Violent video games = Free Speech says Supreme Court

It was a 7-2 vote to overturn a California law which limited the sale of video games classified as violent  to minors. I guess the next thing minors can buy will be Playboy and Penthouse.

Why do we need a law prohibiting the sale of violence and pornographic materials to minors? What is it about our society that screams for legislating every part of our lives?

Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan agreed that the government should not protect children by limiting violence in the media. Scalia said there hasn't been any traditions set by our government that restricts child access to violence, stating in his brief, "Certainly, the books we give children to read -- or read to them when they are younger -- have no shortage of gore. Grimm's Fairy Tales, for example, are grim indeed." 

While my imagination is most certainly more vivid than any TV show or movie, I'm not so sure that the violence our society faces today more specifically the disregard of the sanctity of life, isn't somehow tied to the views of the parents instead of the viewing of cowboy/Indian shoot-em-ups on Saturday morning. 

My nine and ten year old daughters somehow acquired a pack of cigarettes and decided to try this product behind the school gym. Fortunately, they were seen and the little bird imparted the tasty morsel to my ears before my daughters made it home. Of course they were dizzy and sick at their stomachs, so I knew the lesson was learned that you must learn to smoke. Since I smoked regularly at that time, my orders for them to cease and desist weren't that piercing. They didn't notice the many times I tried to quit. Unfortunately, they both started smoking long before they were old enough all because of my own example rather than the Camel commercials or the Benson & Hedges ads in magazines.

The deeper question is how could a minor play a violent video game without the parent knowing and putting a stop to it? Of course that would take pay attention to the minors of the household, wouldn't it? That would mean getting home in time for dinner and bedtime activities rather than allowing hired help do those particular "chores". How do parents know what their own child is capable of if they are not home long enough to actually relate to him/her/them?

Society has leaned upon government so long now that we can't seem to live a single day without some kind of intrusion into our homes regulating how we live, how we use products, how we raise our children. Isn't it time to take the reigns back into our own hands? Isn't it time to take raising our children in the way they should go seriously? 
Post a Comment