|
C---------
|
Censorship=security. Censoring things from minors gives them a forbidden fruit like desire to know about it. Instead of censoring them: guide their morals.
Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
exactly
Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?
"Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys" - P.J. O'Rourke "Being powerful is like being a lady. If you have to tell people you are, you aren't." - Margaret Thatcher "Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success." - Christopher Lasch  
H0ary H0bbit Religious Views: “Never to suffer would never to have been blessed.” - Edgar Allan Poe (September 9, 2009 at 3:39 pm)Saerules Wrote: Censorship=security. Censoring things from minors gives them a forbidden fruit like desire to know about it. Instead of censoring them: guide their morals. Isn't censorship guiding their morals? We (my wife and I) don't force our children to do or not do anything that's safe. They choose themselves. We are firm on our guidelines and they have no doubt on our views. Film classification, for example, is a guide. Some kids think it's good to watch material inappropriate for their maturity, and receive little, confusing, or no parental guidance making them their own moral arbiters. Our kids make up their own mind and are given the responsibility. Censorship. in this definition is a clear guide, & not forced.
It certainly didn't guide mine. I had to find out things by myself, without any guidance (because i was afraid of what they would think)... and i rather think that was not good for me. Good parents haven't forgotten what it is like to be a child, and guide their children. A pity these people are less common than the normal people, who rely almost exclusively on censorship to prevent their children from accessing material.
A moral guide will be better than censorship everywhere except in heavy brainwashing. Even with that it is nearly impossible to keep people from seeking that very thing they are denied. A moral guide will tell someone WHY it is wrong to do something... not just that it is wrong. Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
I think you hit the nail on the head.
Censorship is used to suppress freedom and ideas. It's an element of fascism. You can always recognize a fascist simply by noting how many freedoms and ideas they don't want others to have. I find Christianity extremely fascist because it demands that everyone march to the beat of its drummer whether you like it or not. I was once asked by a Christian... "All in all, it seems that if one were teaching a way to find life and life everlasting wouldn't this be of benefit to others and give them a something to look forward to? How could this be damaging? I replied... The issue is not whether the promise of everlasting life is damaging, but whether the strings attached to the promise are damaging (also known as the baggage). And there are plenty of strings. Here are just a few. • One must believe scores of articles of blind-faith. • One must not question the articles of faith, even if some appear absurd, repressive of human rights, unjust or unethical. • One who questions the articles of faith or does not embrace them must be considered evil and therefore must be ostracized, vilified and disenfranchised. • One must submit to obey hundreds of rules and may not question the justice or injustice of them. • One must consider themselves evil if they disobey the rules. One must agree they deserve punishment. • One must consider all others evil who do not obey the rules. They must be punished whether they agree with the rules or not. • One must do everything in their power, using either persuasion or the force of law, to ensure all others embrace the same articles of faith and embrace the same rules. • One must agree that all of the above is the right-way and the only-way. Therefore, society must be everlastingly enslaved to it and never allowed to escape. Now, my mind informs me that these strings are very real, and significantly damage the quality of many lives. If true, a valid question is raised. Is this promise of eternal life really a blessing or is it possible, considering the strings, that it is actually a scourge in disguise, “a wolf in sheep’s clothing?”
H0ary H0bbit Religious Views: “Never to suffer would never to have been blessed.” - Edgar Allan Poe
I think Sae that blind censorship is worse than no guidance, tho' maybe I'm wrong on that. Perhaps I agree with you on this. But then I'm not a mother. I'd think someone so invested would be able to clear this up.
I have a friend who vets what her children watch, (they're young) for example. She'll watch films first to check they're ok.. nothing that will give them nightmares or be disturbing ...she has the welfare of her children at heart, and protects them. This is good censorship IMO. 
I will restate what I've always said to these anti-censorship views.
There are reasons why some people should be censored. Maybe it's because they are too young (film, book, TV censorship) and in my opinion that is appropriate; maybe it's because they have their rights restricted (such as criminals ... that is a form of censorship); maybe it's because they have victims (again criminals ... in an uncensored world paedophiles, whether criminal or not, would have access to their victims AND access to the materials they crave); there are things I wouldn't want everyone to know about me and my family (and neither would they ... that is censorship) and I am sure I could think of many more examples. In principle I agree with keeping censorship to a minimum BUT they way people talk about it here strikes me as fairy gah gah land ... idealism is a good thing but it has to be tempered by practical concepts such as consequences! My children were not allowed to watch 15 certificate films until they were very close to that age, for 18's we were a bit more lax but still applied restrictions ... that is censorship and it was in my opinion and in theirs a good thing. Kyu Angry Atheism
Where those who are hacked off with the stupidity of irrational belief can vent their feelings! Come over to the dark side, we have cookies! Kyuuketsuki, AngryAtheism Owner & Administrator RE: C---------
September 9, 2009 at 5:30 pm
(This post was last modified: September 9, 2009 at 5:34 pm by Violet.)
(September 9, 2009 at 4:41 pm)fr0d0 Wrote: I think Sae that blind censorship is worse than no guidance, tho' maybe I'm wrong on that. Perhaps I agree with you on this. But then I'm not a mother. I'd think someone so invested would be able to clear this up. That indeed is  But sometimes parents forget that their children will make their own decisions, and that children should always be able to experience what they are ready for. There indeed is good censorship. However, I know a few churchgoing parents that won't let their teenage children ready Harry Potter... which i should expect any second grader to be ready for. There is indeed bad censorship  (September 9, 2009 at 5:12 pm)Kyuuketsuki Wrote: I will restate what I've always said to these anti-censorship views. What is a non-criminal pedophile? Is 18 really such a magical age? Is any age a magical one-size-fits all? Not unless we are all clones. There are 13 year olds who are more mature than 50 year olds... that our society has difficulty recognizing that is as a result of not thinking, and usually the societal taboo on thinking even for a moment such things. That arrogance impedes the future, by letting people make decisions they are not ready for... and by not letting people make decisions they are ready for. No good comes from a age-based rights. Please give me a home where cloud buffalo roam
Where the dear and the strangers can play
Where sometimes is heard a discouraging word
But the skies are not stormy all day
While having lines to be drawn... 'cut off points' for doing certain things, where you have to be 12, 15, 18, 21 years old for certain things etc - while I see to not really make sense and be ridiculous: What I ask is for a practical alternative?
Do we have to make a shit choice if the alternative is guess work that could possibly worse, for some? If a child has good parents that can judge, that's fine...but if a child has parents who can't judge the matter, etc - what alternative could we have to some kind of 'cut off point', somewhere to drawn the line, despite the...quite absurd arbitrariness of it? Because if it's totally free, and there's no law on the matter at all - then bad parents could readily allow their children to do things when they aren't ready. So what is the alternative to a highly arbitrary drawing of lines? This is what I wonder to myself. EvF |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
