Why do so many conservatives seem to be so against nutritional food regulations?

I remmeber many conservative commentators were outraged over Happy Meals being banned in San Francisco, and the Republicans in congress declared pizza as a vegetable to get past the nutritional regulations so that kids could eat junk food at school.



I like to eat organically grown food not only because it's healthy but because it's good for the environment when your food is grown locally and sustainably. I think organically grown food should be encouraged by the government. But most conservatives don't see the benefits of things like this and probably prefer big food corporations that ship junk food all over the world.Why do so many conservatives seem to be so against nutritional food regulations?
I prefer organically grown food too, from my garden; however, I don't like the government telling me what I or my family can or cannot eat. It's none of their business.Why do so many conservatives seem to be so against nutritional food regulations?
you know, there is nothing more on earth i hate more than a utopian liberal hippy... sad thing is i am a democrat too... but something about hippies who dont shower..... and always bum money from me... it gets annoying. i bet you never wear socks always are barefoot or wear flipflops. you care about your environment, but you have no qualms about stinking up and offending people who willingly let you crash on their couch. and then you dont pay any rent ever, smoke all my weed, eat all my food, and then complain about corporations
Organic food isn't any healthier. It's less environmental benefit is questionable and it is much less efficient.



However, conservatives never met a regulation they didn't want to destroy.Why do so many conservatives seem to be so against nutritional food regulations?
As a conservative, I actually like free range eggs and grass fed cows milk. I refuse to pay too much for apples and oranges though. Because I taste no difference with fruits and veggies.



I had an issue with SF banning happy meals because happy meals are not that damn bad compared to the s#tload of calories in a kids meal at Applebees. Did those get banned?



Also, Happy meals are something only the poor kids can afford. It is an affordable way for these kids to get a decent meal (chciken nuggets, apples and milk) and a toy, for doing something special. Damn, just let the poor kids have a day!



Instead you think the poor kids will get taken to Trader Joes for lunch and the parents will fork over $8 for a meal? Get REAL!
Now see there you go as long as it suits your purpose it's OK! The issue is not whether bad food is bad for you the issue is Freedom of Choice! Yet through that LIberal thick skull you can't see that! So lets fine everybody that's overweight? Lets put restrictions on School lunches. That will work out well, somebody that is of your choice supply the Schools. That what this was leading up to, taking away some freedoms to suit the view of a Liberal! Yet you can see that point?Why do so many conservatives seem to be so against nutritional food regulations?
I agree that organic food is better for those who consume it and the environment. I also agree that health is an issue in America, and I do not have a problem with the government encouraging us to be healthy. However I do not think it is the governments job to tell us what we can and cannot eat, they should be limited to suggesting the healthier choice. At the end of the day it is the consumer that is getting high cholesterol and diabetes, no one else.
Should it be the government's job to dictate what we eat
The problem isnt the food with children, its the physical activity. Since things like dodgeball are atrocious to liberals and they also want all the children to be winners in a soccer match, all that is left for kids is to sit on their duff at recess and listen to their ipod.
Why did both Obama and Clinton hire Monsanto to run the FDA? Do they want us to be obese and sick?
I think it has more to do with someone else telling you what you can and can not eat.



It's my body, I'll eat what the hell I want to.
govt regulations = dictate how private citizens live or operate = liberalism



organic does not mean healthier, not by any stretch of the imagination
Because poisonous food companies like Monsanto regularly pay Republikkkan (and Democrat) political whores to keep pushing their filth onto an unsuspecting, and mostly indifferent, American public.
Limitations on what one may eat limits ones freedom. Most don't oppose information being provided.
You say: " I like to eat......".
Shouldn't others be granted the personal freedom to make their own choices?
If the Governemnt can decide it can tell you what to eat, where does it stop?
This country is supposed to be based on maximum personal liberty isn't it?
I am greatful for informed and well intentioned advice on the subject, but anyone
who presumes to dictate my diet to me had better be prepared for an
extremely negative reaction.

BTW: Sometimes 'organic' does mean: 'better',
but more often it just means SOS at an inflated price.
It is a little known secret that Republicans eat money instead of food. That is why they need so much money.
I've been in the wellness industry for over 35 years, but I am still against MANDATING what we eat. Education is the key... which is where my peers come in. It requires a coherent message that leads to cultural change where people voluntarily... and even enthusiastically... CHOOSE what they want to eat... versus the anger that comes with being FORCED to eat something you don't want... or like.
bIG bROTHER.
How about you eat what you want, and I'll eat what I want. Deal?



There are a few, enumerated places that the government is authorized to be. My refrigerator isn't one of them.
My health is none of the government's business.



I see the benefit of healthy food. What I do not see is the benefit of the use of force. Mind your own business.
Just because something is bad doesn't mean the government should necessarily do anything about it.

That way lies denial of freedom, and the criminalization of "sin".
because there was nothing non nutritious about a happy meal, they just didn't meet your narrow definition of healthy
if only ORGANIC food were grown,half the world would starve to death...


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/a鈥?/a>
I agree with the other post, I think it has more to do with telling people what to eat. On the other hand, a better way is to have fatties dropped from their health insurance, they are just costing too much!
Damn good question my friend.