When I was in high school, there were two people I wanted to emulate. The first was Mr. Rogers, because I could really get behind the idea of taking a lunch break every day to go home and play with puppets.

The other was Bono. It was inspiring that one of the most famous musicians in the world showed more concern for others’ suffering than his own celebrity. His insistence on wearing sunglasses indoors was just icing on the cake.

My regard for Mr. Rogers never resulted in much, but my desire to be like Bono brought the kinds of results typically seen in young idealists. I drank fair trade coffee, quoted Bobby Kennedy in papers and signed up for countless e-mail lists asking me to contact Congress regarding a number of issues. Suddenly, I was an activist for everything from migrant farmers’ rights to breast cancer treatment.

My goal to do as the Irish singer did, however, began to present unforeseen problems. I left for college, became a lot busier and inevitably found my name on more and more e-mail lists as O-FEST, natural disasters and service trips demanded my attention. I continued signing various petitions to elected officials but only occasionally took the time to actually give the letters a thorough reading. Eventually, I was so overwhelmed by the volume of mail piling up in my inbox that I didn’t have time for the issues I cared most about.

I began to question if this was really the kind of civic action the Bobby Kennedys and Bonos of the world were asking people to participate in. Internet activism has made it possible for almost anyone to speak out on important issues, but this luxury is a double-edged sword. Because most online activist groups provide their members with pre-written letters that can be sent with the click of the button, those members often do not take the time to educate themselves about the issues they are advocating. In the rare occurrences I sufficiently researched the issues I was being asked to support or oppose, I was surprised by how much the particular organization oversimplified the matter or misrepresented their opponents’ viewpoints.

This summer, after one too many of these revelations, I decided it was time to begin unsubscribing to lists and concentrate on one or two causes. At first, it was difficult. I felt like I was giving away my Pog collection all over again. But as I received fewer and fewer e-mails I never would have had the time to read anyway, I felt free as a… whatever feels really free.

I also had more energy to give full attention to a worthy issue. For me, this was the genocide in Darfur. The conflict began in 2003 when Sudan’s government began violently targeting ethnic groups whose members opposed the government’s political and economic marginalization of some of its citizens. The international community recently pressured the Sudanese government to agree to hold a referendum that could allow the Southern part of the country to peacefully secede and avoid civil war with the North. Activists, however, continue to call the White House and ask President Obama to use leverage and finally apply the pressure that could end ethnic cleansing in Darfur.

I believe this issue deserves crucial attention because it involves protecting the most basic human rights. I hope that others might also feel compelled to call the White House and ask the president to do his part to end the conflict. The point, however, is for each person to find the issue that compels him or her to action. Developing a social conscience is certainly a good thing, but so is having the discipline to limit the issues we stand up for to the ones we understand.