Wouldn't that be their right as a parent to make that decision for themselves and do what they felt was in the best interest of their kids?
Once again, we're
NOT talking about rights. We both know and agree that parents have rights when it comes to how they raise their kids. However, I'm trying to get at how
good of an idea something like this is for both the parent and the kid because it's unbalanced. The parent wins and the kids lose. Not to mention, it's quite clear that some parenting practices are not in the best interest of the child. Thankfully, most people that partake in those sorts of beatings and harsh disciplines get taken care of (no I'm not talking about spankers. I'm talking about parents that uppercut their children :lol: )
I guess since some dangers can't be avoided we should just embrace them all without attempting to address the ones that are easier to narrow in on?
People will always be in danger at some point in their lives. The internet is an easier problem to narrow in on, but spying on them to the point that you're recording their conversations and junk is a bit much, don't you think? I mean, are you for the government tapping your phones "just in case" and overhearing sensual or private conversations?
I'm not just talking about monitoring who kids are talking to online. There's a bunch of stuff online that parents might not want their kids to be looking at. In this case I think it's a fair assumption that without the internet kids wouldn't have easy access to some of this stuff.
So you agree, the gun can be blamed in the crime? People fail to see how blaming the tool solves nothing. It avoids the real problem which is the one who acted. For example, the internet has been used to solicit child sex slaves . . it has also been used to donate and raise money for cancer. It has been used to raise awareness of disease, important issues, and helps people do their jobs better. Just like a gun, it is a valuable tool in either good or bad hands however, it is not the problem.
The definition of "poorly raised" is going to differ greatly from parent to parent. Some would say that not taking an active effort to monitor what your kids do on the internet would be poor parenting, right? I mean that's what this whole debate is about in the first place.
Well, I'd imagine you'd be raising your kids to have self-control. Do you just let your kids eat, eat, and eat? No. Do you allow them to skip kindergarten class? No. It's not that kids lack self-control, it's that they're very interested in what they want, not what you want. If you don't teach them from a young age that you're the parent and they're the child and that's how the pecking order runs, they won't listen and if they won't listen to you, what's to make you think they'll listen to themselves?
Exactly. And they'll also catch on to things such as clearing their history, deleting their cache, covering up their tracks, etc. Would you agree or disagree to the following statement:
"There are things online that can really mess people up."
Of course, I never denied that, I don't know why you're even asking.
If you agree, would you want your kids to see those things, especially if they were younger? If you disagree, maybe you have a filter on your own internet... Those padded walls aren't normally there you know.. :lol:
Who says it's a guarantee? Kids don't go looking for this stuff because they want to, they usually go looking for it because
they're told not to. That's why I suggested honestly and talking because that way you can set things straight with them rather than lying and sneaking around behind their backs. Kids are always going to be exposed, it's like a quote from
Finding Nemo when Dory is talking to Marlin about his son who is overprotective towards"You can't stop everything from happening to him, then nothing will happen to him!"