Yes, I am a parent of a daughter (16) and son (12).
Their mother deserves almost all the credit for who they are. She has "controlled" what they are allowed to see on TV for years, and has explained why some channels and programs are off-limits. Now the don't even think about channel-surfing (because they understand why they should avoid a lot of what's on). They certainly know evil is out there, and hear plenty of foul language from other kids at our supposedly all-American junior-high and high schools. They can only access the Internet in a "common" area. They aren't shielded because they're told what's out there and why a lot of it is bad. They (usually) trust that their mother is looking out for their best interests.
My daughter has independently concluded that she doesn't want to live away from home during at least the first couple years of college because she has seen what has happened to a lot of kids who have gone away and ruined themselves. I don't have a problem with that; it strikes me as a pretty mature decision.
Knock on a ton of wood, they're wonderful kids. The disagreement I have with your "it turned out OK" approach is that I don't think kids can afford to "dabble with the dark side" any more; they have to learn to stay away from it (and internalize why they're staying away, not just avoid it out of fear of parents, although fear isn't all bad). It's a LOT darker, scarier, and more dangerous, and percentage of kids who don't return from the dark side, or come back severely damaged, is unacceptably high.
Well, it turns out we agree more than I thought. When you said you wouldn't allow your teens access to Free Republic simply because of a single word within a posted article I was under the impression that you were either, A) not a parent and just imagining a sterile environment for your future offspring, or B) are a parent that is soooooo insecure about how you've prepared your children for the bad elements that they will certainly come into contact with, that you would go to any length to shield them from all unpleasantness by keeping them from coming into contact with other less shielded children, or not allowing them to view a political web site because an occasional bad word may be uttered. But you admit that you are not either of the two (A or B) when you told me you children attend school (I'll assume public) without parental supervision. Even though you know they are subject to a much more harsh environment each day when they attend school.
I have NO problem with your parental abilities, I just took offense at your unwarranted shot at Free Republic. But I can't for the life of me figure out why you would subject you children to schooling away from home but not allow them to view my favorite web site. I would (will) jump for joy if (when) my girls (9 - 11) wanted to join this great community of like-minded conservatives. The way I'd see it is, if they came upon an offensive word or two after reading twenty articles it would be 18 steps forward. You know?