Online Safety Should Empower Parents, Not Expand the State

Originally published on Substack. 

​Children face real dangers online. Nearly half of U.S. teens say they are online “almost constantly,” according to a 2024 report by Pew Research Center⁠. YouTube reaches 90 percent of teens, while TikTok, Instagram, and Snapchat remain widely used. Add artificial intelligence, deepfakes, and new designs, and it is easy to see why parents are concerned.

Christians should take this seriously. Children are made in the image of God. They deserve protection, formation, and love. Parents have a sacred responsibility to guide their children toward wisdom, virtue, and self-control.

But concern does not automatically justify new government control.

Three Takeaways for Policymakers

1. Protect children by enforcing the law.
   
   
   
2. Target abuse, not everyone’s access.
   
   
   
3. Do not create a digital ID mandate.
   
   
   

The Risk Is Real

Texas’ app-store age verification law⁠ is moving forward while litigation continues. The goal is understandable. Parents want help. Lawmakers want to protect children.

But tradeoffs matter.

Age verification is essentially a digital ID requirement. It can require families to share personal information with private companies or third-party vendors before accessing lawful online services.

I generally trust voluntary exchange with private businesses more than government coercion because businesses must earn customers. If they misuse data, people can leave, sue, complain, or choose competitors.

But when government requires the exchange, the choice is no longer voluntary.

A Permission-Slip Internet

Digital ID systems can normalize identity checks for ordinary speech, reading, searching, learning, and association. They can expand data collection, create new privacy risks, push teenagers toward VPNs or foreign websites, and give government or vendors more control over lawful digital life.

A policy sold as child protection could become a permission-slip internet. That should concern anyone who values liberty.

Social Media Has Benefits, Too

We should also avoid pretending social media is only harmful. It has real benefits. Families stay connected across distance. Churches share sermons and prayer needs. Small businesses find customers. Students learn skills. Independent voices bypass gatekeepers. People find communities, mentors, job opportunities, and information that legacy institutions may ignore.

That does not make these platforms harmless. It means the policy question is not whether risks exist. The question is whether the proposed cure creates larger problems than the disease.

A Classical Liberal View

My approach starts with liberty under the rule of law. Government exists to protect rights, not manage every risk.

Adam Smith understood that prosperity grows through voluntary exchange within a framework of justice. Thomas Jefferson warned against concentrated power. Friedrich Hayek taught that knowledge is dispersed. Milton Friedman urged us to judge policies by results, not intentions. Thomas Sowell reminds us there are no perfect solutions, only tradeoffs.

Those insights matter here because parents know more about their children than distant officials do. Families, churches, schools, and communities are closer to the child and better positioned to form character than any agency or algorithm.

The Better Path

The better path includes:

1. Enforce laws against abuse, exploitation, threats, trafficking, fraud, and nonconsensual images.
2. Hold companies accountable when they deceive families or ignore clearly harmful conduct.
3. Encourage better parental tools, clearer settings, and stronger reporting systems.
4. Let teachers set reasonable phone policies during school instruction, not at the state, district, or school level.
5. Help parents understand how platforms shape incentives, attention, and habits.

But be careful before building broad online controls that would never be tolerated in the physical world. We do not require every person to show an ID before entering a bookstore, reading a newspaper, or having a conversation in a public square. We should not casually normalize that standard online.

Faith, Family, and Freedom

Children do not need a government-run internet. They need parents equipped to lead, communities willing to support them, and laws focused on justice rather than control.

Let’s protect kids without surrendering the family or expanding the state beyond its proper role.