Correct Ben, and glad to see you again. My point is however, following your
example, if you responded to your housemate, "The placement of the food is
self-evident and needs no justification on my part. Further more, because
you question my placement of the food, you are obviously in league with an
international conspiracy to dominate food production and subjugate third
world farmers and you don't care about human health but only your profits
and you probably abuse your children." That, IMO, is what I see on the
anti-GM pages. I have looked at as many as I can find on the Web and I'm on
several lists about it. That is where I got the message I sent. There have
been a couple of *specific* examples of GM crops which poised a *potential*
risk to ecosystems. Other than that, I haven't seen anything even in the
area of human health that caught my attention. There have been a couple of
peer  reviewed articles about allergic reactions to GM products due to
trans-genetic effects, but this is hardly a big deal from an environmental
standpoint. Certainly consumers ought to have a choice of whether or not
they buy GM products, but other than this issue of free will, I still don't
see it.

Ben, you are usually pretty insightful. Am I really "missing the point?" If
so, what is the point, and I'm not being snotty, I really haven't been able
to figure this out. What is the over-riding moral or environmental issue
that makes all of the examples in my previous post valid? I do not see any
commonality other than anti-science, anti-agribusiness, anti-technology. I'm
really serious, I don't get the point.
sb


-----Original Message-----
From: [log in to unmask]
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Benjamin S Hale
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 1999 9:13 AM
To: enviroethics
Subject: Re: FW: GE 2 - ACTION AGAINST GM FOODS


On Thu, 30 Sep 1999, Steven Bissell wrote:

>
> Well, here is a summary of GM political action. What bothers me is that I
> fail to find a single justification for any of this. The point seems to be
> that GM is automatically seen as evil and just stopping it is a moral
> action. Read these and if I'm missing the point, please let me know.

You're missing the point.  If you're looking for a justification in a
catalogue of political actions, you're looking to the wrong source.  Try
looking in a source that discusses GM foods.

Here's a quick analogy:  If my housemate asks me what I did with the food
that we just bought, and I say: "I put the milk in the refrigerator, I
placed the vegetables on the counter, and I put the flour in the pantry."
I would be shocked if she came back at me not with a "Why did you put
those things there?"  But with a "Your explanation bothers me.  All I see
is you gloating over where you put the food without offering any
explanation as to why you put the food there."  My response would be: "You
didn't ask me _why_ I put the food where I did, but you asked me where I
put the food.  I gave that answer."

Stupid example, but the point should be clear.  The letter you forwarded
us simply is not a discussion of GM foods.  It's a summary of actions, as
you yourself note.

Ben



%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%