By Michael Kennedy
The University of Louisville will soon enact caloric-intake restrictions on its students, according to university officials. The new program will only allow students to buy 2,500 calories per day at university dining facilities.
Kentucky has one of the highest obesity rates in the country, and U of L wants to do its part to lower that number, the administration said.
One university official acknowledged that some students may like to consume more than 2,500 calories per day, but said, “It’s really not in their best interest to do this.”
If the above scenario seems frightening, it is no different than the grim reality facing campus smokers. The quote above actually referred to smoking, not eating – both of which are equally legal for adults.
The university wants make Kentucky healthier, its student body healthier and students happier. Indeed, these are all noble goals. But these goals should not be pursued at the expense of liberty.
The University of Louisville is a public university, and smoking is legal in Kentucky (and every other state). While on campus, adults should be allowed to participate in whatever legal activity they choose. It’s wrong for the university to second-guess the decisions of its students, and to tell these students that the administration really knows their “best interest.” This is particularly true for students living on campus, who call U of L their “home.”
This isn’t the first time the university has stifled freedom in the interests of a safer, happier environment. Last month, a federal court ruled that U of L must reinstate a nursing student who was expelled for her MySpace blog postings; it seems U of L overstepped its authority. Fortunately, freedom prevailed in that case, but the smoking ban will likely be enacted without a hiccup.
It is still unclear how U of L athletic facilities will be affected by the smoking ban. But it’s not hard to imagine the university would like to see the football stadium completely smoke-free. This would lead to a possible scenario where smoking is banned, but drinking is encouraged. Alcohol would flow abundantly, while nary a cigarette would be in sight. Meanwhile, many college students are too young to legally drink, but almost all are old enough to buy cigarettes.
Why would the university allow that? More college students die in drunk-driving related accidents than from smoking-related causes every year. Surely Budweiser money doesn’t play a role.
But rather than banning drinking and smoking, and turning us into Brigham Young University, the administration should allow the legislatures to make the laws, and focus on educating us.
Shrug now, non-smokers; it’s not your vice that is being targeted. But if you value your Oreos, let the administration know you are concerned about this recent disturbing trend.
