3 ms·

> it’s because they want to look out for children The issue is that it's _their_ job to look out for their children. We don't force all beds to have "walls",

> it’s because they want to look out for children The issue is that it's _their_ job to look out for their children. We don't force all beds to have "walls", and give adults the keys to lower them if they show proof of age. Parents are supposed to buy _cribs_ for their children.

nathan_compton 3y ago
But if a parent neglects those responsibilities society is understood to have the right to intervene. In other words, the state has the responsibility to intervene on behalf of society for the well being of children. Given that responsibility, its pretty easy to suggest that the state has the power to make laws which may protect children over and above what individual parents might do.
- rootusrootus 3y ago
  I think most of us understand the line for gov't involvement to be much closer to the abuse end of the scale than the ate-too-much-candy end. We know empirically that gov't intervention itself has significant consequences that may completely outweigh the damage being done by whatever bad behavior they were trying to solve.
BadThink6655321 3y ago
Just recently a black child, who was born at home with jaundice, was taken from the parents to be given care in a hospital, because a doctor didn’t think the parents would provide effective treatment. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/temecia-rodney-mila-jackson-returned-home-birth-jaundice-texas/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/temecia-rodney-mila-jackson-ret...
- haldujai 3y ago
  It's unequivocal that the state has the right and obligation to intervene in cases of child neglect/abuse (which refusal or inability to provide necessary medical care is an example of) and is easily evidenced by the existence of agencies like the Child Protective Services or Children's Aid Society. It is completely unnecessary to state the child's ethnicity to make this point which is entirely irrelevant to the argument you are attempting to make.
wyldberry 3y ago
It takes a village to raise children. While it is the parent's responsibility to raise a child, it's not unreasonable for them to ask government to make society conducive for raising and protecting the next generation. The incentives are mismatched. The organizations providing access to pornography have no incentive to limit access to their product without legal enforcement. Hacker News is filled with technical people. However, think about all the workers who are not tech workers who have families. The burden of knowledge for these parents to setup home networks and devices that provide content filtering, monitoring, and alerting is way too high. Access to pornography ends up being an economic negative externality caused by the increased access to the internet, and we haven't really figured out how to handle the cost.
Curvature5868 3y ago
Should pornography be allowed to be displayed on billboards or in storefront windows? Is it the job of parents to cover their children's eyes as they stroll through town? As a society we have (mostly) set limits on where pornography can be accessed. Adult shops have a proprietor who can shoo kids out. Is the www different from public streets?
bart_spoon 3y ago
> The issue is that it's _their_ job to look out for their children. Perhaps, but society seems to be increasingly creating hostile environments for parents and their children. Immediate and constant access to unlimited pornography is the tip of the iceberg. Social media has been shown to be highly toxic to young adults. Most digital content, be it social media, video games, etc is being explicitly designed to addict users, especially children. Education is crumbling. Food is loaded with artificial sweeteners and additives making them addictive and unhealthy. Local communities and support have decayed. And all the while the average income in comparison to inflation has cratered, making it more difficult for parents to actually spend time away from work to actually parent. The ability of parents to raise healthy, well adjusted children has gotten much more difficult in recent decades, largely due the pursuit of profit over human well-being. You can disagree with individual laws, but you should not simply bury your head in the sand and respond to every attempt to help parents out with “just do your job and parent!”

nathan_compton 3y ago

But if a parent neglects those responsibilities society is understood to have the right to intervene. In other words, the state has the responsibility to intervene on behalf of society for the well being of children. Given that responsibility, its pretty easy to suggest that the state has the power to make laws which may protect children over and above what individual parents might do.

rootusrootus 3y ago
I think most of us understand the line for gov't involvement to be much closer to the abuse end of the scale than the ate-too-much-candy end. We know empirically that gov't intervention itself has significant consequences that may completely outweigh the damage being done by whatever bad behavior they were trying to solve.

BadThink6655321 3y ago

Just recently a black child, who was born at home with jaundice, was taken from the parents to be given care in a hospital, because a doctor didn’t think the parents would provide effective treatment. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/temecia-rodney-mila-jackson-returned-home-birth-jaundice-texas/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/temecia-rodney-mila-jackson-ret...

haldujai 3y ago
It's unequivocal that the state has the right and obligation to intervene in cases of child neglect/abuse (which refusal or inability to provide necessary medical care is an example of) and is easily evidenced by the existence of agencies like the Child Protective Services or Children's Aid Society. It is completely unnecessary to state the child's ethnicity to make this point which is entirely irrelevant to the argument you are attempting to make.

wyldberry 3y ago

It takes a village to raise children. While it is the parent's responsibility to raise a child, it's not unreasonable for them to ask government to make society conducive for raising and protecting the next generation. The incentives are mismatched. The organizations providing access to pornography have no incentive to limit access to their product without legal enforcement. Hacker News is filled with technical people. However, think about all the workers who are not tech workers who have families. The burden of knowledge for these parents to setup home networks and devices that provide content filtering, monitoring, and alerting is way too high. Access to pornography ends up being an economic negative externality caused by the increased access to the internet, and we haven't really figured out how to handle the cost.

Curvature5868 3y ago

Should pornography be allowed to be displayed on billboards or in storefront windows? Is it the job of parents to cover their children's eyes as they stroll through town? As a society we have (mostly) set limits on where pornography can be accessed. Adult shops have a proprietor who can shoo kids out. Is the www different from public streets?

bart_spoon 3y ago

> The issue is that it's _their_ job to look out for their children. Perhaps, but society seems to be increasingly creating hostile environments for parents and their children. Immediate and constant access to unlimited pornography is the tip of the iceberg. Social media has been shown to be highly toxic to young adults. Most digital content, be it social media, video games, etc is being explicitly designed to addict users, especially children. Education is crumbling. Food is loaded with artificial sweeteners and additives making them addictive and unhealthy. Local communities and support have decayed. And all the while the average income in comparison to inflation has cratered, making it more difficult for parents to actually spend time away from work to actually parent. The ability of parents to raise healthy, well adjusted children has gotten much more difficult in recent decades, largely due the pursuit of profit over human well-being. You can disagree with individual laws, but you should not simply bury your head in the sand and respond to every attempt to help parents out with “just do your job and parent!”