> An argument of "Think of the children" generally means restricting something from dissemination, discussion, or presentation because it's availability or the process by which it is made available would be a negative children as they aren't fully grown and responsible adults. Restricting porn, or discussion or drugs or sexuality, or child porn laws all fit this. It does not literally mean doing anything positive because it will benefit a child.

Says who? And the argument in question is actually more "if we don't do this, there might not be an liveable earth for our descendants" - you don't have to agree, but from their point of view its far from "doing anything positive because it will benefit a child".