Ok, I’m shocked. Not about the institution, but about this parent who is upset over her child’s lunch.
I was a little incredulous about this statement from the parent:
“I can go pay a dollar for a lunchabe and get more food in it,” added Kaytlin’s father Vince Holton. “Schools are responsible for children while they’re at school, they’re responsible for feeding the children.”
Ahhh, nope. Lunchables don’t cost just a dollar, and neither does this meal, even though that’s all she expects to have to pay for it. The rest will come from the thousands of people paying taxes who don’t even have a child in that building. But nevermind all that, the school is not responsible for her child. She is! And it’s irresponsible of her to send her to this schoolhouse even if they fed him a steak dinner every day.
Yesterday we talked about the schoolhouse dumping out lunches becaue the students didn’t have the money to pay for them. Here we have a parent who cares enough about his children to send them to school with a lunch in hand and he gets a nasty note from big brother about his choice of food:
The note reads: ”The cafeteria reported to me that Alia’s lunch today included four chocolate bars, a bag of marshmallows, Ritz crackers and a pickle. Please see that she packs a proper lunch tomorrow.”
I’m not going to be one of those horribly judgemental people that the institution taught me not to be and judge this poor parent on his choice of lunch for his children, but I will say I like his response:
The note ended with “Parent signature requested,” and the Pucketts wrote back “Request declined.”
Puckett was incensed at the implication he was failing to keep his daughter healthy. “Unfortunately, the letter didn’t have what she had, correctly. She had four pieces of ham, a whole protein meat, she also had some pickles, which we admittedly cheat on pickles every once and awhile as a vegetable, because some fights just aren’t worth having,” Puckett told Heartland Connection.
If you’re going to send your child to the institution, it will behoove you to realize that the institution sees the child’s mind as theirs, and your child’s physical responsibility as yours.
This is about sweets. But it’s creepy all the same as we continue our march toward slavery. The day is sure to come when a parent won’t be allowed to “decline”, and it won’t be about sweets either. If history is any indication of the future, it might well be a note warning another Mr. Pucket that he is not allowed to criticize his superiors in the god-state.
Teach your children liberty. The state will teach them slavery.
If you commit some horrible crime, the government will put you into an institution that is, in my opinion, much like the one that you send your child to for an education. But there is a big difference. The poor soul who is in the penitentiary doesn’t have to worry about do-gooders playing around with his meals for health purposes, and he doesn’t have to worry about whether or not someone has paid for them.
A friend posted this article from his local paper and I found it to be fascinating. It shows just one of the conundrums the education institution finds itself in. It seems that when it comes to feeding time some of the students don’t have the money to pay for their meals. And, just like the children’s institutional brothers and sisters down the street in the prison house, the children have no means of earning money to pay for them either. But there is something that the institution is able to pay for without a problem, early retirements for its unionized employees with pay and benefits till they die. But we won’t talk about that because we’re supposed to be moved by grief for these poor children so that we give the nod for more taxes and cash for the institution so that the teachers can perhaps retire even earlier with better benifits, and the many administrators can get those overdue raises.
But what is really going on here? Parents know that the government is going to take care of their children. So they’re using their children as leverage for free lunches. The institution at the same time responds the same as it does about everything. Pull the institution’s string and it sings the same old thing; “We need more money”. It will never have enough… ever. We know that. It’s government. But if these children did go hungry for the day, they wouldn’t be the first to do so. There have been millions before them, and there is a good chance that, given the institution’s goals for their nation, hunger may well be a constant companion for them when they grow up. Of course, the article points to the studies that show children will not benefit from the super-duper, excellent education if they miss that meal. But they define education differently than I do. Missing meals can build character, which is just as much a part of education as any of the social justice, marriage equality, sex, sex, sex, dribble that the institution pushes constantly. There was a time when the character trait of self-respect would carry the day for a young one, and his parents too. Accepting charity simply would not do. But these are the children of a generation that not only accepts charity, they expect it, and even demand it.
I may be so broke some day that my children may have to miss a meal. But we will miss that meal with full hearts, and respect for god’s providence. We won’t be standing in a line being humiliated by the institution as they pour perfectly good food in a trash can while our dining peers watch. At least I can say that it won’t happen while I’m a free man, which may not be much longer if the institution continues in its current successes.
Here’s the story. What a mess: