Do you believe that the lawmakers decided that they would abuse the bill before or after it was passed? For your post to make any sense, you would have to believe that the lawmakers did not have malicious intentions prior to passing the bill.

Based on the observable reality that the law is being abused to prevent people from seeing Israeli war crimes. The law has been active for less than a week and it is already being used to protect Zionist ideology. We are observing the this law being used maliciously immediately after going into effect and you are suggesting that we must still frame the law as if it was passed with good intentions.

Are we to assume that the lawmakers had pure intentions and have made a mistake by blocking anti-Zionist topics? Are we naive? It is necessary to consider that the motivations were malicious prior to the implementation of the bill.

There was already a mechanism that exists for preventing minors from seeing pornography on the internet. It's called parental supervision. Additional to monitoring their child's internet usage, a parent can use a firewall on their own devices to block content unsuitable for minors.

The motivations of internet ID laws are made in bad faith. This has been observed in the past year with over 20 US states requiring porn websites to verify IDs of every visitor and then the states do not provide the websites with the tools needed to verify the ID of each visitor. Then the websites block traffic from the states, so that they don't get sued. The intention of these laws is to outlaw porn websites and the promoters of these laws blatantly say so.

The people pushing Internet ID laws are lying. Their intentions are not protecting children. People who want to ban transgender medical care, claim that they are protecting children. People who want to ban abortion, claim that they are protecting children. People who want to ban same-sex marriage, claim that they were protecting children. It should be considered that reactionaries commonly use "protecting children" to justify enforcing their puritanical world view.