From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@datamann.com)
Date: Fri May 03 2002 - 15:48:26 MDT
Brian D Williams wrote:
>
> >From: Mike Lorrey <mlorrey@datamann.com>
>
> >By the standard of the definition of "organic" that you say is
> >accepted, a country is a "democracy" even if it doesn't allow a
> >subgroup, like blacks or jews, to vote....
>
> I have absolutely no idea how you derived this, and challenge
> anyone else to explain it.
"Organic" produce is only produce that has been grown using 'natural'
fertilizers (non-human animal manure, lime, etc) with no pesticides, no
antibiotics or hormones for the animals, etc and processed after
harvesting with only 'natural' methods (i.e. no huge automatic egg
sorting and packaging machines, no irradiation, no Purdue style chicken
slaughtering, etc).
By your analogy of 'democracies', produce that fits this definition is
"Organic".
THEN you also add in the caveat that any food that is grown and
harvested and processed in this manner is only "Organic" if and only if
the plants or animals being grown have never had any gene splicing
occuring at human hands at any time in their ancestry.
This caveat is tantamount to saying "one man, one vote, unless, of
course, you are black or jewish", specifically because blacks and jews
are seen as different for genetic reasons, for their ancestry, and thus
are not considered "human", just as GM foods are not considered
"organic" because of their ancestry and not because of the way they were
raised.
Perhaps a less inflammatory way of putting it is if we in the US deny
cloned/genetically engineered babies the rights of citizenship simply
because their genes were once sorted out and/or fixed (or their parents
were).
>
> It's clear there is no basis for discussion here, enjoy your
> project, maybe the folks at truth.com will pick up on it, it's of
> the same shall we say "caliber".
>
> Feel free to have the last word, I'm done.
I had no intent to call you racist personally.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:48 MST