It has more enzymes and nutrients for you that pasteurized milk doesn't have. Also, raw milk has been proven to help asthma, allergies, hay fever, and other respiratory infections. Raw milk also helps the environment because cows that produce raw milk live roaming free , whereas cos that produce pasteurized milk are stuck in a pen all day eating corn.
Yes, raw milk should be sold legally. Although the arguments against its use are valid, raw milk is just fine to drink if you get it from a reliable source. The ban against it is to prevent people from selling bad or impure milk. If a person does their due diligence and trusts the source of their raw milk, the government should not get in the way of them purchasing and consuming it.
Raw ilk should be sold legally. I'm personally not a fan of it and it is nothing that I would buy, but I'm sure there are consumers out there that would. People should be able to pick up the milk of their choice. The positive of selling raw milk vastly outweigh the negatives.
Considering all the hormones and chemicals in the milk we buy, I believe it should be our choice. Just like you can buy organic milk, you should be able to buy raw milk. People believe in the concept of organic products and many believe they are healthier for you. So how would unpasturized milk be any different? Heat probably kills many of the nutrients in the milk. With a short shelf life I don't see the harm in letting it be a choice for people.
Raw milk has many beneficial nutrients that are removed when they are pasteurized. The Pennsylvania Bureau of Foods and Chemistry says that pasteurization removes some beneficial qualities of milk, such as antibacterial properties. You may argue that there are more germs, diseases. and even pieces of straw or hay in the milk, but this isn't true, the milk is filtered first.