The Internet is no exception, but it is uniquely capable of delivering potentially harmful sexual images to children, and thus deserving of some form of restriction. The question is how to do that without stomping on the First Amendment.

Unlike printed material, the Internet is instantaneous and allows users to view a vast array of content with no one else being aware of what they are doing.

That, understandably, causes acute concern among parents who cannot always be around to personally monitor what their children are dialing up on the home computer. In the old days of youthful exploration, Mom and Dad had only to search a child's room for explicit magazines or to quietly listen on a phone extension to nip what they considered excessive or inappropriate sexual content in the bud.

The Internet poses more of a challenge. Filtering devices work for some Web sites, but sometimes they filter more or less than they should, and that can interfere with scholarly study or legitimate research on non-sexual topics. They may miss pornographic Web sites with innocuous domain names meant to lure unsuspecting computer users.

Other proposals, with varying levels of practicality and efficiency, are being debated. One is to give all adult sites an ".xxx" domain name instead of ".com" or ".net." That would make it easy for filters to identify and screen sites not meant for children. But there is no effective way to force all domains to use the .xxx designation, and the adult industry claims with some justification that such restriction may be unconstitutional.

Utah legislation passed this year requires Internet providers to give filters to customers who want them and to force Web sites that carry pornographic images to display the label: "harmful to minors." The law also requires the Attorney General's Office to create a list of such sites that consumers could block.

That plan is opposed in a lawsuit as unconstitutional because the Web sites of bookstores, publishers and others might be blocked. That suit is currently in federal court. Another idea is to create a separate Internet channel for all adult content.

It won't be easy, but a way must be found to protect free expression on the Internet, while helping parents to maintain the innocence of their children.