[Reader-list] Sri Lankan Army war crime Video footage - News Channels responsibility

[Murali V]

If as you had stated children should know everything, then why put a
condition and I quote "While not Films". Visual education is the best
form education is it not?

Regards,
V Murali

On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 12:42 PM, Rakesh Iyer<rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree on that part, which is why I said the warning is necessary. But
> there can be cases where simply maturity is not important alone, or it may
> not come even after 18 years of age as assumed. Therefore, showing it
> without warning is wrong, but showing it with warning can and should not be
> termed wrong.
>
> Also, while not films, sex education of some kind is advised to be given to
> children to ensure that they are not sexually exploited, right from their
> childhood. What do you think about that? Are they mature enough to
> understand how is an action termed sexual exploitation?
>
> Therefore, while on this issue there can be a consensus, on many others
> there can't be. Let us not mix issues, and instead go into one issue in
> detail. So forgetting army actions for one, let's look at whether the
> warning is necessary, and yes it is. But hiding that information forever
> from people is something I am against.
>
> Regards
>
> Rakesh
>
>
>