The Internet is the subject of a current Supreme Court case that could affect whether restrictions are made on materials considered indecent in cyberspace.

The case is specifically concerned about children’s access to the Internet. Critics of the Communications Decency Act, an amendment to the 1996 telecommunications bill, say this material would include pornography, but also nude artwork and safe sex discussions.

Options to control access to such things for children include an ID system where only adults can view potentially indecent material and a parent-installed software that blocks out indecent material.

Although these options may sound good in theory, they are not solutions to a concern that has existed for decades.

People today still burn books they consider improper literature for elementary students to study. However, indecent material, whether it is in the form of words or pictures, is not something new to our society. Children were visually exposed to sexually explicit materials long before the Internet existed.

Nude photos in National Geographic, book covers of die-hard romances and ads for women’s undergarments in The Des Moines Register could all be categorized as indecent. Children see these things more often than many parents realize. Although most Internet users are in the United States, children here and in other countries are often exposed to sexually explicit material from billboard advertisements and television.

It is usually immoral for children to view explicit material on the Internet, but an attempt to restrict access to indecency is clearly a violation of the constitutional right of free speech for adults.

If our government is so concerned about how children will be affected by Internet indecency, it should allow parents to take responsibility for what is on their computer screens and not attempt to control a technology that is continuously educating others.