More Freedom Loving Lefties On The March

[Nitegazer]

And here I hoped this was a thread celebrating patriotic southpaws.

In all seriousness, while I agree that there are real issues here regarding the state's role in the raising of children, believing this policy came out of the 'do-gooder' left wingers out there is naive.

As in nearly all things politic: follow the money. Fact is the diabetes costs our government a lot of $$. Schools must pay for the administration of insulin, develop diabetes friendly menus, and and risk law suits from parents angry that their child wasn't adequately cared for. Check out this link from the NIH regarding 'Optimal Support' for kids with diabetes. (Now add to that all the costs for medicaid...)

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1955407/

So, public schools are just trying to hold costs down so they don't have to go to tax payers for more money. Unless we accept that it is acceptable for uninsured children to die from diabetes, we are left with the state taking a role in children's health.

The argument can still be made that cutting out home-packed lunches goes too far, but the issue is far from clear-cut.

 

[Serapis]

I have questions about the ability of the principal to ban lunches from home. I think you can create a list of what students may not bring, but her ban, in essences states, parents can't be trusted, and that may be true, but she has gone beyond her scope, in my opinion. I believe it's fine to ban candy, chips, sodas, sugary snacks. But banning all food from home is simply overbearing and infringing on parent's roles as guardians.

 

[NoDrama]

No one guaranteed you the freedom to select from sugary corn syrup drinks while in school.... to analyze this and toss the word freedom into the mix is pretty silly... Just because they may go home and eat junk doesn't mean we should throw up our hands and forget teaching nutrition.... How do you teach kids to eat responsibly yet offer junk with zero nutritional value for sale at a profit? And that fat kid with the candy bar.... no victim? What about himself or his future kids or family if he contracts heart disease or diabetes... obesity is not a victimless crime... it is a disease... I'm sure there are just as many parents happy that their kids can no longer get that junk in school.

I don't have any problem educating children on the dangers of junk food, but physically banning lunches that the children's parents made for them isn't right. As far as sugary junk food and soda for sale. You ever eat a candy bar or drink a Coke? Are you a fat ass?

kids CAN eat a candy bar and drink a pop without getting fat and without hurting themselves, maybe they should be taught self control if that is all they will eat if given a choice.

Obesity is a victimless crime, logically anyone who is affected by someone elses obesity was because of choices made, not because their was a candy machine in the school lobby.

 

[The Ruiner]

This issue speaks directly so a self-imposed paradigm of self-destruction. We as a people have let our own appetites become our undoing. We have basically said to the commercial model: "we cant control ourselves, and we constantly want more more more, even if it kills us," and they have listened. We drastically need to change this paradigm if we are to persevere. We need to teach habits of self-control and moderation through illustrative examples of consequence. Televise bowel surguries...put people with tracheotomies on the news as anchors, show the reprecussions of absent-minded free choice. Show our children that yes, while free to "do what they want" there are SERIOUS consequences.

It sucks that the government has to step in where the public has largely failed...but at least SOMEONE has our overall best interests in mind.

 

[Nitegazer]

I have questions about the ability of the principal to ban lunches from home. I think you can create a list of what students may not bring, but her ban, in essences states, parents can't be trusted, and that may be true, but she has gone beyond her scope, in my opinion. I believe it's fine to ban candy, chips, sodas, sugary snacks. But banning all food from home is simply overbearing and infringing on parent's roles as guardians.

Agreed. Maybe school lunches have changed a lot since I was a kid (remember catchup the vegetable?), I can't imagine that publicly provided food can be better than what a thoughtful parent would prepare.

 

[NoDrama]

You want kids to be unable to purchase pop and candy from a school vending machine? Stop giving them money.

 

[tip top toker]

The school should be told to stop giving kids anything but healthy basics. If the kids want sugar and shit then their parents can give it to them, not the school. You can't promote a society of 5 fruit of veg a day and that lot when you send your kids to learn in a place loading them up with chemicals and sugar. Like learning to be a hippy in a military school

 

[NoDrama]

This issue speaks directly so a self-imposed paradigm of self-destruction. We as a people have let our own appetites become our undoing. We have basically said to the commercial model: "we cant control ourselves, and we constantly want more more more, even if it kills us," and they have listened. We drastically need to change this paradigm if we are to persevere. We need to teach habits of self-control and moderation through illustrative examples of consequence. Televise bowel surguries...put people with tracheotomies on the news as anchors, show the reprecussions of absent-minded free choice. Show our children that yes, while free to "do what they want" there are SERIOUS consequences.

It sucks that the government has to step in where the public has largely failed...but at least SOMEONE has our overall best interests in mind.

I liked everything you had to say, until i got to the last sentence.

Government can butt out of my personal choices that have to do with MY body and my child's body.
Some of you who are so glad government is telling people what they can and cannot eat would be up in arms if they were telling you you couldn't have an abortion.

 

[Nitegazer]

I liked everything you had to say, until i got to the last sentence.

Government can butt out of my personal choices that have to do with MY body and my child's body.

But what about MY insurance costs, property taxes and income taxes? This is really much the same as the whole seat belt debate.

--edit-- Actually more like the child car seat debate....

 

[PeachOibleBoiblePeach#1]

Yea kinnda like banning smoking in public,,,Where is my freedom?

 

[Nitegazer]

Yea kinnda like banning smoking in public,,,Where is my freedom?

Almost, except this is about children. A more fitting analogy would be children smoking in public.

 

[PeachOibleBoiblePeach#1]

Ok when I was in High school you could smoke on school ground's Than they banned it. We were children,,,Now if you get caught with any tobbaco product's detention,,,or expulsion,,,where is smokers freedom?

 

[canndo]

I don't see how a child eating a candy bar is hurting any other children. No Victim , no reason to ban anything. Freedom is hard.

You think when these kids go home they are going to eat healthy because you took away their lunch? No, they will binge eat the fuck out of the junk they have at home. Things will get worse and people will be less free. Government cannot and should not ever make personal choices for people.

Wait.....


If we take away the vending machine that vends corporate sponsorship AND some sort of sweet poison we will somehow be... less free? Really.

 

[The Ruiner]

I liked everything you had to say, until i got to the last sentence.

Government can butt out of my personal choices that have to do with MY body and my child's body.
Some of you who are so glad government is telling people what they can and cannot eat would be up in arms if they were telling you you couldn't have an abortion.

Thats quite a leap to make. But in reality, abortions keep the costs/consequences lower in this country. So, I dont ever think that will be an issue. It strategically doesnt make sense. And furthermore, if you are making "good" decisions for yourself and your child, then why worry about what stipulations are placed in order to restore some degree of public well-being?

 

[Serapis]

Obesity is not a victimless crime, we all pay for it through tax dollars allocated for medical care....
As for the banning of home made lunches all together, I question that judgment as i stated above. When I went to school, we didn't have candy and soda machines in school. We also didn't have a national obseity problem.... it may very well not be the sole fault of those machines, but show me that they don't contribute to the problem and maybe I'll take up your opinion myself....

I don't have any problem educating children on the dangers of junk food, but physically banning lunches that the children's parents made for them isn't right. As far as sugary junk food and soda for sale. You ever eat a candy bar or drink a Coke? Are you a fat ass?

kids CAN eat a candy bar and drink a pop without getting fat and without hurting themselves, maybe they should be taught self control if that is all they will eat if given a choice.

Obesity is a victimless crime, logically anyone who is affected by someone elses obesity was because of choices made, not because their was a candy machine in the school lobby.

 

[Serapis]

That is exactly my thoughts....

Wait.....


If we take away the vending machine that vends corporate sponsorship AND some sort of sweet poison we will somehow be... less free? Really.

 

[canndo]

I liked everything you had to say, until i got to the last sentence.

Government can butt out of my personal choices that have to do with MY body and my child's body.
Some of you who are so glad government is telling people what they can and cannot eat would be up in arms if they were telling you you couldn't have an abortion.

No one is talking about what you can and cannot eat. They are talking about what is redily available at school. Just as no one is telling a child he cannot pray at school, only that he must not be led in prayer. What is it with these "my right" folks who somehow believe that anything they want to do must surely be some sort of God given constitutionaly guaranteed "right"?

 

[NoDrama]

You can take the vending machines out, that is not a problem for me. Banning consumption of a 100% legal substance is tyranny though. Your just teaching these kids to not be responsible for themselves.

When I went to school High Fructose Corn Syrup wasn't even used in anything. Coke came in glass bottles or steel cans with a pull tab, there were about 10 different candy bars to choose from and they cost 5cents each.

Take candy away from kids and there will be a candy black market in the boys bathroom overnight. And some of that candy will be unsafe due to the sugar content. That candy will be unregulated and start causing our children to OD on sugar, think of the CHILDREN for gods sake!!

 

[NoDrama]

No one is talking about what you can and cannot eat. They are talking about what is redily available at school. Just as no one is telling a child he cannot pray at school, only that he must not be led in prayer. What is it with these "my right" folks who somehow believe that anything they want to do must surely be some sort of God given constitutionaly guaranteed "right"?

That IS what we are talking about here bub, perhaps you didn't actually read the OP post and click BOTH links?

NOWHERE IN EITHER OF THE LINKS ARE THEY TALKING ABOUT TAKING VENDING MACHINES OUT!!!!!!! THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT BANNING WHAT YOU CAN AND CANNOT EAT OR DRINK!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[The Ruiner]

You can take the vending machines out, that is not a problem for me. Banning consumption of a 100% legal substance is tyranny though. Your just teaching these kids to not be responsible for themselves.

When I went to school High Fructose Corn Syrup wasn't even used in anything. Coke came in glass bottles or steel cans with a pull tab, there were about 10 different candy bars to choose from and they cost 5cents each.

Take candy away from kids and there will be a candy black market in the boys bathroom overnight. And some of that candy will be unsafe due to the sugar content. That candy will be unregulated and start causing our children to OD on sugar, think of the CHILDREN for gods sake!!

But at the very least this would restrict access, which is the overall point of the legislation.