What was the best part of elementary school? Learning the complex details of the English language? I don't think so. Grasping rudimentary mathematics? Probably not. Dodgeball in gym class? Definitely great, yet there was something I'm sure everyone liked just a little better.
Unquestionably, the best part of elementary school was when one of your classmates celebrated a birthday. Singing "Happy Birthday" to your peer, while gorging on the cupcakes their mom had made the night before, was a bi-weekly ritual that made enduring the rigors of multiplication and phonics just a little easier. Elementary school birthdays were great times, times when everyone was friends and the sweets were ever abundant.
However, for baked-good lovers everywhere, I have tragic news to report. Principal Robert Davis of the Meadowside School in Milford, Conn, wants to take away this childhood joy from Milford elementary school students. Davis recently passed a ban on cakes, brownies and cupcakes at his school, effectively eliminating birthday celebrations altogether. In doing so, he is taking away a fundamental American right: the ability to gorge oneself with unhealthy food to the point of a stomach rupture.
In an attempt to maintain the integrity of birthdays, an impossible task without a cake-related goody, Davis has replaced birthday sweets with "games and crafts to celebrate birthdays, holidays and special occasions." Great, birthday games and crafts. Who wants a birthday Popsicle stick house? How about a birthday handprint turkey? What about some Christmas Monopoly? Anyone?
O, fair principal, have some compassion. Even the fascist Mussolini enjoyed a cannoli from time to time.
In all seriousness, Davis' ban is well-intentioned. Considering America's immense childhood obesity "epidemic," I'm certain Davis feels he is simply doing his part to help control a problem amongst his schoolchildren. Yet, simply because a ban is well-intentioned does not mean it is justified. Davis' action is, in fact, far from justified.
There are two main flaws to his seemingly benign ban. First and foremost, in dictating what his students can and cannot eat, Davis is violating civil liberties. While it is understandable that children do not in fact have civil liberties themselves, their parents do. If a parent deems cupcakes acceptable food for their children, it is not the place of the state to interfere. One cupcake, in celebration of another child's birthday, is rather innocuous. It will not cause unhealthy weight gain if complimented by an otherwise balanced diet. A single cupcake is not the kind of stuff a Bill Clinton-esque quadruple bypass surgery is made of.
Truly, the school has no right to regulate cupcake consumption, nor does the government (as this is a public school, this is indeed just another example of useless government regulation). If you have any familiarity with my values, or my article last year begging for the social liberties prescribed by John Stuart Mill, you realize I abhor such pointless government interference in civilians' lives. The government has no place to intervene in matters that do not involve causing direct harm to another. It should be up to parents what their kids eat, not the school. In the words of concerned parent Jack Fowler, Davis' initiative is "way too Big Brother-ish." Now, had Principal Davis conducted a study concluding cupcakes were violently being used as projectiles, then perhaps I would have to re-examine denouncing his prohibition.
Yet my anger about this ban isn't simply limited to its violation of civil liberties. I'm also rather irked by its flawed execution. This ban can be described as, at best, ineffective. Sure, eliminating sweets in school marginally improves a student's health. But if it is complimented by excessive eating at home, it's rather useless. Truly, there's no way to stop students from eating badly if they really want to. Thus, the question remains: why even bother impose a rule of this nature at school?
Since there is no way to change what students eat at home, Davis is needlessly and arbitrarily imposing rules on students without any real benefit. I don't know about Mr. Davis, but if a ban is causing harm without causing good, it shouldn't be in effect.
Perhaps the principal should devote his healthy food measures to something on a grander scale - school lunch. Growing up, I rarely bought school lunch. My mom would pack my lunch every morning, as my concerned parents realized this was far healthier than the garbage my school served on a regular basis. At Pine Grove Elementary School, home of the (I kid you not) "Fightin' Porcupines," school lunch was typically a deep fried piece of chicken or a greasy hamburger. I can only imagine the same holds true at Davis' Meadowside School. Certainly, eating such filth on a daily basis, which many students do, is far worse than the occasional treat brought in by the class. Honestly, which is worse: a bi-weekly frosted goody or years upon years of artery abusing tacos and nachos?
The cupcake industry - let's call it "Big Hostess" - should stand up to the tyrannical Davis and force him to repeal his ban. After all, in American politics nothing gets done without a special interest group's support. Of course, while there are hoards of individuals defending "Big Tobacco" and the NRA, the baked good industry seems a little short on lobbyists. Where are the special interest groups when you need them?
Regardless of the outcome of this incident, I want one thing to be clear: I universally stand up for a toddler's "right to chose!" Whether it be cookies, cupcakes, candy or any other sort of confectionary, let young people make their own decisions! It's high time that this country takes the power away from nutritional bureaucrats and gives it back to who deserve it: the people.
Sources:
http://www.ctnow.com/news/local/hc-ap-cupcake-ban-1028,1,582969.story?coll=hc-headlines-local
http://www.nhregister.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=13240629&BRD=1281&PAG=461&dept_id=517515&rfi=6
Be the first to comment on this article!