The Libertarian Case AGAINST Mandatory GMO Labeling

[better-dead-than-fed]

But regarding your claims about taxonomists and bananas, I have a friend who has a Ph.D. in biology, and I've sent him an email asking him if what you say about taxonomy, and what a banana is to taxonomists, is accurate.

Thanks in advance for posting his reply.

 

[Carlybee]

The FDA and USDA are not going to be abolished anytime soon. Just like they blackballed Ron Paul the ptb are not going to support or advance any legislation like that so either get realistic or provide proof there is anything like that being introduced with a snowballs chance in hell of advancing.

 

[Neil Desmond]

I've heard of nothing stopping you from contaminating their crops and then suing them on IP infringement grounds.

Yeah, good idea! That'll solve everything.

 

[Neil Desmond]

Thanks in advance for posting his reply.

You're welcome.

 

[better-dead-than-fed]

Yeah, good idea! That'll solve everything.

'k

 

[better-dead-than-fed]

How do you propose we find that out without it being on the label?

this

 

[better-dead-than-fed]

asking for labeling is more of a pressure tactic...of course most of us here do not want to expand govt power

Most of who where don't want to expand government power? The March Against Monsanto and numerous RPF posters are calling for government-expansion.

 

[kcchiefs6465]

Only idiots cry troll.

You probably have 300 posts on this topic having your mental gymnastics circle jerk yet I'm the idiot? At best, your time could probably be better spent. I have no doubts that you'll continue these threads until your word is last. Probably bumping multiple times down the road to pat yourself on the back.

If you read, now this is good so try to stay with me, I did not call you a troll. I compared you to a troll for your mental, self patting on the back, circle jerk.

But by all means, carry on.

 

[kcchiefs6465]

You're free to make up your own definitions for words, and then sue yourself, claiming you've been defrauded by your own idiosyncratic definitions.

Or I could go with the tried and true world over definition of what a tomato is.

Then you go and look at what a tomato is not.

The hell would I care what the taxonomist has to say for when they clearly are not the same? A small child would know there is difference.

 

[kcchiefs6465]

I've heard of nothing stopping you from contaminating their crops and then suing them on IP infringement grounds.

Not everyone is an asshole.

That's aside from the clear fact of government collusion with Monsanto and the likeliness you'd lose.

 

[better-dead-than-fed]

You probably have 300 posts on this topic having your mental gymnastics circle jerk yet I'm the idiot? At best, your time could probably be better spent. I have no doubts that you'll continue these threads until your word is last. Probably bumping multiple times down the road to pat yourself on the back.

If you read, now this is good so try to stay with me, I did not call you a troll. I compared you to a troll for your mental, self patting on the back, circle jerk.

But by all means, carry on.

I'm merely comparing you to an idiot, for introducing personal attacks into an argument about politics.

 

[better-dead-than-fed]

Or I could go with the tried and true world over definition of what a tomato is.

There are 2 million monsanto-marchers who might back you up, but 7 billion other people who probably won't.

Then you go and look at what a tomato is not.

The hell would I care what the taxonomist has to say for when they clearly are not the same? A small child would know there is difference.

If a small child can tell the difference between a pig-mato and tomato, it would take a pretty incompetent adult to confuse the two, so what court is going to rule that the incompetent adult was "defrauded".

I'm not telling you to care what taxonomists say. By all means, I'd like to see you make up your own definitions and then file in court when the world fails to adopt your odd definitions.

 

[better-dead-than-fed]

Not everyone is an asshole.

Just give them a taste of their own medicine. It might even motivate Monsanto's lawyers to seek a court-ruling declaring that farmers shouldn't be blamed for stuff that blows onto their property. How is that being an asshole, especially compared with all the monsanto-marchers advocating violence to force their peculiar, idiosyncratic personal values on the rest of world.

 

[familydog]

Liberty stands or falls on principle. Either you advocate the use of government force against people to make them do what you think they should do with their own lives and property or you don't. As soon as you say that it is sometimes okay to invade people's freedom at gunpoint, you have lost the battle, even if you really don't like the people and are really offended by what they are doing. If you act to broaden the scope of government force - even by a gnat's ass - you have compromised the principles and you ARE working against liberty. If you say that MORE government is the answer here, you have essentially said that liberty fails.

You're missing the point. It's not about "more government." Government does not get bigger because a couple of words are added to an already mandated label. Again, we didn't make the rules. We are playing by rules set forth by government. If you don't think there should be any rules, then that's fine. Your outrage should be at the idea of mandatory labels in the first place. Nitpicking does not help anyone.

 

[better-dead-than-fed]

You're missing the point. It's not about "more government." Government does not get bigger because a couple of words are added to an already mandated label. Again, we didn't make the rules. We are playing by rules set forth by government. If you don't think there should be any rules, then that's fine. Your outrage should be at the idea of mandatory labels in the first place. Nitpicking does not help anyone.

Are you willing personally to cover all costs for adding a couple of words to already-mandated labels? Isn't that the obvious solution under your analysis?

 

[Warrior_of_Freedom]

Are you willing personally to cover all costs for adding a couple of words to already-mandated labels? Isn't that the obvious solution under your analysis?

The costs for adding a couple words? There are no costs for adding a couple words. At all. There's none at all. You go into photoshop, type (Genetically modified) after the ingredient, save it, and send it to the printer to print that label instead.

 

[better-dead-than-fed]

The costs for adding a couple words? There are no costs for adding a couple words. At all. There's none at all. You go into photoshop, type (Genetically modified) after the ingredient, save it, and send it to the printer to print that label instead.

So you are willing personally to cover all costs of mandatory GMO-labeling? There'd be GMO-labels by now, if only you'd offered to fund the program sooner.

 

[kcchiefs6465]

I'm merely comparing you to an idiot, for introducing personal attacks into an argument about politics.

That's better.

 

[ClydeCoulter]

Are you guys still allowing better-than.. run you around in circles? It's no use, he's not interested in real debate here, he appears to be just enjoying the mind-masturbation aspect that this whole circle-jerk provides.

 

[better-dead-than-fed]

Are you guys still allowing better-than.. run you around in circles? It's no use, he's not interested in real debate here, he appears to be just enjoying the mind-masturbation aspect that this whole circle-jerk provides.

Not that your post says anything about the issue of state-mandated GMO-labeling, but what evident basis is there for your personal attack here? If you meant to show that Monsanto-March types tend to be hateful, deceitful, and ignorant, I think that was already clear.