All this phony caring about children. Who really gives a damn ? 50 million aborted leads me to doubt most don't care at all. Probably just a selfish motive at best not wanting to pay for the medical consequences
Pensacola Discussion Forum
Go to page : 1, 2, 3
boards of FL wrote:Correct. So is that a valid explanation then? "Hmm. That was the parents decision". That is the question here. The kid isn't of the mental capacity to decide to eat McDonald's or not. Should these kids be afforded any protection by society from irresponsible parents? At what point do you cross the line from "parental decision" to "illegal"?Joanimaroni wrote:Boards in order to prevent obesity in the picture you posted....you need to realize it was not McDonald's that caused the situation......100% of the blame lies with the irresponsible parent.
This is true, since sugar (fructose) is highly toxic to the human body. It is the main cause of heart disease, obesity, diabetes, and hypertension in people. In that photo of that kid, it shows a drink cup in front of him. THAT may be the true reason for this kid's obesity, instead of the burgers.Nekochan wrote:That is only your opinion that it's not fit for human consumption. If your thinking was followed, all sweets and snacks would be banned.boards of FL wrote:We didn't know then what we know now; hence this thread. Now that we know that McDonald's uses meat that is not fit for human consumption, and basically puts it through an ammonia wash and re-purposes it so that it just meets minimum standards to be consumed by human beings...now that we know this, shouldn't we take the next logical step and say only adults can consume this crap? At the very least, shouldn't we prohibit the marketing of this waste to children via happy meals?Joanimaroni wrote: Didn't you say your parents bought you Happy Meals? Were there standards that low?
Last edited by ZVUGKTUBM on 8/13/2013, 4:31 pm; edited 1 time in total
gulfbeachbandit wrote:When mcdonalds happy meals are outlawed, only outlaws will have mcdonalds happy meals.
"From my cold dead hands". Charlton Heston.
Last edited by Damaged Eagle on 8/15/2013, 7:30 pm; edited 1 time in total
It's called a worthless parent. Giving an infant any alcohol is extremely dangerous and illegal. Yes, it is abuse. Breastfeeding mother's, if they consume alcohol are told to pump and dump.....and give the infant their stored (previously frozen)breast milk.Sal wrote:Joanimaroni wrote:
Do you think it is ok? Should the government ban bourbon?
The boy was a contemporary of mine, so this happened four decades ago.
My mother told me about it.
At the time I think she thought it was irresponsible parenting.
With studies over the past four decades showing the adverse effects of alcohol on the developing brain, today I feel certain it would be considered child abuse.
There you go.Joanimaroni wrote:It's called a worthless parent. Giving an infant any alcohol is extremely dangerous and illegal. Yes, it is abuse. Breastfeeding mother's, if they consume alcohol are told to pump and dump.....and give the infant their stored (previously frozen)breast milk.Sal wrote:Joanimaroni wrote:
Do you think it is ok? Should the government ban bourbon?
The boy was a contemporary of mine, so this happened four decades ago.
My mother told me about it.
At the time I think she thought it was irresponsible parenting.
With studies over the past four decades showing the adverse effects of alcohol on the developing brain, today I feel certain it would be considered child abuse.
The infants body absorbs alcohol much faster than adults. One ounce of alcohol could be fatal to an infant.
There you go? Not hardly.Sal wrote:There you go.Joanimaroni wrote:It's called a worthless parent. Giving an infant any alcohol is extremely dangerous and illegal. Yes, it is abuse. Breastfeeding mother's, if they consume alcohol are told to pump and dump.....and give the infant their stored (previously frozen)breast milk.Sal wrote:Joanimaroni wrote:
Do you think it is ok? Should the government ban bourbon?
The boy was a contemporary of mine, so this happened four decades ago.
My mother told me about it.
At the time I think she thought it was irresponsible parenting.
With studies over the past four decades showing the adverse effects of alcohol on the developing brain, today I feel certain it would be considered child abuse.
The infants body absorbs alcohol much faster than adults. One ounce of alcohol could be fatal to an infant.
Parents should have the prerogative to feed kids poison.
boards of FL wrote:Correct. So is that a valid explanation then? "Hmm. That was the parents decision". That is the question here. The kid isn't of the mental capacity to decide to eat McDonald's or not. Should these kids be afforded any protection by society from irresponsible parents? At what point do you cross the line from "parental decision" to "illegal"?Joanimaroni wrote:Boards in order to prevent obesity in the picture you posted....you need to realize it was not McDonald's that caused the situation......100% of the blame lies with the irresponsible parent.
Nekochan wrote:The kid in that photo (the photo was posted before when we were discussing this issue) does NOT have a happy meal in front of him. That is a large drink and large fries.
I don't think I'm missing the point. You want to somehow restrict or ban McDonald's for kids. What about all the other restaurants that serve burgers and fries and milkshakes, etc? What about parents who shop poorly in the supermarket and buy carts full of junk food to take home for their kids? Do you want to go into these families' homes and dictate what they can buy at the grocery store and eat?boards of FL wrote:You two are missing the point, and I don't think I am capable of explaining it any better.
Well just spit it out instead of speaking in circles waiting for us to guess what answer you are looking for.boards of FL wrote:You two are missing the point, and I don't think I am capable of explaining it any better.
Nekochan wrote:I don't think I'm missing the point. You want to somehow restrict or ban McDonald's for kids. What about all the other restaurants that serve burgers and fries and milkshakes, etc? What about parents who shop poorly in the supermarket and buy carts full of junk food to take home for their kids? Do you want to go into these families' homes and dictate what they can buy at the grocery store and eat?boards of FL wrote:You two are missing the point, and I don't think I am capable of explaining it any better.
I've said it several times. If someone isn't of the mental capacity to grasp the long term, negative consequences of consuming a product, there should be a law that prohibits their consumption of said product.Joanimaroni wrote:Well just spit it out instead of speaking in circles waiting for us to guess what answer you are looking for.boards of FL wrote:You two are missing the point, and I don't think I am capable of explaining it any better.
You want the government to stifle and control free enterprise, operating within USDA guidelines, because of negligent parents....Parents that refuse to heed warnings regarding unhealthy aspects of a steady diet of fast food is not McDonald's fault.
If you think beating a child is the same as taking him to McDonald's for a Happy Meal, then you and I will never see eye to eye.boards of FL wrote:True. And what about parents that physically beat their children? There really isn't anything we can do to stop that either, so what sense is there to make that illegal?Nekochan wrote:I don't think I'm missing the point. You want to somehow restrict or ban McDonald's for kids. What about all the other restaurants that serve burgers and fries and milkshakes, etc? What about parents who shop poorly in the supermarket and buy carts full of junk food to take home for their kids? Do you want to go into these families' homes and dictate what they can buy at the grocery store and eat?boards of FL wrote:You two are missing the point, and I don't think I am capable of explaining it any better.
Plus, it's not as if we already have a working model in place for other products that we could follow. No consumption of any product has ever been prohibited for minors before, so we would be breaking into uncharted territory here.
You're right. There are simply too many roadblocks to deal with. The best we can do is basically to allow large, multinational corporations to re-purpose dog food with ammonia and then market it to our children with toys and fancy lunch boxes, and then just deal with the childhood obesity epidemic in the hospitals when costly, long term care that was easily preventable with a common sense regulation will be needed. It is simply a necessary evil.
Think I'll have a double fat burger with extra sauce for lunch today!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_slimeNekochan wrote:If you think that the US food supply is unsafe and that food companies/restaurants practice unsafe processing methods and that they market dog food to children, then you need to take up your complaint with the USDA and the FDA.
Pink slime is the common name for a controversial beef product. The name used in the meat industry is lean finely textured beef (LFTB)[3] and boneless lean beef trimmings (BLBT).[4] It is also known by the dysphemistic slang term soylent pink.[5][6][7][8] Pink slime is a processed beef product that was originally used in pet food and cooking oil and later approved for public consumption.[9] In 2001, The United States approved the product for limited human consumption and it was used as a food additive to ground beef and beef-based processed meats as a filler at a ratio of usually no more than 25 percent of any product. The production process uses heat in centrifuges to separate the fat from the meat in beef trimmings.[10] The resulting product is exposed to ammonia gas or citric acid to kill bacteria.[10][11]
Exactly. Restaurants must comply with standards set by the government. McDonald's operates well within the requirements.Nekochan wrote:If you think beating a child is the same as taking him to McDonald's for a Happy Meal, then you and I will never see eye to eye.boards of FL wrote:True. And what about parents that physically beat their children? There really isn't anything we can do to stop that either, so what sense is there to make that illegal?Nekochan wrote:I don't think I'm missing the point. You want to somehow restrict or ban McDonald's for kids. What about all the other restaurants that serve burgers and fries and milkshakes, etc? What about parents who shop poorly in the supermarket and buy carts full of junk food to take home for their kids? Do you want to go into these families' homes and dictate what they can buy at the grocery store and eat?boards of FL wrote:You two are missing the point, and I don't think I am capable of explaining it any better.
Plus, it's not as if we already have a working model in place for other products that we could follow. No consumption of any product has ever been prohibited for minors before, so we would be breaking into uncharted territory here.
You're right. There are simply too many roadblocks to deal with. The best we can do is basically to allow large, multinational corporations to re-purpose dog food with ammonia and then market it to our children with toys and fancy lunch boxes, and then just deal with the childhood obesity epidemic in the hospitals when costly, long term care that was easily preventable with a common sense regulation will be needed. It is simply a necessary evil.
Think I'll have a double fat burger with extra sauce for lunch today!
If you think that the US food supply is unsafe and that food companies/restaurants practice unsafe processing methods and that they market dog food to children, then you need to take up your complaint with the USDA and the FDA.
So? There are lots of things in dog food that are in people food. Again, if you think something is dangerous, you need to take it up with the Fed government.boards of FL wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_slimeNekochan wrote:If you think that the US food supply is unsafe and that food companies/restaurants practice unsafe processing methods and that they market dog food to children, then you need to take up your complaint with the USDA and the FDA.
Pink slime is the common name for a controversial beef product. The name used in the meat industry is lean finely textured beef (LFTB)[3] and boneless lean beef trimmings (BLBT).[4] It is also known by the dysphemistic slang term soylent pink.[5][6][7][8] Pink slime is a processed beef product that was originally used in pet food and cooking oil and later approved for public consumption.[9] In 2001, The United States approved the product for limited human consumption and it was used as a food additive to ground beef and beef-based processed meats as a filler at a ratio of usually no more than 25 percent of any product. The production process uses heat in centrifuges to separate the fat from the meat in beef trimmings.[10] The resulting product is exposed to ammonia gas or citric acid to kill bacteria.[10][11]
Try a 1200 cal. Patty Melt from Whataburger.boards of FL wrote:True. And what about parents that physically beat their children? There really isn't anything we can do to stop that either, so what sense is there to make that illegal?Nekochan wrote:I don't think I'm missing the point. You want to somehow restrict or ban McDonald's for kids. What about all the other restaurants that serve burgers and fries and milkshakes, etc? What about parents who shop poorly in the supermarket and buy carts full of junk food to take home for their kids? Do you want to go into these families' homes and dictate what they can buy at the grocery store and eat?boards of FL wrote:You two are missing the point, and I don't think I am capable of explaining it any better.
Plus, it's not as if we already have a working model in place for other products that we could follow. No consumption of any product has ever been prohibited for minors before, so we would be breaking into uncharted territory here.
You're right. There are simply too many roadblocks to deal with. The best we can do is basically to allow large, multinational corporations to re-purpose dog food with ammonia and then market it to our children with toys and fancy lunch boxes, and then just deal with the childhood obesity epidemic in the hospitals when costly, long term care that was easily preventable with a common sense regulation will be needed. It is simply a necessary evil.
Think I'll have a double fat burger with extra sauce for lunch today!
And, the government can't fix stupid!boards of FL wrote:I've said it several times. If someone isn't of the mental capacity to grasp the long term, negative consequences of consuming a product, there should be a law that prohibits their consumption of said product.Joanimaroni wrote:Well just spit it out instead of speaking in circles waiting for us to guess what answer you are looking for.boards of FL wrote:You two are missing the point, and I don't think I am capable of explaining it any better.
You want the government to stifle and control free enterprise, operating within USDA guidelines, because of negligent parents....Parents that refuse to heed warnings regarding unhealthy aspects of a steady diet of fast food is not McDonald's fault.
You can't feed alcohol to dogs.
You can't let your 4 year old get a tattoo of a Power Ranger on his forehead.
You can't feed your kid dog food that has been repurposed to look like beef through some processing with ammonia.
ImpishScoundrel wrote:And, the government can't fix stupid!boards of FL wrote:I've said it several times. If someone isn't of the mental capacity to grasp the long term, negative consequences of consuming a product, there should be a law that prohibits their consumption of said product.Joanimaroni wrote:Well just spit it out instead of speaking in circles waiting for us to guess what answer you are looking for.boards of FL wrote:You two are missing the point, and I don't think I am capable of explaining it any better.
You want the government to stifle and control free enterprise, operating within USDA guidelines, because of negligent parents....Parents that refuse to heed warnings regarding unhealthy aspects of a steady diet of fast food is not McDonald's fault.
You can't feed alcohol to dogs.
You can't let your 4 year old get a tattoo of a Power Ranger on his forehead.
You can't feed your kid dog food that has been repurposed to look like beef through some processing with ammonia.
Mr. Circular logic strikes again. LOL Why don't you just say what you mean in your first post? Why all the stupid questions about "giving kids cigarettes and liqour"? Not even on the same map. Well, maybe they're on one of your charts/graphs. Sigh...........boards of FL wrote:True. And what about parents that physically beat their children? There really isn't anything we can do to stop that either, so what sense is there to make that illegal?Nekochan wrote:I don't think I'm missing the point. You want to somehow restrict or ban McDonald's for kids. What about all the other restaurants that serve burgers and fries and milkshakes, etc? What about parents who shop poorly in the supermarket and buy carts full of junk food to take home for their kids? Do you want to go into these families' homes and dictate what they can buy at the grocery store and eat?boards of FL wrote:You two are missing the point, and I don't think I am capable of explaining it any better.
Plus, it's not as if we already have a working model in place for other products that we could follow. No consumption of any product has ever been prohibited for minors before, so we would be breaking into uncharted territory here.
You're right. There are simply too many roadblocks to deal with. The best we can do is basically to allow large, multinational corporations to re-purpose dog food with ammonia and then market it to our children with toys and fancy lunch boxes, and then just deal with the childhood obesity epidemic in the hospitals when costly, long term care that was easily preventable with a common sense regulation will be needed. It is simply a necessary evil.
Think I'll have a double fat burger with extra sauce for lunch today!
Go to page : 1, 2, 3
Pensacola Discussion Forum » General Discussion » How bad must a product be before consumption by children is prohibited?
Similar topics
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum