Skip to comments.Land of the Free Does Not Apply to Food
Posted on 07/02/2013 5:30:54 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
This week we celebrate our nations freedom.We will fly our flags and set off our fireworksin celebration of the founding of the United States and the signing of the Declaration of Independence. It is an interesting fact of history that one of the first things we did after throwing off the yoke of British rule and military occupation was to create a federal government that started putting limits on personal freedom.
Last week the USDA continued that effort by taking away freedom of choice for studentsattending public schools. A year ago USDA put restrictions of the kind of food that was served in school lunchrooms, now they have placed limits on what food can be sold in schools outside of the lunch line.
U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack says the nations students will have healthier food options during the school day under USDAs new Smart Snacks in School nutritionstandards. USDA was required to establish nutrition standardsfor all foods sold in schools by the Healthy, Hunger-Free KidsAct of 2010.
(Excerpt) Read more at hoosieragtoday.com ...
“Land of the Free” does apply to food if you’re one of the 47 million on food stamps. /S
Nanny govt. gets worse and worse. Possible long-term consequences of the 19th amendment?
When discussing minors, constitutional freedom does not apply.
Taking “Catcher in the Rye” out of public libraries is violating the first ammendment. Taking it out of public school libraries is not.
Telling parents what can and cannot be in lunches brought from home is unconstitutional. Controlling what schools can offer children as food choices is not.
That being said, all of this should be controlled at the local or, at most, state level. It’s none of the federal government’s business. Their job is to protect us from invasion and protect us from each other when crimes cross state lines. Anything else is scope creep.
This reminds me of the adult kids who moves back home to save rent money then is surprised that his/her parents lay out a set of rules for them.
Uncle Sam decided to pay for some kids meals so this is the result.,.
Those Dem base voters didnt like Bloomy’s soda regulations.
So then the 5th's protection against self-incrimination, or the taking of property, liberty, or life simply don't apply to minors.
I guess that explains why
abortion is a right.
“Horse hockey!” to quote General Potter.
Bilge. The FEDERAL government is NOT charged by the Constitution with creating dietary decisions for local schools. Local school boards and communities are the proper channels for those decisions.
When a central bureaucracy hundreds or thousands of miles away intrudes upon daily decisions like this it is fascism.
How do you play horse hockey, and what do sports have to do with this?
So then the 5th’s protection against self-incrimination, or the taking of property, liberty, or life simply don’t apply to minors.
I guess that explains why abortion is a right.
But if the government tries these things with adults, the constitution is clearly violated.
It’s a MASH reference, which makes about as much sense as your minors have no rights comments. All your children are belong to us!
I think I nailed down my objection to public schooling yesterday -
it’s not that the parents who send their kids to public school don’t care about them,
it’s that the parents who don’t care about their kids send them to public school.
Ever played water polo?
It’s great fun, but pretty hard on the horses.
Ah, so because they are wards of someone they can have their papers or effects searched and seized by a government official at-whim?
Or to be secure in their homes? I suppose this explains why CPS can just bust in on hearsay and take the children. I suppose, too, that this means that teachers can demand entry (
to inspect the child's living conditions, or some other pretense) without any warrant [upon probable cause] supported by oath/affirmation.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
You're viewing the Constitution's relationship to the people in an incorrect manner: the constitution is not about the people, it is about the government — it does not bind your fellow citizen, but it binds your government.
All true—but they shouldn’t be funding it either. Those who fund have a say.
Its a MASH reference, which makes about as much sense as your minors have no rights comments.
I’m on the same page with most of the people here. I am just trying to communicate the distinction between adults and minors, regarding individual rights. There really are differences, though the parents become the party that chooses what rights can be “violated”. e.g. searching their son’s room for dope...
the constitution is not about the people, it is about the government it does not bind your fellow citizen, but it binds your government.
Back in the 1950s and 1960s, there were usually a private owned fast food shop across the street from the school.
Student who did not want a school lunch could go over and buy a hamburger or hot dog, ice cream, chips, sodas.
Then the schools started the “closed campus” and the malt shops closed down due to lack of business.
***How do you play horse hockey, and what do sports have to do with this?***
Reminds me of the old HEE HAW jokes by Archie Campbell about seeing the sign...HOCKEY HERE TONIGHT, and trying to figure out what hockey was.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.