You have no right to plant a garden and eat the vegetables

Anyone read the article? The judge just said that having a cow and consuming your own milk is a states right thing.

The Federal constitution said nothing about certain foods being protected by the constitution.

So how can strict constitutalionists disagree with this decision?
Especially if they are against the FDA.

OK, A STATES RIGHT THING.

The remedies for oppression are, according to the founders? Hint it is along the same lines as federal thought.

States were not considered any less a threat to liberty then the federal system.
 
Anyone read the article? The judge just said that having a cow and consuming your own milk is a states right thing.

The Federal constitution said nothing about certain foods being protected by the constitution.

So how can strict constitutalionists disagree with this decision?
Especially if they are against the FDA.

OK, A STATES RIGHT THING.

The remedies for oppression are, according to the founders? Hint it is along the same lines as federal thought.

States were not considered any less a threat to liberty then the federal system.

Sure they can. Duhhh.

This problem and similar ones can exist on all levels of government right down to deed restricted neighborhoods which many are stupid enough to buy into.

Of course the lower the level of govt the easier it is to influence and change for the better or worse.
Bribe levels are much cheaper for lobbyists at the city level for instance vs the state level.
 
Last edited:
Anyone read the article? The judge just said that having a cow and consuming your own milk is a states right thing.

The Federal constitution said nothing about certain foods being protected by the constitution.

So how can strict constitutalionists disagree with this decision?
Especially if they are against the FDA.

OK, A STATES RIGHT THING.

The remedies for oppression are, according to the founders? Hint it is along the same lines as federal thought.

States were not considered any less a threat to liberty then the federal system.

Sure they can. Duhhh.

This problem and similar ones can exist on all levels of government right down to deed restricted neighborhoods which many are stupid enough to buy into.

Sure they can? I made no comment on whether they could or could not. I only commented on what the thoughts were at the time of our formation.

The founders gave unchecked power to tax, with the understanding anything extremely oppressive would be met with resistance from the people. Those same sentiments were also felt about the states.
 
OK, A STATES RIGHT THING.

The remedies for oppression are, according to the founders? Hint it is along the same lines as federal thought.

States were not considered any less a threat to liberty then the federal system.

Sure they can. Duhhh.

This problem and similar ones can exist on all levels of government right down to deed restricted neighborhoods which many are stupid enough to buy into.

Sure they can? I made no comment on whether they could or could not. I only commented on what the thoughts were at the time of our formation.

The founders gave unchecked power to tax, with the understanding anything extremely oppressive would be met with resistance from the people. Those same sentiments were also felt about the states.

Yep so either the people are a majority supporting the no right to own a cow and drink your own milk law or they are just dio not care enough to fight it.
Probably the latter since virtually all people drink store bought milk.
 
Anyone read the article? The judge just said that having a cow and consuming your own milk is a states right thing.

The Federal constitution said nothing about certain foods being protected by the constitution.

So how can strict constitutalionists disagree with this decision?
Especially if they are against the FDA.

Just because the Judgement came from a State Court does not make it just. Don't be an Idiot.

Bottom line, if the Ruling is Overturned at the State Level, and The Federal Government has a bug up It's ass, the matter could be addressed as an abuse to the Commerce Clause, which has been done before. The point is Injustice, not what Jurisdiction the Injustice was done. Can one legally consume the milk from one's own cow? We are addressing Personal use, not Commercial use.
 
Whenever anyone asks me why I think the government is the problem I think of things like this.


WI Judge to Zinniker, FTCLDF: No "Fundamental Right" to Own a Cow, or Consume Its Milk...Am I Making Myself*Clear? - Journal - The Complete Patient - The Business of Your Health

I am sure someone thinks this idiot is right, but I cannot imagine it.

Your side always says how fucked up the government is and how they cant do anything right...unless they are bombing a fucking contry and killing people...the the government is just doing a fine job. Righty?

I am pretty sure you cannot find a single post where I defended bombing a country.

If you need more help, let me know.
 
And do you know who would be behind such legislation? Try Cargill and Monsanto. They want to control and profit from EVERY bite of food you put in your mouth and that is grown in the ground. These are two of the most sinister and dangerous corporations out there. THIS is the very reason we need to get all corporate influence OUT of our government, especially these guys.
 
And do you know who would be behind such legislation? Try Cargill and Monsanto. They want to control and profit from EVERY bite of food you put in your mouth and that is grown in the ground. These are two of the most sinister and dangerous corporations out there. THIS is the very reason we need to get all corporate influence OUT of our government, especially these guys.

Break the Monopolies. Encourage Free Market Principle and competition. Business Minds in Government are not always a bad thing, sometimes very necessary when establishing balance.
 
Whatever happened to "government OF the PEOPLE, FOR the PEOPLE, and BY the PEOPLE", huh? Or now, is it supposed to be "OF the STATE, FOR the STATE, and BY the STATE? I guess we can see what this judge thinks......

Actually, the state has nothing to do with it. The state is US! Problem with this country is that it has become of the corporation, for the corporation and by the corporation. THEY alone are behind such dangerous legislation.

Organic Farmers v Monsanto : Slow Food USA
 
Business Minds in Government are not always a bad thing, sometimes very necessary when establishing balance.

I respectfully disagree. The business "minds" are only there to influence legislation to ensure more profit for their industry, 99% of the time, to the detriment of the rest of us and our country. Eliminate all corporate monies coming into government. Overturn corporations' "citizenship" as they have done nothing but abuse it. Allow only real people to send money to campaigns and cap that at $100. Problem solved.
 
Business Minds in Government are not always a bad thing, sometimes very necessary when establishing balance.

I respectfully disagree. The business "minds" are only there to influence legislation to ensure more profit for their industry, 99% of the time, to the detriment of the rest of us and our country. Eliminate all corporate monies coming into government. Overturn corporations' "citizenship" as they have done nothing but abuse it. Allow only real people to send money to campaigns and cap that at $100. Problem solved.

Free Speech includes the Right to hear or read. You can't limit that, without limiting Rights and Ideas. Hearing something and acting on it are also two different things. Many good Business Men have made good Representatives over time. You are confusing Unfair Lobbying Interests with All Business Interest.
 
Whenever anyone asks me why I think the government is the problem I think of things like this.

This court is unwilling to declare that there is a fundamental right to consume the food of one's choice without first being presented with significantly more developed arguments on both sides of the issue." Gee, I thought they both had to do with the right to decide what to do with your own body. As if to show how pissed he was at being questioned, he said his decision translates further that "no, Plaintiffs to not have a fundamental right to own and use a dairy cow or a dairy herd;
"no, Plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to consume the milk from their own cow;"
And in a kind of exclamation point, he added this to his list of no-nos: "no, Plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to produce and consume the foods of their choice..."


WI Judge to Zinniker, FTCLDF: No "Fundamental Right" to Own a Cow, or Consume Its Milk...Am I Making Myself*Clear? - Journal - The Complete Patient - The Business of Your Health

I am sure someone thinks this idiot is right, but I cannot imagine it.

Where does it say it in the Constitution?


Where does The Constitution give the government the power to tell you what you can and cannot eat?
 
You're all missing part of the bigger picture here.

It makes absolutely no difference what any court rules regarding personal production and consumption of goods.

The federal government has already asserted its power to regulate any and all activity by its blatant abuse of the commerce clause.

The Federal government can and has restricted personal use of personally grown produce. The precedent has already been set

Wickard v. Filburn

The government has already been given the power to deny people the ability to grow food for personal use.
 
Last edited:
If I decide to grow a vegetable garden in my back yard, I need to go downtown and get a permit. Telling them exactly what I am going to grow and I am only allowed to have a certain amount.

Not that I would ever do that




















I mean get a permit or anything.

But to grow a garden, I will do, I may have to to feed myself if the government keeps growing like our vegetable gardens should be.
 
You are confusing Unfair Lobbying Interests with All Business Interest.

Where do you think 99% of our legislation comes from, and why is it always so blatantly pro-corporate? It certainly does not do anything beneficial for the majority of our population. One of the roles of government is to protect it's citizens, but it seems that the only ones being protected are corporations. Not one piece of legislation bought with lobbyist money has EVER been for the benefit of regular American citizens. This is the absolute truth.
 

Forum List

Back
Top