Quote:
Originally Posted by fatbuckRTO
Rhetorical nonsense and you know it. There is a difference between dictating every minor behavior of a person who utilizes a government program and dictating the acceptable uses of government money. No one cries about Pell Grants being only applicable to university fees. But support restrictions on welfare money and all of a sudden I'm trying to own poor people? Sell that crap somewhere else.
That being said, I have less of a problem with the story if the school simply provides a lunch. Providing a whole other meal to a student who already has a meal is just a waste of money, not a violation of rights. Forcing the students to eat one thing or another is a different matter, and not apparently what happened in this case.
However, if they actually try to force the parents to pay for an arbitrarily-provided extra lunch when the parents have already provided a lunch, that crosses the line.
|
Whenever welfare comes up theres a common theme that these people are using "my" money and therefore should follow my rules. Nobody has a problem with the government intervening to decide where the recipients spend their money. This is obviously a different situation but its still an instance of the government making rules that only apply to patrons of a particular government sponsored program.
Im just speculating but Ill bet that at some point a study showed that the children most likely to participate in this type of free preschool program are also the most at risk for obesity or other diet related diseases so they decided to add dietary requirements for everyone that participates. Thats a lot like what happened in Florida when they decided that all welfare recipients must take a drug test to get benefits.