Am I allowed to speak?

[OpenD]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Russell

In a recent editorial, Mr. Richard Ha accused me of conflict of interest because I speak out about GMO issues, claiming I have no right to express my opinion or to vote on such issues because I am in the natural foods business.
.....

If my advocacy were to somehow be fully successful GMOs would be labeled, as is desired by 90% of the population...

---

I accept that your advocacy is not a conflict of interest, and that you believe in your position, but I do expect you to be open minded in considering debate and evidence that may rebut your position.

But something I do not understand is why you waste time and money advocating for mandatory GMO labelling, when it's clear no such law can pass Constitutional muster. If it gets passed, it can only fall on appeal.

This point has already been adjudicated in the overturn of the Vermont rBGH labeling law in the 1990s. Absent a compelling pubic interest, people and companies cannot be compelled to say what they don't wish to say, i.e., put a label they don't believe in on the food they produce, because it violates their Freedom of Speech. That's fundamental to our system of democracy.

You are perfectly free to promote a voluntary "GMO Free" labeling program if you wish, but obviously this does not require the expenditure of tax money, and it puts the cost burden where it belongs, on the consumers who are actually willing to pay more to have that label on the food they buy.