>1. OK, I'll assume a lack of porn videos is not a "technical measure".

It is a technical measure, in the same sense that having a firewall that will not allow access to porn sites is a technical measure.

>
>2. The Internet is already fully available to him, and will continue to be so regardless of what Steve does, short of "house arrest" and disconnected service. My approval or disapproval has no bearing on this.
>

There are firewalls can do a pretty good job at it...for example the Belkin models with the parental control feature. The firewall "asks" an offsite server if the it is okay to retrieve each page.


>3. And no, I don't know what you mean by "a [or 'the'] temptation". If we're going to discuss this please explain clearly what you mean.
>

Aren't we talking about viewing porn? You've stated that Steve needs to teach his son what is appropriate, and what is not. That is great. If Steve, and his son, agree that he shouldn't view certain things, does that mean there will never be a time when he "wants" to look at stuff, even if he "knows" or "believes" that he shouldn't?

IMO, one way to avoid being "tempted" to do things you believe you shouldn't do is to stay away from the opportunity. For example, I want to be faithful to my wife. It is good personal policy that I do not spend lots of time alone with other women. Why put myself in a position where I might build an emotional bond with someone, only to have other bad things follow? It could all start so innocently....

So does that mean I don't "trust" myself? Why test it?

Let's assume that my 17 year old son (they aren't that old yet) agrees that he should't look at porn. How could he possibly be offended about it not being available in my house (on the internet, or otherwise)?