"If you rely on others to protect your kids, you have lost the battle."
I can't figure out if that is wrongheadedness or ignorance.
A parent cannot remain by the side of each of his children 24 hours a day. You have to let them go to school, go swimming, go to the mall, go to the library...and all the while you have other children, a wife, and a living to make.
Parents desire to create a community in which children can live a normal life without running a constant risk of being debauched by pornographers, liberals, or other evil scumbags. To mischaracterize that as "relying on others to protect your kids" is so transparently wrong that it's difficult to believe that anyone with a three-digit IQ could utter it with a straight face.
One way a parent protects his children is by removing harmful influences from the community. Removing harmful influences in no way constitutes "relying on others to protect your kids." You, on the other hand, seem to be arguing that removing harmful influences is in some way wrongful.
It looks to me like you're saying that, if the price of your own unrestricted access to pornography is that my kids are exposed to it in public places, so be it.
Well, I say that price is too high to pay.
"Why not teach them your values such that they do not view porn in librarys, their friends homes, tv shows, book stores or movies?"
Why not get in some marginal contact with reality, Dr. Spock?
"Is it really that diffcult?"
Of course not. It's easy as pie. That's why our prisons are empty and our crime rate is zero. It's so easy to bring children up to be moral that we have no unwed teen pregnancy or teen drug use. As a matter of fact, we don't even have any pornography, because everyone was brought up to be the kind of person who would never appear in it.
And it's even easier to bring children up right when all the adults around them are showing them pornography and passing out condoms. The only thing that could make it easier would be mandatory anal sex and free drugs in school.
"Are your values so unsuportable that they require a Nanny State to protect them?"
That assertion is not just bogus, it's downright unintelligent. Pornography is one of the things that was banned before the nanny state ever emerged, like child molesting, sodomy, murder, adultery, and theft.
A glance at reality shows that it is easy to be a scumbag, but difficult to walk the straight and narrow. The glamor of evil and peer pressure are powerful, as is the propaganda onslaught of the popular "culture." Children are more easily corrupted by the glamor of evil than adults, even if brought up right.
In short, your position is completely out of touch with reality, an obvious and transparent attempt to demonize the regulation of pornography.
Pornography, it's values and evils are not a big part of life. If you like pornography fine. Don't force it on me. If you hate pornography, fine. Don't impose your views on me. I put this issue right next to gun control, the war on drugs, tort reform, taxation, welfair, equal opportunity, and a host of other issues where people need to impose their will upon me.
I raised my kids to know right from wrong. You can too.