The FTCLDF highlighted a few of the key phrases from the FDA's response document in a recent email to its supporters. They include the following two statements from the FDA:
"There is no 'deeply rooted' historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds." [p. 26]
"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." [p.26]
There's a lot more in the document, which primarily addresses the raw milk issue, but these statements alone clearly reveal how the FDA views the concept of health freedom. Essentially, the FDA does not believe in health freedom at all. It believes that it is the only entity granted the authority to decide for you what you are able to eat and drink.
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.
******
But it gets even worse. On page 27 of the dismissal, the FDA also states that Americans do not have a fundamental right to enter into private contractual agreements with one another, either.
Read entire article here>>>>
I found some more tidbits
Here>>>
There is No Right to Consume or Feed Children Any Particular Food (pg25)
There is No Generalized Right to Bodily and Physical Health. (pg26)
There is No Fundamental Right to Freedom of Contract (pg 27)
12 comments:
.... absolutely staggering, on so many levels....
:(
Whatever happened to "Land of the Free"?
This whole thing is so wrong on so many levels, it's hard to even get your mind wrapped around!
Can't help but wonder what's next!
I gotta go with the Hermit on this one...sitting here shaking my head, wondering where to start ranting, realising the whole thing is worthy...
Here's irony: my word verification for this comment: CANDA. One 'a' away...
Slainte, Lady Phelan
I would like it if someone could explain to me why we have a right to health care but no right to Bodily and Physical Health.
Might want to check out Sentate bill S510.. Its a doozy too.. Maybe someone here can tell me something.. If this legal decision states.. "There is No Generalized Right to Bodily and Physical Health" why am I now mandated to purchase health insurance for myself and help pay for anyone that can't afford it with my tax dollars? Thought health care was a "right"?
Sorry Phelan, I didn't read all the comments.. Just finished reading about S510 and figured you would have something to say about it.. I had not read about this decision..
Allie, I have indeed read that bill and it scares me. If passed, I am screwed and will not be able to afford to open the CSA.
I'm in agreement with what HermitJim said, the only thing I can add is it is pure evil!
I hear you Phelan, same goes for us and farmer's market. They are forcing us all to become outlaws.
Phelan said, "I would like it if someone could explain to me why we have a right to health care but no right to Bodily and Physical Health."
The answer to all of this lies in the writings of Albert Jay Nock, who wrote the seminal "Our Enemy the State," way back in the 1930's. He was very smart, prescient, and sagacious. For those interested, here's a free download of this hard to find, out of print book.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig3/nock1.html
This book sums up what every rational, independent person of liberty should be thinking about.
Jeff
Jeff, that was scary sad. Thanks
what they mean is that we have no rights and they have every right.
Post a Comment