DeSantis signs Florida ban on kids using social media.

but we should all give up our freedoms to "protect the children", who needs our freedoms,,, and after that, the children will still find a way to use the net

they do not get that this is NOT to protect the children....

 

You keep telling that, and its a CLASSIC example of psychological projection. You are the only one here who is fixated on who it comes from.

If you think banning social media is somehow identical to not letting 12 yrs olds drive cars and put others in danger, then there isn't much to discuss because you are missing the obvious.

What you do is your business, but your rights end when they infringe on rights on others. This is something authoritarian minds will never understand, and you prove it every time you post

Don't hesitate to explain this claim? I have no clue what you are referring to

More projection. YOU oppose things for partisan reasons and you assume everyone else does too. I oppose authoritarian government, which you love it. It has nothing to do with who imposes it.

I have explained it a dozens times why 12 yr olds should not be driving cars and I also said I don't give a rats ass about smoking cigarettes

You need them to parent your kids. That's your ONLY argument here

Your inability to comprehend what others say is on you, not me

Don't be shy. Give some examples.

I am opposed to authoritarian governments, and its telling you cannot comprehend or accept that as a valid reason. Nanny Staters never do.

Its authoritarian.

I heard you the first 10 times. You are projecting.

 

Of course not. Its about expanding government control over the citizens. They insist on controlling what people read and see.

 

No no not a glass of wine. Blotto. Stone cold drunk. I think you know the answer which is why you are pivoting. We have laws and regulations parents must follow while raising their children. Things the government deems unfit or unsafe for children. You know this. Social services has standards that have to be met as a parent or they take your child away.

You. Are purposefully being obtuse.

 

agree, parents and the church can let their children have alcohol, that is my point, it's not all or nothing

that is why I said "no one is saying a parent should be allowed to get children drunk, but there has to be common sense....."

 

Maybe there should be a debate if social media benefits outweigh the negative, so parents can make an educated parenting decision, and leave the government out of it. YouTube, for example, is full of very useful educational videos and banning it is not helpful, except to the government who wants to control speech.

 

It's not common sense. It's rules and laws created by government of which parents must follow for the safety of their children. Why? Because they could lead to harmful outcomes to the child.

 

Why do you want the government to decide if YouTube is 'harmful' to your child? Aren't you able to decide that on your own?

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety"

 

so no alcohol for children means the church can not give children alcohol, or do we use common sense and see the church is not trying to get them drunk and it's a-ok

we have to be careful with absolutes

how are you gonna prove online you are an adult? cause to keep kids restricted, you have to prove your identity

 

It shouldn't. Many things, including this, cannot be solved with laws.

 

how does a site verify a child is a child.... they have to verify the ID of everyone to verify age

 

they should not, but an 80-year-old man should not be denied alcohol or cigarettes because he doesn't have an ID

in fact, that 80-year-old man should be able to buy those things online

 

Can children have sex? Let's say an 8 year old. Is it LEGAL for an 8 year old to have sex?

Yes, we have absolutes.

 

some homes don't have basements

 

no, it's not legal for an 8-year-old to have sex, is it legal to force an 8-year-old to have their rapists baby?

 

It is ILLEGAL for a child to have sex. Because negative outcomes.

There. We've given you an example of laws dictating parental rights and control.

 

it should be illegal to force a child to have their rapists baby too, Because of negative outcomes.

 

Don't pivot. This was about the morality of a law preventing children from being on social media which has proven to lead to harmful/negative outcomes.

It can lead to bullying, suicide, predatory situations and self esteem issues. It should be meant only for teens and up. This is not a big deal.

 

yep, but adults should not have to give up their freedoms over it

 

IMHO you are more or less right, but of course there are people who are libertarian conservatives such as myself. Liberals love big government period.

 

Children eating the wrong food or eating too much food can lead to bullying, suicide, predatory situations and self esteem issues too. Would you be ok with the government controlling what parents give their children to eat?

 

In order to verify your identity, there has to be some kind of government database with everyone's personal info in it, and god knows how that will be used in the future.

 

yep, a national ID of sorts

 

You're the one who posted an absolute. That every kid under 12 needs the nanny gov't.
I merely asked if you want gov't or parents being in control of kids under 12.
Your line in the sand.

 

Yet you are the one using anarchy or dictatorship as the only absolute options.
As if the world operates in binary options.

LOL!!!!