On Tue, 2003-10-21 at 16:26, Ron Johnson wrote: > When one is sitting in front of the computer, one is not running, > jumping, reading books, etc. It is all moderation. For example my nine year old uses the computer regularly. Her common tasks. Email relatives in California and Hawaii. Instant Message Friends. (As to not tie up the phone line) MathWars - Practice Mathed Timed Tests TuxTyping - Practice Typing Skills Open Office - To write reports for school That said, she can't touch the computer until she has practiced her piano for 20 minutes and read at least 20 minutes. She plays football (2 practices a week, plus one game a week), She plays soccer (2 practices a week and one game a week). She is lucky if she has 60 minutes a week total to look at the computer. I think your running, jumping playing point is valid, but only in the case where a child is "abusing" a computer, tv, video console to a point of excess that they are neglecting those things. A balanced lifestyle should afford a wide variety of experiences. > For example, if I'd had a computer when I was young, there's no > way that I'd have read so many books, and, thus, even though my > joystick skills would be more highly developed, my intellect and > "world exposure" would be much diminished. Unless your parents moderated your use of these things. In our family we try to regulate activities to provide balance. > Ok, here's another provocative question: why is it needed? Anyone > over 40 grew up without computers, and there are lots of 40+ geeks. > (Those of us who are 40+ can attest to this.) This is silly logic. If every generation used this logic, we wouldn't have heaters, air conditioners, motor vehicles and plethora of other modern advances. Are they mandatory to sustain life? No, but they help better the quality of life. For example in this day and age it would be fairly hard to imagine not having motorized vehicles in all but probably New York or Chicago. > Yes, computers are better than the TV, but the kids are going to be > in front of them so often (young people going into the military are > much heavier, and less in shape than they used to be) for the rest > of their lives. So, pushing it back for a couple of years can't > hurt them. Blaming computers, TV etc on children being obese is silly. It is a culmination of many things mostly lazy parents. :) For example, why don't we blame soda, fast food and political correctness on the weight prob lem. -- Derek Neighbors GNU Enterprise http://www.gnuenterprise.org derek@gnue.org Was I helpful? Let others know: http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=dneighbo
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part