My husband stormed in from his shop on Tuesday, furious over a news story he heard on the Rush Limbaugh show. It seems there are now Nutrition Nazis inspecting preschoolers’ homemade lunches in North Carolina. A hapless 4-year-old was required to eat chicken nuggets instead of the sandwich her mother had packed.

These Nutrition Nazis are just another manifestation of government tyranny in America.

I own a book called “Government Nannies” by Cathy Duffy. Written back in 1995, it was an alarming analysis of the true agenda of Goals 2000 (remember that?), which foretold exactly what’s happening today.

“While most of us weren’t looking,” writes Duffy, “our government redefined its role. Cradle-to-grave care from your concerned government is the new plan. … Parents and families are no longer assumed to be competent enough to handle their responsibilities on their own. The government decided to join us as partners in parenting.” She adds, “… Goals 2000 goes much further, out of the classroom and into the home, beyond instruction and into indoctrination. … Fixing families is beginning to dominate the school agenda.” [Emphasis added.]

Seventeen years ago, Duffy noted how public schools, because they are a constant in the lives of most children, were becoming hubs for family assistance programs. Fast forward to today, when we have Nutrition Nazis analyzing the bag lunches of preschoolers.

Health care and its corollary, nutrition, is fast becoming the back-door approach into the lives of all Americans. After all, who can object to the idea of children receiving the best possible nutrition? While it’s only in the la-la-land of government logic that chicken nuggets could be considered nutritionally superior to a turkey-and-cheese sandwich, nonetheless these goons took the opportunity to intimidate a four-year-old into believing mommy wasn’t smart enough to properly feed her own child.

And that concept – parental incompetence – is the implied (and sometimes stated) justification behind this kind of blatant and unconstitutional abuse of power. Consider the interview with Debbie Squires, associate director of the Michigan Elementary and Middle School Principles Association, during a House Education Committee hearing: “You know, educators go through education for a reason. They are the people who know best about how to serve children. That’s not necessarily true of an individual resident. I’m not saying they don’t want the best for their children, but they may not know what actually is best from an education standpoint.”

Yep, that’s us parents. Dumb as rocks.

Naturally, there are some parents who are, indeed, dumb as rocks. But the vast majority of parents, as Squires so condescendingly admits, want what’s best for their children. And if a mother thinks a turkey-and-cheese sandwich and a banana constitutes a suitably nutritious lunch, no government goon has the right to intimidate a kid into thinking otherwise.

Needless to say, this issue goes so much deeper than feigned concern over a preschooler’s meal. This issue embraces the very essence of individual liberty. If we’re going to recapture the unique freedoms that were once the hallmark of this nation, we’d darn well better start by divorcing ourselves from any and every government “service” we possibly can … beginning with public schools.

It was Adolf Hitler who said, “He alone, who owns the youth, gains the future.” He also said, “When an opponent declares, ‘I will not come over to your side,’ I calmly say, ‘Your child belongs to us already.’ … What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.”

If these words don’t send chills down your spine, you’re already a member of this “new community.” And if you willingly send your children to public schools, you must accept that they will end up in this “new community” as well.

Naturally, we all have the compulsion to help “at risk” children. What’s less well-known is that under the purposely broad definition established by the government, nearly every single child can be defined as “at risk.” Even more telling, there are NO criteria for determining what constitutes “normal” for a child.

Are there parents who are neglectful? Of course. We’re a nation of over 300 million people, and there are as many ways to raise children as there are parents. However, that doesn’t mean every parent should be presumed guilty because of the sins of the statistically few. But this doesn’t prevent the government from concluding that because some parents need help, then solutions must be forced upon all, regardless of whether that intervention is wanted or needed.

Since it’s defined as a health issue, the strangling tentacles of “good nutrition” are so comprehensive and invasive that virtually every private aspect of family life could legitimately come under scrutiny of government goons – discipline, housing, education, shopping habits, religious philosophy, income, mental health, tobacco and alcohol use, even parental sex lives.

The more the government pushes to include all families under its beneficent rules for good nutrition, the more certain free-thinking families will resist. Of course, these resisters are automatically categorized as suspicious on government watch lists. After all, why else would they object to such generous and altruistic intervention unless they have something to hide? The previously ridiculed “tinfoil hat” concepts of home inspections or parental licensing or other Camazotz-like requirements are fast approaching reality.

And what happens if parents don’t like the government’s intervention? What if parents really DO think they know best how to raise their kids? What will the Nutrition Nazis do then? Will they fine the parents? Require children to attend public schools and/or day care? Remove the children from their parents’ custody?

If you’ve ever wondered if there was a good time to remove your children from the clutches of the Nazi goons, it’s now. As Duffy put it, “All of this exhibits a massive mistrust of parents. Government would have absolutely no need to know what goes on within our families unless they intend to do something about it. Because they have assumed the right and the authority to fix our families, they see nothing wrong with invasive practices.” [Emphasis added.]

These invasive practices are on the rise. The “new community” of children who no longer trust their parents is growing. If you continue to send your kids to government schools, you will be forced to reap what the government sows.

Don’t say I didn’t warn you.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.