Federal law backed by Michelle Obama would prohibit school bake sales

I don't think the provision of dinner would be for everyone, but just kids that in some after-school programs and qualified for the subsidy. If the proposal was to extend the school day an extra 3 hours, I think that would have been the headline.

As for fighting obesity, the schools have been doing something about exercise for a long time called gym class. Unfortunately, school districts seem to be a little too quick to cannibalize PE when they feel pressure to improve their academic performance. But, in general, the State has acknowledged the children's need for exercise. The other side of the coin - diet - is where they've been failing really badly the past few decades. Maybe one is more important than the other (I don't believe that, but for the sake of argument...), but why not attack on both fronts anyway?

As for the bill, I wonder if this article has given us a very accurate picture of what it's doing. School districts are run on the local level, so I imagine they only need to submit to these rules if they want in on the Federal School Lunch Program that subsidizes food for schoolchildren. Even before this legislation, schools opting in are held to federal nutritional guidelines. I think this law just makes these guidelines more rigorous and is not changing anything fundamental about the relationship between school districts and the federal government.

As for the bake sales, who cares? Run the bake sales after school hours. Instead of baking, sell some crappy trinkets. Ask parents to donate outright. Do a fundraising dinner. Do an auction. There are a million different formats to fundraising; you don't have to bake all the damn time.

 

What part(s) - specifically - do you think are too intrusive?

 

When you tell American children what they can and can't eat, the next step is telling Americans what they can and can't say.

 

So you're good with doing away with the legal drinking age and selling cigarettes to 10 year olds.

 

You have allowed your ideaology to preclude rational thought.

 

if mom wants to put five packs of dingdongs in junior's lunch so be it.

 

Fair enough. Remove all parental duties and responsibilities and give the children to the state to raise.

As I said, I agree with the goals of the law, but equating a brownie with alcohol and cigarettes is a little much.

 

They can eat whatever they want (and can convince their parents to allow). This is an issue about what the school can offer. If it's not acceptable to students, the kids can put their pizza and fried twinkies in a brown bag and carry it to school.

I could take your exact same argument and say the school has been dictating what students could eat by offering only low-quality, low-nutrition junk food that tasted like cardboard. Except that you're under no obligation to eat anything they're selling.

 

Unless I am mistaked Heart Disease and Diabetes which are related the diet
are far outpacing Cancer as the #1 Killer in America .. . .

Rocket River
I could be wrong

 

So the next step for the federal government, after requiring that public schools provide healthier meals to students, is that they will take away our freedom of speech? Thank God we have the Republicans to protect us from the government, otherwise we'd probably already all be slaves to Chairman Obama and his cronies.

 

As I have stated at least twice in this thread alone, I agree with the goals of fighting childhood obesity. I am not comfortable with the methodology of the federal approach.

There is more than one key to fighting obesity. In addition to food, exercise is crucial. Because of the "liabilities" we took away the playground and recess where children could shed excess energy. Exercise programs need to be re-instituted. Also, if we limit sugar and carbs, shouldn't we also limit video game playing -- which makes children and adults excessively sedentary -- to two hours per day? This could be done by mandating federal rules to put kill switches on all video games so that they only work two hours in any 24-hour period. An added benefit would be a reduction of exposure to extreme violence, which is very harmful to children's psyches.

 

Agree.

 

You sound like a wife during an argument. Making up imaginary scenarios having nothing to do with the issue at hand and having no basis in reality.

 

I thought you are a member of the tea party; not a republican?

 

What are the imaginary scenarios? Are you saying childhood obesity has only one cause -- eating badly? Really?

 

The post was so absurd, I didn't want to change a word of it.

 

sounds pretty accurate to me

 

Then you can reply to that post with a simple "Agree."