Pres. Obama’s war on religious principles

Did you see what the Food and Drug Administration did to an Amish farmer?  The Washington Times reported, and I saw it again tonight on the news:

The FDA won its two-year fight to shut down an Amish farmer who was selling fresh raw milk to eager consumers in the Washington, D.C., region after a judge this month banned Daniel Allgyer from selling his milk across state lines and he told his customers he would shut down his farm altogether.

The decision has enraged Mr. Allgyer’s supporters, some of whom have been buying from him for six years and say the government is interfering with their parental rights to feed their children.

But the Food and Drug Administration, which launched a full investigation complete with a 5 a.m. surprise inspection and a straw-purchase sting operation against Mr. Allgyer’s Rainbow Acres Farm, said unpasteurized milk is unsafe and it was exercising its due authority to stop sales of the milk from one state to another.

[…]

By the way, the FDA is part of the Dept. of Health and Human Services, the HHS, run by the same Kathleen Sebelius, catholic, who at her master’s command is trying to force distribution of abortifacients on Catholic institutions.

One of your fellow readers here is/was a customer of this Amish farmer.  He told me by email that under the cover of darkness the FDA came in armed to raid the man’s farm … at gunpoint.  He has 7 children.  Nice.

The Amish can’t sell milk across state lines, but the Obama Adminstration can sell guns to drug lords across borders.

The Obama Administration is going to make sure you can’t buy or sell milk the way you want to according to your religious principles, and make damn sure your religious principles are violated when turning contraception into a human right entitlement you have to pay for whether you want to or not.

Imagine what a second term would be like.  Without the constraint of facing reelection, how far will he go?

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Our Catholic Identity, Religious Liberty, The Drill, The future and our choices and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

46 Responses to Pres. Obama’s war on religious principles

  1. tcreek says:

    From Rush Limbaugh’s talk show today.

    RUSH: I’m gonna read it to you exactly as it printed out here: “A preschooler at West Hoke Elementary School ate three chicken nuggets for lunch Jan. 30 because a state employee told her the lunch her mother packed was not nutritious. The girl’s turkey and cheese sandwich, banana, potato chips and apple juice did not meet US Department of Agriculture guidelines, according to the interpretation of the agent who was inspecting all lunch boxes in her More at Four classroom that day.”

  2. … inspecting lunchboxes?
    Sheesh!

  3. ConnerW says:

    What a gross distortion of the interstate commerce clause, especially coming from the president, who was a former constitutional law professor.

  4. Subdeacon Joseph says:

    I worked in an Amish wood shop for five years and grew up around them in Adams County Ohio. What is so sad is that the dairy farmer will probably go out of business because he can afford to sell his healthy product to conscientious consumers at a fair price. If he had to sell his milk in bulk he wouldn’t get nearly the amount he does at the local farmer’s market.

    You know, I thought Mrs. Obama was a super local organic health food nut!

  5. EXCHIEF says:

    When you and your regime are Marxists and you realize that the only potential formidable opponent you have is religion, and when you only feign being religious yourself for voter appeal, then you will do your best to destroy religion—won’t you Mr. Sotero? No sense asking him that question as you would simply get a lie as an answer.

  6. APX says:

    This reminds me of something my Mormon friends kept posting on Facebook in the US regarding their food stores. The FBI has actually raided food storage facilities demanding to know who their customers are.

    I think you guys should ditch your $1 bills and make a coin with Obama on the back and call it a Loonie.

  7. EXCHIEF says:

    One more thing since it is clear that Obama is aligned with the anti-life crowd. Obamacare includes the provision for a huge increase in IRS agents. Any doubt they would go after the tax exempt status of any religion that dares ever mention a political candidate from the pulpit? And no, I am not a conspiracy theorist.

  8. Sword40 says:

    As Ezra Meeker, the American pioneer and western settler, said to his wagon train folks, when a disagreement arose; “its time for a divide”. Lets buy Mr. O a one-way ticket to Kenya. I’m sure they’ll just love him “back home”.

  9. Andrew says:

    The Washington Times article mentions something interesting, namely: at one point the farmer “arranged to sell shares in the cows to his customers, arguing that they owned the milk and he was only transferring it to them.”

    That was a noteworthy “accommodation” I would say. Reminds me of a certain recent insurance “accommodation”.

    But the judge, according to Washington Times “called that deal merely a subterfuge.”

  10. tcreek says:

    Raw milk was the only milk that my parents, grandparents and all farmers and their families ever drank. Non dairy neighboring farmers would swap eggs, sausage, sorghum, grain, whatever, for milk and vice versa.

  11. Winfield says:

    This kind of law may have its origins in the New Deal. Recall the stories about killing hogs and other livestock and burning or burying their corpses–during the Depression? Plowing up acres of grain to create artificial shortages–all at the order of “superior men.” The heavy regulation of agricultural products began then, driven in part by the (admittedly fictional) stories in Steinbeck et al., and the undying belief in the wisdom of “experts.” If you haven’t yet read Jonah Goldberg’s 2007 book Liberal Fascism, you’ll find it hauntingly relevant. Watch for much heavier regulation of farmers’ markets, bake sales (already happening), lemonade stands (ditto), and much else. The destruction of our liberties didn’t begin with Obama, but it has certainly accelerated under his administration.

  12. Elizabeth M says:

    I think we have to look at it from both sides. It is (so far) legal for him to sell unpasteurized milk within the State he lives. The law forbids interstate sale based on contamination since it takes time to transport it. Half my family are Amish, so I can understand that this farmer is trying to make a living in the way he can. In California the laws are even more restrictive and recently the government stopped the sale of unpasteurized milk of an “organic” diary farm in Fresno because of an E Coli scare. The gov was more afraid of a lawsuit than anything else. We’re headed for tough times so we must be active vocal Catholics if we want things to change.

  13. Elizabeth M says:

    I also wanted to say that if someone had become sick from this milk, the first thing the relatives of the sick person would do is run to the government and ask them why they let this man sell contaminated goods.

  14. Scarltherr says:

    We are talking here abut milk, but the truth is, the larger picture is bout bout the immortal souls of our children. Are you or your child allowed to procreate, provide food, etc., without government intervention? How long do you think that will last?

  15. Titus says:

    What a gross distortion of the interstate commerce clause, especially coming from the president, who was a former constitutional law professor.

    Actually, the prohibition of the interstate shipping of specified goods is almost certainly one of the few things that Congress can do under the commerce clause. Surely that’s the legitimate rationale behind the Comstock or Mann Acts.

    But the history of FDA milk regulation would make for a really interesting read. These laws are not, as a poster above suggested, Depression New Deal innovations: they’re Progressive Era reforms designed to protect consumers from disease and fraudulent trade dress. The concern then was that merchants were selling products that were decidedly unsafe, and labeling them in such a way as to conceal their hazards. Needless to say, it seems that the present administration is merely enforcing rules for the sake of enforcing rules.

  16. When I am feeling particularly stressed, I often muse about quitting my job and becoming an Amish farmer. I see that their lot is not all that pleasant at times. The time has come for those of all religions to unite and rise up against those elected officials who are hostile to religion and “throw the bums out.” In a democracy, we get the government we deserve. Clearly, we have not been attentive to the preservation of the liberties that the Founding Fathers wanted to enshrine in our Constitution.

  17. chcrix says:

    Let us remember that Mr. Obama is not responsible for the situation the United States is in right now. He is just an empty suit.

    It is not possible to seriously maintain that such a raid and court decision could not have occurred during any of the last 4 or 5 presidential administrations – Repocrat or Demublican.

    Yes, we do get the government deserved. Unfortunately the source of the problem is at least 100 years old.

    Focusing too much on Barry O perpetuates the charade that we actually have a choice in our ‘elections’.

  18. xsosdid says:

    To go with yer mini depression, you got yer milky prohibition…

  19. muckemdanno says:

    Obama did not create the FDA. Obama is not the one who has decided that the federal government has the power to regulate the the food we choose to eat.

    “Friends Don’t Let Friends Vote”

  20. Uncledan says:

    Time for solutions. Rather than wring our hands and complain, why don’t we take up the weapons we have and fight this horrible administration?
    Would Father Z or anyone else be willing to post a date for an online rosary rally? For example, a Saturday at noon. You wouldn’t have to be at this site, just join in from wherever you are. Or, it could be directed from this site. Whatever. The point is: we have our weapons – rosary, prayer, bible, mass, fasting, confession. Why not use them?

  21. digdigby says:

    “A preschooler at West Hoke (NC) Elementary School ate three chicken nuggets for lunch Jan. 30 because a state employee told her the lunch her mother packed was not nutritious. The girl’s turkey and cheese sandwich, banana, potato chips and apple juice did not meet US Department of Agriculture guidelines, according to the interpretation of the agent who was inspecting all lunch boxes in her classroom.”

  22. heway says:

    Sorry, but your cow, your milk, you may drink it but the public shouldn’t – because it is not pasteurized. That was the law in New York State in 1968. I tried to buy a neighbor’s fresh milk but they would not sell it to me and that is why – the law and the danger..

  23. Margaret says:

    I hope the Amish vote.

  24. When I see these stories, I am reminded of something from the Nicene Creed: “He shall come again in glory to judge the living and the dead, and His kingdom shall have no end.”

    That isn’t about Ron Paul, Mitt Romney, or any other man. It’s about Our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ. Obama, Sebelius, and all the rest will have to answer to Him.

    Lord, come quickly.

  25. Clinton R. says:

    Gee, why drink fresh milk or eat fresh foods when we can eat genetically modified food brought to us by the good folks at Monsanto.

  26. How long until you throw this tyrant’s carcass into the Tiber?

  27. Peter in Canberra says:

    With respect Father, there are some pretty well documented reasons that underpin the prohibition of sale of raw milk in a lot of jurisdictions around the world. Protection of public health.
    Not every law is a bad one.

  28. New Sister says:

    FDA and Bishops should reverse roles: it would be more appropriate for the FDA to (like our Bishops) publish documents/pamphlets that warn citizens against buying a product that the government deems risky to their health, but ultimately leaving it up to their consciences – the “right to choose” – on what to feed their families. Bishops ought to act more like the FDA… come in armed and scourge the temple of filth, where souls (not stomachs) are imperiled.

  29. Phil_NL says:

    @Peter in Canberra :

    Those concerns would warrant labelling, so people who are at risk (if your immune system is fine, it’s minimal; the French eat cheeses of unpasteurised milk by the kilo) know to avoid this milk and its products. There’s no reason to forbid it, people can decide form themselves if they want to risk it. Every time we let the government determine whether or not we can think properly regarding our own health is one time too many.

    There are better arguments against kosher/halal butchering than against unpasteurised milk. Strangely enough, the former is usually allowed. Guess you’re just out of luck if you have objections against pasteurizing.

  30. GordonB says:

    Its not just Democrats who oppose raw milk sales… I live in Kansas – Red State, and a dairy farmer I know was threatened by legal authorities for selling raw milk.

  31. Andrew says:

    I grew up on raw milk only. My mother used to boil it which makes it perfectly safe.

  32. cwhitty says:

    By “her master” are you referring to the Evil One, Obama, or both?

  33. Mrs. O says:

    I believe we have gotten where we are by a combination of things especially abuse of lawsuits. Our niece was denied treatment at a hospital because they had not performed the c-section (bleeding afterwards) but would stabilize her and transport her to the other hospital. Why? Lawsuits. It has all gotten out of hand and we are creating an environment for something far worse- socialism and/or tyranny. As long as they agree to deal with any adverse side effects they may have, there should be no reason to do this. Of course, I didn’t realize how absurd things have gotten regarding the agriculture side either with lawsuits against farmers in which there was cross pollination (companies have patents on seeds!). Election time can’t come fast enough.

  34. jarhead462 says:

    Peter in Canberra: Actually, raw milk in of itself is usually more safe than pasturized, as long as the environment where it is produced meets the standards for hygiene. Pasturization became the law in the early part of the 20th century, because mass production farms were not adhering to proper cleanliness protocalls. Since pasturization became the norm, there has been many outbreaks of illness which can be traced to the pasturization process, i.e. Cleanliness of equipment, and the additional handling of the product, which increases the chance of contamination. Not to mention the fact that the pasturization process strips the milk of almost ANY nutrition, to the point where stuff has to be added.

    Semper Fi!

  35. Peggy R says:

    There’s always been the possibility of over-regulation that could be approved by courts. This is why the character and background of a president–and all elected officials–is important. O has consistently chosen the side of limiting freedom–religious, economic and political. He is a Statist. O adopted new limits on garage sales of some products, in the name of public safety. There was also a new farming regulation having to do with run-off that I understood was going to hurt Amish immensely. Some other farm regulations, ie, of dust, I understood were walked back after much outrage–but I don’t know what we can really believe from the media of course. Independent research is vital today–and more feasible with the Internet.

    People making their own decisions based on their own values and interests really, really bothers this man. And that should bother all of us. Immensely.

  36. Joe Magarac says:

    For the record:

    1. I don’t think this is a free exercise of religion case. The Amish version of the Christian faith does not require Amish farmers to drink or sell raw milk.

    2. I don’t think this is an example of the Obama administration taking federal oversight to a new extreme. (There are lots of examples of that; but this isn’t one of them). In 1942, the Supreme Court held (Wickard v. Filburn) that the Constitution’s commerce clause allows the federal government to regulate farmers even if their products never cross state lines. That’s why the FDA had the legal right to get involved here.

    3. I am on the fence about whether or not to sympathize with raw milk farmers. From what I read, raw milk is perfectly safe so long as the farm where it is produced is spotlessly clean. It is even arguably better for you than pasteurized milk, as the pasteurization kills good bacteria as well as bad. However, there are plenty of examples of good farms and good farmers making mistakes that prove harmful to consumers: here in PA, a man was recently paralyzed from a disease he got by drinking raw milk, and any number of people have gotten sick from it as it has become more popular. We can debate whether the answer to this risk is a flat ban on raw milk, or a labelling requirement, or an open market (caveat emptor!). I hope we can agree that those who favor a ban have a legitimate argument, even if we don’t think it’s the right one.

  37. tealady24 says:

    When my husband and I were innkeepers in NH we bought raw milk from the dairy farm adjacent to our property; we always said exactly what it was and many people used it. It was delicious and we never had a problem. Again, it’s government stepping on our rights!

    How far will he go? Do you have to ask? This atheist wants to take away all our rights until all that is left is what the government tells us to do. After all, it’s equal everything for everybody; isn’t that the socialist way? He wants to collapse this country as it runs now, into a government dependent state, just like Greece.

    Then, he will have the coronation day that he has been patiently waiting for.

  38. Liz says:

    Scary! By the way, have you ever smelled old, pasteurized milk?…like some that has leaked in a car or been wiped up with rags. It is perhaps one of the foulest smells ever! Raw milk when it is old smells sour, but not putrid. I buy raw milk presently and the good, Catholic law-abiding people I buy it from live in fear of the government and no wonder. They are so careful to follow every law, but it’s still scary.

  39. AnAmericanMother says:

    We had one of the last raw-milk dairies here in Atlanta when I was young. It was owned by a family that had been in the dairy business forever – when the patriarch died it was sold and ceased operations.
    The dairy had a playground, picnic area and lake, and they hosted school and Scout tours and were open to the public on visiting days. They were thoroughly inspected and certified, and the place was cleaner than a hospital.
    It’s possible to have a good raw-milk dairy, but there has to be a state certification process in place.
    That subsidiarity thing again!

  40. oakdiocesegirl says:

    I seem to recall some Church official once saying no Catholic could in good conscience vote for the Democratic platform because of its positions on abortion & contraception. Wouldn’t it be great if the USCCB came out on the record saying No Catholic Could in good conscience Vote for Obama’s re-election because of his administrative record on abortion & contraception? Well, I can dream, can’t I? Did you catch George Will on ABCSunday saying the USCCB got what they deserved for enthusiastically supporting Obamacare? Also, Donna Brazile revealed herself to be a Pelosi catholic.
    Meanwhile, in my diocese, we’re wondering why Bp. Cordelione STILL hasn’t issued a pastoral letter from all pulpits in solidarity w/other bishops. Very strange, considering his activism against same-sex marriage. What ‘s up with that?

  41. Pingback: Nazi Nanny Cares For Your Milk. « Mundabor's Blog

  42. Pingback: THURSDAY RELIGIOUS LIBERTY EXTRA | ThePulp.it

  43. Supertradmum says:

    The name of the game is CONTROL. It doesn’t matter whether it is cheese sandwiches, milk or contraceptives. A tyranny, by definition, places all modes of independence under one rule. We already have a tyrannical government. It’s tentacles are just growing longer and stronger.

    The will to power reveals evil. When one loses the right to make their kid’s lunch, parental control is lost to state control. When one loses the right to sell raw milk, one loses the right to support themselves by prudence and good judgment. When one voted for Obamacare, the list just grew longer of the areas of bloated government control. He who has power wants more and he who loses power rarely gets it back.

  44. PostCatholic says:

    One lost the right to sell unpasteurized milk in interstate commerce in 1987, under the Reagan administration.

  45. Tina in Ashburn says:

    The war on raw milk has been going on for a long time. Apparently, it is more dangerous than illegal drugs and drug cartels; contraceptives, abortion, and the morning-after-pill; spouse and child battering; human trafficking. Whereas there are many documented benefits of raw milk and cheese [from clean dairies], the government is swift and cruel in denying the population this food that everyone used to consume regularly for thousands of years.

    Its not about religion or Obama – this raw milk tyranny is an old one, and I don’t get it. There are so many other real dangers that should be squashed.

  46. Pingback: Convert Journal – 7 Quick Takes Friday (set #55)