Massachusetts has banned junk food on school grounds during school hours but now they want to ban junk food 24/7 which would include evenings and weekends. No more junk food at banquets, no more door-to-door candy sales and no junk food at football games. No more bake sales which help pay for many of the after school activities for kids. No junk food at holiday parties. They even would prefer that no milk or white bread be on the tables at school.
In other words Massachusetts wants to hold the record for being the best “Nanny State”.
Now don’t get me wrong we don’t feed my granddaughter junk. I realize that a lot of parents do. I also know that if kids in school want snacks they will get snacks. Now you will have a whole new black market thing going on in the hallways of 1st graders. Little Johnny from next door will be selling Sour Patch Kids for $3.00 and homemade chocolate chip cookies for $2.50 apiece.
How do you draw the line at what constitutes junk food. I make Lilah Oat cakes. They have no sugar, lots of oats, dried cranberries, sunflower seeds and some pastry flour. She loves them but if she whips one out at lunch how is the food patrol going to know they are healthy? Will they test them on the spot or maybe send it to a lab? Maybe have to take a bite? Soon the food patrol person will be the one having to shed some pounds.
The whole thing is disturbing to me because I truly feel that our government is taking too much control over our lives and we are letting them.
This man knew what he was talking about when he wrote “1984” published in 1948.
I realize that everyone is going to have a different opinion about this and I do respect all opinions. Fortunately we still have that right and the government damn well better not take that away from us.
We just better be careful that we don’t let our government take too much control over our daily lives. Last time I checked we are not all stupid but if we choose to be stupid we should have that choice. I’m afraid that some day a chubby person will be eating fried chicken in a restaurant and the food police will give him a ticket.
Damn, those oat cakes look good. I keep going back to that photo of them. I think I will make some tomorrow.
Who should decide what you can eat: you? Or the state?…
It is no coincidence that the push for more food regulation came at a time when Congress obsessed about the rising cost of medical care.
When government pays for your health care, it will inevitably be drawn into regulating your personal life. First, politicians promise to pay. Then, they propose to control you.
Where does it stop? If we must control diet to balance the government’s budget, will the health squad next ban skydiving and extramarital sex? How about another try at Prohibition?
But what about reasonable-sounding policies like forcing businesses to post calorie counts?
Often the Food Police strike an innocent pose, claiming that they just want to give people information. Information is good. But it’s not free. Mandated calorie signs in restaurants cost money. Those costs are passed on to consumers, and the endless parade of calorie counts and warning labels make us numb to more important warnings – like, “This Coffee Is Scalding Hot.”
It’s not as if dietary information isn’t already available. Health and diet websites abound. Talk shows routinely discuss the latest books on diet and nutrition. TV diet gurus are celebrities. That’s enough. We have information. We don’t need government force.