Whether you welcome it with open arms or cower underneath your desk in Unabomber-like apprehension of its magical, mysterious technology, there's no denying the influence the Internet has on today's society. Hailed as the "shiny new cotton-gin" for the 21st Century, the Internet's impact on the economy is already quite evident. Countless success stories from start-up company CEOs serve as daily reminders of what the American dream is all about--getting ridiculously rich while working at home in your underwear.
Today's Internet is capable of serving so many more useful functions and opening so many more doors of communication than even its inventor, Al Gore, could have imagined. People can now shop online, pay bills online, send mail, chat, check sports scores or stock quotes from around the world, and even listen to the radio or watch "real-time" television - without ever leaving their house. In fact, some high-ranking computer industry insiders (read: colossal nerds) estimate that by the year 2010, actual face-to-face human contact will become out-dated and obsolete.
By now you're probably thinking: "No more human contact! Great, sign me up!" But slow down there, tiger. The Internet isn't all milk and honey. In fact, this fiber-optic metropolis is teeming with its very own red-light district. As useful a weapon as the Internet can be in the battle to never have to leave your room, it is not without its serious flaws and pitfalls. As more and more children access the Internet, the debate escalates as to how to limit their access to adult-themed websites.
The first attempt to keep kids away from pornography and violence-laden websites was to keep children away from computers altogether. This method proved ineffective when it was discovered that most parents couldn't even plug in their computer without the help of their children. Eventually, software companies developed programs that could monitor or keep track of the websites visited by a particular user. That way, if a child went to a website that his parents didn't approve of, the parents would be able to find out about it and discuss the situation calmly and rationally with their child. This method seemed to satisfy everyone except the government.
Throughout the history of time, there have been groups of people who take it upon themselves to assume the role of parent to people who are not their children. The Dartmouth College Board of Trustees is one such group. The United States government is, at times, another. Now, I'm no gun-toting, Confederate-flag waving, draft-card-burning libertarian. But I do think that the government's role in regulating the Internet should be severely limited, since I am a staunch supporter of the right to free speech.
By installing E-chips or other programs that filter or restrict access to websites based on the morality of their content, the government is overstepping its duties and intruding on our most sacred right. The freedom to choose means the freedom to be wrong, morally or otherwise. If I had a kid, would I want him spending his time on some lewd pornographic website? Of course not. If I were a webmaster and I devoted my site to pirated MP3s, racist propaganda, anarchistic militia tactics, and movie clippings of a naked 20 year old celebrity and a German shepherd getting to know each other better, would I be any less of a person? Probably. Should children not be allowed to access my site? Should I be stopped? Yes. But not by the government. Especially not when the average government agent is probably morally suspect himself; especially not when our own President is more famous for hooking up with interns than he is for anything else.
There is a lot of stuff out there on the Internet that can and will offend many people. But what an individual considers offensive varies greatly depending on the individual and his or her upbringing and experiences. The Internet can be a wonderful tool for information. But for the government to classify what information is useful and what is harmful requires a qualitative judgement that the government is in no position to make. As humans, we have the God-given ability to make our own individual choices. Along with that gift comes the danger that we will make the wrong choices. That's a risk that we have to be allowed to take, however, because if the government limits our freedom to choose, it lowers us to something subhuman.
