Feds Tell Court They Can Decide What You Eat

[Rupert Pupkin]

There is a case going on right now where attorneys for the federal government have argued that citizens have no "fundamental right" to obtain what food they choose. I don't make this stuff up. Here is the quote from the US Attorney representing the government: "There is no 'deeply rooted' historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds."

They go on to say, "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."

These words speak for themselves. There is no way to spin this.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=153133

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

There is a case going on right now where attorneys for the federal government have argued that citizens have no "fundamental right" to obtain what food they choose. I don't make this stuff up. Here is the quote from the US Attorney representing the government: "There is no 'deeply rooted' historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds."

They go on to say, "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."

These words speak for themselves. There is no way to spin this.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=153133

So you think the public should have unfettered access to any "food"..and this can be a very broad category...that anyone wants to sell to them? I don't.

[Danzig]

the spin is already on, by the 'natural news' or whatever they call themselves. a suit over milk. another example of the litigious society we live in.


as for obtaining any food we wish-absinthe, anyone?

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Danzig

the spin is already on, by the 'natural news' or whatever they call themselves. a suit over milk. another example of the litigious society we live in.


as for obtaining any food we wish-absinthe, anyone?

I'm down.

[dellinger63]

It's already been done locally. The Chicago city council outlawed foie gras last year.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

It's already been done locally. The Chicago city council outlawed foie gras last year.

That, I disagreed with..but in general, I think the FDA does need to have some regulatory power

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

It's already been done locally. The Chicago city council outlawed foie gras last year.

But smoking is still OK in all 50 states. Go figure.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

It's already been done locally. The Chicago city council outlawed foie gras last year.

I think that when it comes to animal cruelty, the government needs to get involved. The making of foie gras is very cruel. They force feed these animals with a tube down their throat to make their liver the size of a grape-fruit.

Here is some information about how foie gras is made:

"Foie gras, French for "fatty liver," is made from the grotesquely enlarged livers of male ducks and geese. The birds are kept in tiny wire cages or packed into sheds. Pipes are repeatedly shoved down the birds' throats, and up to 4 pounds of grain and fat are pumped into their stomachs two or three times every day. The pipes puncture many birds' throats, sometimes causing the animals to bleed to death. This cruel procedure causes the birds' livers to become diseased and swell to up to 10 times their normal size. Many birds become too sick to stand up. The birds who survive the force-feeding are killed, and their livers are sold for foie gras."

That is cruelty to animals. That should be illegal. IMO.

http://www.goveg.com/feat/foie/

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by Danzig

the spin is already on, by the 'natural news' or whatever they call themselves. a suit over milk. another example of the litigious society we live in.


as for obtaining any food we wish-absinthe, anyone?

just an ounce,please!

[Riot]

These words speak for themselves. There is no way to spin this.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=153133

Well, I think the article spun it alot. What it says in context is that people cannot force the federal government to allow raw milk to be sold across states lines based simply upon the "rights" of some people to want to drink it.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Riot

Well, I think the article spun it alot. What it says in context is that people cannot force the federal government to allow raw milk to be sold across states lines based simply upon the "rights" of some people to want to drink it.

I agree there may be some "spin" in the article. But that still doesn't change the words of the US Attorney. The words are what they are. Maybe the US Attorney shouldn't have made such a broad statement.