Michelle Obama's "food police" in North Carolina send 4 year old girl back home from pre-kindergarten school because they declared that the lunch her mommy prepared for her didn't meet their nutritional standards. Yay or nay?
tncdel
2012/02/20 02:20:04
|
|
|||||
|
2 votes
|
|
5% | |||
|
38 votes
|
|
95% | |||
See report here:
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/n-c-food-inspector-sends-girl...
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/n-c-food-inspector-sends-girl...
Michelle Obama has indeed tried to make sure that public schools cafeterias offer healthier choices for kids who do not bring their own lunches. This absurd instance has nothing to do with that.
about this incident. I think the Government is too involved with
American's private lives. There was nothing wrong with the lunch
and the school has no business telling children what they can or
can't eat or drink. A lot of children (adults too) have severe food
allergies and some foods can kill them. Milk is at the top of the
list of food and drink allergies, yet the Government insists we
should drink milk every day & is part of a healthy diet.
You also incorrectly stated that the girl was sent home. The headline you cite says the girl's *lunch* was sent home - but I believe they were speaking metaphorically.
None of that changes the fact that this is an illegal and unconstitutional violation of the right to privacy, and the right to be secure in your person, and constitutes and illegal and unconstitutional search.
Here is the document from the North Carolina state government that describes the program:
http://ncchildcare.dhhs.state...
This text from page 4-1 demonstrates that the stories of unwarranted inspection of lunches, and mandated ordering of food for four year olds, are true:
D. Nutrition
Sites must provide breakfast and/or snacks and lunch meeting USDA requirements
during the regular school day. The partial/full cost of meals may be charged when
families do not qualify for free/reduced price meals.
When children bring their own food for meals and snacks to the center, if the food
does not meet the specified nutritional requirements, the cente...
You also incorrectly stated that the girl was sent home. The headline you cite says the girl's *lunch* was sent home - but I believe they were speaking metaphorically.
None of that changes the fact that this is an illegal and unconstitutional violation of the right to privacy, and the right to be secure in your person, and constitutes and illegal and unconstitutional search.
Here is the document from the North Carolina state government that describes the program:
http://ncchildcare.dhhs.state...
This text from page 4-1 demonstrates that the stories of unwarranted inspection of lunches, and mandated ordering of food for four year olds, are true:
D. Nutrition
Sites must provide breakfast and/or snacks and lunch meeting USDA requirements
during the regular school day. The partial/full cost of meals may be charged when
families do not qualify for free/reduced price meals.
When children bring their own food for meals and snacks to the center, if the food
does not meet the specified nutritional requirements, the center must provide
additional food necessary to meet those requirements.
hard evidence you have accumulated to date. We'll be waiting anxiously for you to prove
what a sleuth you are. Answwer quickly before some of the wingnuts harm themselves in
suspense of your findings.