Woodruff wrote: Night Strike wrote: Woodruff wrote: Night Strike wrote:
Juan_Bottom wrote:Then you can't say those kids are starving.
So lets ignore that.
Why can't you bring your own food to your high school?
These kids did precisely that, and good for them. The school was not providing them with an adequate service, so they boycotted that service and found an alternative.
So what's the problem? I'm asking this in a completely serious manner. I see no problem here.
That kids chose to stand against the nanny-state control is a good thing. The fact that the federal government thinks they need to dictate the number of calories kids get to eat from school lunches is the problem. It's absolute control by the government that simply harms people.
It's not a problem, in my opinion. Childhood obesity is a very serious problem in this nation. You want less taxes and less government spending...well, a healthy populace is one way to help that.
Night Strike wrote: Woodruff wrote: Night Strike wrote:
Juan_Bottom wrote:Another hit piece without any skepticism. Where are the experts? It's just kids and their mom talking.
Since when do the "experts" get to decide my personal freedoms?
It's funny how often you're in favor of the government dictating personal freedoms that you like, and how often you're not in favor of the government dictating personal freedoms you don't like.
To name two off the top of my head, "gay marriage" and "legalization of drugs".
To me, it's not about being for or against. It's about "in practice", the people choose at the state level. That is democracy. That is Liberty
"I want you to remember that, to remind you to stay out of my way. In all the years to come, in all your most private moments, I want you to remember my hand at your throat. I want you to remember the one man who beat you."