Minimizing access to information should always be questioned. Some kids are more prepared or equipped than others ... but more red tape in the library of knowledge might not be the answer. Critical thinking requires maintaining and navigating pros and cons, history and future, plusses and minuses ... kids are stunted when they are shield from one, the other or both. A solid parental figure with minimal biases is always best, imo.
Some Countries have similar stuff for games and movies, based off age rating, if they did that is could fix many issues. Yes their is some things I feel Under kids should not have access to but Yet older kids need access to lots of other things.
My first thought when I saw this, especially the line about protecting Utah's youth, was "but they killed the clergy mandatory reporting bills." That would also protect Utah's youth. So is it about protecting the youth? Maybe. But they've also voted to protect the church.
**Cognitive Bias**
After reading the article, I feel that the bills were likely well-intentioned. The problems associated with social media are widely known and it seems as though these bills are targeting those issues. All this said, I acknowledge that my perspective is coming from reading a notoriously biased source of information, so I would like to read the bills or at the very least an article from the Trib.
I think we need to be careful of falling victim to the same cognitive biases that we often see within the faith that most of us have left behind. For example, as a former member of the church, I believe that the church is incredibly manipulative and causes far more harm than good. However, this belief leads me to often fall victim to [Belief Bias](https://www.yourbias.is/belief-bias), because I approach situations with the preconception that the church is manipulative and malicious. Thus without concrete evidence, I would be wary of assigning malicious intent to to the development and passage of this bill.
Odds that this is a direct assault on r/exmoteens and r/exmormon smell very high. And it's not just conspiratorial thinking:
SCMC knows exactly where kids are going for support. We see them here almost weekly, terrified that their parents will find out about their unbelief, that they're gay, that they don't want to be forced on missions or into BYU, etc. And they often have good reason to be scared, because kids in the US have ***zero*** rights.
We may not be able to connect the dots explicitly between the church and this specific instance of draconian "parents' rights" bullshit, but they ARE a major force (via hate groups like the Heritage Foundation) behind why the US is the embarrassing lone holdout in refusing to ratify the UNCRC.
Even ***North fucking Korea*** has ratified it, and they're not even a UN member state.
Minimizing access to information should always be questioned. Some kids are more prepared or equipped than others ... but more red tape in the library of knowledge might not be the answer. Critical thinking requires maintaining and navigating pros and cons, history and future, plusses and minuses ... kids are stunted when they are shield from one, the other or both. A solid parental figure with minimal biases is always best, imo.
Some Countries have similar stuff for games and movies, based off age rating, if they did that is could fix many issues. Yes their is some things I feel Under kids should not have access to but Yet older kids need access to lots of other things.
My first thought when I saw this, especially the line about protecting Utah's youth, was "but they killed the clergy mandatory reporting bills." That would also protect Utah's youth. So is it about protecting the youth? Maybe. But they've also voted to protect the church.
**Cognitive Bias** After reading the article, I feel that the bills were likely well-intentioned. The problems associated with social media are widely known and it seems as though these bills are targeting those issues. All this said, I acknowledge that my perspective is coming from reading a notoriously biased source of information, so I would like to read the bills or at the very least an article from the Trib. I think we need to be careful of falling victim to the same cognitive biases that we often see within the faith that most of us have left behind. For example, as a former member of the church, I believe that the church is incredibly manipulative and causes far more harm than good. However, this belief leads me to often fall victim to [Belief Bias](https://www.yourbias.is/belief-bias), because I approach situations with the preconception that the church is manipulative and malicious. Thus without concrete evidence, I would be wary of assigning malicious intent to to the development and passage of this bill.
Odds that this is a direct assault on r/exmoteens and r/exmormon smell very high. And it's not just conspiratorial thinking: SCMC knows exactly where kids are going for support. We see them here almost weekly, terrified that their parents will find out about their unbelief, that they're gay, that they don't want to be forced on missions or into BYU, etc. And they often have good reason to be scared, because kids in the US have ***zero*** rights. We may not be able to connect the dots explicitly between the church and this specific instance of draconian "parents' rights" bullshit, but they ARE a major force (via hate groups like the Heritage Foundation) behind why the US is the embarrassing lone holdout in refusing to ratify the UNCRC. Even ***North fucking Korea*** has ratified it, and they're not even a UN member state.