You said, "The fact that 'CHILDREN' are used as pawns in so many arguments calls into suspicion every such use. If the cause is legitimate it should be easy to argue the cause without making CHILDREN the pawns."
Let's deal with the facts. Fact. The Children's Internet Protection Act (CIPA) was designed to protect children. Fact. President Clinton signed the legislation into law. Fact. The ACLU and the ALA joined forces (well that goes without saying) to stop the implementation of CIPA. Fact. The ALA lost in the US Supreme Court in a case called US v. ALA. Fact. CIPA is constitutional. Fact. The ALA advises libraries on CIPA avoidance techniques. Fact. The C in CIPA stands for children.
Fact. Your original statement I quoted above shows you are the king of being oblivious to almost all previous facts as I just stated. I strongly encourage you to spend a knight reading US v. ALA so you don't forever say children are pawns. Lots of these "pawns" are suffering. En passant, why don't you
donate to one to atone for your insensitivity before more children get rooked or sacrificed? Checkmate.