Internet Censorship

My opponent has stated that internet censorship is a direct violation of our rights as stated by the First Amendment.However, you must know that all rights of Americans can be revoked once they are infringing upon another's rights. By knowing this, the government as a unit has its rights to its secrecy, as it also has its reasons. Yes, we can petition the government in hopes of creating a better government, but we cannot demand that they show every action that they have taken in the past or will take in the future. It is a violation of the government's privacy and because the government is the basis of this nation, we cannot overrule them.Also, interestingly enough, there has been an incline of Americans that believe the First Amendment offers too much liberty to the individual [4].My opponent has also stated, "Nations that have Internet censorship suffer human rights abuses."While I cannot find a source on how internet censorhip correlates with abuse of human rights, which my opponent has yet to do as well, I did find a map of internet censorship, source [5]. The quote my opponent has used was almost refuted by my opponent themself as they proved that it was legal in China, therefore not restricting human rights. Because it was legal, it would mean that the people do not have the right, meaning there is no right to oppress. We cannot base other countries with the rights of America as that would be extremely biased because we are one of the most free countries in the world [6]. We must look at all countries individually, and because my opponent has stuck to China, a country where my opponent agreed gives strict rules, we can see that China's government has not oppressed ungiven rights.Let's be honest, I literally copied and pasted this from my last debate. But since the debate has been nullified and incomplete, I find it just to use these arguments again.Content is already censored:Some content on the internet is already censored, for example, a pornographic website. This does not meant that people cannot find their way around the censored materials in order to view them, it just means that there are efforts in which the government/website creators make in order to follow certain rules, legal or moral. YouTube, also, blocks content for certain age groups, but, much like anything else, people find a way around it by creating fake accounts that reach the age limit set on the video.Content is censored for a reason:Pornographic content, for example, is censored for everyone under the age of 18. This is because at 18, people become a legal adult and can enjoy all rights other adults have, other than drinking of course. But why is it limited to people under 18? Why is it not censored for people under the age of, say, 25? Porn glorifies regular situations and deteriorates the values of actual sex, and can often lead people to sexually please themselves. According to [1], porn nullifies the real world experiences as it fills the minds with more erotic/exotic situations. It is staged to glorify the situation, and will often lead to less pleasing experiences first hand.Violent material should also be censored as it will desensitize humans, esp. young children exposed to this material, leading them to have no emotions when committing a harmful action against another. Studies may show that video games, although not internet, may actually cause violence in teens and children participating in them [2]. Video games give people the experience without the consequence, while the internet would give neither experience or consequence, leading people to believe that, "If it's on the internet, it must be okay to do." Four year olds are beginning to pick up bad behavior they have viewed on (CENSORED) tv [3], so imagine the consequences of a child getting a hold of uncensored material on the internet.Sources:[1] http://theresurgence.com......][2] http://www.howstuffworks.com......[3] http://www.telegraph.co.uk......[4] http://www.theblaze.com...[5] http://gizmodo.com...[6] http://www.heritage.org...