I don't disagree with you on the effects of this sort of thing on children. What I don't like, in any form, is a blanket statement like "children need protection from"..... Or at least in any context where this protection is mandated. I see the shift from "children need protection from violent images" (and all that entails) to "the people need protection from terrorism" (and that *that* entails). Yes, there is a real concern in both of these cases. But the actions taken as "protection" tend to be as commensurate as using a sledgehammer to swat flies. If we have mandated "protection", who is to do the mandating? The national government? No, thank you. They've got too much power as it is. Community standards? Hmm. Better, but that concept has just recently taken a broadside hit, at least where the net is concerned. It'll be interesting how the Supremes deal with Virtual Communities.