vegetarian school lunches

I feel that High school and JH's should feature something other than meats drenched in sauce, ketchup, oils, and salt. Many schools, still are based on the fact that a child will at meat if there is nothing else, or they suppose that you will pack your own lunch if you don't eat meat. I sit with 2 vegetarians at my lunch table and for a week and a half they had nothing but meats in our lunch lines. Now I don't think that they should be able to provide a lunch for kids who cant eat peanut butter, but not for vegetarians.

I leave the rest up to my opponent to make an argument, Thank you.

I will first build up my case then attack what my opponent said.

REASONS WHY SCHOOLS DO NOT OFFER VEGETARIAN OPTIONS:

1. It costs more to make foods that are not processed - and processed foods are very likely to have some animal derived ingredients in them (i.e. french fries with meat extracts or lipase in them). Public schools in America are paid for by property taxes - if a school is in a very poor neighborhood, they get the worst funding. America is the ONLY country in the world with such a backwards, twisted system - which assures that the rich only get richer and the poor only get poorer and more debilitated. Since the funding is so bad in so many areas of our country, you can only expect the worst of slop on the plate for lunch.

2. Less than 5% of the population are vegetarian, so there's a potential that the food will be wasted when students choose meaty items instead. If schools were to offer vegetarian lunches, they would have to offer Hindu lunches (no beef, pork, turkey, chicken allowed but not on Fridays), diabetic lunches, etc. You can't please all the minorities out there. Schools offer a variety of foods that don't contain meat. Besides, if somebody has a special "eating issue", they should just bring their own foods (as my opponent stated).

Now moving on to what my opponent said:

"something other than meats drenched in sauce, ketchup, oils, and salt."
Is meat honestly the only thing your school offers to eat? I highly doubt it. Schools are required by law to serve food from each food group.

"based on the fact that a child will at meat if there is nothing else"
What logical school actually believes this? Unless a child is STARVING then they would rather go hungry then eat meat (if vegetarian or something to that extent). The people who run the schools and create the menu know this. They aren't stupid.

"or they suppose that you will pack your own lunch if you don't eat meat"
EXACTLY. This is what smart children SHOULD do. If you are not satisfied with the food they are serving then by all means, feel free to bring your own. I actually recommend doing this for non-vegetarians as well, because if the meats they serve are as grouse as you make them sound to be then no one should be eating them.

"I sit with 2 vegetarians at my lunch table and for a week and a half they had nothing but meats in our lunch lines"
This argument really has no impact for the pro side. That's great that you sat with vegetarians for a week and a half. I'm happy for you. I really am. However, what's your point? Also, the only examples you give only concern YOUR school. You never give any examples from other schools. your personal observations alone are not valid.

"Now I don't think that they should be able to provide a lunch for kids who cant eat peanut butter, but not for vegetarians"
I have never heard of any school doing this. Please provide proof to validate your point.

Vegetarianism - the practice of following a diet based on plant-based foods including fruits, vegetables, cereal grains, nuts, and seeds, with or without dairy products and eggs.

It costs 3.00$ to make a school lunch. the schools get 2.50 for the lunches. as i will continue to say, adding a salad bar would add .10cents, now I don't think that this will affect many people in the long run.

As you may know, vegetarian foods have no cholesterol and lots of fiber; meat, eggs, and dairy products contain a lot of cholesterol and have no fiber. No wonder that meat-eaters are nine times more likely to be obese than vegans are.

Recent surveys show that about 2% of children under age 18 consider
themselves vegetarians, about the same percentage as adults. With nearly 50
million children attending public schools, that means approximately 1
million children who don't eat meet line up for school lunches each day.
"Less than 5% of the population are vegetarian, so there's a potential that the food will be wasted when students choose meaty items instead."
Of the 50 million children in schools you are saying 1 millions choices would be "wasted"? And that is only 2% of vegetarians, as you can see my opponent cannot keep their facts correct.

Schools in many areas have responded by adding salad bars as well as more
fruits, vegetables and meatless entrees, according to Marcia Smith,
president of the American School Food Service Association.

Over the past five years, some schools have begun serving a vegetarian item
every day, she said. Schools must also accommodate children who don't eat
meat for religious reasons. To rebut your Hindi comment, my friends, Ravi Deasi and Swetak Pradhan are Hindi. His family finds it easier to go all vegetarian then no beef, in case you dd not know this hinds don't eat beef other meats are fine.
Also if some of the schools can add vegetarian maels, even if it IS just a salad bar, they still can be respected.

" "I sit with 2 vegetarians at my lunch table AND for a week and a half they had nothing but meats in our lunch lines"
This argument really has no impact for the pro side. That's great that you sat with vegetarians for a week and a half. I'm happy for you. I really am. However, what's your point?" If anyone would actually pay attention and read what I said iI would not need to restate myself. i did not say I had, i said and which means i continue to in the context of the sentence. i apologize for the off topic, but we do get points for things like that, and this my help you understand how that "point" of mine effects my topic.

http://www.todaysdietitian.com...
http://www.usnews.com...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.todaysdietitian.com...

My opponents definition for vegetarianism is incorrect. What he described is the vegan diet.

vegan: a person who does not eat meat, fish, or any animal products such as cheese, butter, etc.
vegetarian: People who do not eat meat of animals such as chicken, pigs, cows, etc. Also they do not eat fish and seafood. But they do eat eggs, egg products, milk and other dairy products.
Collins Essential English Dictionary 2nd Edition 2006 © HarperCollins Publishers 2004, 2006

Depending on where you go to school, school lunches have different prices and cost different amounts to make.

Vegetarian foods may contain no cholesterol and lots of fiber, but they lack in protein. Also, as I stated, you can always bring you lunch to school if you are dissatisfied with the menu.

Last time I checked, 2% is less then 5%. So as you can see, my opponent cannot count or read. Also, there are not 1 million children in each school who do not eat meat. You have to consider that these 1 million children are dispersed all over the country. So yes, food would be wasted.

"Schools in many areas have responded by adding salad bars as well as more
fruits, vegetables and meatless entrees"
This statement has no impact on my opponents case what-so-ever. Nor do any other quotes from this source that my opponent included.

If your friends are dissatisfied with the school lunches they can bring their own.

My opponents rebut to "I sit with 2 vegetarians" still had no impact for the pro side.

Wikipedia is not a credited source, as anyone can post anything on there.

For these reasons I urge you to vote CON