>I haven't read the bill yet, and if anyone has specific
>objections I am very interested in them. But all I have
>read so far is objections to the general idea of limiting
>children's access to information.
This bill requires that all (ALL) people who speak on the web (not just MySpace users) label their material as either obscene or not obscene. That will require that government finally provide a definition for that term (in 90 days according to the law). So, I will have to label my content as acceptible or not for public consumption according to the US Government censors.
This will limit my ability to speak, not only to those who may agree with me, but also to those I may want to try to convince - ESPECIALLY those people. They will, of course, wall themselves up behind filters that specifically block all such sites, from their children and themselves and all locations they have control over. And soon, "obscene" and "potentially harmful to children" will no longer be the only required labels.
How can this be considered Constitutional? Isn't this government making a law abridging free speach?