We believe that we live in a Democratic and free society, where justice is blind and protects the poor and despondent of the world. We are one of the last great nations that has a social safety net large enough to catch those who would otherwise fall through the cracks. So, in a backwards slide from freedom to government controlled bread lines comes the enforcement of the nationwide removal of the Super Size selection from the Mcdonald's menu. How in this day and age of "bigger is better" does one of the world's largest corporation begin nationwide "downsizing" in our range of free choice. After years and years of Mcdonald's induced stomach expansion, how will they now deny me the right to a satisfying 64oz Coke and 1/2lb of fried potatoes. Will my stomach ever truly be able to recover and to shrink beneath its present 4 cubic liter capacity.
Did any CEO or top executive stop and ask the question: Will this decision hinder the personal growth of so many of the horizontally challenged around the world? Why, I ask, when personal fullfillment adorns the cover of so many self-help books, does Mcdonalds want to deny me the right to sustenance fulfillment? If I choose to eat in order to fill my gaping existential void, is it really so wrong. What will they do next, require harper and collins to impose a page limit on the books that they publish citing a desire to not "overfeed" peoples brains? We spoke about this at my obese rights group meeting last week and I discovered that I was not the only one whom felt outraged about such a personally touching issue. In a poignant address, my fellow activist delivered a speech reminiscent of a US presidential address in the following way; "Starve me once, and I go to bed hungry, starve me twice and I will eat your insides and use your carcass to stay warm in the cold Toronto winters...or something like that." Who could deny such eloquence and emotional forcefulness? Well I guess that the corporate totalitarian regime called "Mcdonalds" would do so. All I want is to continue on my own chosen journey of horizontal growth, is that too much to ask?
Answer to last post's question: If you are the same mass and volume of a small Chinese village you should be bludgeoned over the head and shipped to said village in cold storage so that you will be fresh and ready to serve on arrival. Descartes did not think animals were rational.
Question of the Post: Why do text books claim a "normal" range of body wieght? Obviously, the text book corporations are enforcing a bodytypist stance and should be brought before a government tribunal on hate crimes. Einstein, in his theory of special relativity espoused the proof that time is a structure relative to the set of clocks used to measure according to the speed of that set of clocks. Why then are textbooks not written relative to watches attached to a fat persons wrist, which moves slower, than they are to skinny persons watches who move at a faster pace?
No comments:
Post a Comment