Is internet porn ruining our next generation? Is censorship the answer?

I think I speak for everyone when I say I'm a little confused as to what you mean by 'internet porn'.Perhaps you could post a few examples?

Yes.

Your understanding is wrong. = very few people; a small percentage of those who actually appear in pornographic images/videos/other content. The Chinese do it and it's not really that hard. If the signal you're sending/receiving ever hits a physical location within the boarders of your country, then your government can censor what you view online.A direct satellite connection might help you work around this, but even with that your access would be limited. So they should lie to their kids?

And I think you need to crawl out from under that rock you got over your head.

Why rely on what you're told?Just do a simple experiment.I googled 'porn' (does it get simpler than that?)The first five links (so I didn't have to scroll) all went to free porn video websites. It appears each one contains enough material that one could watch the videos non-stop 24/7 back to back and still not see them all in their lifetimefor each site!Seeing this, I can imagine only an idiot would pay for their porn. And given how easy it was to find, I cannot imagine many children are having difficulty so long as their browsing is not restricted through some sort of filter.

Two can jest. Loosen up, or you'll end up like Tanypteryx.

Exactly. Finding porn on the Internet is so easy you can do it by accident.Anyone who thinks children are going to be kept from porn because 'most porn sites are not free' simply hasn't bothered investigating the issue in even the most cursory way.

I think you already did

Hey! Now we're getting somewhere. I agree with the above; however sometimes parents refuse to take that responsibility, and since society has an interest in the matter (for example, not wanting a population overrun with STDs, unwanted children, etc.) sometimes the public needs to step in to pick up the slack of obstinate parents, much like some states are now doing regarding vaccination (making it harder for parents to refuse vaccinating their kids). To set a limit of "all the things children need to know about living in this world" is to not set any limit at all. We are all limited by how much time we have in our lives. The Internet doesn't add so much as replace older ways.I like to think that our aspirations and concerns about the Internet are little different than those expressed by folks in the past dealing with technologies new to their eras, and, as it always has, history will likely show all of our impressions premature and inaccurate. In line with what I said above, my bigger concerns with things like Internet porn is related more to what it is replacing. What do children who don't watch Internet porn do more of than those who do watch it? What effect does this have on their development and their behavior as adults?

You can't really compare some behaviors of modern first-world societies to those of 'aboriginal tribes' without addressing the obvious question of whether some of those behavioral differences are responsible for the different levels of economic achievement between the two.There are minor variances between the attitudes of different wealthy countries, but they are more similar than different. In none of them is there the kind of 'sexual freedom' seen in 'aboriginal tribes'. I think that needs to be addressed. That depends on how you define things. Ripping the clothes off a strange woman is what we'd consider 'sexual abuse'; in some cultures the woman wouldn't have clothes to begin with. Same with rape. Where do you draw your lines? How close to 'aboriginal tribes' do you think is appropriate? And why are your lines more valid than those of the puritans?

So "thou shalt not kill" has no place in society because it comes from a religion?Or does it maybe make more sense to judge values on the basis of their content rather than on the source(s) from which they may or may not ultimately be derived?

You're missing the point. (Deliberately as usual I would imagine.)If a serial killer sleeping under his bookcase is awoken by a Bible falling from the top shelf and landing open at the Ten Commandments, his realization that he should stop murdering people is no less valid than anyone else's realization of the same just because his realization is religiously sourced.When judging policies, potential or actual, it matters not from where the policies come but what the policies are.

Whatever, ringo. I'm not going to be part of the chicken and egg argument you're trying to start.The fact remains: it doesn't matter where we get our values from, it only matters what the values are.

They do make some pretty good porn, don't they?