241
Post by: Ahtman
Article
1. Required Use of Condoms in Porn Movies
In Los Angeles County, voters were asked their opinion on whether or not actors in the adult film industry should be required to wear condoms and practice safe sex while shooting scenes in L.A. The Safer Sex in the Adult Film Industry Act, also called Measure B, was introduced in response to repetitive allegations of sexually transmitted disease outbreaks among adult film industry workers.
"Self-regulation has failed miserably when it comes to the porn industry," Michael Weinstein, president of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, told Reason TV.
However, adult film producers beg to differ. "This isn't the government's place," Steven Hirsch, founder and co-chairman of Vivid Entertainment, said.
He continued, "There's several reasons the industry is against condoms. One is that it's just not needed. The testing procedures that are in place work, and work well. The performers are comfortable with the testing procedures, and the companies are comfortable with the testing procedures. Second reason is movies with condoms simply don't sell as well. People don't want to watch movies with condoms."
This ballot initiative only pertains to people in Los Angeles County, so Hirsch argues it wouldn't be fair to make one group of producers follow a law the rest of producers around the country wouldn't have to abide by.
2. Who Owns the Grand Canyon?
When Arizona voters arrived to the polls, they found themselves involved in a battle over boundaries.
Proposition 120 questions whether millions of acres of federal land in the state, including the Grand Canyon, should remain in the hands of the federal government, or officially become the property of Arizona's residents. The ballot measure, supported by the state's Republicans, seeks to amend the state's constitution to declare Arizona's sovereignty over the "air, water, public lands, minerals, wildlife and other natural resources within the state's boundaries."
The proposition is part of the "sagebrush revolt" - Republicans in the West aim to regain control of land owned by federal agencies, particularly the Interior Department's Bureau of Land Management.
3. The Right to Hunt and Fish
In Nebraska and Wyoming, two states where hunting and fishing seem like second nature, voters officially had the chance in this election to establish their right to hunt and fish.
In 2010, Arizona, Arkansas, South Carolina and Tennessee all had similar measures on their ballots. All states passed the right to amend their states' constitutions to allow the right to hunting and fishing, except Arizona.
Idaho is also considering a similar initiative this year. The Idaho Fish and Game Commission have opposed lawmakers' efforts to make hunting, fishing and trapping a constitutional right for more than 10 years. However this year, Twin Falls Republican Sen. Lee Heider was finally successful in getting the issue on the ballot, asking Idaho voters to add language saying "the rights to hunt, fish and trap … shall forever be preserved" to the state constitution.
4. Harsher Punishments for Animal Cruelty
In North and South Dakota, animal cruelty is only a misdemeanor. But on Tuesday, North Dakota voters had the opportunity to change the fact that animal cruelty is punished the same as littering on their ballots.
North Dakota voters weighed in on Measure 5, which would allow harsher punishments for animal abuse cases involving live cats, dogs or horses. The specific actions the measure cracks down upon are maliciously and intentionally burning, poisoning, crushing, suffocating, impaling, drowning, blinding, skinning, beating to death, dragging to death, exsanguinating, disemboweling or dismembering.
5. Must Label Genetically Modified Food
One of the most controversial ballot measures is California's Prop 37, which states that all genetically modified food must be labeled as such in grocery stores.
According to the Washington Post, more than 88 percent of corn and soy grown in the United States is genetically modified in some way. Consumer watchdogs and organic food companies say Californians deserve to know what they are eating.
Corporate food and bio tech companies have spent more than $44 million fighting the proposition, saying it will raise food prices and hurt businesses.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Louisiana passed a law requiring strict scrutiny in review of future laws as pertains to the 2nd Amendment.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Previously Louisiana congress did not feel it necessary to strictly scrutinise the laws they made?
That explains a lot.
34390
Post by: whembly
 Ahtman wrote:Article
1. Required Use of Condoms in Porn Movies
In Los Angeles County, voters were asked their opinion on whether or not actors in the adult film industry should be required to wear condoms and practice safe sex while shooting scenes in L.A. The Safer Sex in the Adult Film Industry Act, also called Measure B, was introduced in response to repetitive allegations of sexually transmitted disease outbreaks among adult film industry workers.
"Self-regulation has failed miserably when it comes to the porn industry," Michael Weinstein, president of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, told Reason TV.
However, adult film producers beg to differ. "This isn't the government's place," Steven Hirsch, founder and co-chairman of Vivid Entertainment, said.
He continued, "There's several reasons the industry is against condoms. One is that it's just not needed. The testing procedures that are in place work, and work well. The performers are comfortable with the testing procedures, and the companies are comfortable with the testing procedures. Second reason is movies with condoms simply don't sell as well. People don't want to watch movies with condoms."
This ballot initiative only pertains to people in Los Angeles County, so Hirsch argues it wouldn't be fair to make one group of producers follow a law the rest of producers around the country wouldn't have to abide by.
The industry will move... no biggie. LA's lost tho.
8617
Post by: Hulksmash
That's a significant amount of lost taxes for the city. Oh well...
34252
Post by: Squigsquasher
Lulz.
Tis a great day to be a Hentai afficianado.
53375
Post by: hotsauceman1
What is so bad about labeling foods that contain GMO's?
Or the animal cruelty one?
34252
Post by: Squigsquasher
Nothing.
People are getting their panties in a twist over nothing.
Again.
221
Post by: Frazzled
 Kilkrazy wrote:Previously Louisiana congress did not feel it necessary to strictly scrutinise the laws they made?
That explains a lot.
Its a legal term of art. It basically sets the legal standard really  ing high for anything that would limit or regulate firearms/ammunition. Louisianians really like their Second Amendment.
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
Harsher punishment for animal cruelty is in no way 'weird'. It's a sad state of affairs that we, modern humans, don't even recognize the integrity of animal life.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Er the Title says Interesting/Odd. That fits under interesting.
18698
Post by: kronk
I'm good with labeling GMO's, but is there a clear definition?
Is cultivating plants that give blue celery to encourage more blue celery a GMO or is that just selective breeding?
<----- Not a GMO authority.
221
Post by: Frazzled
 kronk wrote:I'm good with labeling GMO's, but is there a clear definition?
Is cultivating plants that give blue celery to encourage more blue celery a GMO or is that just selective breeding?
<----- Not a GMO authority.
The problem of course if that much if not most of our vegetables and grains are genetically modified. We just have the capacity to do it more swiftly now instead of slow selective pollination/extinction.
34252
Post by: Squigsquasher
If anything can be done through genetic engineering to reduce the amount of celery in the world, DO IT! Celery is pure evil in vegetable form. Seriously. It is nothing but string and what I can only describe as dried water.
Bleurgh.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Squigsquasher wins the thread.
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
meh, can't be bothered to hate something so bland.
Boudin, now...
221
Post by: Frazzled
You besmear the greatness of Boudin sausage? Of course you realize, this means war.
20043
Post by: Mattman154
Did the condom one actually pass?
34390
Post by: whembly
Yup... only impacts LA.
The business would probably move just outside the LA... which could impact the tax revenue for that City  .
See this hilarious reddit Q&A with James Deen:
http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/12p9tj/i_am_james_deen_ask_me_anything_regarding_measure/
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
Come to Montreal.
COOOOOME TO MONTREAAAAAAAAAAAL!!!
You can hit both french and english markets that way. he he, 'hit'.
34390
Post by: whembly
 Kovnik Obama wrote:Come to Montreal.
COOOOOME TO MONTREAAAAAAAAAAAL!!!
You can hit both french and english markets that way. he he, 'hit'.
Hmmmmm.... I might take you up on that offer...
After my visit to Colorado to "ahem" soak in the scenery...
221
Post by: Frazzled
I hear the local flora is epic.
34252
Post by: Squigsquasher
It had better not be celery...
Saying that, my mum loves celery so maybe I might hold off the anti celery campaign.
34390
Post by: whembly
 Squigsquasher wrote:
It had better not be celery...
Saying that, my mum loves celery so maybe I might hold off the anti celery campaign.
Dude... after "observing" the local flora, I'm sure celery+peanut butter would make excellent munchies...
oh wait!
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
 Frazzled wrote:
You besmear the greatness of Boudin sausage? Of course you realize, this means war.
Yes. Nothing essentially made of dried pig's blood should approach a person's mouth.
(Funny story, I once worked in a hog butchering plant, in the room where they kept the tank where they warmed the blood so that it didn't dry up. One of the joint of the pressurized tank blew. Horror movie scene ensued, with thousands of litters of blood sprayed from the ceilings to the floor. Of course, guess who drew out the cleaning detail... )
34252
Post by: Squigsquasher
Oh dear.
Oh dear oh dear oh dear.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hang on, is Boudin sausage similar to what we call black pudding?
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
 whembly wrote: Squigsquasher wrote:
It had better not be celery...
Saying that, my mum loves celery so maybe I might hold off the anti celery campaign.
Dude... after "observing" the local flora, I'm sure celery+peanut butter would make excellent munchies...
oh wait!
Such flora might be illegal to peddle here, it's completely tolerated in broadview as long as you are not beside a kindergarden. During summer, it's the 20th of April every sunday on the Mont-Royal.
I really just wished they would legalized so that I wouldn't have to worry about 'admiring the flora' in my appartment.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Kovnik Obama wrote: Frazzled wrote:
You besmear the greatness of Boudin sausage? Of course you realize, this means war.
Yes. Nothing essentially made of dried pig's blood should approach a person's mouth.
(Funny story, I once worked in a hog butchering plant, in the room where they kept the tank where they warmed the blood so that it didn't dry up. One of the joint of the pressurized tank blew. Horror movie scene ensued, with thousands of litters of blood sprayed from the ceilings to the floor. Of course, guess who drew out the cleaning detail... )
One should never witness politics or sausage being made.
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
Squigsquasher wrote:Oh dear.
Oh dear oh dear oh dear.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hang on, is Boudin sausage similar to what we call black pudding?
Same thing apparently. Which is sick, because pudding is a yummy desert to us.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Squigsquasher wrote:Oh dear.
Oh dear oh dear oh dear.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hang on, is Boudin sausage similar to what we call black pudding?
Just better. Its started out as a French dish. Where he's from it still may be like that. Down here, its been infused with Cajun goodness (translation some grades can be more hot than the surface of the sun). Ours has rice and such in it. How about up there Canuck?
63000
Post by: Peregrine
Ahtman wrote:
2. Who Owns the Grand Canyon?[/u]
When Arizona voters arrived to the polls, they found themselves involved in a battle over boundaries.
Proposition 120 questions whether millions of acres of federal land in the state, including the Grand Canyon, should remain in the hands of the federal government, or officially become the property of Arizona's residents. The ballot measure, supported by the state's Republicans, seeks to amend the state's constitution to declare Arizona's sovereignty over the "air, water, public lands, minerals, wildlife and other natural resources within the state's boundaries."
The proposition is part of the "sagebrush revolt" - Republicans in the West aim to regain control of land owned by federal agencies, particularly the Interior Department's Bureau of Land Management.
Yeah, this will be amusing:
Arizona: we take back this federal land!
Federal government: no you don't.
Arizona: ok, sorry for bothering you.
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
Worked on the sausage line for 3 months.
Wasn't as bad as the casing line, were I had to grab pigs viscereas with both hands and hook them on a spike. They don't tell you that guts can literraly explode on you.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Yep I reckon thats an excellent motivator for one to upgrade their job skills and pronto.
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
Frazzled wrote: Squigsquasher wrote:Oh dear.
Oh dear oh dear oh dear.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hang on, is Boudin sausage similar to what we call black pudding?
Just better. Its started out as a French dish. Where he's from it still may be like that. Down here, its been infused with Cajun goodness (translation some grades can be more hot than the surface of the sun). Ours has rice and such in it. How about up there Canuck?
I think that's what we call White Boudin. Honestly, my father was the only one in my family who liked that, and he was gracious enough not to force us through that ordeal after we threatened to replace him with some transient... So we didn't try the entire range of atrocities that Boudin is... Automatically Appended Next Post: Frazzled wrote:Yep I reckon thats an excellent motivator for one to upgrade their job skills and pronto.
Indeed. It was during an exchange in Alberta, supposedly to learn English. I suspect the idea was to motivate me as I was about to enter University.
Didn't work, as I met a dirty little asian girl and decided to stay there for a few years. Changed job quite rapidly, tho.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Kovnik Obama wrote: Frazzled wrote: Squigsquasher wrote:Oh dear.
Oh dear oh dear oh dear.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hang on, is Boudin sausage similar to what we call black pudding?
Just better. Its started out as a French dish. Where he's from it still may be like that. Down here, its been infused with Cajun goodness (translation some grades can be more hot than the surface of the sun). Ours has rice and such in it. How about up there Canuck?
I think that's what we call White Boudin. Honestly, my father was the only one in my family who liked that, and he was gracious enough not to force us through that ordeal after we threatened to replace him with some transient... So we didn't try the entire range of atrocities that Boudin is...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Frazzled wrote:Yep I reckon thats an excellent motivator for one to upgrade their job skills and pronto.
Indeed. It was during an exchange in Alberta, supposedly to learn English. I suspect the idea was to motivate me as I was about to enter University.
Didn't work, as I met a dirty little asian girl and decided to stay there for a few years. Changed job quite rapidly, tho.
Thats probably closer to what we have here. Is yours spicy?
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
Nope. Taste like a mix of cigarette ashes and existential anguish.
221
Post by: Frazzled
Not ours.
Ours' tastes like a cajun family friday night. Spicy and tasty. Often it has crab/shrimp/crawdad meat in it as well.
37231
Post by: d-usa
What if they combined the vote and legalized genetically modified weed for extra potency?
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
Frazzled wrote:
Not ours.
Ours' tastes like a cajun family friday night. Spicy and tasty. Often it has crab/shrimp/crawdad meat in it as well.
The sealife meat and spice might actually make it good. I'd potentially try that. If I felt daring someday.
What if they combined the vote and legalized genetically modified weed for extra potency?
That way you think.
I like it.
38279
Post by: Mr Hyena
The porn industry has always had health programs, some of which are life threatening. Its only right to ensure its a safe industry to work in. So the condom vote is fine.
 hotsauceman1 wrote:What is so bad about labeling foods that contain GMO's?
Or the animal cruelty one?
The labelling one is ridiculous because technically all Crops ARE genetically modified.
27987
Post by: Surtur
These aren't that odd. Animal cruelty has been linked to other violent behaviors and usually leads to similar acts against humans. The genetic labeling is important because certain genes put in products can have unexpected results, like the gene they put in corn to ward off certain insects also wound up killing monarch butterflies as well.
34390
Post by: whembly
 Mr Hyena wrote: hotsauceman1 wrote:What is so bad about labeling foods that contain GMO's?
Or the animal cruelty one?
The labelling one is ridiculous because technically all Crops ARE genetically modified.
Yeah...i'm kinda confused on this one...
Someone is trying to delineate the difference between "mainstream" crops vs "organic" methinks...
29110
Post by: AustonT
Kilkrazy wrote:Previously Louisiana congress did not feel it necessary to strictly scrutinise the laws they made?
That explains a lot.
My wild shot in the dark is that its to prevent something like the hughes amendment from happening at the state level.
38279
Post by: Mr Hyena
Someone is trying to delineate the difference between "mainstream" crops vs "organic" methinks...
Yet there isn't one.
At its heart, there is nothing that makes Organic vegetables any different from 'mainstream' vegetables (the crops themselves. Growth conditions may differ, but shouldn't affect the crop).
The genetic labeling is important because certain genes put in products can have unexpected results, like the gene they put in corn to ward off certain insects also wound up killing monarch butterflies as well.
So apply the same label to all corn, all wheat, all bananas, all apples, etc etc.
29110
Post by: AustonT
Mr Hyena wrote:
Someone is trying to delineate the difference between "mainstream" crops vs "organic" methinks...
Yet there isn't one.
At its heart, there is nothing that makes Organic vegetables any different from 'mainstream' vegetables (the crops themselves. Growth conditions may differ, but shouldn't affect the crop).
The genetic labeling is important because certain genes put in products can have unexpected results, like the gene they put in corn to ward off certain insects also wound up killing monarch butterflies as well.
So apply the same label to all corn, all wheat, all bananas, all apples, etc etc.
Did someone say GMO?
49775
Post by: DIDM
portland would gladly house those poor actors
we already have record numbers of sex shops, strip clubs and the like
10097
Post by: Ensis Ferrae
kronk wrote:I'm good with labeling GMO's, but is there a clear definition?
Is cultivating plants that give blue celery to encourage more blue celery a GMO or is that just selective breeding?
<----- Not a GMO authority.
The thing this bill was apparently after is not selective breeding (as most people who are educated through middle school), it is going after the guys like Monsanto and BASF, and Dow.
I recently saw a program on this stuff... Basically, scientists and chemical companies are engineering strains of wheat and other vegetables that are "immune" to or highly resistant to pesticides and herbicides (like round-up). What is in turn happening is that the weeds and bugs are becoming resistant to these same chemicals, so each generation more and more stuff has to be used, and soon more and more chemicals are used.
Apparently, these strains are being noticed in the number of allergies and athsma and other similar illnesses in the Chicago area are have exploded.
Most recently, one of the companies just gave the OK to use d-12 or d-14 (i forget which number it is) on their crops. The thing is, that particular chemical is half of the active ingredient in Agent Orange. Which I am confident that most people are at least familiar with the name and what it's "famous" for.
38279
Post by: Mr Hyena
Except selective breeding is also genetically modified. Look at what happened with the Wheat we know today. Its Genes increased.
Apparently, these strains are being noticed in the number of allergies and athsma and other similar illnesses in the Chicago area are have exploded.
There is many reasons for why allergies have increased. There is a theory, with some evidence, that it is a lack of Worm (parasite) infections that have caused a surge in allergies (Eosinophils, the White blood cell that is most involved with parasites (especially worms) also is involved with allergies). We're just too healthy. The immune system doesn't get enough exposure.
In otherwords, don't trust whats on tv. Go to core literature.
10097
Post by: Ensis Ferrae
Mr Hyena wrote:
In otherwords, don't trust whats on tv. Go to core literature.
All well and good, doesn't change the fact that we're going to be using parts of Agent Orange on US soil, which doesn't sit well with me.
38279
Post by: Mr Hyena
 Ensis Ferrae wrote: Mr Hyena wrote:
In otherwords, don't trust whats on tv. Go to core literature.
All well and good, doesn't change the fact that we're going to be using parts of Agent Orange on US soil, which doesn't sit well with me.
If its only a part of it, and not the whole, proper thing (chemically speaking) then I doubt its a threat.
Certainly not as deadly as Paracetamol.
29784
Post by: timetowaste85
Bland? Obviously you've never drowned celery in buffalo sauce until the voices of thousands of buffalo cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced. I fear something awful has happened.
Crap, they're trying to put condoms in my porn. Terror doesn't even begin to cover this. Leia got off easy.
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
... Princess Leia?
... Have you seen her recently?
29784
Post by: timetowaste85
Mooooo Automatically Appended Next Post: Hmm, it really turns my comment into a real circle of life. 
5470
Post by: sebster
Frazzled wrote:Louisiana passed a law requiring strict scrutiny in review of future laws as pertains to the 2nd Amendment.
Does that do anything meaningful. As in, wouldn't any law end up being reviewed anyway, to make sure it wasn't struck down in constitutional review? Automatically Appended Next Post:
It's actually really, really hard to do, because so many finished products are full of stuff that was made from stuff, that was made from stuff that might have come from genetically modified crops. I mean, look at the ingredient list on your average three minute microwave meal, amongst all the chemicals there's a load of food products in there, most of which was sourced from whoever was selling cheap. Automatically Appended Next Post:
"To retain respect for sausages and laws, one must not watch them in the making."
Commonly attributed to Bismarck, but I think it was actually someone else.
Automatically Appended Next Post:  Surtur wrote:These aren't that odd. Animal cruelty has been linked to other violent behaviors and usually leads to similar acts against humans. The genetic labeling is important because certain genes put in products can have unexpected results, like the gene they put in corn to ward off certain insects also wound up killing monarch butterflies as well.
How does putting a warning on the side of the tin help the Monarch butterfly?
1309
Post by: Lordhat
 sebster wrote:
How does putting a warning on the side of the tin help the Monarch butterfly?
Helping The Monarch is Dr. Girlfriend's responsibility.
5531
Post by: Leigen_Zero
Kovnik Obama wrote: Squigsquasher wrote:Oh dear. Oh dear oh dear oh dear. Automatically Appended Next Post: Hang on, is Boudin sausage similar to what we call black pudding?
Same thing apparently. Which is sick, because pudding is a yummy desert to us.
It's called a 'pudding' due to the way it is cooked, rather than the sweet/savoury distinction, however, vernacularisation (is that even a word?) has turned it into a term commonly associated with dessert (mainly because a lot of desserts qualify as puddings). I think a pudding is defined by a long and slow boiling/steaming, but I'm not a food historian so I might be wrong. Also, black pudding is the shiz, especially if you get good quality stuff with a decent fat ratio and good quality spices, you can't have an english cooked breakfast without a few thick slices of fried scab-sausage (this is what I call it, as my fiance is a pescetarian and squeamish )
11653
Post by: Huffy
 Lordhat wrote: sebster wrote:
How does putting a warning on the side of the tin help the Monarch butterfly?
Helping The Monarch is Dr. Girlfriend's responsibility.
/thread
221
Post by: Frazzled
Lordhat wrote: sebster wrote:
How does putting a warning on the side of the tin help the Monarch butterfly?
Helping The Monarch is Dr. Girlfriend's responsibility.
When Frazzled was walking the younge wiener dog and the Tank dog Sunday a butterfly landed on his green Hawaiian shirt and closed up its wings. You couldn't see it. It hitched a ride for about a mile until I brushed it off before going in the house, occasionally flexing ruby red wings. Way cool!
131
Post by: malfred
One of them is a bloody mess involving pigs.
The other one is making sausages.
37231
Post by: d-usa
Frazzled wrote: Lordhat wrote: sebster wrote:
How does putting a warning on the side of the tin help the Monarch butterfly?
Helping The Monarch is Dr. Girlfriend's responsibility.
When Frazzled was walking the younge wiener dog and the Tank dog Sunday a butterfly landed on his green Hawaiian shirt and closed up its wings. You couldn't see it. It hitched a ride for about a mile until I brushed it off before going in the house, occasionally flexing ruby red wings. Way cool!
Butterflies are awesome.
Edit: Linked wrong picture.
10097
Post by: Ensis Ferrae
Mr Hyena wrote: Ensis Ferrae wrote: Mr Hyena wrote:
In otherwords, don't trust whats on tv. Go to core literature.
All well and good, doesn't change the fact that we're going to be using parts of Agent Orange on US soil, which doesn't sit well with me.
If its only a part of it, and not the whole, proper thing (chemically speaking) then I doubt its a threat.
Certainly not as deadly as Paracetamol.
I think that the point those who wrote this bill were trying to get across is that the Monsanto types out there don't care about people or evn food. In giving th OK to use even a portion of agent orange (and who reakky knows if you only need part of it to be horrible?), what else are the willing to put into food in order to ensure their profits?
To me, it is important to watch what i put in myself foodwise, for the simple matter of health. 'D rather be able to clearly see that the produce i get has major chemical byproducts/ genetically modified for herbicide and pesticide, etc. Similar to how the tobacco companies have to put their ridiculous label on smokes. The only difference here is,we KNOW smoking is bad, we don't really know what food is good anymore because they dont have to let you know how they grow it, unless you buy organic or grow it yourself.
5470
Post by: sebster
Ensis Ferrae wrote:I think that the point those who wrote this bill were trying to get across is that the Monsanto types out there don't care about people or evn food. In giving th OK to use even a portion of agent orange (and who reakky knows if you only need part of it to be horrible?), what else are the willing to put into food in order to ensure their profits?
To me, it is important to watch what i put in myself foodwise, for the simple matter of health. 'D rather be able to clearly see that the produce i get has major chemical byproducts/ genetically modified for herbicide and pesticide, etc. Similar to how the tobacco companies have to put their ridiculous label on smokes. The only difference here is,we KNOW smoking is bad, we don't really know what food is good anymore because they dont have to let you know how they grow it, unless you buy organic or grow it yourself.
Yeah, Monsanto do some bad gak.
But Monsanto doing bad gak means that lawmakers should target the bad gak Monsanto are doing, look to forms laws to stop them doing that bad gak, and prosecute them if they continue to do it.
But unfortunately the anti- GM movement has a significant and very noisy number of people who are for ideological and often very unscientific reasons opposed to GM food in any form, and these people use poor behaviour by Monsanto and other GM companies as a wedge to oppose all GM food. They then add in a lot of not-science to make GM sound very scary.
All the while there are better crops being developed year in, year out, and a growing population that needs to be fed.
7926
Post by: youbedead
Yeah for how much the left like to claim they are scientifically literate they seem to ignore every shred of scientific evidence when it comes to GMO's and nuclear power
38279
Post by: Mr Hyena
Mosanto et al doesn't really do any bad gak. The stuff they've done has been harmless to humans.
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
Prop 37 was bad because it would increase food costs, while at the same time not really doing what it was claiming it would do.
Because guess whats getting labeled? EVERYTHING, except most meats.
And because its only California, any food that comes into CA from out of state has to get its packaging changed specifically for CA. Plus food produced in state has to get its packaging altered too.
Increasing the cost of living for people in CA would be a very bad thing to do, especially when you are getting no real benifit from the bill in the first place.
10097
Post by: Ensis Ferrae
 Grey Templar wrote:
And because its only California, any food that comes into CA from out of state has to get its packaging changed specifically for CA. Plus food produced in state has to get its packaging altered too.
I doubt that it would have had that big an affect on food prices. This is because I don't think that any company that makes food here in America would actually make a "California box" and a "non-California box" for it's products.
In principle, I think that it is a good idea to label anything that is made with or from chemicals as such. I mean, there are warnings on cleaning products, tobacco products, alcohol products, etc.
37231
Post by: d-usa
I don't live in California, but everything here has the mandatory "I cause cancer in California" label. They would just use the same package everywhere.
27151
Post by: streamdragon
Mr Hyena wrote:Mosanto et al doesn't really do any bad gak. The stuff they've done has been harmless to humans.
"Patenting" the process of growing soy ground cover to plow into the fields is a dick move though. Basically this requires farmers to acquire a license to do something that has been done since farming began.
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
Regardless, it will still increase food prices.
Packaging is in many cases the highest cost associated with an item, and anything that effects the packaging will effect the price by a large amount.
It may not have seemed like alot in the store, maybe a few cents here and there, but overall it would add up to several hundred extra $s a year. And in a sluggish economy thats going to hurt.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
It will make no discernible difference at all to food prices. The marginal cost of putting a extra warning message on a label is minute.
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
Wrong, it will effect food prices. I am studying for Ag Business and I know people in the industry. They know what is involved is such changes.
37231
Post by: d-usa
Grey Templar wrote:Wrong, it will effect food prices. I am studying for Ag Business and I know people in the industry. They know what is involved is such changes.
1) People in the ag business knowing that adding a tiny message to a package and changing nothing else will raise prices.
or
2) People in the ag business saying what they can to avoid having to be more transparent.
or
3) People in the ag business using any excuse to raise prices a bit.
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
I think people in the Farm Bureau and small farmers have no incentive to lie on this subject.
Of course this is just classic ignorence on the part of the general populace as to what farming entails and how it works.
37231
Post by: d-usa
Grey Templar wrote:I think people in the Farm Bureau and small farmers have no incentive to lie on this subject.
Of course this is just classic ignorence on the part of the general populace as to what farming entails and how it works.
I just gave two good reasons why they might have an incentive to lie on this subject.
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
And you show how you know nothing on the subject.
The extra profit would not be seen by the Farm Bureau, they are simply a support organization(an important one)
Nor would it be seen by farmers but the distributers who are the ones doing the labeling.
37231
Post by: d-usa
Because farmers are so ignorant that they don't know that many people don't like GM food and that by requiring to label them could possibly mean less sales for farmers...
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
Sorry, but people will still buy GM food, regardless of knowing or not. Farmers are NOT stupid or ignorant. They are well aware people don't like GM food. But they are also aware that people really have no choice.
Food is something you must buy. Farmers know that, so they try to avoid things that will make food as a whole cost more. Because they actually care about the people buying their product.
Now farmers do get their crop seeds from big seed companies like Monsanto, but there is no other real option.
Unless you want to be organic, in which case the price of the food will skyrocket.
You simply cannot feed the current population on organic food. Its too expensive and not practical.
37231
Post by: d-usa
And just because people "still have to buy food" doesn't mean that they don't know that slapping a big fat "GM" label will affect business, so they have a motivation for not wanting it.
10097
Post by: Ensis Ferrae
Grey Templar wrote:
Unless you want to be organic, in which case the price of the food will skyrocket.
Actually, my wife and I just switched from doing most of our grocery shopping at the big chain places, to shopping at Whole Foods market... Depending on where you buy, buying organic does not "skyrocket" the price, in fact, we spend less on MORE food at Whole Foods than we did at our other usual places.
So again, the price increase that you think will be mandatory, really isn't.
Also, having lived in Germany, I know that there are indeed ways in which the government can have a huge impact on the price of organics. I'm not saying we should do the same as Europe in regards to taxing or tax incentives, etc. but I think that people, especially low income families need to be aware of the gak that they are eating. Seeing some of the items that are "WIC approved" straight up sicken me.
299
Post by: Kilkrazy
Grey Templar wrote:Wrong, it will effect food prices. I am studying for Ag Business and I know people in the industry. They know what is involved is such changes.
I work with people in the packaging industry. I know what is involved in putting a new line of text on a label.
38279
Post by: Mr Hyena
Ensis Ferrae wrote: Grey Templar wrote:
Unless you want to be organic, in which case the price of the food will skyrocket.
Actually, my wife and I just switched from doing most of our grocery shopping at the big chain places, to shopping at Whole Foods market... Depending on where you buy, buying organic does not "skyrocket" the price, in fact, we spend less on MORE food at Whole Foods than we did at our other usual places.
So again, the price increase that you think will be mandatory, really isn't.
Also, having lived in Germany, I know that there are indeed ways in which the government can have a huge impact on the price of organics. I'm not saying we should do the same as Europe in regards to taxing or tax incentives, etc. but I think that people, especially low income families need to be aware of the gak that they are eating. Seeing some of the items that are "WIC approved" straight up sicken me.
'Organic' food is a lie (Free-range animals is not a lie however). Its no different at all to normal vegetables and at best, its fraudulent behaviour to increase prices.
34390
Post by: whembly
Mr Hyena wrote: Ensis Ferrae wrote: Grey Templar wrote:
Unless you want to be organic, in which case the price of the food will skyrocket.
Actually, my wife and I just switched from doing most of our grocery shopping at the big chain places, to shopping at Whole Foods market... Depending on where you buy, buying organic does not "skyrocket" the price, in fact, we spend less on MORE food at Whole Foods than we did at our other usual places.
So again, the price increase that you think will be mandatory, really isn't.
Also, having lived in Germany, I know that there are indeed ways in which the government can have a huge impact on the price of organics. I'm not saying we should do the same as Europe in regards to taxing or tax incentives, etc. but I think that people, especially low income families need to be aware of the gak that they are eating. Seeing some of the items that are "WIC approved" straight up sicken me.
'Organic' food is a lie (Free-range animals is not a lie however). Its no different at all to normal vegetables and at best, its fraudulent behaviour to increase prices.
^^^ditto...
Also... isn't all food "organic" anyways? 
10097
Post by: Ensis Ferrae
Yes... however, I'm sure we all know what is meant by slapping an "Organic" label onto a piece of fruit or whatnot.
34390
Post by: whembly
Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Yes... however, I'm sure we all know what is meant by slapping an "Organic" label onto a piece of fruit or whatnot.
That's my point. There's a door there for deceptive advertising...
Now... the Free-Range stuff. I get some eggs and steaks that are Free Ranged... and HOL-Y-BAT-MAN! It does taste different!
Too bad they're expensive. 
10097
Post by: Ensis Ferrae
Well, I was talking about the foods that are produced by only using "natural" means of fertilizing and feeding, etc.
Partly, this is our own Gov'ts. fault in it's definition of what an organically raised/grown food is which allows some companies to "fraudulently" claim that their stuff is organic. And I believe that there are those farmers and ranchers that genuinely live and die by being as truly organic as they can.
Also, I don't know if you have a Whole Foods Market near you, but if you want decently priced Free-Range eggs and meat, you should check them out. Honestly, the only meat product that I found to not be comparably priced to other chain grocers was the Filet Mignon... but then, where is that particular cut cheap??
38279
Post by: Mr Hyena
Ensis Ferrae wrote:Well, I was talking about the foods that are produced by only using "natural" means of fertilizing and feeding, etc.
Partly, this is our own Gov'ts. fault in it's definition of what an organically raised/grown food is which allows some companies to "fraudulently" claim that their stuff is organic. And I believe that there are those farmers and ranchers that genuinely live and die by being as truly organic as they can.
Also, I don't know if you have a Whole Foods Market near you, but if you want decently priced Free-Range eggs and meat, you should check them out. Honestly, the only meat product that I found to not be comparably priced to other chain grocers was the Filet Mignon... but then, where is that particular cut cheap??
If the farmer tills the land or any other 'natural' farming technique...then under that definition its still not Organic, unless its left to grow freely on open ground with no assistance. Its still human interference.
10097
Post by: Ensis Ferrae
Mr Hyena wrote:
If the farmer tills the land or any other 'natural' farming technique...then under that definition its still not Organic, unless its left to grow freely on open ground with no assistance. Its still human interference.
However, for the sake of what people normally buy as their produce and meat products, Organic means not using Chemical compounds to treat their product... It's all natural poo and water, and generally untreated feed for the animal types.
I mean obviously a policy of "found food" is not a sound economic outlook to take, and a business that does that probably won't last too long. That sort of thing, I think, may work in one of those ultra hippy "sustainable commune", but not for us average joe consumer type person.
38279
Post by: Mr Hyena
However, for the sake of what people normally buy as their produce and meat products, Organic means not using Chemical compounds to treat their product... It's all natural poo and water, and generally untreated feed for the animal types.
I get what your saying, but its redundant. Both are 'chemical compounds'. With the difference being the manure has more chance of being contaminated (using human fecal matter especially is a no-no...spreads some serious parasitic disease that way.).
64930
Post by: MrScience
I have a problem with GM food (you'd have to be a moron to), but I do have a problem with patent trolls like Monsanto.
55600
Post by: Kovnik Obama
 MrScience wrote:I have a problem with GM food (you'd have to be a moron to), but I do have a problem with patent trolls like Monsanto.
I'm sure someone somewhere said the same thing about Thalidomide.
Sucks to be the kid born with 8 thumbs. In the face.
38279
Post by: Mr Hyena
Kovnik Obama wrote: MrScience wrote:I have a problem with GM food (you'd have to be a moron to), but I do have a problem with patent trolls like Monsanto.
I'm sure someone somewhere said the same thing about Thalidomide.
Sucks to be the kid born with 8 thumbs. In the face.
There isn't a biological relation between GM food and the Thalidomide drug.
|
|
