Catholiccontriversy on school mandated lunches

Mandatory school lunches. Can this be a good idea?

Hello Catholiccontriversy here with my thoughts on these mandatory "healthy" school lunches I've been hearing about. Chances are there's more to these laws that what I keep hearing about, but here's the gist; some elementary schools are adopting this policy of healthy school lunches. Some subsidize kids from home lunch if they aren't healthy enough and others are outright banning home lunches for only school lunches.

This irks me for a couple of reasons. One being that, maybe it's changed since I was in elementary school, but I don't recall the school lunches being all that healthy in comparison to home lunches. I remember nachos, Domino's pizza, pizza bagel, and others I don't remember. I don't remember them because I never had them. I'll get to that later, but back to health. Now, to say that mass produced pizza bagel is healthier than lunchables may be true, but I can't imagine by much. Sure they always had fruit, but I don't recall many people having lots of those. Some kids might bring more healthy lunches but apparently that doesn't matter.

Now this is the part that really makes me thankful that this wasn't a thing at my school when I was there. I never ate hot lunch because I never liked what they had. I used to get Domino's pizza for about half one year, but this was back when Domino's sucked and I was used to hungry Howie's or jets, much better pizza. I think I got pizza bagel once and hated it. I much more preferred either peanut butter or lunchables. And if I was given the choice of eat something I don't like or starve, I'd choose starve. No kidding. My pallet has increased since then, but to this day given the choice of eat something I don't like or starve I will still choose starve. It's not that big a deal now because I have some body fat to feed off of, but that wasn't the case when I was a kid. I was a really skinny kid, so any not eating would probably be very bad. In fact a couple of times I had to go home because I didn't have enough to eat, and that was a packed lunch. I can imagine there being some court cases named after me if this were the case when I was in elementary school.

My final point just comes down to who's ultimately responsible. If I was a parent, I wouldn't want the school district saying "this is what your child must eat." Like snowflakes, no 2 kids are exactly alike, and some more different than others. While one may happily eat school lunch, others won't. I don't only believe that it should ultimately be the parents responsibility on what there kids eat, I feel it is ultimately the parent's responsibility. If I had me for a son, I wouldn't stand for mandatory school lunches, because I know I wouldn't eat if I didn't like it. Kids are humans, not animals. Humans have will power, and part of that is not eating if one chooses not to. I don't buy into "oh they'll eat if they're really hungry," because I know that's a lie from experience. I can recall events when I would miss a meal because I didn't like what was being served. I lived with the hunger, but that was also a rare event, like if we went to a party and what was served was something I didn't like. Times like that were few and far between, so it was never an issue. If it was school though, that would be a problem. I would not stand for it. I would be beating down the school boards door with my lawyer right next to me. If a parent chooses to have their kid eat school lunch, that's their choice. The school doesn't have the right to say that I'm wrong.

I guess I can see where the idea comes from, but like communism, it's only good on paper, but in practice, it doesn't work. Well this has been catholiccontriversy signing off and may God bless you.