• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Republicans block child nutrition bill

Boo Radley said:
I'm more a feed the hungry kind of guy:

Deut. 15:7. If there is a poor man among you, one of your brothers, in any of the towns of the land which the LORD your God is giving you, you shall not harden your heart, nor close your hand to your poor brother; but you shall freely open your hand to him, and generously lend him sufficient for his need in whatever he lacks.

Lev. 19:19ff. Now when you reap the harvest of your land, you shall not reap to the very corners of your field, neither shall you gather the gleanings of your harvest. Nor shall you glean your vineyard, nor shall you gather the fallen fruit of your vineyard; you shall leave them for the needy and for the stranger. I am the LORD your God.

Prov. 19:17. He who is gracious to a poor man lends to the LORD, and He will repay him for his good deed.
Click to expand...
If it said this, you might have a point:

"He who commands through authority to confiscate the goods of others under threat of imprisonment and graciously gives a share to a poor man whilst using the rest for personal gain lends to the LORD"
 
j-mac said:
Not anymore it isn't....When my son was in HS I can't remember him ever, or at least often having homework.

j-mac
Click to expand...



You shouldn have complained. Not only that, everyone should ahve demanded more.
 
Taylor said:
If it said this, you might have a point:

"He who commands through authority to confiscate the goods of others under threat of imprisonment and graciously gives a share to a poor man whilst using the rest for personal gain lends to the LORD"
Click to expand...

Funny, but no. The point I was making is in what I quoted. :coffeepap
 
OscarB63 said:
2 thessalonians 3:10 one of my favorite verses of all time.
Click to expand...

They must have left out that end bit "And his children shall starve as well."
 
Boo Radley said:
You shouldn have complained. Not only that, everyone should ahve demanded more.
Click to expand...


We worked very closely with our schools. Problem is that the liberal dunderhead administrations there are about as open to complaint as liberals as a whole....

j-mac
 
BDBoop said:
They must have left out that end bit "And his children shall starve as well."
Click to expand...

sorry, I don't/didn't expect anyone else to feed my children..why should I be forced to feed his?

by continuing to feed them for him all we do is make the situation worse. each of them will grow up to have more children for my children to have to feed. with each passing generation there will be more and more "poor" children to feed and less and less productive citizens to feed them.

what, pray tell, is going to happen when the system collpases? better his children starve today than his, mine and our grandchildren starve tomorrow.
 
Boo Radley said:
As I've told j, we are the government. It's just one tool we can use. BTW, I am a Christian. And I have sat in on Christain meeting were conservative Christians have complained that they shouldn't have to give so much to the poor.

And why won't it see the lunch tray. Explain.
Click to expand...

Did you see all the "extras" in the bill? Why the need?

The government already dipped into social security time and time again until it was gone. Are you actually putting forth the idea that the government isn't grotesquely wasteful with our money?
 
OscarB63 said:
sorry, I don't/didn't expect anyone else to feed my children..why should I be forced to feed his?

by continuing to feed them for him all we do is make the situation worse. each of them will grow up to have more children for my children to have to feed. with each passing generation there will be more and more "poor" children to feed and less and less productive citizens to feed them.

what, pray tell, is going to happen when the system collpases? better his children starve today than his, mine and our grandchildren starve tomorrow.
Click to expand...

Actually by all accounts, be more worried about feeding and taking care of old people, that's the biggest concern, people are having less babies in the developed world. Your assessment is off a little.

For the first time in human history, especially in Japan, older people will outnumber younger ones.
 
Jetboogieman said:
Actually by all accounts, be more worried about feeding and taking care of old people, that's the biggest concern, people are having less babies in the developed world. Your assessment is off a little.

For the first time in human history, especially in Japan, older people will outnumber younger ones.
Click to expand...

important part bolded


been to many housing projects and/or trailer parks lately?
 
Boo Radley said:
As kids? Provided for themselves?
Click to expand...

certainly helped with family stuff; but as far as feeding and housing myself no, no one is arguing that they should. why do lefties always assume that if you don't want the Federal Government doing it, you obviously don't want it done?
 
Last edited:
BDBoop said:
Republicans block child nutrition bill - Yahoo! News


:(
Click to expand...

At first I was confused - because I KNOW that all children eat lunch at school - and many eat breakfast. If their parents qualify they are on a free or reduced program.

So this line suggests that, right now, children are going to school - but not eating lunch at all.
the $4.5 billion bill, which would give more needy children the opportunity to eat free lunches at school
Click to expand...

But that's not the case. The real issue of the bill is this:
The bill would provide money to serve more than 20 million additional after-school meals annually to children in all 50 states. Many of those children now only receive after-school snacks. It would also increase the number of children eligible for school meals programs by at least 115,000, using Medicaid and census data to identify them.
Click to expand...

AFTER school should not be a SCHOOL concern at all.

There's no reason why schools should be turned into a soup-kitchen in AFTER SCHOOL hours.

The purpose of the school cafeteria is to provide food to children DURING school hours - and since many buses pick kids up at the crack of dawn it makes sense that it would include breakfast, as well. . . but they should draw the line of this issue at 'dinner'

That part of a child's day, diet and life should be purely in the governance of the parents . . .and if they qualify for assistance - then they should be able to get said funds through their already existing welfare / tanf or whatever it might be.
 
Last edited:
Boo Radley said:
I don't really know how to respond to that nonsense. I really don't. It is not such a bad thing to help were we can. And government is a perfectly legitimate tool to use to that. It is a far better use of the tax dollar than helping corroprations or fighting needless wars IMHO.
Click to expand...

No, government is not a legitimate tool to help others. The government is not being kind and generous by taking other peoples money and giving it to a third party, usually because of reelection campaigns.

People can help other people best when it is direct and from the heart, and given the chance people will do that. Charity is a good thing but enforced charity, which is what this "tax the rich" class warfare is all about, is not a good thing. It separates people from each other, breaks down communities, and creates resentments. There is evidence of that everywhere.
 
OscarB63 said:
important part bolded


been to many housing projects and/or trailer parks lately?
Click to expand...

Sadly - only about 2/3 of our nation is 'developed' in the sense that we consider it.

They tried to solve some of this problem with efforts like 'the projects' like Cabrini Green.
And with other efforts like welfare and such benefits.

Nothing's really working out well to *end* the problem.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
ke 'the projects' like Cabrini Green.
And with other efforts like welfare and such benefits.

Nothing's really working out well to *end* the problem.
Click to expand...

And the problem will never end when people become dependent on government rather than becoming self reliant.

We have family and friends to help us in time of need, of unexpected and unforeseen problems, as well as the kindness of strangers. We lose our humanity if we turn our backs on those in need and tell the government to look after those having difficult times. We are shirking our own personal responsibilities by not helping others ourselves.
 
Deuce said:
If there really were a "liberal mainstream media," the fact that the GOP does this sort of thing all the time would me more prevalent in the narrative.
Click to expand...

You mean, kids are going to go hungry at school, because the Republicans blocked this bill?

Let me guess...Republicans hate kids? Is that it?
 
Boo Radley said:
The point is an easy one. People on food stamps have to either brown bag, or come up with money for the hot meal. If they're on food stamps, they are unlikely to able to spring the the cost of the hot meal.
Click to expand...

How do we know parents are properly cleaning the kids butts? What if they can't spring for just the right kind of baby wipes? What if they are forced to use a wash cloth? Is that going to be the government's job too in your world? I mean, that could lead to diaper rash and that could get infected and that could drive up healthcare costs. Yes! now that I think of it, government should be in charge of changing dirty diapers! Parents are too stupid to be trusted.
 
Barbbtx said:
How do we know parents are properly cleaning the kids butts? What if they can't spring for just the right kind of baby wipes? What if they are forced to use a wash cloth? Is that going to be the government's job too in your world? I mean, that could lead to diaper rash and that could get infected and that could drive up healthcare costs. Yes! now that I think of it, government should be in charge of changing dirty diapers! Parents are too stupid to be trusted.
Click to expand...

And the slippery slope strawman reveals itself...
 
Boo Radley said:
The point is an easy one. People on food stamps have to either brown bag, or come up with money for the hot meal. If they're on food stamps, they are unlikely to able to spring the the cost of the hot meal.
Click to expand...

I bet they don't want for cigarettes, or beer on Friday night.
 
j-mac said:
Do you think that 501(c) orgs. should be getting this money?

j-mac
Click to expand...

Boo Radley said:
What would be the objection? Is there something inherently wrong with nonprofit organizations?
Click to expand...

j-mac said:
I am pretty sure that Media Matters doesn't have the slightest care about school nutrition beyond how they can get at that money.


j-mac
Click to expand...

j-mac,

If that's the best you can come up with in reply to his question, your intellect and credibility - not to mention your sense of compassion - are in trouble. The latter, of course, is what frustrates me about the so-called devout Conservatives. You say let the poor seek the charity of others, i.e., local churchs, community groups, corporations, yet here the government is setting aside grant funding specifically for non-profit charitable organizations to provide for the poor and you're upset about it? Mind you, a large portion of funding for non-profits come from people like you and me. So, what's the problem with charities doing what folks like you say they are suppose to be doing?

For a list of 501(c) non-profit organizations, click here, then go to "Types". Non-profit organizations under 501(d) structure are reserved primarilty for religious organizations, i.e., churches, religious associations, etc.

To the rest of the arguments against S.3307, perhaps folks should read this article, "No Lunch Left Behind" (which originally appeared in the NYTimes) before responding further and then review the bill. I think you'd be surprised at the changes the bill proposes in public school nutrition programs compared to how things currently stand.

"Seak first to understand, then be understood." - Stephen A. Covey
 
Objective Voice said:
j-mac,

If that's the best you can come up with in reply to his question, your intellect and credibility - not to mention your sense of compassion - are in trouble. The latter, of course, is what frustrates me about the so-called devout Conservatives. You say let the poor seek the charity of others, i.e., local churchs, community groups, corporations, yet here the government is setting aside grant funding specifically for non-profit charitable organizations to provide for the poor and you're upset about it?
Click to expand...

If everything you say here is 100% accurate, it's not inconsistent.
 
cpwill said:
as the man said; he who will not work, let him not eat.
Click to expand...

If you want to look like a clown keep on quoting Bible verses :roll:

2 Kings 2:23-24 NKJV
Then he went up from there to Bethel; and as he was going up the road, some youths came from the city and mocked him, and said to him, “Go up, you baldhead! Go up, you baldhead!” So he turned around and looked at them, and pronounced a curse on them in the name of the LORD. And two female bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the youths.
 
liblady said:
then why are the republcans insisting that obama cut unemployment benefits if he want to raise taxes on the wealthy? THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THE GOP IS ABOUT.
Click to expand...

Why are the dems refusing to pay for the unempoyment benefits from the stimulous? Whay do the Dems want to RAISE taxes is this economy?
 
This board seems to have more than its fair share of arrogant, self-centered people per capita. Not aimed at anyone in particular. Well - okay. Maybe aimed at those who are fine with seeing children go hungry to teach them some lesson I myself can't comprehend.
 
Last edited:
Boo Radley said:
Didn't say anything about making them dependent. I said something about giving some kids a regular meal.
Click to expand...

The parents will become dependent on welfare, foodstamps, free lunches. When enough people become addicted to those things and they get cut off someday, there will be rioting in the streets. This country needs jobs so people can get off the government dole.
Look at how things are now? I never thought I'd see the day when people were able to collect unemployment for 2 yrs! and then cry because they may not get them extended longer. Since when did it become the government's job to provide a paycheck to people because they lost their job. 26 wks should be the max. Now we are going to provide 3 meals a day all year long. Come on guys? Is this the America you want for yourself and your kids?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom