Julford

I don't know to much about the pornagraphy issue, MrBlank; my guess is that people see porn as something that would be harmful later on to children; They would be able to see sex in such a manner (i.e. no foreseeable consequences) that it could increase the chances of them becoming rapists later in life. It is probably seen as something necessary to hide from a child until they are better able to understand what is involved... And what the potential consequences are.

ANYWAY, onto the topic of the game law. One of the major points I've heard from others (I have just recently talked with a group of friends, many for this law and just as many against) is that we need to think of the children, and that by removing this law means we show that we don't care about the children.

So, one question that I feel is important; When should a parent be seen responsible for thier child's activities? Should the government watch what a child plays from there, or should the parent?

Morally, I agree with this law at it's core; prevent underage children from purchasing violent and/or sexually explicit material. Exposure to such things CAN de-sensitize a child to them, if exposed regularly from an early age. However, it is not something that should be passed into law; the governments job is not to BE our morals, but instead to encourage us to find these morals ourselves.