Quote:
Originally Posted by Normal
No, I think parenting is different today. I don’t think all parents are good parents. I also don’t think all kids are the same. Most of course don’t even have fully developed brains till their mid 20’s. Are you suggesting all parents are good?
You do realize we still have parents out there that think it’s OK for their kids to use their phones in class? Yes, that rudeness towards others is out their and even encouraged by some. They don’t care about the impact their kids actions have on others or learning.
|
I agree that parenting is "different" today, for many reasons; one biggie being that many parents these days are parents by default, and many of them have their own problems relating to substance abuse, serial relationships, etc. In my opinion the primary responsibility of a good parent is and always has been to impart VALUES to their children. Unfortunately, two-married-parent households that teach values not just by words but by example is becoming more and more rare.
Unless a child is provably at-risk (and I suppose an argument could be made for that, in this case), I generally don't favor government stepping in. But in this particular case I think the emphasis is in the wrong place. Rather than banning sites so that KIDS cannot access provably dangerous sites, why not penalize PARENTS when it is proven that their children access such sites? Such a move would take the onus of parenting away from the government and place it squarely back on the parent(s), where it belongs.