The point of view is *not* that children should be educated in such-and-such a way, but rather that people who want to be restrictive about the material that people (not necessarily just children!) have access to should set up those restrictions *themselves*; that it is not part of Wikipedia's mission to censor material about certain topics, but that our license allows anyone who wishes to to create a derivitive work which is more limited in scope and more targeted in audience.
Yeah, I agree - and I think that LD is in agreement - that setting up a means for parents to "protect" children is not unreasonable. They already do. What we dont want is for Netnanny to censor us. So then we should have a scalable protection scheme.
But we could do all of that - and still be censored by CS, NN and others... We would be then trying fit into a mold set by other parameters - CORPORATE parameters - and this would be cross to our original purpose - which is based on freedom and minimalist rules. Its what drives the WP.
WikiLove to all -SM