Nutrition in Schools? Preposterous!

The link leads to the California Department of Education's Food program page. What is of particular interest to me is the fact that, although one can find any combination of data analysis and training materials regarding transport, acquisition, distribution, and costs (in the form of grants or reimbursements) there is missing something very important to the actual use of the food itself (I'll cut-and-paste):

Nutrition Analysis of School Meals

School meal nutrition analysis report from National School Lunch Program reviews conducted by the California Department of Education (CDE).

* School Meal Nutrition Analysis Report: 1998-2005 (In Process)

Yes, that's right. the actual nutritional value of the food served in the public schools of Cal-ee-Foh-nee-a is not only 4 years past due, but hasn't been properly analyzed in 11 years. I checked the "nutrition information" page of my local school district and I found all sorts of information regarding the carbohydrate values of the food they serve. Where's the vitamins? The salt? The sugar (well HFCS [gag] anyway)? McDonald's has a more comprehensive nutritional list (almost kept a straight face there) than our public schools.

This is not good. I don't really care if the food improves or not. I don't even care that what they serve is truly a tragic approximation of food. Okay, the fruits are good as long as they haven't soaked everything in lemon juice. All I want is the information necessary to correct nutritional deficiencies arising from the ingestion of this meal. I need to know what vegetables to serve to give the right balance of vitamins and minerals. How, exactly, are parents supposed to compensate with such a lack of information?

More Rampant Stupidity

Apparently, the sheep... I mean the twits... I mean the followers of ancient religious myths... I mean the Christian Right has won (for now) in California. The morons who ran the campaign for Proposition 8 there can't hide.

Here's their entry on Whois. Notice they have 5 other domains under just this name. They seem to be bouncing from IP to IP and server to server. Hmmmm... Zombie anyone? So why would a California "company" want the server in Chicago? If someone out there has an account with WhoIs, please post the rest of their nonsense in the comments. Thanks.

Also, the wonderfully interesting Christians apparently think it's okay to vandalize property, steal, and extort. This article explains what I'm talking about. They just don't get that their religion is just that - their religion. They still believe that morality begins and ends with them. Unfortunately they spout all this while living in opposition to their own precepts. Hypocritical much?

Well, they never were very good at living up to the standards they set for other people. From the Pope on down through all the vast permutations of Christianity, none of those groups have ever lived up to the "morality" they attempt, or as in this case do, force on the rest of the populace.

The Jews at least have the good sense to live their lives according to their precepts (mostly), but keep their religion in the temple. They don't try to cram laws down our throats.

I can think of only one law that the Muslims have enacted, and that only for the convenience of the practice of their religion: foot baths in public parks. Didn't the Christians believe in foot baths way back when?

The Buddhists are happy where they are. The Zoroastrians are not exactly silent, but are very quiet. The Pagans and Neo-pagans just can't believe any of these things are an issue. These three groups believe in the founding principle of many of our original 13 colonies: freedom of religion. In short, believe what you want even if I think you are wrong. It is unfortunate that the colonists actually meant, "freedom to practice our religion." What do you expect from Christians?

So, Christians, if the sanctity of marriage is to be truly upheld, then the tax breaks allowed those with "marriages" should be voided. Only those with a "domestic partnership," a secular title amounting to the same thing (almost), would be allowed those tax breaks. No one would be able to get a divorce except in cases of extreme violence. Even then, women would not be free to marry whom they wish, they would "belong" to the brother or nearest male relative of the original husband.

If you twits wanna live by the Bible, you better be damned sure you want to follow everything. You can't pick and choose. It's everything or nothing including all the laws you've tried to say are, "out of touch with modern times." Guess what? If some of those things are, "out of touch," then none of the rest makes any sense given the empty space left by taking them out. Ask yourself this: when was the last time you lived an entire day without breaking one of the Big 10? I can almost guarantee that none of you have. Those that claim they have have are, "Bearing false witness," (lying).

By the way, catholics - if there weren't any homosexuals out there, you'd have very few priests. Is that why you won't let them "marry?"

Edit: I just looked up other initiatives. Looks like the Fundies were busy this year. Just take a look at these and tell me that the Christians aren't legislating their religion...