said by whocares :

those that enjoy looking at pornography,do not & CANNOT see anything wrong with pornography

kinda like telling someone using hard drugs,thats its bad for you..

said by Blackbird :

True, porn does not cause people to do those acts. Porn is but one of a number of passive media that cannot "cause" anybody to do anything. Behavior is a choice. But porn arguably does have an effect on people, if only to create in them a desire to see more of it or view nastier and more-explicit forms of it. If a person is inherently unstable or secretly fantasizes heavily about certain behavior, porn can encourage them to put thought and suggestion into action. And perhaps even show them how. Far too many serial killers and child molestors have come down the path with a documented history of severe porn fixation to ignore the connection in their lives and choices. That is not the same thing as saying porn causes such behavior... but it can and does influence it. Alcohol does not cause traffic accidents, but it has an influence on people who do cause accidents. Perhaps the most damning thing is that porn, by its inherent focus on self-gratification, leads to viewing people as mere objects for achieving self-gratification, much of the time at the expense of the other person's dignity. In the wrong minds, that can be as destructive as dynamite. And to the minds of the young, that viewpoint is as damaging as poison.

It never ceases to amaze me that folks who argue vehemently that media like TV, video, computers, books, etc can be such positive and effective tools to educating, improving, and motivating people (especially the young) will go into equally vehement denial that such media can be used destructively or have a negative impact or motivation on those same people.

But as to how best to raise a child in the real world, I agree with those who have indicated that the key lies in communicating with them openly and often about values and the choices they'll face or already are facing, and discussing with them the reasons for and consequences of those choices.

edit: clarified para 2

said by ric b :

...
um, that should NEVER include censorship. Morals/right from wrong and censorship, are not the same thing (totally). You are teaching your children to believe what YOU believe, not letting them make up their own minds, based on right from wrong, or even basic morals. If you want to take away internet acess, then you must, as someone already said, take away everything else, music, books etc. (EVERYTHING).

By taking away EVERYTHING that can in some way teach a child pretty much whatever they want to know, then you are living your childs life for them. YOU are censoring your own children. If that's what a person likes to do, then that's great. Do it to your OWN children, not everyone elses children.

This USED to be the land of the FREE. Now everyone wants to be in everyone elses business and telling them how to live their lives. When I think about it, telling "you" to stay out of other people's lives, is being a hypocrite too. The difference is, I prefer to let my children, and everyone elses child too, to live their OWN lives.
...

said by Pake :

... stories on kidnappings, molestations, brutalizations, and killings. Porn does not cause people to do those acts.

said by whocares :

those that enjoy looking at pornography,do not & CANNOT see anything wrong with pornography

kinda like telling someone using hard drugs,thats its bad for you..

said by whocares :

those that enjoy looking at pornography,do not & CANNOT see anything wrong with pornography

kinda like telling someone using hard drugs,thats its bad for you..

said by SimbaTLK1 :

My point exactly. Thank you.

--Matt

said by Pake :

If it were up to me, there wouldn't be any filtering on any computers in schools or libraries, because in actuality they are more detrimental to learning than they are beneficial at blocking pornography.

said by whocares :

But also believe that any public school, library,ect SHOULD block any type of porn,games,music,links that are offesive in language,image's or words[/b[ & and PARENTS HAVE A RIGHT to expect this type of protection for their children,you can call it CENSORSHIP,or freedom of speech or whatever, but when you,([B]NOT YOU PERSONALLY but a public school,library,ect) where my son or daughter is concerned, then you have no freedom speech around my loved one

said by Mchart :

Would you please stop posting these utterly worthless threads? Seriously. Kids will find any way possible to view porn. They aren't as innocent as you like to think. Stop making these absurd threads and get a grip on your life.

said by Mchart :

Right, because it is totally realistic to make a bunch of classrooms of only 25 computers at a highschool that has an incomming freshmen class size of nearly 3000 kids.

said by fatness :

quote:

---

"I went into Kroger and their were two young girls," she said. "I said, 'Are you in high school' and they said 'Yes, we are.' I said, 'Have you all ever accessed porn or know anybody who did on the computer' and they said, 'Yes, all the time'&at school"

---

Sounds like a thoroughly-researched and convincing study to me. :)

said by Pake :

Complain about the funding then, but this isn't about funding, it's about how to prevent students from viewing material the school doesn't want them to view. You can also limit the number of computers to 25, that's VERY easy to do.

said by Mchart :

Hint - It is hard for a single teacher to keep track of the alt-tabbing activities of 50+ kids at the same time.

said by Mchart :

"The rule of thumb is generally no more than 25 students to 1 teacher. Any more than that and the problem should not be able computer filtering, but rather student to teacher ratio."

k

said by Pake :

And that has absolutely nothing to do with pornography filtering, which is the topic of this thread.

said by Mchart :

DING DING DING!!! What do you think is happening to the majority of the public schools across America due to the lack of federal funding?

said by Pake :

The rule of thumb is generally no more than 25 students to 1 teacher. Any more than that and the problem should not be able computer filtering, but rather student to teacher ratio.

said by Mchart :

You could do that with a group of 10 kids. Unfortunatly it is way more then 10 kids.

said by Pake :

Placing a person of power behind the students rather than in front or to the sides makes people more hesitant to Alt+Tab to those types of sites. 50+ students would make it difficult, but there should never be more than 25 students to 1 administrator anyways.

said by MooJohn :

I think the wrong issue is being discussed. Yes, porn is accessible in many schools. We all know that filtering isn't 100% effective. Fixes using this technology are just band-aids for the real issue.

I want to know why nobody is questioning the SUPERVISION of these students while they're using the computers. Too often, school computers are treated as electronic babysitters, as if they were just some sort of over-complicated CD player.

Computers need to be positioned so that monitors are visible to others. Someone needs to be doing their job and watching the students while they're in class. The computer is just the medium; it could just as easily be a porn magazine or a "travel-size" DVD player loaded with the latest Girls Gone Wild.

I say take the focus off of what they're using to view porn and work on how and why they're able to do it in the classroom in the first place.

said by whocares :

IF some parents raised their children RIGHT their children would not even be thinking of porn in the 1st place...

said by CPM :

I rather have my kids watch a R or X rated sex movie then a horror movie. Making love is good. Killing people is not.

said by whocares :

not everyone who uses the school computers or the library just to look at porn
There is no chance a school can protect your child 100%. For every 100 ways to filter, there are 100 ways to get around those filters.
=======================================================
PhoenixAZ,lopinboy good argument/counter point,but then also guess you don't mind tax payers $$ being wasted,because a PUBLIC SCHOOL or library that we pay for will not install filters,.
again not talking private,but a PUBLIC place.
where childrens mind are still being developing.

said by whocares :

not to get into any arguments, but maybe IF some parents raised their children RIGHT their children would not even be thinking of porn in the 1st place,

said by Michieru2 :

In all schools in my district we are to sign a contract stating that we will not use the schools internet for yatta yatta yatta. One of those lines lists access to any pornography.

With your thinking because a teenager bought a car he has the capability of running someone over so we should ban cars to teenagers.

said by whocares :

claud,Also, what some people call "porn" varies considerably. Some people would call anything they find objectionable,including sex education materials,

understood as you saying good sound argument,,what some people call "porn" varies considerably,
and yes nothing will be done UNLESS parents who care about their child's education ban togeather & to force the pron out of the schools & libraries,

THERE is a time & place for everything but a public school & a library isn't the place for porn

said by whocares :

yes have to agree with SOME you about your statement,but thats as you said was a different time period,your sons,(men now)but back when you were raising your sons how many times did you hear of a young boy or girl being kidnapped,molested,killed or brutalized,& i would also dare say when playboy was being sold they were kept mostly behind the counter,
***********************************************
pick yourself a less rigid and more open minded school.

oh you mean a school that allows teachers to molest students,or allows students to make out & get into some heavy " petting or necking" in the halls?? & not have to learn anything.
that argument fails, [b]anyway post says what needed to be said,PARENTS protect your children even while at school

said by fivetimeparent :

This is turning the world upside down. I've raised five, all have had their fair share of porn one way or the other (Playboy in the old days, internet lately). No harm done and all of them ended up very well,both emotional as for having a decent job.
pick yourself a less rigid and more open minded school.

said by whocares :

i give up
IF you don't UNDERSTAND the problem,then you cannot possibly understand how to solve it,or protect our children

said by whocares :

IF you don't UNDERSTAND the problem,then you cannot possibly understand how to solve it,or protect our children

said by fivetimeparent :

This is turning the world upside down. In case parents do talk enough and using open common sense, there's no need to worry about their children seeing porn. I've raised five, all have had their fair share of porn one way or the other (Playboy in the old days, internet lately). No harm done and all of them ended up very well,both emotional as for having a decent job.
So: those parents who dislike their kids seeing porn (if only they knew...) on school: pick one where filters are up. All other parents: sex and porn exists for ages and ages. No harm done and pick yourself a less rigid and more open minded school.

said by whocares :

quit trying to put something into a reply that is not written

said by you, earlier :

not to get into any arguments, but maybe IF some parents raised their children RIGHT their children would not even be thinking of porn in the 1st place

said by whocares :

we are talking about a public school/library allowing children access to pron sites

said by whocares :

not to get into any arguments, but maybe IF some parents raised their children RIGHTtheir children would not even be thinking of porn in the 1st place,

said by fatness :

The article is about 1 libraray computer operated by 1 librarian with an image filter that could be turned off. The supporting information is 2 girls interviewed in Kroger.

said by tobicat :

And so what! If they do not see it there they are going down the street to some friends house and look there. And probably at the public library also. If they want to look they are gonna look and you ain't gonna stop it. A little one on one discussion on morals would be far better use of time.

said by fatness :

Sounds like a thoroughly-researched and convincing study to me.