<p>Government Censorship would damage the atmosphere of the freedom to express ideas on the Internet; therefore, censorship should not be encouraged. The internet is a world wide computer network, The U.S. Net. The problem that concerns most people is offensive materials such as pornography. One reaction to this inapplicability has been the "Censor the Net" approach (the censorship bill), but how does this affect the average user who is merely surfing the net for their own information seeking or pleasure? It is not fair to exclude the freedom and class everyone the same way, or even to force ones ideas on another in the vain hope that they are protecting the masses. Most internet users are enjoying their freedom of speech on the Net, which is supposed to be protected by the First Amendment. Additionally, only a very small portion of the Net contains offensive material, most people do not use the Net for pornography. <i>Data has been created with Essay Writers !</i></p><br /><br /><br /><br /><p>It must also be understood that censoring the Net is technically impossible. While people are concerned about Internet pornography, it should be recognized that pornography is sometimes legal; for example, pornography is legal in video and magazines. There are many alternative measures to government censorship which would prevent misuse of the Net and would have the same effects as censorship. It is of course, very important for parents to provide moral guidance for their children, and parents should have this responsibility and the parents alone. An alternative to government censorship is the technological fix, which would prevent the so-called misuse of the Net and would have the same effects as government censorship, example's of technological fixes are the "SurfWatch" software. And similar which are designed for parents to deceide exactly what their children are able to access during their surfing time. Also, there are commercial Internet service providers that allow parents to control what Internet relay chat (IRC) sessions are available to their children. Another technological fix is for parents and guardians to have a separate "proxy server" for their children's web browser. There are no computer programs to automatically and reliably classify material; only people can do this. As a result, while practicing technological fixes, the classification of the contents of the material when posting is very important. Nowadays, most internet users classify their postings with standard categories, and leave signatures at the end of postings. The combination of the installation of censoring software and the classification of materials is a much better solution than government censorship. The Internet is a wonderful place of entertainment and education but like all places used by millions of people, it can be a hive of activity with many directions to travel.</p><br /><br /><p>Since every crisis carries with it the seed for equal or greater opportunity for growth, the pursuit of power and control disguised as global terrorism and political games, may actually be a golden opportunity for a true re-birth and resurrection of the human spirit as a human family working in a new and promising direction united by the spirit that connects us all. The real salvation for preserving a free and thriving society is not by developing more sophisticated and deadly weapons (what good does it do if you win but you are dead in an ocean of mass destruction?), but rather through increased awareness and knowledge. Likewise, since the real battle is the battle within, in our way of thinking, the ultimate power we seek is not “out there” but rather is already within. She founded ONE SPIRIT, ONE WORLD to help children and promote a culture of peace and harmony.</p><br /><br /><p>Many people happily risk dying for their pleasure – the mountaineer, the equestrian, the potholer, the yachtsman, and countless others – so why not the smoker? Remove lung cancer and something else will become the nation's next favourite killer. Take away another freedom? This time perhaps fast-foods? Sugary drinks – like beers and lemonades? What will they want to ban next? Who will suffer next? Sufferers of smoke-related illnesses will on average, through a lifetime of exorbitant taxes on tobacco, in real terms have paid for the cost of their treatment many, many times over. The same cannot be said for many other treatments people receive throughout a lifetime, some of them far more expensive. Providing facilities could exist which ensured those who objected to smoke didnt have to suffer it, and they could quite easily, there is no credible reason for this ban. Will “the authorities” ever stop banning things and allow us to live our own lives? They are our lives – not theirs! It is we who should be making the choices – not them! Who is really behind all this banning, and what are their true motives? I fear if we were to find out, we may not like the truth. Once we lived in fear of a foreign State that controlled its people - the USSR. Today we live more in fear of our own State.</p><br />