EDUCATION: Side Effects

I guess I was wrong.  Politics is evidently a part of any course, and though I’ve railed against it (Bush-bashing was a common professorial commitment), it shows up as part of everyone in their opinions and choices relative to almost any subject.  And that’s fine and normal.

But I was right about this:  We learn much more than just the central topic of any course. 

In taking an online course, there may be a way of determining age and certainly gender from the introductions and some comments made in mandatory discussion, but the age of students within the environment is not visibly constant as it is in a classroom setting.  We can’t turn our heads to see who’s speaking and listen raptly nor dismiss them because of preconceived notions relative to their age, gender, style, etc.

In Nutrition online, we discussed the legislative move to ban the sale of soda and junk foods in schools, basically via vending machines, which was voted down.  Naturally, in a course on nutrition the tendency would be to support the ban.  I, of course, was against it.  Why?  Because I don’t want government taking away any more of our rights, including that of poor eating habits.

The funny thing is, is that those who feel they are so liberal are the ones who supported the ban–hey, EVERYBODY has to eat healthy.  Let’s make a law that says they can’t buy junk food in schools.  People are stupid.  Kids are stupid.  The parents can’t be trusted with knowing that an apple is better for you than potato chips.

I don’t mind, and truly support, government health agencies telling us what we should and shouldn’t eat.  I draw the line at telling us what we can and cannot.  Prohibition didn’t work.  Neither will a ban on cheese-doodles.  I realize that this is not a ban on the individual, per se, but it would be on what a school can sell.  (Another example, Uconn’s decision not to sell cigarettes is their own business, and I would think, a caring and wise choice.)

I was happy to see that many of the students felt as I did, and probably are more conservative in their nature than they believe or would admit.  I don’t think we need any more new laws made up–often based upon a single incident, and sadly, often that incident is one of reckless stupidity on the part of the "victim"–when we already have a law in place that covers it. 

For example, murder is a crime.  Why do we have to worry about gun laws beyond permits and stolen weapons when that’s all covered?  Eating healthy food is good, and there’s government and medical evidence and guidelines behind it.  Ignoring those guidelines must, I maintain, remain an option, a personal right.