You know, I was half kidding the other day when I talked about “Happy Meal reform.” I know that whenever liberals talk about running our lives that they're being serious but I was sure no one else on the county board would take this seriously. I guess I should never underestimate megalomania. Here's what has happened; Santa Clara, CA, has officially banned toys and other promotions that come with high-calorie children's meals.
This is one of those defining issues that distinguishes the right from the left. Who has the final word about our personal liberties? It seems that the liberals think it's the government that does. Do I think fast food is usually unhealthy? Yes. Do I think people can become overweight from eating burgers and fries? Yes. But if I want to eat burgers and fries I will do it and if I want to buy my kids burgers and fries I will do it. On the other hand, if I don't want my kids eating burgers and fries I will tell them, “no.” I can decide what's best for my own kids without help from big brother.
What confounds me the post is understanding one what grounds liberals feel justified in micromanaging our lives. In the case of the toy ban, there are a few arguments I've heard in support of the ban. Primarily, toys in meals “induces” kids to eat unhealthy food which can lead to child obesity. Contingent upon this same point is the idea that the toy promotions make it harder for parents to say no when their kids ask for the toys. These may both be true but I still fail to see how that justifies government intervention.
If this ban is allowed to stand, think of the precedent it will set. If we allow the government to ban toys from fast food meals, then why couldn't the government also ban toys from Cracker Jacks boxes? They could also ban toys from cereal boxes. They could even ban cartoon characters from cereal boxes. Imagine the argument that the Trix Rabbit makes kids want to eat sugary cereal. What's the difference? They could ban the cartoon commercials from TY because it induces kids to want to eat sugary cereal which could lead to obesity. The cartoon character also makes it harder for parents to say, “no.”
Why stop at child obesity? Just ban all advertising of anything that's not healthy. Or even better, just ban the sugary cereal. Ban candy bars, cup cakes, and soft drinks while you're at it and throw in a ban on things like bacon and eggs for good measure. I know that New York is already trying to ban the use of salt in restaurants because it's unhealthy. If we say that the government is allowed to run our lives in one area, then we open the door for the government to run our lives in any area.
Another thought struck me too is the hypocrisy of liberals. Haven't we, as concerned parents, asked for cleaner TV programs? Haven't we wanted more family friendly movies and music albums? I believe Desperate Housewives being broadcast into my home is more detrimental to my kids than happy meal toys but in that case liberals say it's up to me to turn off the TV. Indeed I would have to turn off the TV because this stuff is on nearly every network. Why do liberals trust me to monitor my kids' TV viewing 24/7 but don't trust me to say no to cheeseburgers? If they really want to help, do something about the filth being broadcast into my home and not the greasy food I have to take my kids to a restaurant to eat.
I can't say I always have made the best decisions as a parent but I know that I – and not the government – have the best intentions for my own children. The Bible says we are to raise our children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord (Ephesians 6:4). Raising our children is clearly the God ordain responsibility of the parent. Thank you, Caesar, for offering to help but I think I can handle it without you.
No comments:
Post a Comment