Jump to content
I thought there had to be some conservatives involved in this, but I wasn't sure enough to say so.
I don't see how a conservative could oppose this because it's educating the public -- regardless of what the government thinks -- and allowing the free market to determine what happens.
What does it matter who proposed it, Jerry? Or do you automatically discount things when you know they were proposed by liberals?
Did you guys really do your homework on this? It sure doesn't look like it.
Everyone has really said all that needs saying to set the record straight here.
In particular, your naivety comes through clearly when you essentially say that since the USDA and FDA say these foods are safe, we should trust in them. Did it escape you that the head of food safety at the FDA used to be the head of public policy at Monsanto? C'mon, people. Wake up! Why do you think these companies are throwing tens of millions of dollars into campaigns to defeat these initiatives no matter where they pop up; conversely, they support a bill -- that thankfully hasn't gotten very far -- which would allow genetically modified foods to be labeled as natural and would hamstring any attempts to require companies to label their foods as genetically modified. Do you really think these guys have the public's best interests at heart? Oh yeah, they do, because they figure the public will shun GM foods if they know they're out there. Better for everyone that they not be told at all.
Here's my take on what's really going on here:
Chemical companies got approval from the EPA way back when for Roundup. They then sold this to farmers along with genetically modified seeds that could withstand Roundup. But recently, the weeds have been growing resistance to Roundup, so these companies have been forced to turn to a cocktail of chemicals, one of which was the primary ingredient in agent orange. They then created seeds that grow crops that are resistant to these chemicals. The EPA just recently approved these chemicals for use in a couple states, with more to come soon. Is anyone seeing a pattern here? What happens when the weeds shrug off this chemical combo? Even if these companies find a chemical cocktail that works perfectly, do you think they're going to say yay, this is great; we'll just leave it here and keep making this chemical-seed combo. That won't make them any money. They'll be compelled to keep creating new combos. I imagine at some point they'll turn things back the other way and say hey, this is better for you and the environment than the last batch, boys and girls, buy them up!
What the chemical companies have here is a self-perpetuating cash cow that will destroy our food supply because these chemicals are likely to get into crops that aren't designed to withstand them. Farmers will then have no choice but to use Monsanto or whoever's seeds.
Remember the guy who Monsanto took to the supreme court because he used some left-over seeds that were the property of Monsanto without paying them. He did that because he couldn't afford to buy the latest and greatest Monsanto seeds. He lost. What are small farmers like him going to do if they're required to buy the latest generation of chemically resistant seeds in order for their crops to grow at all?
This is a horrible paradigm that needs to be nipped in the bud now. This proposition won't do that, but it'll shed some badly needed light on this issue and prompt the public to think more about what they're buying. As far as local farmers/ranchers being hurt by this, I know I'm going to keep buying John's milk because it's local and it tastes better than even the organic milk you can get at the grocery store. I'm going to do this even though I'm pretty sure John feeds his cows genetically modified grain. It would be kind of hard not to these days. If he doesn't, good on him and better for us.
Don't be afraid of leading, Colorado. We did it with legal pot, and we need to do it here, too. Sure, there will be some implementation squabbles. When aren't there? But as far as I'm concerned, they'll be fights worth having.
Holy God, people. We're talking about a label. You know, something that will educate you about what's inside a package and enable you to make an informed decision as to whether you want to buy it. The market will determine whether these companies then need to change their practices. I don't see how a conservative could possibly oppose this.
As someone who can't write a check, it'd be great if they accepted payment online as well. Through PayPal or something.
It's a personal attack to say you think someone gets their history from the right-wing echo chamber?
If it's not a living document, why can it be amended?
Aah, finally some sanity on this subject as opposed to Tipton's scaremongering. Thanks.
Last login: Tuesday, October 14, 2014
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2014 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.