• Gork@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    2 years ago

    How did this get normalized? Why is this even something that is even considered debatable? As a society, feeding our children should be the first priority.

    I’m flubbered.

    • Ghostalmedia@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 years ago

      Echo chambers that reinforce the lie that democrats want to take your money to pay for irresponsible people’s children.

      • jabjoe
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        2 years ago

        Maybe they are irresponsible, but that’s not their kids fault. Feeding kids regardless of who their parents are, is a basic morality thing.

        • Jazzy Vidalia@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          But that is the whole point of this. These people making and advocating for this kind of stuff are abusers. The GOP is a pro-abuse party. We need to stop pretending otherwise. The goal is to enable abusers. When these people talk about “parental rights” that is what they mean. They believe they have a right to abuse their kids including starving them. They also believe that anyone who tries to assist their children—even so much as feeding them—is interfering with their right as a parent.

          I know this because my step-dad was exactly of this type of mindset when I was a kid. They don’t see children as having rights or dignity. They are just property of their parents with zero personage to them. Food insecurity even when the parents have the ability to feed their children is used as a form of control. “If you won’t do as we say you won’t eat” was very much a thing in my household and a lot of others I knew growing up.

          Allowing free breakfast and lunch at school usurps their ability to use hunger and starvation as a punishment. I know it’s dark but it’s worth noting.

      • /JJ
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        2 years ago

        the unplanned kids that arrived under anti abortion laws.

      • gogozero@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 years ago

        i understand its a bullshit argument, but even if were true, idgaf why kids dont have food, i want them to get food one way or another

        • tangentism@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 years ago

          Well, sweeping chimneys and working night shifts in abattoirs is a good way of acquiring the money for it!

          /S

    • Mummelpuffin@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      Literally everyone in this comment section is missing “regardless of the individual eligibility of each student”. Everyone is getting hysterical over something that isn’t even in the cards.

      Of course a lot of kids rely on free school lunches and they aren’t trying to take that away. They’re trying to restrict free lunches to kids with parents who are actually incapable of feeding them. If parents can afford food for their kids, feed your fucking kids.

      • offthecrossbar@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        I’m admittedly not familiar with how the program works but I suspect that “totally bulletproof and unbiased eligibility criteria that can’t / won’t be weaponized against specific people groups” isn’t something that it guarantees