Debra Pickett

I came across the news of the ban on foie gras in a report in the London Daily Telegraph. For this article, and to read an informative account of how foie gras is really produced, see http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/foreign/colinrandall/.

I am intrigued by how such a ban can be introduced and I would appreciate it if someone could spare a minute or three to explain, how, in the Land of the Free, it is possible to ban a perfectly wholesome foodstuff from an entire city.

It is not that I dispute the right of Chicago City Authorities to do so if they so wish and the law allows, it is just that I am puzzled as to why on earth they should want to and how they can do so and not fall foul of the Constitution.

Surely you can't just go round banning things because some ill-informed Animal Welfare Nazi doesn't like it? Can you?

After all, it is not as if foie gras is a noxious substance, nor is it compulsory at present to eat it. Those who don't like it can leave it. Who has decided on this ban? Why?

Foie gras is not just produced from geese, in fact the majority of foie gras comes from ducks. Gourmets assure me that duck foie gras is in fact superior to that from geese, but I am unable to offer a personal opinion as I so rarely eat goose foie gras. In any case, duck or goose, it's all lovely.

Does the ban also extend to duck magret, which is the breast of a duck specially fattened to produce foie gras? If not, why not, or is it just that the Banners don't know what a magret really is?

At the moment, it looks like it is OK to fatten up ducks to eat their plump breasts, as long as you throw away the liver. I'm sure that there's a logic in there somewhere, struggling to get out.