My comment about all this is fairly simple. When a child or teen goes to any 
website the real question is the source of his intellectual anchor and the 
quality of it. Many on this list have mocked religion and its manifestations 
for instance but that is precisely what it is for. To provide an anchor that 
regardless of how much raw intellectual wind blows aganist the body of moral 
and ethical thinking that the child/teen is held fast to ethical and moral 
judgement that serves to reveal such mutant thinking as espoused by the KKK. 
Those who promote relativist moral code in which anything is ok so long as 
the person believes it is ok are the very same people who need to fear the 
KKK websites and many other websites. Now of course certain "intellectuals" 
will recite a litanny of bad religion-based historical incidents but the fact 
that a Pope impregnated a nun in 1650 is irrelevant. The fact is that moral 
upbringing of children innoculates them against both political mutants and 
moral mutants like porn sites. They may go there, they may see whats there, 
but in all likelyhood they wont be influenced by whats there. This is how 
true free speech is protected. Not by external "laws" but by internal 
intellectual anchors. This is what parents are supposed to give to their 
children. Now if a parent feels that anything the kid does is ok and makes 
excuses for bad thinking and chooses to ignore the bomb materials he has 
found in the kids bedroom under the bed then he has a great deal to worry 
about with respect to websites. marcel deste

Reply via email to