How The USDA Ruined Burns Supper
As I write this, it is Burns Night, the occasion of a traditional Scottish celebration that honors the birthday of Robert Burns (1759-1796), a poet and lyricist of both the English and Scottish languages who inspired classical liberals and socialists alike. The occasion is marked by a Burns supper, which begins as any other gathering. The host welcomes everyone and the festivities begin. A traditional prayer is said, after which an opening course of soup is served.
The main course of haggis is then brought in to a fanfare of bagpipes. The host, or perhaps a guest talented in oration, recites Address to a Haggis. A Scotch whisky toast is made and the meal of haggis with potatoes and rutabagas begins. After this, dessert, cheeses, and/or coffee may be served and various speeches and toasts are made. These typically include a speech about the life and works of Burns, a speech by the host, a toast to the lassies by a male guest and a response to the laddies by a female guest.
People then sing songs and recite poems written by Burns, which could go on for as long as the host and guests wish. Finally, the host calls on a guest to give the vote of thanks, after which everyone stands, joins hands, and sings Auld Lang Syne to end the event.
Although I have no Scottish ancestry of which I am aware and am only scarcely familiar with Burns, I have found the above custom to be a great deal of fun. But the Burns supper, like so many other fun things, has been ruined by government regulation. The USDA ruled in 1971 that “[l]ivestock lungs shall not be saved for use as human food,” although they can still be used for pet food.
Sheep lungs are a key ingredient in haggis, along with the heart, liver, and suet of the animal. Oatmeal, onions, and spices are also used. These are all minced, stuffed into the stomach of the animal, and baked. Thus, it is impossible to purchase a proper haggis in America. Unless one has access to a livestock farmer who can provide a sheep for slaughter or can go hunting for a wild bighorn sheep, one must find a lung-free substitute.
Having eaten both a proper haggis and a lung-free substitute, I can tell you that the lungs make a profound difference. A lung-free haggis is more of a cross between sausage and livermush than a proper haggis. The lungs contribute a certain lightness and peculiar flavor that set the haggis apart from other offal dishes with similar ingredients.
So why did the benevolent overlords who wish to dictate to us what we may or may not consume decide to ban lungs from being used as food? Clearly it is not a matter of food safety, as many regional cuisines throughout the world feature lung dishes, with no demonstrated ill effects for those who consume them. It is also not a matter of appearances; while some people do not like the idea of eating something which may have been exposed to bodily fluids, this reasoning fails to explain why lungs are banned but stomachs and intestines are allowed.
Perhaps it is the lung mucus that motivates the ban, but this can be disgorged by parboiling them, as anyone who has prepared a lung dish of any kind can attest. We are left with no reason but the usual one: government regulator busybodies telling the rest of us what to do simply because they can. As there is no logical or empirical reason to sustain the lung ban, let us take a stand for food freedom. Remove pointless regulations, restore the Burns supper, and bring back the haggis!
<<A case for self-defense against Child Protective Services++++++++++++++++++The fallacies of blaming Walmart for obesity>>