Login to Change.org
Create an Account
Amanda Woods
La Jolla, CA
Recent Activity
-
Amanda commented on the article |Sorry, I meant to post as a response to yours but somehow my post ended up being the head of a new thread.
-
Amanda commented on the article |
Ms. Woods, do you want to wake up Lesbian?
As a matter of fact, there are plenty of days when I wish I weren't heterosexual. I look at the men my age and they seem incapable of maintaining a committed relationship. Actually if it weren't for all the discrimination they face I would actually envy lesbians. They have a love and understanding for their own sex I as a heterosexual woman will never have.
You seem to be on our side.
If by "our side" you mean pro-gay, pro-marriage equality, yes I'm on your side.
Condolences on losing your father. I do believe in God but I don't take the Bible literally. I hope this answers your questions.
-
Amanda commented on the article |
Cold showers, prayers, and abstinence can change sexual orientation? I practice the latter two and I've yet to wake up lesbian. Seriously, if sexual orientation can be changed, why wouldn't it be a two-way street? Would the folks who are so keen to help others "leave homosexuality" be as supportive of those wishing to leave heterosexuality? I doubt it.
-
Amanda commented on the article |I'm not sure advertising cigarettes is logically equivalent to advertising fast food. Nicotine has been proven to be physically addictive. People who try to quit smoking suffer terrible side effects. Although more research is always a good thing, current research shows no indication that fast food is addictive in the same way nicotine is. No one wakes up with the shakes after deciding to quit Big Macs. It is possible to have an occasional McDonalds burger without jeopardizing your health; on the other hand, it is extremely difficult to have just one cigarette without becoming hooked.
How does the toy ban educate children about the dangers of fast food? Young children are not politically aware and therefore do not understand why the adults have banned Happy Meals. To them, the ban is going to seem completely arbitrary.
What can it hurt to pass the law? The law is based on the assumption that parents don't know how to raise their children properly and the state does. That is a dangerous assumption to make in a supposedly free country.
-
Amanda commented on the article |
Would banning the toys lead to decreased sales? I was raised a vegetarian and thus never ate at McDonald's or any other outlet offering toys with a meal. Yet I still craved foods that, in excess, would have made me fat if my parents hadn't learned to say "no". The primary reason kids demand Happy Meals is because they taste good. The toys are a secondary consideration. Take away the toys and the kids will still prefer burgers to veggies. It's the parent's job to see that they eat properly.
I don't think all the legislators behind this measure are ignorant. The way I see it they could fall into 4 possible categories. 1) They could just be trying to win the sustainable foodie vote and actually be completely indifferent to whether or not the measure succeeds in reducing childhood obesity. 2) They could be genuinely well-meaning but not particularly knowledgeable about human biology and the role a taste for fattening foods played in human evolution. Most politicians started out as lawyers and businesspeople, not scientists, so this is always a possibility. 3) They could be well-informed about nutrition but arrogant enough to believe their legislation can overcome biology. 4) They could be power-hungry and enjoy micromanaging citizens' lives.
I've taken a political psychology class. Does that count? I agree all academic disciplines are important and it's a mistake to focus solely on one's own narrow specialization. With regard to advertising, there is a third factor controlling the relationship between advertisers and the children they try to influence: the parents. Young children are not driving themselves to McDonalds nor are they earning their own money to pay for fast food. Their parents have to take them to McDonalds and either pay for the meals or give the children money to pay for the meals. If the parents set a strict limit on how often the family ate out at McDonalds, say, once or twice a month, childhood obesity wouldn't be such a problem. Children are too young to understand how advertising tries to manipulate people's choices but their parents are not.
-
Amanda commented on the article |And people wonder why American children are falling behind educationally. Whatever happened to reading, 'riting, and 'rithmetic?
-
Amanda commented on the article |"Kids eat more of their meals at school than at home these days"- That's something that needs to change if possible under the child's economic circumstances. It alienates children from their family and makes them more dependent on government.
"and if they are on free or reduced lunch their parents may not be able to afford to pack them a lunch"- I'm not saying we should abolish school-provided lunches. I believe students should be able to choose between bringing a homemade lunch or buying a school lunch.
"or a single parent working multiple jobs may not have the time"- What's wrong with teaching a kid how to pack their own lunch? When I was growing up, my parents were both busy in the morning, so I started packing my own lunch when I was in first grade. That taught me a lot about self-sufficiency.
I have 3 main problems with this policy.
1) It's unnecessary. While excessive sugar intake is not good for you, having chocolate milk with an otherwise healthy lunch will not kill you.
2) It assumes that all children buy flavored milk on an everyday basis. That's not true for every child. By banning flavored milk, the school is punishing the students who make responsible lunch choices. It also teaches children that a freedom can be taken away because *some* use their freedom irresponsibly. If you don't have the freedom to decide what you will have for lunch... can you really call yourself a citizen of a free country? I know this particular policy applies only to children, whose food choices are restricted anyway by their parents, but it does set a dangerous precedent.
3) Some kids, and even some adults, will not drink milk unless it's flavored. If they can't buy flavored milk, they will drink juice, soda, maybe water, none of which provide the calcium that milk does. Well-meaning policies often have unintended consequences.
"Whether we like it or not, the government IS involved here."- I do realize that a certain amount of government intervention is necessary. That doesn't mean I have to cheer every time the government micromanages our food choices still more.
-
Amanda commented on the article |
When I was in elementary school I had chocolate milk for lunch. So did plenty of other kids. None of us ended up obese. Why? Because our parents ensured that we got plenty of healthy food to balance it out. It is the parent's, not the state's job to feed their children properly. If you're concerned about your child eating unhealthy food at school then pack them a lunch. Don't ban flavored milk for all children, including those who only buy chocolate milk as an occasional treat.
Whoever controls the food controls the nation. Whoever controls the children controls the political thinking of the future. Do you really want to give the government that much power? Get the government out of the business of raising our children.
-
Amanda commented on the article |Yep, I'm willing to bet that's the real reason behind this decision. Can't have Mom's homemade lunches endangering company profits.
-
Amanda commented on the petition |Censorship is not an American value.
Impact
597 Actions
0 Recruits
Top Causes
|
126 Actions
|
119 Actions
|
|
107 Actions
|
95 Actions
|
|
60 Actions
|
59 Actions
|
|
49 Actions
|
48 Actions
|
|
43 Actions
|
41 Actions
|
|
38 Actions
|
35 Actions
|
Organizations
-
CREDO Action36 Actions 0 Recruits -
The Wilderness Society8 Actions 0 Recruits -
Greenpeace5 Actions 0 Recruits -
Oxfam America7 Actions 0 Recruits -
Alliance for Climate Protection5 Actions 0 Recruits
