I am hesistant to include any content 'warning' because I feel the ultimate result of labels is to censor speech. After all, if there is a warning, it must mean that there is a threat, and if there is a threat, the material (book, cd, website, etc) should be blocked from those sites where children might see them. The result being that adults are blocked too, since many places adults look also distribute to minors, and furthermore even some 'acceptable' materials are blocked to make sure there is no trouble. This is troubling threat to free speech, which is a very important part of our free society. After all, how can we be free without getting the education and debate of ideas that free speech allows. Censorship limits such freedom and should be stopped in all its forms as much as possible. I know a lot of people come to this site to check out my pages on "Reboot," and even though I'm an adult, many of these people are minors. Nonetheless, it is wrong to equalize minors with immature little children who can not handle serious issues, and serious issues come up in nearly everything I talk about. Even "Reboot" touches upon some serious themes, including violence and death. Someone was worried about a review of an 'R' rated movie (especially given its homosexual subject matter). The Constitution touches upon quite a few mature issues, including abortion and homosexuality, so my pages on it must do so as well. The same can be said about the news in general, books I read, movies I watch, and so on. We live in a "PG-13" and "R" rated world, and any website that broadly covers issues in it must touch upon themes some might deem inappropriate for some people. So in the interest of full disclosure, I will say that this site is not 'G' rated, and sometimes (especially some of the links) might not always even be "PG-13" rated, as some so define such a rating. Nonetheless, I do not see this as a problem. First of all, for parents so concerned about such things (and it's not like I'm writing graphic fiction or sexual how to manuals here), there are blocking systems. Second, most if not all of the subjects discussed are also discussed in many junior high schools or young adult books. Such courses and books usually do not have a rating, though some have a reading level notice. And finally in a related way, those able to understand my more serious essays probably are mature enough to read them, given that I wrote them using upper grade vocabulary and such. If this is not enough, I apologize, but I won't be a tool for censorship, and feel in no way that I need to be in this case. A little experiment showed me today (7/14/01) how content restrictions, ratings, and blocking systems can be arbitrary. AOL has various levels of "maturity" in its blocking programming, and I discovered that certain material on this site is illicit for even 16-17 year olds. Now, before you get the idea I deal with porn or the like, a page (at times) blocked dealt with sexual privacy (mainly abortion, but homosexuality and other matters are also addressed) issues. Also blocked, a discussion of an admittedly mature film, but done so in a restrained manner without explicit details. Thus, matters dealt with in courts, legislatures, public debate, and your local paper are not proper for seniors in high school! The early teens maturity level even blocked my home page! Such infantilizing of teenagers is just a tad disgusting. The "Dawson's Creek" crowd can handle some sexual topics and the like without being traumatized. Actually, serious treatment of such topics is healthy and required for their road to a truly mature and complete adulthood.