Florida Banning Social Media for Kids

[Normal]

The Florida House has passed a law through bipartisan support prohibiting kids under the age of 16 from using social media. We are the first state which has taken an action long overdue. What sites should be banned though and how can it be enforced?

Florida House passes bill banning children under 16 from social media: 'Kids can't stay off the platforms' (https://news.yahoo.com/florida-house-passes-bill-banning-071915024.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall)

It’s about time!

[Keefelane66]

Where there is a will there is a way. We don’t need legislation if parents would do their job.

[ThirdOfFive]

The Florida House has passed a law prohibiting kids under the age of 16 from using social media. We are the first state which has taken an action long overdue. What sites should be banned though and how can it be enforced?

Florida House passes bill banning children under 16 from social media: 'Kids can't stay off the platforms' (https://news.yahoo.com/florida-house-passes-bill-banning-071915024.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall)

It’s about time!
Sounds laudable in principle but how would something like that be enforced?

[Normal]

Where there is a will there is a way. We don’t need legislation if parents would do their job.

Some don’t, then the poison spreads like wildfire between peers. If you suggest all do their jobs, then it would be effective.

Cyber bullying, Tiktok dares as well as most rebellious behavior suggestions could be reduced.

[Bill14564]

Not the first state to try something like this.

Not a law yet.

Not a good idea.

[Boffin]

The Florida House has passed a law prohibiting kids under the age of 16 from using social media. We are the first state which has taken an action long overdue. What sites should be banned though and how can it be enforced?

Florida House passes bill banning children under 16 from social media: 'Kids can't stay off the platforms' (https://news.yahoo.com/florida-house-passes-bill-banning-071915024.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall)

It’s about time!

The children are smarter and more skilled in technology than the parents; they will find and use a work around. That work around may be worse for them than the current situation. Enforcement will be nonexistent.

[retiredguy123]

Florida seems to pass a lot of laws that are impossible to enforce. For example, you need a permit to solicit door-to-door. But, there is no fine, so I guess the only enforcement would be for a police officer to arrest you.

[Blueblaze]

Sounds laudable in principle but how would something like that be enforced?

Well, it won't be in Florida, but it's certainly enforceable. China does it all the time. Heck, I was in Belgium last December and half the sites I visit every day were blocked. Talk of the Villages was blocked, for crying out loud!

The internet is easily filtered, but I doubt that the legislature will do any more to enforce this law than they did when American Integrity dropped the insurance on my 14-year-old roof (the year they passed a law that said they couldn't), or get "Bogus Money, and More" off my TV (after they passed Tort Reform).

[Sparty6971]

Not something I can agree with. It would be impossible to enforce fairly, should be the choice of parents/guardians, etc., we don't need "mommy and daddy" government committee deciding which web site is okay or not okay. On last night's news, our governor wisely said he understands the desire of some to do such a thing, but he went on to say he couldn't see how it could be don't fairly or correctly any better than parents should/could do. I put this idea in a knee-jerk idea category of a solution in search of a real problem.

[Taltarzac725]

Looks like something the kids will get around quickly.

[coralway]

Another election year nutty idea. There are also certain states considering banning and removing books that tell about a certain part of our country’s history that they don’t like. And they would ban books by authors they don’t like.

[Aces4]

Not something I can agree with. It would be impossible to enforce fairly, should be the choice of parents/guardians, etc., we don't need "mommy and daddy" government committee deciding which web site is okay or not okay. On last night's news, our governor wisely said he understands the desire of some to do such a thing, but he went on to say he couldn't see how it could be don't fairly or correctly any better than parents should/could do. I put this idea in a knee-jerk idea category of a solution in search of a real problem.

I’m all for waiting until age 16. Are you aware of the bullying and traumatic effect social media has had for many children? Suicides have occurred due to this bullying.

Allowing kids to be children is important and removing this huge obstacle would be applauded.

[Aces4]

Another election year nutty idea. There are also certain states considering banning and removing books that tell about a certain part of our country’s history that they don’t like. And they would ban books by authors they don’t like.

That’s not true, the removal would be based on graphic content. Removing books from everywhere or libraries for children, which is it?

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

That’s not true, the removal would be based on graphic content. Removing books from everywhere or libraries for children, which is it?

You're right of course. The Bible should be removed from all school libraries. It's filled with filth, degradation, inhumanity, torture, graphic violence, explicit sexual situations.

Check out Ezekiel 20:23 if you don't believe me. It's pretty insane that children are ENCOURAGED to read this stuff.

[shaw8700@outlook.com]

This law should not and will not be passed.

Now I’m not saying that young kids should use social media, in fact with all the bullying going on I wouldn’t let my kids. But this is another step to taking our freedoms away.

[Aces4]

You're right of course. The Bible should be removed from all school libraries. It's filled with filth, degradation, inhumanity, torture, graphic violence, explicit sexual situations.

Check out Ezekiel 20:23 if you don't believe me. It's pretty insane that children are ENCOURAGED to read this stuff.

Lol, I was never assigned that for homework and I don’t remember any kids checking out the Bible.

Would someone explain to me why it’s wrong to wait until a child reaches adulthood and reads these books. Is reading the books at a young age better for indoctrination?

I am a voracious reader but most of the reading has been through adulthood. Again, why the push to target children?

[Aces4]

This law should not and will not be passed.

Now I’m not saying that young kids should use social media, in fact with all the bullying going on I wouldn’t let my kids. But this is another step to taking our freedoms away.

Freedom? Why not let kids carry arms to target one another? That’s what bullying is and does to the targets. There is a loss of self esteem and happiness in those children.

If it’s allowed, you can’t keep your children from it even if they personally aren’t using social media. They just need to be attacked from that media.

[Boffin]

Survival of the fittest.

[Pairadocs]

The Florida House has passed a law prohibiting kids under the age of 16 from using social media. We are the first state which has taken an action long overdue. What sites should be banned though and how can it be enforced?

Florida House passes bill banning children under 16 from social media: 'Kids can't stay off the platforms' (https://news.yahoo.com/florida-house-passes-bill-banning-071915024.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall)

It’s about time!

One can't stop "progress" of course, and there are many valuable aspects of social media sites such as this one, and so many many others. But, IMHO, our entire culture has also suffered many negatives since the development of such sights. Everything has a price, and even we, adults in general, also pay a high price for all the joys social media sites can bring us. I personally welcome any attempt to at least slow down the dark crimes perpetrated on our children and teens, but I also think "the horse is out of the barn" and going to be VERY hard to capture and corral again !

[Buckeyephan]

My daughter says it is terribly frustrating to be the parent of a teen. Just when parents discover and block sites, kids find a work-around. She says it is like playing whack-a-mole. When parents take away their child’s phone, a friend provides a burner phone. She tells horror stories about challenges on TikTok. So glad the internet wasn’t around when my kids were teens. All I had to do was unplug her phone and hide it.

[kkingston57]

The Florida House has passed a law prohibiting kids under the age of 16 from using social media. We are the first state which has taken an action long overdue. What sites should be banned though and how can it be enforced?

Florida House passes bill banning children under 16 from social media: 'Kids can't stay off the platforms' (https://news.yahoo.com/florida-house-passes-bill-banning-071915024.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall)

It’s about time!

Another stupid law.

On paper sounds good. In meantime, most of these < 16 year olds know more about computer than their parents and most of them are 2-3 clicks away from hard core porn. Enforce it? Police Squad will be replaced by Internet Police. Leslie Neilson would have a field day.

In meantime Sumter County deputies are ticketing golf cart drivers for speeding.

When are they going to start arresting men from using the womans bathroom on a golf course and vice versa. Yes, our legislature recently said that a person needs to use the restroom per WHAT they were at birth and that is against the law. If a male is playing golf with 3 other guys and 4 of us need to go, guess where 1-2 of them are going. This could happen to the ladies also.

Our legislature is clue less.

[Blackbird45]

These law makers can't be serious, they can't stop kids younger than 16 from drugs, porn, drinking and sex. The cat is already out of the bag do they really think the can stop someone from going on to social media who's already made it part of their daily life.

[stone8735]

The Florida House has passed a law prohibiting kids under the age of 16 from using social media. We are the first state which has taken an action long overdue. What sites should be banned though and how can it be enforced?

Florida House passes bill banning children under 16 from social media: 'Kids can't stay off the platforms' (https://news.yahoo.com/florida-house-passes-bill-banning-071915024.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall)

It’s about time!

So you think that it is OK for the state to regulate how parents raise their children?

[Normal]

So you think that it is OK for the state to regulate how parents raise their children?

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.

[FredMitchell]

It seems like nobody here is familiar with the First Amendment to the US Constitution, which the Supreme Court has found applies to all states as well!

[sharonl7340]

The Florida House has passed a law through bipartisan support prohibiting kids under the age of 16 from using social media. We are the first state which has taken an action long overdue. What sites should be banned though and how can it be enforced?

Florida House passes bill banning children under 16 from social media: 'Kids can't stay off the platforms' (https://news.yahoo.com/florida-house-passes-bill-banning-071915024.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall)

It’s about time!

I find it interesting that FL always touts that it is a parental rights state, meaning that parents should be making their own decisions about what their children can or can't do rayher than the state. But then it turns around and makes these sweeping laws about things that fall within the parent's sphere of decision making (thinking Healthcare for transgender children or social media). Sounds like FL is having an identity crisis of its own.

How can you even enforce such a law? What are the punishments if it is enforced? Is it really about "protecting" children or getting more money in the coffers from the fines that would be levied?

[Maker]

The worst part is having to prove you are an adult. How will that be done?
Scanning and submitting your driver license? Maybe your SSN? Send in a tax return too?
Do you really want Facebook to have that much information about you? Will they promptly delete that info after validation to prevent it from being misused or stolen (hacked)?

There will be 2 groups of people. Those who cave to this, and those who know how to get around it.

[ThirdOfFive]

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.

[Normal]

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 place 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.

For sure! If a kid is being bullied in school on a website, hammer the parents and crack down with fines on the host server. It is a lot like smoking, drinking, or watching rated R movies though. Kids will break the rules. I don’t think Tik Tok or others are necessarily a good influence, but then neither is gaming where you gain points while killing as many as you can. The issue is larger than laws we have or the laws that can fix our problems. I don’t like laws that block free speech, but then a law against yelling “fire” in a crowded movie theater was passed too.

Kids can and should be treated different than adults, they don’t always know better. The internet is basically unfiltered for all. Should it remain unfiltered for the more vulnerable youth, or just let them get crushed?

[FredJacobs]

More government trying to regulate our lives.

[Bob.Betty]

The Florida House has passed a law through bipartisan support prohibiting kids under the age of 16 from using social media. We are the first state which has taken an action long overdue. What sites should be banned though and how can it be enforced?

Florida House passes bill banning children under 16 from social media: 'Kids can't stay off the platforms' (https://news.yahoo.com/florida-house-passes-bill-banning-071915024.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall)

It’s about time!

Who are you (the government) to decide what my child can or can't do on social media?

[sallyg]

Good luck with that.

[Topspinmo]

Where there is a will there is a way. We don’t need legislation if parents would do their job.

They are doing they jobs but daycare raising their children.

[airstreamingypsy]

Wow, this is the worst case over government overreach yet. I wish Florida would concern itself with insurance costs, overbuilding and crime...... instead of posturing at Disney, banning books and other freedoms that I dare not mention. The free state of Florida gets less free every day.

[Topspinmo]

For sure! If a kid is being bullied in school on a website, hammer the parents and crack down with fines on the host server. It is a lot like smoking, drinking, or watching rated R movies though. Kids will break the rules. I don’t think Tik Tok or others are necessarily a good influence, but then neither is gaming where you gain points while killing as many as you can. The issue is larger than laws we have or the laws that can fix our problems. I don’t like laws that block free speech, but then a law against yelling “fire” in a crowded movie theater was passed too.

Kids can and should be treated different than adults, they don’t always know better. The internet is basically unfiltered for all. Should it remain unfiltered for the more vulnerable youth, or just let them get crushed?

Kids now know better, just ask them. O wait it’s always been that way If they don’t get what they want.

[Topspinmo]

Wow, this is the worst case over government overreach yet. I wish Florida would concern itself with insurance costs, overbuilding and crime...... instead of posturing at Disney, banning books and other freedoms that I dare not mention. The free state of Florida gets less free every day.

Disney not it’s own state like they thought they was.

[Cliff Fr]

It's a nice idea but that cats already out of the bag. A lot of parents gjve the cell phone to kids as a baby sitter. There are "games" available to children on the cell phone, some if which have unsuitable images and languages.

[Byte1]

You're right of course. The Bible should be removed from all school libraries. It's filled with filth, degradation, inhumanity, torture, graphic violence, explicit sexual situations.

Check out Ezekiel 20:23 if you don't believe me. It's pretty insane that children are ENCOURAGED to read this stuff.

Some folks enjoy or find the NEED to look/seek the negative. :cryin2:

[Taltarzac725]

Book Bans in Florida Schools: The Complete List | Miami New Times (https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/more-than-350-books-banned-in-florida-schools-since-last-july-16817328)

Here is a list of banned books here in Florida. One county does ban many books related to The Bible as well as that Holy Book.

[Byte1]

Social media with children IS a problem. There is a lot of cyber bullying, juvenile and adult. What's the answer? Perhaps teaching children the difference between right and wrong is a good start. Kind of hard for some adults, especially those that shouldn't have children because they are unfit when it comes to parenting. Kind of hard when judges severely punish small violations of the law and a slap on the wrist for murder and manslaughter. Values are different for individual folks, but individuals should respect other folks views, regardless of belief. You can disagree without being aggressive and even sometimes violent.

[Papa5]

Law is an example of something that is un-enforceable and not necessary due to the fact that responsible parents can monitor and control access on a devise.


NThe Florida House has passed a law through bipartisan support prohibiting kids under the age of 16 from using social media. We are the first state which has taken an action long overdue. What sites should be banned though and how can it be enforced?

Florida House passes bill banning children under 16 from social media: 'Kids can't stay off the platforms' (https://news.yahoo.com/florida-house-passes-bill-banning-071915024.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall)

It’s about time!

[Taltarzac725]

Law is an example of something that is un-enforceable and not necessary due to the fact that responsible parents can monitor and control access on a devise.


N

It is books in the school library. Of course, kids could get an older friend to buy the book online or wherever. Or get it from a public library.

I volunteered at a Palm Harbor, FL library from 2000 through 2003 or so and recall one young lady who was checking out all kinds of romance novels. The very racy kind.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Social media with children IS a problem. There is a lot of cyber bullying, juvenile and adult. What's the answer? Perhaps teaching children the difference between right and wrong is a good start. Kind of hard for some adults, especially those that shouldn't have children because they are unfit when it comes to parenting. Kind of hard when judges severely punish small violations of the law and a slap on the wrist for murder and manslaughter. Values are different for individual folks, but individuals should respect other folks views, regardless of belief. You can disagree without being aggressive and even sometimes violent.

Yes there are some people who shouldn't have children. Some of them might not even want them. If only there was some medical procedure that could prevent the birth of unwanted children to girls and women who were victims of crimes against their bodies, that didn't require that the conception be identified before most women even know they're pregnant.

[GATORBILL66]

Kids under 16 shouldn't even have phones!

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

This law should not and will not be passed.

Now I’m not saying that young kids should use social media, in fact with all the bullying going on I wouldn’t let my kids. But this is another step to taking our freedoms away.

The Senate is planning on passing it. And the Governor will sign off on it.

[Bill14564]

The Senate is planning on passing it. And the Governor will sign off on it.

Not according to the Governor (https://floridaphoenix.com/2024/01/26/gov-desantis-has-doubts-about-fl-lawmakers-effort-to-ban-children-under-16-from-social-media/), at least not in its current form.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Lol, I was never assigned that for homework and I don’t remember any kids checking out the Bible.

Would someone explain to me why it’s wrong to wait until a child reaches adulthood and reads these books. Is reading the books at a young age better for indoctrination?

I am a voracious reader but most of the reading has been through adulthood. Again, why the push to target children?

Some of us got past the Dick and Jane books and were on to bigger and better things. School libraries, that I knew of, never had ONLY required reading in them. We were allowed to select any book we wanted, there was no section we weren't "allowed" to check. If I, in 3rd grade, wanted to read Catcher in the Rye, I could check the book out. if I, in 7th grade, wanted to return to Dick and Jane, I could. If I was reading Catcher in the Rye in 3rd grade and didn't understand a concept I'd ask my parents. And they would explain.

Of course, that would require that the parents be directly involved in the upbringing of their own children.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Sorry this comes under “Government trying to parent a child that they don’t know, or pay for. Then pass a law that basically say you are unfit to parent and this is the first right we are going to remove.

Wait for the second law that states when, and how many girls you are allowed. Didn’t a country already do that……..

That ship has sailed. A variety of classic literature has been banned in various public schools for decades. In Florida, if a girl REALLY has to go to the bathroom, but the girl's room is full and the boy's room is empty, she just has to pee in her pants. Or else risk breaking the law by going into the boy's room. In Florida public schools, if the kids are talking about what they want to be when they grow up, Johnny isn't ALLOWED to say "I want to be like my two mommies, they're both doctors!" If 13-year-old Susie, who only just started menstruating a year before and her periods aren't regular yet, becomes victim of a crime by her uncle and becomes pregnant, she has to give birth all because she didn't know she was pregnant until she was in her third month, and by the time she was able to schedule an abortion, she would've been in her 16th week, and that is illegal in Florida. Parents of minor children living in poverty could've received an extra $120/month in the summer to accommodate the lunches their kids can't get in school, while school is out for the summer. But Florida chose to reject that. That amounts to less than $1.50 per day per kid for 5 days per week, to help offset the cost of lunches for those kids.

Children in Florida have no rights. Florida forces women to give birth in the name of "right to life" but once that life is outside the womb, Florida doesn't want to know about it.

[MidWestIA]

how will they enforce that??

[asianthree]

It's a nice idea but that cats already out of the bag. A lot of parents gjve the cell phone to kids as a baby sitter. There are "games" available to children on the cell phone, some if which have unsuitable images and languages.

Well one can agree or disagree that a child engaged on a learning site as a child curbs public displays of unhappiness. (Think how many hate children in restaurants in TV)

Tablets and phones Very helpful when a child is autistic, just for the parents well being.

Our son, Behavioral Psychologist for autistic children, programs phones and tablets that are providing much needed help for child and parents.

A phone and a four year old autistic child can be a godsend no matter how you look at it.

[Bill14564]

how will they enforce that??

The bill doesn't prohibit children from accessing social media, the bill prohibits social media from establishing accounts for children. The onus is on the social media site to verify the age of the account holder and disallow accounts from those under a certain age.

I believe the bill says the personal identification information that is used for verification cannot be retained by the social media site. To me, this means there will be no proof that verification was performed.

Social media sites cannot ask for verification from just those under 18; how would they know? They must ask for verification from everyone. This means you and I will need to provide personal information to X, FB, ToTV, and others in order to keep our accounts.

One possible approach (taken by some porn sites in other states) is to block access for the entire state. Those with VPNs may be able to get around this though even then their experience will be be lessened since the site won't know where you actually are.

Enforcement: The Department of Legal Affairs is authorized to adopt rules to bring action for violations of the new statutes. It seems to be unclear how it will be enforced.

[bp243]

The Florida House has passed a law through bipartisan support prohibiting kids under the age of 16 from using social media. We are the first state which has taken an action long overdue. What sites should be banned though and how can it be enforced?

Florida House passes bill banning children under 16 from social media: 'Kids can't stay off the platforms' (https://news.yahoo.com/florida-house-passes-bill-banning-071915024.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall)

It’s about time!

So, are we asking parents to monitor their child's social media or they will be fined or punished in some other way? Hmmm...would love to hear how that law will be enforced.

[Bill14564]

So, are we asking parents to monitor their child's social media or they will be fined or punished in some other way? Hmmm...would love to hear how that law will be enforced.

That is not at all what the bill says.

On the other hand, holding parents accountable for what they allow or enable their children to do to others is not such a bad idea.

[Normal]

So, are we asking parents to monitor their child's social media or they will be fined or punished in some other way.

Oh the outrage! Parents shouldn’t care about their children or their habits /s

[Aces4]

Some of us got past the Dick and Jane books and were on to bigger and better things. School libraries, that I knew of, never had ONLY required reading in them. We were allowed to select any book we wanted, there was no section we weren't "allowed" to check. If I, in 3rd grade, wanted to read Catcher in the Rye, I could check the book out. if I, in 7th grade, wanted to return to Dick and Jane, I could. If I was reading Catcher in the Rye in 3rd grade and didn't understand a concept I'd ask my parents. And they would explain.

Of course, that would require that the parents be directly involved in the upbringing of their own children.

We selected any book we wanted also, age appropriate. So how would Catcher in the Rye appeal to a third grader?

There are so many wonderful, educational, mind and character building books available for children under the age of eighteen. Why not allow access for the more mature subject matter after turning 18?

[Aces4]

That ship has sailed. A variety of classic literature has been banned in various public schools for decades. In Florida, if a girl REALLY has to go to the bathroom, but the girl's room is full and the boy's room is empty, she just has to pee in her pants. Or else risk breaking the law by going into the boy's room. In Florida public schools, if the kids are talking about what they want to be when they grow up, Johnny isn't ALLOWED to say "I want to be like my two mommies, they're both doctors!" If 13-year-old Susie, who only just started menstruating a year before and her periods aren't regular yet, becomes victim of a crime by her uncle and becomes pregnant, she has to give birth all because she didn't know she was pregnant until she was in her third month, and by the time she was able to schedule an abortion, she would've been in her 16th week, and that is illegal in Florida. Parents of minor children living in poverty could've received an extra $120/month in the summer to accommodate the lunches their kids can't get in school, while school is out for the summer. But Florida chose to reject that. That amounts to less than $1.50 per day per kid for 5 days per week, to help offset the cost of lunches for those kids.

Children in Florida have no rights. Florida forces women to give birth in the name of "right to life" but once that life is outside the womb, Florida doesn't want to know about it.

I think your post is extremely political.

[Aces4]

Survival of the fittest.

Or the cruelest…

[Aces4]

These law makers can't be serious, they can't stop kids younger than 16 from drugs, porn, drinking and sex. The cat is already out of the bag do they really think the can stop someone from going on to social media who's already made it part of their daily life.

And thus, witnessing the collapse of society and humanity. Stay tuned…

[Aces4]

It seems like nobody here is familiar with the First Amendment to the US Constitution, which the Supreme Court has found applies to all states as well!

Is that the freedom to bully, attack, sexually exploit and harm other children. Some freedom!

[Aces4]

I find it interesting that FL always touts that it is a parental rights state, meaning that parents should be making their own decisions about what their children can or can't do rayher than the state. But then it turns around and makes these sweeping laws about things that fall within the parent's sphere of decision making (thinking Healthcare for transgender children or social media). Sounds like FL is having an identity crisis of its own.

How can you even enforce such a law? What are the punishments if it is enforced? Is it really about "protecting" children or getting more money in the coffers from the fines that would be levied?

It’s about the collapse of society and ruination of our future, our children. Swirling the drain…

[Bill14564]

We selected any book we wanted also, age appropriate. So how would Catcher in the Rye appeal to a third grader?

There are so many wonderful, educational, mind and character building books available for children under the age of eighteen. Why not allow access for the more mature subject matter after turning 18?

Allow access? As if access should be denied until the Govt chooses to allow it? That seems to be the opposite of how our Constitution is written: Govt stays out of the way until it can present a very good reason to interfere.

No books should be banned without a very good reason. Essentially, the written word should be considered speech and afforded first amendment protections. Parents can choose what comes into their homes, private businesses can choose what is discussed within their walls, social media companies can choose what topics are allowed, but Govt (schools, public libraries) should not be allowed to censor speech simply because they don't like the message.

What is wrong about choosing appropriate mind and character building books for children to read while preventing access to more mature material? I don't trust those who desire to force those choices on parents. Too often those who demand to control access to information use words like "indoctrination" and "target" in their justifications. I fear that their choice of "appropriate" books will train the next generation to be just as intolerant as they are. Not all books would be banned, only those with the "wrong" viewpoint. I would prefer that future generations learn about all viewpoints.

[Aces4]

Sorry this comes under “Government trying to parent a child that they don’t know, or pay for. Then pass a law that basically say you are unfit to parent and this is the first right we are going to remove.

Wait for the second law that states when, and how many girls you are allowed. Didn’t a country already do that……..

Or the government trying to save our children because parents can’t figure out how to do that.

[Aces4]

Allow access? As if access should be denied until the Govt chooses to allow it? That seems to be the opposite of how our Constitution is written: Govt stays out of the way until it can present a very good reason to interfere.

No books should be banned without a very good reason. Essentially, the written word should be considered speech and afforded first amendment protections. Parents can choose what comes into their homes, private businesses can choose what is discussed within their walls, social media companies can choose what topics are allowed, but Govt (schools, public libraries) should not be allowed to censor speech simply because they don't like the message.

What is wrong about choosing appropriate mind and character building books for children to read while preventing access to more mature material? I don't trust those who desire to force those choices on parents. Too often those who demand to control access to information use words like "indoctrination" and "target" in their justifications. I fear that their choice of "appropriate" books will train the next generation to be just as intolerant as they are. Not all books would be banned, only those with the "wrong" viewpoint. I would prefer that future generations learn about all viewpoints.

So many holes in this… if all parents were paying attention or had an interest in what their minor children are being exposed to at school, these reading levels would be established for children and adults.

I’m thinking I am far more tolerant than you espouse to be since many of the social issues being addressed are within our extended family.

Did you and others ever question yourselves as to how you are able to function at this point without being subjected to all books available on the planet since first grade? Don’t you wonder how skewed your perspective is since you couldn’t read all books from age 6 to 18? (Do these books mean different things if read after the age of eighteen?)

[Aces4]

Who are you (the government) to decide what my child can or can't do on social media?

Right! Also, how do we expect sexual predators to operate without access to children?


It would be interesting to see how many parents who work in IT Administration and Security allow their young children access to social media.

[Bill14564]

So many holes in this… if all parents were paying attention or had an interest in what their minor children are being exposed to at school, these reading levels would be established for children and adults.
It seems a lot of parents disagree with that characterization and with the book banning that is happening in schools. They *want* the choice but the choice is being taken from them.

I’m thinking I am far more tolerant than you espouse to be since many of the social issues being addressed are within our extended family.
Is that the "I can't be _____ I have a _____ friend" argument?

Did you and others ever question yourselves as to how you are able to function at this point without being subjected to all books available on the planet since first grade? Don’t you wonder how skewed your perspective is since you couldn’t read all books from age 6 to 18? (Do these books mean different things if read after the age of eighteen?)

"Diary of Anne Frank" and "Huckleberry Finn" before I was a teenager. Wish "The Bluest Eye" had been available back then. I actually see how my perspective was skewed by NOT reading more of the viewpoints that are being censored today. I would have been a kinder, more understanding, and less prejudiced young adult if I had been exposed to a more diverse experience in school.

[Aces4]

"Diary of Anne Frank" and "Huckleberry Finn" before I was a teenager. Wish "The Bluest Eye" had been available back then. I actually see how my perspective was skewed by NOT reading more of the viewpoints that are being censored today. I would have been a kinder, more understanding, and less prejudiced young adult if I had been exposed to a more diverse experience in school.



Few children live such sheltered lives and I doubt your parents would have let you read those books from the sound of it. We were raised to have empathy.

I remember clearly the our child’s friend complained our child talked to everyone, even the retarded child on the bus. I smiled and explained we taught our children we are all equal, no one is superior. The friend looked at me for a moment and then shook his head affirmatively. Teaching moment coming from a parent and that’s what is missing. All the books in the world can’t guarantee perspective just by reading them.

[Aces4]

Originally Posted by Bill14564 View Post
It seems a lot of parents disagree with that characterization and with the book banning that is happening in schools. They *want* the choice but the choice is being taken from them.


Is that the "I can't be _____ I have a _____ friend" argument?



Low, low argument. I’m not going to list family member instances for your inspection. Is everyone who lives in The Villages too special to have family dynamics that don’t match perfection?

[Normal]

It seems like nobody here is familiar with the First Amendment to the US Constitution, which the Supreme Court has found applies to all states as well!

I’m also familiar with the fact that not everyone has the right to “enhanced “ expression or reception of free speech. One cannot or does not have the right to say whatever you want in a crowded movie theater or on a plane.

Of course children have the right to an education, in fact, they don’t have the right to skip school but are obligated through compulsory law. This is of course because they don’t always know everything and haven’t the discernment skills needed to survive.

Many support the Chinese owned Tik Tok hoping they continue to program our youth? Or Facebook continuing with Instagram. This comes from congress’ interviews “Haugen has leaked one Facebook study that found that 13.5% of U.K. teen girls in one survey say their suicidal thoughts became more frequent after starting on Instagram.

Another leaked study found 17% of teen girls say their eating disorders got worse after using Instagram.

About 32% of teen girls said that when they felt bad about their bodies, Instagram made them feel worse, Facebook's researchers found, which was first reported by the Journal.

Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., accused Facebook of intentionally targeting children under age 13 with an "addictive" product — despite the app requiring users be 13 years or older.”-NPR

Why? Perhaps poorly educated?

[kkingston57]

Disney not it’s own state like they thought they was.

No problems for 30+ years until someone's feathers were ruffled. What happened to the old term: about fixing something which is not broken.

[kkingston57]

The Senate is planning on passing it. And the Governor will sign off on it.

And who is going to enforce it? Police have a lot of better things to do like nabbing speeders in golf carts.

[kkingston57]

I think your post is extremely political.

Yes, writer is political, but it started with original post