Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"So, you guys want to place limits"? It is not "you guys", the constitution dictates that. This thread has nothing to do with private industry or enterprise.
Sorry Kitty, I'm just as thick as an old barn door. Where does the Constitution say Monsanto can't undertake research?
In the original post you quoted (that I was replying to) where was "redistribution of wealth" mentioned or looking in a child's lunch box?
Where in the constitution does it give anyone the right to enter another's home and "see" what they possess? It does not. You are either playing word games or not comprehending/following the thread not sure which.
I may have taken the concept of his post a bit too literally as far as entering their homes, however the concept that recipients of that assistance (which is paid for by the said re distribution of wealth.) should have to demonstrate that they are deserving of it is a sound concept.
It is the same concept that the government uses to hold schools that accept Federal funding to minimum nutritional standards for the food they provide and prepare with those funds.
However, the concept falls flat at my child's lunch box because the contents are not provided with those funds... they are provided by me.
Sorry Kitty, I'm just as thick as an old barn door. Where does the Constitution say Monsanto can't undertake research?
I think the problem is that large corporations like Monsanto end up paying the government to make laws and regulations that allow them to do more unregulated things and make more money, all at the expense of the uneducated sheeple.
Do you really think the masses would allow Monsanto to go out of business? They are too concerned about saving $.25 on taco shells at Wal Mart. The answer is always more GMO.
Sorry Kitty, I'm just as thick as an old barn door. Where does the Constitution say Monsanto can't undertake research?
Research and then implementing something that endangers our food supply is another. But this is taking this thread way OT, there are some threads elsewhere on CD about monsanto with many good resources to learn how disgusting this company is.
I think the problem is that large corporations like Monsanto end up paying the government to make laws and regulations that allow them to do more unregulated things and make more money, all at the expense of the uneducated sheeple.
Do you really think the masses would allow Monsanto to go out of business? They are too concerned about saving $.25 on taco shells at Wal Mart. The answer is always more GMO.
Agree. And we are back once again to... Get the money and corporate america and the banksters out of politics.
"A preschooler at West Hoke Elementary School ate three chicken nuggets for lunch Jan. 30 because a state employee told her the lunch her mother packed was not nutritious.
The girl's turkey and cheese sandwich, banana, potato chips, and apple juice did not meet U.S. Department of Agriculture guidelines, according to the interpretation of the agent who was inspecting all lunch boxes in her More at Four classroom that day."
Not that I agree with all of what happened and this is changing the subject slightly...but what i find interesting is on one end of the spectrum people complain that they shouldn't be inspecting lunches, or having any control over this process...but on the other hand people complain that school lunches are part of the obesity problem in america...wonder if its the same people, or rather, you can't make anyone happy one way or the other.
I whole heartedly agree with the part about being a state issue.
However, the content's of my child's lunch box are not paid for by Federal dollars given to the school. They are paid for by money that I earn that has already been taxed....several times.
Right there with ya . . . I find the whole thing outrageous. Now, I also understand that any school receiving subsidies for school lunches can expect inspections - that is part of the program. But for that to somehow infer the right to snoop in other kids' lunchboxes (who are not getting free lunches) is just weird. If parents are sending crappy food to school for their kids to eat . . . then that is b/n that parent and the child. I am sorry - this is simply not anyone else's business.
I shudder to think what would have been said to my parents' generation. They took their own lunch to school, wh/ typically consisted of leftover biscuits and a piece of fatback. Or my mom and her siblings said - somedays, it was cornbread and butter in the middle. The teachers would sometimes bring in beans in a pot, warm it on the wood stove, and then share w/ the kids. That is the closest they came to a hot meal.
And they all survived. My mother had 11 siblings and she is the youngest, at 82. Her siblings range into their 90s. The ones who have died were 87 at the youngest. I guess my g/parents would have been under investigation for child abuse if today's standards were applied to what they ate in the 30s.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
