Well, I don't have kids. Maybe you should stop trying to make assumptions about me and respond to the argument. The original argument is that schools offering lunch to students is a government takeover of a role that parents are suppose to provide, and your take on it is that people who elect to buy the school lunch are outsourcing that role to the government. You have provided no evidence to back that up other than anecdotal evidence about your own family, making up assumptions about me and others, and re-framing the argument to make it about the quality of school lunches rather than the principle of whether they should be offered or not (the strawman fallacy).

Oh, and the comparison with restaurants are because it's the same situation-parents paying a restaurant to provide food for their kids; like when they pay a school cafeteria to provide it. That's the equivalency. In both situations they are paying for something that you argue they should be doing themselves.