Jay, you live in an alternate reality. The reality of society is that not everyone is perfect parents - and you can't govern parenting. (and if you could, somehow you'd manage to object to that as well) The argument, "they shouldn't be parents" is not something that has any applicability whatsoever. Great. They shouldn't be parents. But they're going to be, because that's how it goes and there's nothing anyone can do about it. So the government must step in and do some "nannying" as you call it.

If you want money pumped into phys ed programs - why? Can't parents be trusted to get their kids enough exercise? Why should the government pay for it?

They've already implemented a similar policy for cigarette advertising. I don't see the difference. Why allow advertisers easy access to mold our children's minds. They can't make critical decisions for themselves. What are we supposed to do, cover their eyes everywhere we go, so they don't see marketing ploys directed to them for unhealthy foods that they associate with great toys? I don't think this applies to freedom of speech. It is more like discretion and our moral responsibility to reduce negative effects as much as possible for these young impressionable minds. Go for it, ban it.
Just my 2 cents.

___________________
Some people are like slinkies, they don't really have a purpose,
But they still bring a smile to your face, when you push them down the stairs.

When i was 5 my mom packed my lunch for me, i didn't have money wasn't much i could get my hands on unless i traded even then no one traded anything good. haha

quote:

Originally posted by Skipper And then at age 5, your kid goes off to school and can eat whatever the hell they get their hands on.

really? so kids have their own money and visit stores and restaurants alone at age 5? Wow talk about liberal parenting!

quote:

The reality is that if your child is out of sight, your control is limited. Kids will find a way to get what they want, particularly when it's something as accessible as junk food.

Obviously you will send a lunch to school with your kid. The rest of the time you have control over his food as well. And if you dont trust your kid with junk food, dont give him an allowance or only allow the spending of the allowance with adult supervision.

quote:

I have a 14 year old brother and have watched my parents do their absolute best, but he's a kid and he wants stuff and will get it when they're not around. Are you saying my parents are poor parents because they can't control his every decision?

14 is a different age from 5. At that point if you dont know better, you wont for a long time (until the first heart attack anyways)

quote:

Originally posted by Skipper The reality of society is that not everyone is perfect parents - and you can't govern parenting.

EXACTLY WHAT IVE BEEN SAYING ALL ALONG. You cant govern parenting. Some are good parents and some are bad. BUT ITS NOT UP TO THE GOVERNMENT TO BE EVERYONE'S PARENTS

quote:

(and if you could, somehow you'd manage to object to that as well)

I object to many forms of government intrusiveness as you may already know.

quote:

The argument, "they shouldn't be parents" is not something that has any applicability whatsoever.

Why not? Some people arent fit to be parents. Its an absolute fact.

quote:

Great. They shouldn't be parents. But they're going to be, because that's how it goes and there's nothing anyone can do about it.

Exactly my point. People by their very nature are victims of their own circumstance. No amount of government meddling can change this.

quote:

So the government must step in and do some "nannying" as you call it.

So if the government does indeed know better than us, why dont we just hand our kids over to them at birth so they can raise them as they see fit? As a parent i expect to have the ability to parent a child whether others agree with my style or not shouldnt be anyone else's concern unless its criminal. This kind of intrusiveness that we are seeing more and more of is disturbing at best.

quote:

If you want money pumped into phys ed programs - why? Can't parents be trusted to get their kids enough exercise? Why should the government pay for it?

Allowing someone a choice as opposed to taking someone's choice away are two entirely different matters altogether. As a parent, if you object to phys ed you can have your child pulled from it at any time. But taking away liberties means the state decides for you regardless of your opinion. Sadly, lefties hardly ever understand the difference between these two concepts.

quote:

Originally posted by Jungle Fever They've already implemented a similar policy for cigarette advertising. I don't see the difference. Why allow advertisers easy access to mold our children's minds. They can't make critical decisions for themselves. What are we supposed to do, cover their eyes everywhere we go, so they don't see marketing ploys directed to them for unhealthy foods that they associate with great toys? I don't think this applies to freedom of speech. It is more like discretion and our moral responsibility to reduce negative effects as much as possible for these young impressionable minds. Go for it, ban it. Just my 2 cents.

Because cigarettes are only allowed for people over 19. So marketing to kids SHOULD be illegal. However, we have taken it a step further and made it illegal to advertise to ADULTS which is fundamentally wrong. So whats next? Putting all junk food in locked cases and IDing everyone who wishes to buy a slushy? Seriously folks, get a grip!

quote:

If you want money pumped into phys ed programs - why? Can't parents be trusted to get their kids enough exercise? Why should the government pay for it?

I think it would be great to do that. I first moved to ontario from nova Scotia when i was 11 I had played minor soccer for years, the first year i was here tried to sign up for soccer here was gonna cost me well over 500$ to join a 13 and younger league the year before in NS 130$ my parents could not afford this so i didn't play soccer. Money into programs like physed and minor sports leagues does help.

quote:

Originally posted by Skipper So lemme get this straight, you're defending a corporation's RIGHT to advertise its unhealthy products to children of an age that can't make well considered decisions? Seriously? This isn't even a personal freedom we're talking about. It's ADVERTISING.

That's what you got parents for, not the government

___________________
Great Music Stations: 2HP.ca Radio & etn.fm

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Thank you. Everybody is so quick to blame diets, and particularly fast food, for obesity and poor health. You can eat a lot of that garbage with few ill effects if you just get some damn exercise. But that's like, you know, hard 'nshit.

There! Well Said

___________________
Great Music Stations: 2HP.ca Radio & etn.fm

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 Instead of banning things i think the liberals and NDP should come up with a list of allowable things. Im sure the list would be quite brief!

Makes you wonder, kind of reminds me of communist time eh ... lol not allowed to do pretty much anything

___________________
Great Music Stations: 2HP.ca Radio & etn.fm

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Thank you. Everybody is so quick to blame diets, and particularly fast food, for obesity and poor health. You can eat a lot of that garbage with few ill effects if you just get some damn exercise. But that's like, you know, hard 'nshit.

LOL what? Exercise is hardly enough on its own if you eat garbage all the time.