Quote Originally Posted by scbubba View Post
Ok. I concede the point that it is censorship for a parent to limit, in any way, what his or her child has access or exposure to. It is the definition of the word/language/term/etc.

I disagree that it is wrong or damnable for the parent to do it, in context, just because it fits the term. My observation was that you were saying that it was wrong or damnable for the parent to do it unless the parent simply shuttered the child from exposure completely. Which I don't really understand because, by your definition, that complete shuttering would also be censorship and therefore wrong or damnable.

So, we come back to where all internet debates seem to land. You still have your opinion on the topic and I still have mine.

I have, however, been educated on the definition of censorship and for that, my friend, I thank you. :-)
The issue that I take with the whole thing is the principle of it all. It's the simple fact that we live in a world where censorship is so unobtrusive that it's commonplace and most don't even realize that it is happening around them. I think at its core, censorship itself is evil, and has no place in a world that prides itself on tolerance and the values of acceptance. That's the world that the majority lives in (China, India, and parts of the Middle East excluded), but it's a lie. I understand shielding a child from something, but the biggest point I'm trying to get across is: if you feel your child is too young for the language, perhaps the show is not suitable to expose them to in the first place. If you're going hide a piece, hide the whole.

I do see your point, and I can understand why you might not consider it to be on par with some other forms. That's fine. You're entitled to that opinion, and it's completely valid, and reasonable. If everybody agreed, nobody would think. If everyone stops thinking, we're doomed to repeat the mistakes we've already made.