercial web sites is that lots of sites that contain objectionable material (either rique' or outright pornagraphy, or gambeling sites) are hosted outside the USA, so we would have no jurisdiction anyway. Parental control and good filering sofrware seem to be the only reasonable option.

I've also seen software packages that let a parent select only the sites the child is allowed to access, so if the site is not on the list, it can't be visited by the child. (this requires the parent to set up a password the child must use to get onto the internet).

[mnelsonix]

This is crazy. The kids today have the know how to go to any web site they choose. Give the parents a break - they can't be everywhere. They can only control their home computer and the kids probably know how to get thru those controls.
Posted by cathaleen at 12:21 PM : Mar 22, 2007

Don't give up cathaleen. Learn about computers. You can control your kids, and their internet use. Please do not rely on the government to protect your kids...It is ultimately your job.

Read: Posted by digitaldog1 at 01:57 PM : Mar 22, 2007. He said it all.

As a parent, I agree with the Judges ruling. I don't believe that the government has the right to decided what my children can or cannot see. I also feel that it is my responsibilty to teach them right from wrong, and that just because they can do something does not mean that they should. If they don't learn this leason from me know, they will be destined to learn it from the court system later.

[cantshutup]

CANTSHUTUP..Well now we know what you watch !! PERVERT
Posted by FARTKNOCKER2

You don't know krap...are you off your meds?...you are a complete moron...you can't even get a simple point! i don't know what made you think that, but maybe you should stop smelling your farts, fartsniffer

[nothappyatall]

"This is crazy. The kids today have the know how to go to any web site they choose. Give the parents a break - they can't be everywhere. They can only control their home computer and the kids probably know how to get thru those controls.
Posted by cathaleen"

Give the PARENTS a break? why the hell should I alter my life to suit YOU because you have CHILDREN and don't have enough time and can't monitor them??!!
Suggestions: If you can't A)Afford your children, B)can't monitor them C)can't enforce rules in YOUR house, then A) Give them up for adoption to someone who can afford them, B)quit your day joband stay at home so you CAN monitor them, C)Unplug YOUR computer and get rid of it if you have so little control over it, your ISP and your children that you can't stop them from viewing sites on the net.

Whatever you do, do it YOURSELF in your home, with your kids and your computer and stop demanding the entire world and everyone in it revolve around YOU and your children!

[l8c6]

HawkSprings, can't you right wing neo cons get be consistent? The poster boy of the neo con movement Ronald Reagan said we must get big government out of our lives. Grover Nordquist said government should be shrunk to a size small enough to fit into a bathtub where it can be drowned. Milton Friedman, the prized neo con economist said government should only be present for purposes of security...he meant a militia to defend against hostile invaders, not pornographers. Come now, pick your self up by your boot straps open your mouth and drink some more of that trickle down.

[cosmicfluke]

On my homepage I have the top stories of literally dozens of media outlets, currently, three of CBS' top 6 headlines are sexual.

the one we're commenting on being one, "Man Convicted Of Nearly 1,000 *** Assaults", the other
"Cops: Family Held, Beat Woman "Slave" "

oooooh, how titillating! Too bad I didn't discover CBS News when I was a ***** young boy.....

[l8c6]

What a mixed message in this country. "Get big government out of our lives". Pat Roberson would agree that government is too big and intrusive. Many fundamentalist republican preachers would agree government meddles in our personal lives too much. So, keep government off of this one too and put responsibility into individuals to take care of themselves. Parents should look after their own kids and take responsibility for the results of their interventions. If porno websites behave aggressively, conduct their business in a way that is intrusive and deceptive and fail to respect people's privacy then that should be dealt with meaningful consequences. I think pornographers largely are offensive, exploitative individuals with a serious sociopathy but how to deal with their presence must be done carefully.

[l8c6]

What a mixed message in this country. "Get big government out of our lives". Pat Roberson would agree that government is too big and intrusive. Many fundamentalist republican preachers would agree government meddles in our personal lives too much. So, keep government off of this one too and put responsibility into individuals to take care of themselves. Parents should look after their own kids and take responsibility for the results of their interventions. If porno websites behave aggressively, conduct their business in a way that is intrusive and deceptive and fail to respect people's privacy then that should be dealt with meaningful consequences. I think pornographers largely are offensive, exploitative individuals with a serious sociopathy but how to deal with their presence must be done carefully.