06-19-2014, 04:33 AM
The science says there is no food safety, environmental damage, allergenic, etc.
Whose "science" can be taken seriously when everything has been monetized and politicized? Scientifically speaking, it's incredibly unlikely that seven IRS employees could have lost all their emails in a "crash" ... that only came to light after they were the focus of an investigation.
there is no rational basis for harm as a justification for forcing labeling
Any labeling "requirement" will be watered down into a marketing gimmick, science and its pesky "rational basis for harm" need not apply.
when farmers can make money, farmers will farm
A premium market for certified non-GMO food would make small-scale "boutique" farming profitable enough to earn a living, regardless of science or "harm".
Whose "science" can be taken seriously when everything has been monetized and politicized? Scientifically speaking, it's incredibly unlikely that seven IRS employees could have lost all their emails in a "crash" ... that only came to light after they were the focus of an investigation.
there is no rational basis for harm as a justification for forcing labeling
Any labeling "requirement" will be watered down into a marketing gimmick, science and its pesky "rational basis for harm" need not apply.
when farmers can make money, farmers will farm
A premium market for certified non-GMO food would make small-scale "boutique" farming profitable enough to earn a living, regardless of science or "harm".