Posted on 04/04/2024 6:35:11 AM PDT by Phoenix8
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a bill on Monday that will prohibit children younger than 14 from joining social media in the state. Those who are 14 or 15 will need a parent’s consent before they join a platform.
The bill, HB3, also directs social media companies to delete the existing accounts of those who are under 14. Companies that fail to do so could be sued on behalf of the child who creates an account on the platform. The minor could be awarded up to $10,000 in damages, according to the bill. Companies found to be in violation of the law would also be liable for up to $50,000 per violation, as well as attorney’s fees and court costs.
“Ultimately, [we’re] trying to help parents navigate this very difficult terrain that we have now with raising kids, and so I appreciate the work that’s been put in,” DeSantis said in remarks during the bill-signing ceremony.
(Excerpt) Read more at nbcnews.com ...
Laws for morality do not change the heart.
They enable enforcement of justice and in some cases, where the death penalty is applied, yes, does cause a reduction in law breaking by reducing recidivism and maybe action as a deterrent for some kinds of crime.
But morality comes from within and cannot be legislated. Laws mostly enable the application of justice when they are broken.
I would go one step further and not allow children under the age of 16 to have a tablet, computer or a phone, except for a basic phone that allows the child to make phone calls.
But as with "love thy neighbor as thyself," and "do unto others..." which even atheists invoke, this presupposes a definitive substantive body teaching what love of God and each other entails, and thus the psalmist stated,
I have seen an end of all perfection: but thy commandment is exceeding broad. O how love I thy law! it is my meditation all the day. Thou through thy commandments hast made me wiser than mine enemies: for they are ever with me. (Psalms 119:96-98)
if they were all followers of Christ the “abortionists” would not exist.
True, and if no one drove recklessly, speed limits need not exist. But which flow from the Biblical principal of life being basically sacred. To be consistent with an animus against moral laws, these should not exist either.
Romans 7:14-20— 14 We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin.
Which is not referring to the law as unable to restrict behavior, but to conquer sin, which begins in the heart. (Mk. 7:21-23) The law - as holy, and just, and good (Romans 7:12) as it is - is not the means to salvation, but reveals to man that he is a law-breaker, and in need salvation by effectual penitent, heart-purifying, regenerating faith in the Divine Son of God who saves sinners by His sinless shed blood. which faith is imputed for righteousness, (Romans 4:5) Glory and thanks be to God.
However, the law does indeed serve as a deterrent to sinful behavior, esp. via capital punishment via communal stoning (much of any prison system is conspicuously absent from the OT), and which begins in the home, as part of the formation of Godly character, progressing in Christ to not needing the fear of chastisement, but purely by love. Far from that myself.
Good information and thanks——That verse is correct. We are to follow the laws of the land UNLESS they go against God.
Was I really that unclear about legislating morality? Am I that off base going against the belief that we feel the more government creates law the more moral we become? Please-—I am for laws against murder, arson, rape, stealing, etc....it’s these other laws(listed below) that I mean by legislating “morality” or “being courteous”. This is where I have a problem. So please, for the last time, I’m not talking about murder and such-—so please.
I guess I’m looking at it as wicked people-—which we all are-—and only through Christ with a changed heart will we grow closer to being a more moral society. All of these little laws won’t change it-—let me make myself clear again. I’m not stating we shouldn’t have laws against murder, rape, coveting, stealing, etc.
I’m talking about laws like this in FL——Or the laws of don’t hold your phone while driving. I don’t do it because I know it’s dangerous. How about laws about people in crosswalks allowing them to cross-—as a society we USED to let the person cross because we knew it was the right thing to do....now it was made law because some politician wanted to get re-elected. We held a door open for people, we thought of others as more important than ourselves-—we had respect for the elderly and police and firemen-—not because of any laws because we simply did. This is what I mean that we can’t legislate “morality”-—
I’m wrong for not explaining on little stuff like I mentioned above-—do we really need laws to hold a door open? Do we need laws to not say offensive things? Do we need laws to guide us through the internet? I’m standing on this as NO-—Maybe my terminology is incorrect because eventually laws “legislating morality” eventually turn into laws simply for revenue.
What?! Like in pass generations until about 2000. How could they survive?
Yeah - this is gonna work.
About as well as keeping them from viewing online porn!
The FCC has standards when it comes to broadcasting over the air (even though those have eroded enormously), but over the internet it has no power.
WIFI and BlueTooth are too small of a signal for them to regulate.
indeed!
One of the foremost constitutional theorists of the founding generation, John Adams, observed,
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
The ‘law’ says that the speed limit on I465 around Indianapolis is 55 MPH.
Direct observation will prove to you that is actually closer to 70 MPH.
Not to worry, as the PTB have installed new electronic speed limit signs that’ll work to control our driving habits better.
No $#|+!
💯
Like someone else said these same FRs saying it’s not the governments job to regulate anything because it’s all the families responsibility are hypocrites.
I’d bet money 90% of them would be against eliminating say… drinking age minimums. And it’s the SAME concept.
There are legions of kids watching sick pro-trans TikTok videos or porn on various social media yet the parents are failing miserably at stopping it because it’s not regulated.
Finally saying it’s worse than the effect of indoctrination in education is a bold statement.
This doesn’t prevent parents from doing their job. It’s akin to the government making it an offense to sell alcohol and cigarettes to children. Do you disagree with that, also? Yes, if someone wants something and has the money to get it, they will do so, but that doesn’t mean we should just give up.
Well said. Laws aren’t a guarantee against evil-doing. They are society’s way to say here’s the line, don’t cross it unless you want to face the consequences.
That was not what the argument seemed to convey, but that it was broadly wrong to make laws. "I disagree with him on this-—parents need to be parents and stop using the government as the “parent”'.
Please-—I am for laws against murder, arson, rape, stealing, etc....it’s these other laws(listed below) that I mean by legislating “morality” or “being courteous”. This is where I have a problem. So please, for the last time, I’m not talking about murder and such-—so please.
If you had clarified your statement, as not meaning what it broadly conveyed, you would have saved some typing by you and others. When making a polemical statement, we (I) should anticipate counter arguments and seek to address them before hand. Not that I always do.
I guess I’m looking at it as wicked people-—which we all are-—and only through Christ with a changed heart will we grow closer to being a more moral society. All of these little laws won’t change it-—let me make myself clear again.
"Change it," no, not as a replacement for formation of good character, but laws do deter evil by those who are not controlled from within by God and conscience, as seen by the increase in lawlessness when enforcement is lax, and when even gender is subjectively determined. No standards =-chaos.
But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully; Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine; (1 Timothy 1:8-10)I’m not stating we shouldn’t have laws against murder, rape, coveting, stealing, etc.
So it is a matter of degrees.
I’m talking about laws like this in FL
Which has good intent, and seems warranted due to lack of diligence by parents in an environment of an unprecedented plethora of perverse, persuasive pervasive media, but is quite unenforceable or able to prevail in court. But formation of good character is the real priority, with laws being due to lack of such.
We held a door open for people, we thought of others as more important than ourselves-—we had respect for the elderly and police and firemen-—not because of any laws because we simply did. This is what I mean that we can’t legislate “morality”-—
Of course there are degrees (but the above is not the same a protecting kids from porn and sexting), and over-legislation is a problem (esp. as regards Climageddon), but it remains that laws have their place, both in setting a standard and deterring evil. And they are increasingly required as a society spiritually and morally declines. While the laws themselves are not the solution for the latter, yet they are necessary. Ask merchants in Frisco and Portland, Or. or any place police disappeared.
Thus the argument should be, you cannot legislate moral character, but it is necessary insofar as that is lacking, thus they are not a substitute for formation of Godly character, which must be the priority.
And of course, insofar as law makers themselves fail in the character, then the righteousness suffer.
That's Bible.
“the parents are failing miserably at stopping it because it’s not regulated”
Parents didn’t see this coming until it was too late. Kids have access to porn. They engage in sexting. If parents at least had full control over their children’s Internet and phone access, they would have the tools to stop a lot of this. Not every parent would step up, but many would. Seems like the big social media companies would prefer to keep the parents out of their children’s online activities because these companies can manipulate the children better.
I can tell you from firsthand experience that most parents think their children are not affected and are shocked to discover their daughters and even sons are being asked by their peers for nude and sexually explicit photos and videos. Lots of girls have porn addictions now when it use to be an almost exclusively make problem.
I didn’t realize girls are getting more porn addictions.
I’ve been out of education for almost 8 years and my how tech has changed in that time!
This should be up to the parents, not the government.
As much as I like DeSantis, I don't like this.
EPeople are missing the point!
Whatever it is that the kids are doing on their phones is making them really stupid. We see it here in our Daycare Center especially with what we call the “Covid Babies”.
We are working to reverse it, but...
The science that is coming out about this problem is very disturbing. What we know about early brain development suggests that these kids as a whole will always be significantly dumber than any generation before. The teachers are saying they have never seen anything like it before. I cannot predict the societal impact, but I must say that those who are commenting against this law cannot show that they are aware of this problem. The entire legislate morality argument shows that they do not even realize what we are talking about. The children are being crippled intelectually.
The behavioral problems have gotten so much worse that the teachers I know are quitting or are tempted to quit and you cannot blame them. These kids can NOT able to control themselves.
Perhaps we can debate whether DeSantis’ law will help or not, but suggest a more effective way to deal with this ver real and very serious problem.
Three issues:
Teenager’s mental illness!
Preteens, ages 10-14 social development!
Early childhood brain development!
PLEASE LOOK IT UP
I retired from education…8 years ago almost.
I have a few younger friends still in teaching and I hear from them on the odd occasion.
They say kids have gotten considerably worse since I left.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.