Doer
Well-Known Member
I can hold it steady if you can. The mirror I mean. I take it kinda like this.most times I can compensate for my own liberal bias
Life ain't nothing but a happy, happy riddle. Wait...funny, funny.
I can hold it steady if you can. The mirror I mean. I take it kinda like this.most times I can compensate for my own liberal bias
No I said I wish to abolish my consumption of GMO's. I could care less what you choose to eat, why do you care what I choose? You don't even want me to have the choice. Your stance is why medical marijuana is still outlawed in many states.Your stated goal is to abolish the practice of genetically modified crops, so you want to decide what I eat and as you said you don't get to decide what's good for me, I do.
if you want to avoid GMO's become a subsistence farmer.No I said I wish to abolish my consumption of GMO's. I could care less what you choose to eat, why do you care what I choose? You don't even want me to have the choice. Your stance is why medical marijuana is still outlawed in many states.
I support your right to spend your money as you see fit. There are companies that cater to your fear of GMOs, and they label their products with "contains no GMOs", i.e. you have a choice. What you said was that you want to force labeling on companies as a method to force them to stop using GMOs, i.e. you want to deny the rest of us a choice. I don't support that. I see absolutely nothing wrong with GMO crops, or selective breeding of crops. Both methods achieve more or less the same result, but genetic modification does it faster and better.No I said I wish to abolish my consumption of GMO's. I could care less what you choose to eat, why do you care what I choose? You don't even want me to have the choice. Your stance is why medical marijuana is still outlawed in many states.
if you want to avoid GMO's become a subsistence farmer.
otherwise you are imposing your Gris-Gris on the rest of society through your irrational dietary restrictions and your demand everything be labeled beyond all reason.
people who are allergic to peanuts should take responsibility for their issue and NOT eat foods which might be prepared with peanuts.
those who are lactose intolerant (lol, the only intolerance allowed, except for intolerance of intolerance...) should figure out how to avoid milk products.
people who are allergic to shellfish should grab the bull by the horns and keep shellfish away from their delicate digestive tracts.
insisting that everybody else submit to endless idiotic warnings about how "this product was prepared in a facility that processes tree nuts, pea nuts, soy, dairy and shellfish" is ridiculous, and this is for REAL medical conditions.
vegans, vegetarians, macrobiotic dingbats, raw foodies, and whatnot should either make like the jews hindus and moslems and set up their own food supply systems, adhering to their specific dietary superstitions, or STFU.
people who are terrified of GMO's "Contaminating" them with "Tainted Genetics" should be put in the stocks in the town square and be subjected to humiliating scorn from the rest of the village.
You make the assumption that GMO foods are either more tastey, more healthy or more beneificial to you and so you should have that choice. In truth you can't tell the difference, so why rally for that trumpted up " choice" you are insisting on.I support your right to spend your money as you see fit. There are companies that cater to your fear of GMOs, and they label their products with "contains no GMOs", i.e. you have a choice. What you said was that you want to force labeling on companies as a method to force them to stop using GMOs, i.e. you want to deny the rest of us a choice. I don't support that. I see absolutely nothing wrong with GMO crops, or selective breeding of crops. Both methods achieve more or less the same result, but genetic modification does it faster and better.
Here is what you said:
"The sooner we get busy labeling GMO's, the sooner less will be grown. It will be a self correcting problem over time. Firm pressure relentlessly applied, will achieve the desired result."
explain how adding three more words to a label is "beyond all reason" ??otherwise you are imposing your Gris-Gris on the rest of society through your irrational dietary restrictions and your demand everything be labeled beyond all reason.
.
people who are allergic to peanuts should take responsibility for their issue and NOT eat foods which might be prepared with peanuts.
those who are lactose intolerant (lol, the only intolerance allowed, except for intolerance of intolerance...) should figure out how to avoid milk products.
people who are allergic to shellfish should grab the bull by the horns and keep shellfish away from their delicate digestive tracts.
your logic is absurd...as in, there is no logic here. If you don't care about the warnings....DON'T READ THEMinsisting that everybody else submit to endless idiotic warnings about how "this product was prepared in a facility that processes tree nuts, pea nuts, soy, dairy and shellfish" is ridiculous, and this is for REAL medical conditions.
retarded...just retardedpeople who are terrified of GMO's "Contaminating" them with "Tainted Genetics" should be put in the stocks in the town square and be subjected to humiliating scorn from the rest of the village.
I don't make any of those assumptions. I believe GMO foods are cheaper to produce thereby making them cheaper to the consumer. Healthy, tasty, beneficial is a dead heat probably.You make the assumption that GMO foods are either more tastey, more healthy or more beneificial to you and so you should have that choice. In truth you can't tell the difference, so why rally for that trumpted up " choice" you are insisting on.
To the bolded: I disagree. This can be argued vigorously.Those like Kubrick are the ones who imagined Krishna and Buddha out of human imagination. Figments of our imagination don't create themselves.
I rally for those 7 billion learning how to grow their own food.I don't make any of those assumptions. I believe GMO foods are cheaper to produce thereby making them cheaper to the consumer. Healthy, tasty, beneficial is a dead heat probably.
I rally for that choice because there are 7 billion people on the planet, each one hungry on a daily basis. Some of them will starve if the cost of food increases. If your goal is population control then "non GMO" is pretty good start.
I realize this will be a lost post, since you haven't answered one of my questions posed to you in quite a long time.The evidence mounts, but those who fancy themselves as real - macho men, the ones who scoff at vegitarians and vegans are perfectly willing to eat GMO foods with gusto, oh, and they are the same ones who claim that they take responsiblity for their own health. So, in short, they claim to be "taking care of themselves", contrary to the unwashed masses who want "free medical care" while obviously stuffing their face with crap. But these self righteous don't even know what the hell they are eating and claim that everything is ok because a company with a terrible track record told them that the food they are given is just fine. Yeah, it all makes huge sense. "but the marlboro man said they help my digestion..... what the hell happened?
But when you say "less will be grown, and that is good" you are leading a moral crusade. It becomes no longer about individual choice but society-wide pressure. At the point at which that raises my food costs without demonstrated benefit, I'll be annoyed.And that's why I demand labeling......because you don't get to decide what's good for me, I do!.....as it is right now, if it don't say Non-GMO, I won't buy it. If they label it, I can decide for myself......
you have the right to "east" whatever you choose, you do NOT have the right to demand that others bow to your irrational desires or your dietary superstitions.In short, we don't really have the right to east what we wish in this country. We only have the right to be good little consumers "eat what we tell you to eat or go away"
Simply because YOU worship at the altar of GMO's and advance regardless of the danger - (and advance for the same ofindustry as you get little or no beneifit from your GMOs - they are not cheaper, they are not better for you.
In short you are imposing your dietary religion upon mine. Who'd have thought?
if you demand special dietary considerations, SEEK IT OUT.explain how adding three more words to a label is "beyond all reason" ??
soooo exactly how are consumers to know if foods are prepared around possible allergy causing substances if they are not labeled....really?
wtf? this is probably one of the dumbest things you've ever posted.
your logic is absurd...as in, there is no logic here. If you don't care about the warnings....DON'T READ THEM
simple really.
and as far as labeling these things being ridiculous, i'm sure there are millions of people who would disagree
retarded...just retarded
au contraire.You make the assumption that GMO foods are either more tastey, more healthy or more beneificial to you and so you should have that choice. In truth you can't tell the difference, so why rally for that trumpted up " choice" you are insisting on.
There is not much for me to disagree with in your post.I rally for those 7 billion learning how to grow their own food.
and having the choice to grow gmo or non gmo crops.
as far as the cheaper for the consumer. Sure it is, but we should be given the right to choose.
that is all
just say NO to GMO seal blubber and non-Organic garbage dumps.But when you say "less will be grown, and that is good" you are leading a moral crusade. It becomes no longer about individual choice but society-wide pressure. At the point at which that raises my food costs without demonstrated benefit, I'll be annoyed.
if you demand special dietary considerations, SEEK IT OUT.
you have no right to force me to submit to your desires.
you can pay extra for all the Organic, Fair Trade, Artisinal, Non-GMO, Vegan, Cruelty Free, Hand Harvested, Micro-Culture, Sustainable products exclusively harvested by dewy virgins on the south side of Mount Aetna by the light of the full moon products that you want.
insisting that this be the default option for everybody else, or the product has to have a giant warning label cautioning against the hazards of less spectacularly esoteric methods of production is ridiculous.
if you simply MUST have products adhering to your very special desires and bizarre requirements, then you should go into the business of producing these products.
maybe youll become rich.
and theres where you fail.if you demand special dietary considerations, SEEK IT OUT
ppl do, they read the labels.....duh
can it be more simple?
the question I'll pose is if gmo products are so good, it seems like this would be a selling point....
Why NOT add "contains gmo" to the label?
do you think the extra ink would break em?
maybe they'll become rich
and there is where YOU fail. If gmo products are essentially the same as non. There is nothing scary about a label.a big scary label reading "May Contain GMO's" has no value save to inflame the fears of the ignorant, and give a boost to the "GMO Free" producers, since why put a warning label on something if it is harless, ergo GMO's must be dangerous...
"Warning! All Mc Donalds Products may contain, or hav
when will the warning label frenzy end?