I'm not married to the bill. I'm wondering how you think the problem should be solved through extrajudicial or cultural means and I guess your answer is, the problem isn't big enough to prompt a solution.
Frankly, that's not my job in the debate. You've put forward a position, I've said I don't agree, and in fact think that literally doing nothing would be preferable. You don't get to counter my argument by asking me to solve your problem.
You keep trying to get me to put forward a specific "solution," when I've already said doing nothing is preferable to government force. So we certainly shouldn't do that. So even in the event of not being able to find another solution, we still shouldn't do that, so whether or not I have a solution is completely irrelevant. I think we want to government involved in the internet as little as possible, because they've shown time and again they can't be trusted in the slightest.
Frankly, that's not my job in the debate. You've put forward a position, I've said I don't agree, and in fact think that literally doing nothing would be preferable. You don't get to counter my argument by asking me to solve your problem.
See, that's where you got the wrong idea. This isn't a debate. Figuring out the best course of action is not an "I win" moment. As such, I'm fine with your position that doing nothing would be acceptable, although I disagree.
You say cultural means after your first post soundly rejected the notion of using cultural means. The fact is that government intervention to erode parental rights is a primary reason that shit has gotten as bad as it is. The education system needs to be reformed and government needs to stop fucking with homeschoolers and threatening to steal your children and jail you if you punish them or stop them from doing harmful things.
Cultural means such as educating people about the negatives of this technology and restoring religion to society are the same means the government has fought against for decades.
You say cultural means after your first post soundly rejected the notion of using cultural means.
No, I rejected the mere invocation of the words "parental responsibility" that usually ends all discourse around this subject in the libertarian sphere. Blaming parents and griping about parents is not going to shame them into making better decisions for their kids, and many of them aren't doing so great at the moment. As a result, we are facing the prospect of generations of people essentially raised by wolves on the internet, basket cases led around by social mobs and authoritative decrees.
At least you talked about some actionable items like empowering and incentivizing responsible parents and public health messaging.
I'm not married to the bill. I'm wondering how you think the problem should be solved through extrajudicial or cultural means and I guess your answer is, the problem isn't big enough to prompt a solution.
The problem isn't big enough to prompt a bad "solution."
Then what's a GOOD "solution"? Please.
Frankly, that's not my job in the debate. You've put forward a position, I've said I don't agree, and in fact think that literally doing nothing would be preferable. You don't get to counter my argument by asking me to solve your problem.
You keep trying to get me to put forward a specific "solution," when I've already said doing nothing is preferable to government force. So we certainly shouldn't do that. So even in the event of not being able to find another solution, we still shouldn't do that, so whether or not I have a solution is completely irrelevant. I think we want to government involved in the internet as little as possible, because they've shown time and again they can't be trusted in the slightest.
See, that's where you got the wrong idea. This isn't a debate. Figuring out the best course of action is not an "I win" moment. As such, I'm fine with your position that doing nothing would be acceptable, although I disagree.
You say cultural means after your first post soundly rejected the notion of using cultural means. The fact is that government intervention to erode parental rights is a primary reason that shit has gotten as bad as it is. The education system needs to be reformed and government needs to stop fucking with homeschoolers and threatening to steal your children and jail you if you punish them or stop them from doing harmful things.
Cultural means such as educating people about the negatives of this technology and restoring religion to society are the same means the government has fought against for decades.
No, I rejected the mere invocation of the words "parental responsibility" that usually ends all discourse around this subject in the libertarian sphere. Blaming parents and griping about parents is not going to shame them into making better decisions for their kids, and many of them aren't doing so great at the moment. As a result, we are facing the prospect of generations of people essentially raised by wolves on the internet, basket cases led around by social mobs and authoritative decrees.
At least you talked about some actionable items like empowering and incentivizing responsible parents and public health messaging.