In being a part of this, W.J. Clinton has done more now that he ever did as President.

He may have saved a generation of American schoolkids from type II diabetes and obesity.

"oh well, they can just get sodas at Taco Bell outside school, ...." Fine. Let them. At least they won't be drinking crap all day, at school.

So sugar-filled drink is banned from schools. Now, if only bullet-filled guns could be banned aswell, we'd be on the right track

A whole nother debate in itself, but the statement nonetheless warrants the following smiley: :rolleyes:

I go to a Catholic High School. There are four soda machines, a snack machine, a lunch counter, and a refrigerator with cold sandwiches, water, milk, and orange juice.

There is also a snack rack on the counter with fresh cookies.

Everyone eats what they want and if they are getting obese or whatever from it, they stop for the most part, because they have a brain. Hell, a lot of people drink the water over the soda already.

I'd be more worried about the drug selling in the school instead of the fucking snacks.

Pfft, too hard of a target. :p

But isn't that against the very essence of a free society? I mean, and I'm playing the Devil's advocate here, who has the right to regulate what we do with our time and money?

I'm not disagreeing with you, I'd just like to know why it would be okay to restrict these particular things, and not others. [/b][/quote]No restriction, as in law of rules, but simply self-discipline. And also sensibilisation (actual word?) of the problem trough an intense government campaign, but I think that is maybe more difficult in the USA.

But isn't that against the very essence of a free society? I mean, and I'm playing the Devil's advocate here, who has the right to regulate what we do with our time and money?

I'm not disagreeing with you, I'd just like to know why it would be okay to restrict these particular things, and not others. [/b][/quote]No restriction, as in law of rules, but simply self-discipline. And also sensibilisation (actual word?) of the problem trough an intense government campaign, but I think that is maybe more difficult in the USA. [/b][/quote]Mmm, I think you're on the right track. I think what you're saying is essentially what DV and I are saying - people need to use a.) common sense and b.) self-control, which seems to be pretty hard for people nowadays. I know when I was in high school (even middle school), we had the mandatory "health" classes that taught you about a range of subjects, from sex ed to, yes, healthy eating.

Mmm, I think you're on the right track. I think what you're saying is essentially what DV and I are saying - people need to use a.) common sense and b.) self-control, which seems to be pretty hard for people nowadays. I know when I was in high school (even middle school), we had the mandatory "health" classes that taught you about a range of subjects, from sex ed to, yes, healthy eating. [/QB][/QUOTE]

Too many people don't even know what common sense is.

How many people well into there forty's do not have any type of additional retirement fund planned.

How many people live above their means and forfeit there future by running up incredible debt.

How many families take the kids to fast food restaurants and treat there kids to all the latest greatest video games but don't put a one cent for higher education.

How many people work entry level positions and complain about making ends meat but have a $4 starbucks everyday

How many people watch Fear Factor..... opps sorry that's another arguement

It's not the government's job to supervise stupid people. Their job is to fuck the middle and lower classes in the ass.

Hey we are talking about PUBLIC schools. As in taxpayer supported. There is no issue about choice, and there should be no quarter given to private soda manufacturers who are poisoning our children. The deal that was made was brilliant, and may I add it was brokered by Bill Clinton.

Put another way, Clinton has in this year done more good for the country than George Bush.

You speak of soda as if it's tobacco. :rolleyes:

And isn't it the school officials who decide what to do with the money? If student counsel members lobby for more then three dances, the school decides whether or not they want to spend the money for it.

If little children are kept away from the soda, ok, fair enough considering the lack of self-control. But I think teenagers are old enough to make healthy decisions themselves.

What does a retirement fund has to do with eating healthy?

Vercetti, I infer from the article I posted that the deal is for elementary schools and possibly for high schools at a later stage. I don't know what age groups exactly fall into the high-school category. IMO, anyone above 15 is mature enough to appreciate the harmful effects of coke/pepsi, though someone younger might possibly understand it as well.

Even diet sodas are harmful for the routine functions of the stomach. After a while, stomach becomes depended on the effects of soda in digestion and stops its natural funtions. It also increases the risk of acid reflux that would result in heartburn. The sugar content in non-diet sodas can increase the risk of diabetes and increase the weight in an unhealthy manner. Caffeine can make just about anyone more irritable, especially women.

Occasional drinks of soda aren't that harmful, but as I've seen real life examples including myself, kids tend to go overboard with sodas. I wouldn't want my children to go down the same path, and be told to stop drinking it altogether after sever stomach problems. However, I'm not sure where and at what age we need to draw the line. Something tells me people have to see some stuff for themselves.