In nonsense law suits news, The Center For Science in Public interest has drummed up a B.S. law suit against McDonalds for manipulating kids into wanting to buy Happy Meals because of their toys. “McDonald’s marketing has the effect of conscripting America’s children into an unpaid drone army of word-of-mouth marketers, causing them to nag their parents to bring them to McDonald’s,” Stephen Gardner of the Center for Science in the Public Interest wrote to the heads of the chain in a letter announcing the lawsuit. The group also believes that Mcdonalds lures children in with toys and in return offers them unhealthy meals. They argue that even though McDonalds may have some healthier alternatives for kids, kids still order the more unhealthy food the majority of the time.
The Center For Public Interest, cut the crap. This law suit is another underhanded strategy for you to manipulate people into raising their kids according to how YOU see fit. This is a way for people to be forced into buying into your interests. Granted, I do not agree with any child shoving MCDonalds down their throat or any other fast food restaurant daily. However, I know that it is not my place to take away a parents right to raise their child as they see fit. Why? Because when it gets to the nitty gritty, it is that individual parent’s decision on what they choose to feed their child.
The group is hoping that the negative publicity forces McDonalds to negotiate with them on this issue. The problem with this group’s suit is where do we draw the line? It is all fine and good to say that you are doing this for the children and their well being. Most people can accept any group who has children’s well being and safety as their cause but within reason. There are piss poor parents out there but we mustn’t forget that there are also some excellent parents out there who place their children as priorities in their lives. These parents opinions and wants for their children (within reason that there is no abuse) should not be ignored or put on the back burner as being less important because a group or people who have never met the parents or their children feels that they are the ones who know what is best for EVERYONE.
Can you imagine if they passed laws on what parents could and could not feed their children? What if there were penalties for breaking this law? Where do we place the limitations? At what point does what the parent’s desire for their children become less valuable than what an outsider deems acceptable? At the end of the day a parent can simply tell the child the phrase “No McDonalds today”. Saying “no” is still a viable option versus passing laws and regulations. Their toys are no more tools of manipulation than KB Toys or Toys R Us. How many parents have had to tell their child “no” after driving by one of their stores? It becomes a slippery slope when we allow outside authorities to control so much.
For More LJ Knight Visit YeahSheSaidIt