aquajet said:I kind of suspected this sort of response would appear (and I'll be frank, especially from you). You've guilefully evaded my question.
I can sympathize with both sides, but let's be fair here: there's a clear difference between whatever "immoral" things a child may come across on the internet or observe on television, radio or the movies and his discovery of nude photographs of his teacher. A teacher has a unique relationship with her adolescent student. How is this relationship affected by sharing nude photographs among one another? Is it reasonable to place certain constraints on a high school teacher's freedoms?
My answer was more direct than perhaps it appeared. My point is, if a parent is worried about their child seeing a nude photo of their teacher on the internet, they'd better unplug their household from it and just about every other form of media on the planet, because their children are bound to be exposed to far worse.
Everyone is in favor of "reasonable constraints," virtually by definition, and therein lay the problem. Nobody thinks the constraints they are trying to place on the personal lives of other people are unreasonable.
All of this makes me wonder if Michelangelo's models were shunned, if Ruben's paintings were banned. It makes me wonder about people I live amongst here in 2006 who'd turn the clock back, not just 100 years, not just 200 or 300 years, but to somewhere in the vicinity of the 14th century.