RE: Many school districts now serving: breakfast, lunch and dinner! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


Musicmystery -> RE: Many school districts now serving: breakfast, lunch and dinner! (4/11/2012 7:01:44 AM)

You asked whether it was necessary for him to make the point. Clearly, it was.

That it's a pity it's necessary is a separate issue.




littlewonder -> RE: Many school districts now serving: breakfast, lunch and dinner! (4/11/2012 8:19:08 AM)

I'm one of those people that used to get free lunches at school. At the beginning of the school year we would get forms for parents to fill out with their wages information. Depending on your income and number of family members you could either get free or reduces meals. But even if you came to school and didn't have money that day they'd still serve you. No one went hungry.

For me it was literally a lifesaver. We had no food most times let alone much of anything at all and my parents were alcoholics who were never home.

I personally think the free meals are a great idea and hopefully they stick around. It's not the fault of the children that they come to school without money or being able to afford it so why punish them by making them go without?




Edwynn -> RE: Many school districts now serving: breakfast, lunch and dinner! (4/11/2012 11:21:57 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SoftBonds
Kalik, did you ever read the study of the Polish Orphanage? Regarding what happens when you don't hug/hold kids? Given what you said in an earlier post about more aggressive/less forgiving parenting of unwanted children, I wonder if that is the ultimate cause of the increased crime effect. If you don't want your kid, and are forced to have him anyway, you don't raise him to be social, and you get a sociopath...


I read some studies like what you mention years ago, maybe including that one, I don't recall.

I did have that in mind when I later delved more deeply into European history, in the process finding out that royal kids were not raised by their monarch parents, but by royal nannies, completely separated from the parents, sometimes in another country. 'Royal orphans,' as it were. I can imagine the whole environment in a royal residence would be what we today might look at as being somewhat "cold." Mom and dad were some 'familiar stranger' the kids visited as part of the parent's busy schedule.

Not that I'm qualified to make any absolute determination in these things, but this intuitively gave me at least partial explanation as to why so many monarchs were such butchers (domestic enemies being executed in the most cruel manner possible, drawn and quartered, gut ripped open and/or heart ripped out while still alive, etc.) and seemingly no compunction about beheading wives, killing brothers, child nephews, cousins, etc.

The majority of monarchs back in the day were certainly sociopaths, whatever else they were. Who knows, just a few semi-regular hugs from king/queen mom and dad at age three might have produced somewhat less sociopathic monarchs.







Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.015625