4 ms·

It must be some weird blindness to the privilege of living in a mostly well organized and safe society. The rules were established a long time ago and do their

It must be some weird blindness to the privilege of living in a mostly well organized and safe society. The rules were established a long time ago and do their job like a well oiled IT support department. Invisible to the common person when it works well. Unfortunately they then start questioning why it is necessary.

elhudy 5y ago
This is such an odd conclusion I’m struggling to wrap my head around the mental gymnastics necessary to make it there. Please see my other response addressing the false equivalencies presented in the previous post. Btw the rules were not made “a long time ago”, the law restricting the sale of raw milk was passed in 1987 in the US.
- skummetmaelk 5y ago
  That's the federal ban. Individual states restricted sales of raw milk prior to that. I just find it weird that we start applying germ theory to combating tubercolosis outbreaks, find out raw milk is a problem, FDA makes recommendations to limit the sale of raw milk and sell only pasteurized milk back in the 1920's. Now there's this whole rejection of past experience and known dangers because of a belief in the naturalistic fallacy. Not everything "natural" is good for you. Drinking milk as an adult isn't even natural. It's nice sure, but it's not natural.
  - elhudy 5y ago
    The discussion isn’t about what’s good for you or what’s natural, it’s about whether the government should be able to impose extreme restrictions on what we consume and how those restrictions are implemented. 43 states allow the sale of raw milk in some form or another, but this sale is largely restricted from grocery stores. Of course the FDA recommends limiting the sale of raw milk, why wouldnt they? On a commercial scale allowing the sale of raw milk in grocery stores could be disastrous. But it’s not consumed on that scale and that’s outside of the context of this discussion - which is about it being legal to drink (not sell) raw milk.

elhudy 5y ago

This is such an odd conclusion I’m struggling to wrap my head around the mental gymnastics necessary to make it there. Please see my other response addressing the false equivalencies presented in the previous post. Btw the rules were not made “a long time ago”, the law restricting the sale of raw milk was passed in 1987 in the US.

skummetmaelk 5y ago
That's the federal ban. Individual states restricted sales of raw milk prior to that. I just find it weird that we start applying germ theory to combating tubercolosis outbreaks, find out raw milk is a problem, FDA makes recommendations to limit the sale of raw milk and sell only pasteurized milk back in the 1920's. Now there's this whole rejection of past experience and known dangers because of a belief in the naturalistic fallacy. Not everything "natural" is good for you. Drinking milk as an adult isn't even natural. It's nice sure, but it's not natural.
- elhudy 5y ago
  The discussion isn’t about what’s good for you or what’s natural, it’s about whether the government should be able to impose extreme restrictions on what we consume and how those restrictions are implemented. 43 states allow the sale of raw milk in some form or another, but this sale is largely restricted from grocery stores. Of course the FDA recommends limiting the sale of raw milk, why wouldnt they? On a commercial scale allowing the sale of raw milk in grocery stores could be disastrous. But it’s not consumed on that scale and that’s outside of the context of this discussion - which is about it being legal to drink (not sell) raw milk.