Dennis Prager warns about the social, psychological, and moral dangers of this breakfast. We agree with him, but we also think he does not go far enough with his condemnations….
This appeared as a column on some unknown website a couple of days ago: a person named Dennis Prager explains the true visionary conservative position on schools providing breakfasts for poor children. To sum up, in his own words:
1. “A nutritious breakfast can be had for less than a dollar….” and therefore “it is inconceivable that there are homes in Los Angeles that cannot afford breakfast for their child. ”
2. Giving poor children nutritious breakfasts at schools “both enables and encourages irresponsible, uninterested, and incompetent parenting.”
3. Giving poor children nutritious breakfasts at schools “weaken the parent-child bond.”
4. “The free breakfast profoundly weakens young people’s character.”
To sum up, again in his own words: “These are the ways in which the Left has damaged children and families through free school breakfasts.”
These are amazing arguments, but we here at LiberalBias.com have to ask this:
…WHY are you limiting this argument only to school-provided breakfasts?
Why are our socialist schools providing textbooks for free? A $20 textbook works out to less than 5 cents per day, so it’s inconceivable that anyone would not be able to afford it. If the school provides the textbook, then it just enables bad parents to not buy the books themselves. It also weakens the parent-child bond, because what is more bonding than a parent and child struggling together when they can’t afford textbooks for school? Finally, giving textbooks to students weakens their character because it makes them assume that they will get free stuff from other people.
Therefore, allowing students to use textbooks without making them pay is destroying the character of our children.
Why do our socialist schools allow students to sit at desks for free? Why are they not paying a rental fee for the year? Isn’t this sending the wrong message? Doesn’t this just encourage dependency? Doesn’t this just enable bad parenting, by letting the parents get away with not paying for the child to rent the desk?
It’s a moral disaster, ladies and gentlemen.
…and so on. You get the idea. You can use this argument to basically demonize anything that schools provide.
So why don’t you, Dennis Prager? You know you want to. Go explain to the world that it’s destroying the character of our children that we let them use school desks without paying rent! Go one: show off your glorious tea-party self!