In San Francisco, the Board of Supervisors actually congregated to officially pass San Francisco as the first city to have “Meatless Monday.”  In the land of Rice-A-Roni, where the homeless roam in Golden Gate Park muttering, chasing and scaring small children, adults and the like, I think that the Board of Supervisors could have discussed other more pursing issues (i.e. Unemployment, homelessness, etc).  This blog is not meant to be political, but this “Meatless Monday” campaign made me think about how can a government impose upon individual choices?

I understand the issues at hand with “Meatless Monday”: reducing carbon foot print, healthier lifestyle, etc. Where is the line drawn?

Different cities have implemented this policy, which I think is a grave mistake.  In a private industry, companies have more flexibility with policy implementation.  For example, if Bill Gates wanted all of Microsoft employees to wear a t-shirt with his face on it and call it a company uniform, he could:

Not to say that Microsoft is not already like this…Anyways, the point is that I do not think that the government has the right to step into the private lives of individuals.  Would it necessarily be fair if the government stepped in and forced individuals to use the iPad?  Currently the iPad is very green in comparison to other technologies.

The moral of the story is that whether you are a carnivore, omnivore, vegetarian or vegan, the government should not step outside of their boundaries of the government and onto the dinner table of anyone.So the next time that you think of participating in “Meatless Monday” think about what else the government will try to implement.

Is Mac-less Monday next?

Disclaimer: All of the views expressed in this specific blog do not necessarily reflect the values and beliefs of the switchtomac.com blog.

Appendix A: “Meatless Monday”

According to:

a study by Cranfield University, commissioned by WWF, the environmental group, found a substantial number of meat substitutes – such as soy, chickpeas and lentils – were more harmful to the environment because they were imported into Britain from overseas.

The study concluded: “A switch from beef and milk to highly refined livestock product analogues such as tofu could actually increase the quantity of arable land needed to supply the UK.”

The results showed that the amount of foreign land required to produce the substitute products – and the potential destruction of forests to make way for farmland – outweighed the negatives of rearing beef and lamb in the UK.

An increase in vegetarianism could result in the collapse of British farming, the study warned, causing meat production to move overseas where there may be less legal protection of forests and uncultivated land. [via Telegraph]

*Take that you hippie vegetarians.