Feds: No Right To Drink Raw Milk

The Feds now claim the right to tell you what kind of food you can put in your mouth.

From World Net Daily:

Attorneys for the federal government have argued in a lawsuit pending in federal court in Iowa that individuals have no “fundamental right” to obtain what food they choose.

The brief was filed April 26 in support of a motion to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund over the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s ban on the interstate sale of raw milk.

“There is no ‘deeply rooted’ historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds,” states the document signed by U.S. Attorney Stephanie Rose, assistant Martha Fagg and Roger Gural, trial attorney for the U.S. Department of Justice.

“Plaintiffs’ assertion of a ‘fundamental right to their own bodily and physical health, which includes what foods they do and do not choose to consume for themselves and their families’ is similarly unavailing because plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to obtain any food they wish,” the government has argued.

WND has reported several times on fed crackdowns on producers of raw milk for friends and neighbors, including the recent case when agents arrived to inspect a private property belonging to Dan Allgyer in Pennsylvania at 5 a.m.

The incident was followed by a report a few days later that documented a proposal pending in Congress that critics say would do for the nation’s food supply what the new health-care reform law has done for health-care.

S. 510, the Food Safety Modernization Act of 2010, may be the most dangerous bill in the history of the U.S.,” critiqued Steve Green on the Food Freedom blog. “It is to our food what the bailout was to our economy, only we can live without money.”

The plan is sponsored by U.S. Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., who explains the legislation “is a critical step toward equipping the FDA with the authorities and funding it needs to regulate what is now a global marketplace for food, drugs, devices and cosmetics.”

Now it’s statism on our plate! Mark Levin’s manifesto – ‘Liberty and Tyranny’ – provides the antidote to its growing stranglehold

His website explains, “The legislation requires foreign and domestic food facilities to have safety plans in place to prevent food hazards before they occur, increases the frequency of inspections. Additionally, it provides strong, flexible enforcement tools, including mandatory recall. Most importantly, this bill generates the resources to support FDA food-safety activities.”

The proposal cleared the U.S. House last year but has been languishing in the Senate because of a full calendar of projects. It creates a long list of new requirements for food-producing entities to meet the demands of the secretary of agriculture. It is expected to be the subject of discussion in coming days.

The Iowa case alleges the federal restrictions on raw milk are a violation of the U.S. Constitution, according to a report at Natural News.

The federal attorneys want the case dismissed.

“The interest claimed by plaintiffs could be framed more narrowly as a right to ‘provide themselves and their families with the foods of their own choice,’” the government document states. But the attorneys say that right doesn’t exist.

“The FDA essentially believes that nobody has the right to choose what to eat or drink,” said the Natural News site, which explains it covers topics that allow individuals to make positive changes in their health, environmental sensitivity and consumer choices.

“You are only ‘allowed’ to eat or drink what the FDA gives you permission to. There is no inherent right or God-given right to consume any foods from nature without the FDA’s consent.”

The Natural News report continued, “The state, in other words, may override your food decisions and deny you free access to the foods and beverages you wish to consume. And the state may do this for completely unscientific reasons – even just political reasons – all at their whim.”

The report cited an increasing level of frustration on the part of the federal government because of tactics including buying “cow shares” in which a consumer drinks milk from a cow he partly owns, or “buying clubs.”

“This arrangement drives the FDA absolutely batty because it bypasses their authority and allows free people to engage in the free sales of raw dairy products produced on small family farms,” Natural News said.

The report blames the aggressive campaign against raw milk on large commercial dairy interests, “because it threatens the commercial milk business.”

The reason cannot be safety, the report said, since a report from the Weston A. Price Foundation revealed that from 1980 to 2005 there were 10 times more illnesses from pasteurized milk than from raw milk.”

4 thoughts on “Feds: No Right To Drink Raw Milk

  1. The Interstate Commerce clause was fundamentally changed / reinterpreted during the FDR era. It’s purpose became price fixing and forming government monopolies. (still is)

    This is why the New Deal was ruled unconstitutional 9 times. FDR argued that the Supreme Court’s decisions limited Democracy. (he was right)

    Eventually FDR “convinced” a couple of justices to change their opinion and the court yielded to the Legislative branch. (mob rule)

  2. I’m curious if you replaced “raw milk” with “cannabis herb” or “opium poppys” or any other good natural product, if the outrage about the evilness of such decrees would be as strong.

    I also question the validity of that last paragraph about the safety of non-pasteurized milk. Are they referring to the actual number of illnesses, or to the percentage within each group of milk users. Obviously there will be more cases among pasteurized-milk drinkers, since they vastly outnumber raw-milk drinkers?! That paragraph worries me :|.

  3. Good point. I’ll check about pasteurized milk.

    I’ve no problem with people smoking dope and think it should be legalized. I have a problem with people smoking (or doing anything else, like chatting on the cell phone) when they’re supposed to be doing something that might endanger my life if it’s not done properly…and if in addition, I as a tax payer, will have to bail them out, pay their medical bills or anything else, or suffer their crimes..

    You’re free to abuse your body any way you want, whether it’s through marijuana, fats, sugar, junk news, sodomy, unprotected promiscuity or anything else..

    Just don’t want any thought police in my house telling me I should also venerate you for your choices…or make them mine

  4. wow.no fundamental right?what gives them the right.they pretty much have control of the food supply.How powerfully evil their statements sound. How about they regulate eating my shit and piss!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>