Recently the U.S supreme court turned to the founding fathers to decide whether a state had the right to prevent minors from buying violent video games.
Ha Dou Ken! That's right.
They went back 235 years for some insight into gaming culture and its impact on modern society. A time when upper class education consisted primarily of simple math and prayers. Paper and textbooks were so scarce lessons often involved reciting things orally over and over until memorization was achieved. Makes sense to start your research on Call of Duty in 1776.
One justice actually denied that children have First Amendment rights by citing extensive historical sources on child rearing practises in Colonial America. Excerpt from the Globe and Mail article:
The practices and beliefs of the founding generation,” he wrote, “establish that ‘the freedom of speech,' as originally understood, does not include a right to speak to minors (or a right of minors to access speech) without going through the minors' parents or guardians. … The historical evidence shows that the founding generation believed parents had absolute authority over their minor children and expected parents to use that authority to direct the proper development of their children.
Ultimately the court ruled (7-2 decision) that California's law prohibiting the sale of violent video games to those under 18 was unconstitutional. Good call. But it's not the point.
The point is that 18th century legal theories can't solve 21st century digital problems. (Imagine evaluating all of your business decisions against a 235 year old strategic plan?!)
Things are changing fast.
But never fast enough for a parent to use pace as an excuse not to engage in their kids' extracurriculars. And never fast enough for us to let the judicial system determine our art.