werepossum
Elite Member
- Jul 10, 2006
- 29,873
- 463
- 126
To many (perhaps most) Americans, the concept that parents do not know how to feed their children and that therefore government needs to step in is certainly every bit as far out, insane and stupid as being a birther. There are legitimate questions about Obama's birth, even if I personally find them unpersuasive and impractical. There is NO legitimacy to the view that parents are not qualified to feed their own children on school grounds, but are otherwise qualified to raise them.No, you really aren't being reasonable. You don't have to agree with my views on state/child interaction to hold reasonable views. It is not a reasonable depiction of liberal thought on state/child interaction to say that they believe them to be state property.
If you believe that there is an action which liberals have taken that show that they believe children to be state property, please list it here. Regulating the food being brought into schools for one meal out of the day will not be sufficient, unfortunately. (or even on the same planet as sufficient)
To be clear: the belief that liberals think the state owns people is every bit as insane and stupid as being a birther. I mean that.
The concepts that government owns the product of your labor, can and should control what your child eats to the point of preventing you from feeding that child, can take your property and transfer it to another for its own benefit via higher taxes - these concepts may somehow fundamentally differ from
