Nothing wrong with my reading comprehension. But there does seem to be something wrong with your snipping. You seem to have accidentally removed a pertinent section of my reply.ErrantX wrote: No; read again. I argue that putting them into a catch 22 situation, where part of the point is the catch them in an unfortunate response, is self-defeating. Having a question that boils down to "Would you recommend showing porn to children?" isn't a difficult question.
The question of "Commons has highly visible porn, what advice would you give to schools and other youth groups?" much more focuses on the point of asking such a question.
Catching someone out in saying "Yes" is fun and all, but doesn't really do all that much in the long term.
What I'd like you to do, though, is to make up your mind. First you say the question is a catch and then you say it boils down to something simple. I agree with the second, but fail to see the catch. Unless you honestly believe a person who answered in the affirmative deserves a vote... and I don't think you do mean that.
As for your question, it's much worse as it places the burden on the parent or school. Frankly, that assumption is distasteful. I hope you didn't mean it to do so, but your phrasing invites the candidate to make it not their problem (and several have done just that). It's a neutered, Dorothy Dix question. Frankly I'm a little dissapointed that Andreas did not hold his ground and I hope he sees the results of giving in this time as a reason not to do so the next.
