[QUOTE=lobotomyboy63]
Oh but I have been making an effort, just not something you were able to read. yet. I’ve been reflecting, examining why I believe as I do and trying to formulate a thoughtful response.
Here it is.
When I was a kid, my mom sometimes sent PB sandwiches to school with me. There was never a call from the school objecting to this. My parents had the right to decide what was suitable for me, nutritionally, in the form of something that also fit their budget. OTOH my mother didn’t have a right to pack a beer in with that PBJ and the school would have called. But that’s because of how it would affect ME, not the kid next to me.
You can say that parents shouldn’t send a PB sandwich with their kid in this scenario because of the extenuating circumstances and I’d AGREE. But what we “shouldn’t” and “aren’t allowed to” do are different. I say it was a right for my mother to do it, and it’s the right of the parents to do it here. First, parents are responsible for the well-being of their OWN child, not someone else’s. They have freedom of choice to do as they see fit in that respect. Second there may be economic or dietary reasons (e.g. veganism) for doing it but damn, they shouldn’t have to justify a PBJ any more than my mother. “Because it’s part of childhood” works for me.
Third, and probably most importantly, there are alternative solutions. E.g. a peanut free table or let the kid eat outside or home school him or whatever. Very often I think we should go an extra step in these discussions.
“This allergic kid has a right not to be exposed to this.” I agree.
“My kid has a right to his PBJ.” I also agree.
And that’s the impasse where discussions like this often end. If our rights are EQUAL, whose rights prevail? The next step could be:
“Then my kid has a right to demand that the school provide another place to eat.”
I agree. Wow. Hey, that could be win-win! But what about peanut butter residue from the lunch the other kid ate? The allergic kid has more rights, like to demand a special form of education, be that with tutors or whatever. And a special bus that has never had peanuts in it. And “virgin” textbooks because who knows if the kid who had the book last year was eating PB while doing homework and smudged a page? And maybe a school that has actually been run through an enormous autoclave. And so on.
Recapitulating then, I can’t take away the allergic child’s rights, fine. But why can he take away mine?
[/QUOTE]
You still have nowhere said where the basis of this right is. The beer example is weak here, because giving you beer at home as an 8 year old would not be legal. The kid with allergies has a legal right to reasonable accomodation, and I have said multiple times I might well agree that a total ban is quite possibly not a reasonable accomodation (but that isn’t a rights based argument).
Everything written here presupposes there is a right to feed your child peanut butter in school. The closest you come to saying why is:
[QUOTE=lobotomyboy63]
My parents had the right to decide what was suitable for me, nutritionally, in the form of something that also fit their budget.
[/QUOTE]
This still doesn’t say where this right comes from. It isn’t a right I have seen expounded before. If the basis is that the law should not eliminate all affordable nutritional sources for their children, there is a valid point there, but you would then need to show that banning peanuts did this in order to show there was the right you claim present. And I don’t think banning peanut products does this at all. If the right you are speaking of is that parents have a right to send any legal food stuff to school with their child, then you get into all sorts of problems over whether schools can ban soft drinks, chewing gum etc.
In your later posts, you talk about the right to a gun, and the right of a child to have an elevator installed. Those are rights that you can specifically point to where they originate - in the Second Amendment (no intention of getting into an argument over whether that guarantees the right to gun ownership or not) and in the ADA. That’s what I am looking for from you - what is the basis of the right to send a child to school with a peanut butter sandwich. It’s not a legal right. I think you intend it to come from a non-interference type concept of rights, which I am pretty much on board with, but the fact it directly affects the wellbeing of others makes it a hard case here, and you also run into problems if you think other things can be banned from school, but not peanut butter.
