I haven't visited TA in a while, nor have I posted in such amount of time either, but I have an inquiry that I hope some of you may touch on...
I've noticed that there are quite a few Atheists/Secularists out there who are supportive on Genetically Modified Organisms in food and drink products. I for one, am not. But aside from that, I'd like to know why exactly you're supportive of it. Do you believe in what corporations like Monsanto say? Things like "GMOs allow us to feed the world.." (generally speaking) and what not? Or is it the science behind it?
I'd love to have some interesting conversation about this.
RE: " just because its science doesn't always mean its for the greater good..."
"Just because you could, doesn't always mean you should"
--Jeff Goldbloom, Jurassic Park --
Just because you could doesn't mean you should or shouldn't, you have to work that out indpendently.....
If by "supportive" you mean "not in opposition" then I presume I would fit the bill.
"I'd like to know why exactly you're supportive of it."
Because there is no good reason to be against it.
"Do you believe in what corporations like Monsanto say?"
Yes? Lying to (potential) shareholders is a criminal offense which may lead to those who do it facing about as much time in jail as a rapist. Would you risk something like that for your job?
"Or is it the science behind it?"
Most of the work is done by scientist. Of course, take everything the marketing guys and sales people claim with a grain of salt.
GMOs is considered safe by agencies such as the US FDA and NAS, EU Commission, Royal Society of Medicine, FAO, and WHO, generally by way of reviewing peer evaluated scientific reports. I'm not going to discount that the may be wrong, but they are in a better position to speak on the subject and evaluate the evidence then I will ever be. In addition, detractors tend not to be scientific institutions, but interested parties, which lessen their credibility.
Edit: I recommend watching this video which is a good pro-con summary:
@Arcus - the photo at about 6:00 in that video reminded me of this
Adultswim - the only true contribution to modern culture the US has produced ;)
Well...we've made a few others. But none as significant or entertaining.
I love me some Adult Swim.
I don't see that just because (the very backwards and corrupt) government food agencies approve of GMOs, that I should have to. The WHO is also not credible based on its background. I see many reasons to not be against it, but to be highly skeptical of it and I do feel we all should have a right to know what foods contain GMO sources. That video to me is very pro-GMO and with every PRO he gave, he had no potential CON, and with every CON he gave, he had a PRO. It seems very one-sided. Have you ever seen 'The Future of Food'? How Monsanto is muscling their way into every farm in any way they can? To me, Scientists can also be bought. So I do see very good reasons to be against it, at least against that it 100% okay and not harmful at all. But yet GMOs are in millions of food products already, even food being bought in your local grocery store and you might have no idea that they're in there. I think the debate should be more about knowing you're consuming them, rather then them existing at all. I have no problem with the science behind it, but I can choose what I want to consume and put in mine, and my families body... Those are my main concerns and I see no evidence FOR GMOs that could easily alleviate those concerns.
You do not trust scientist, thus it i impossible for me to persuade you otherwise. You are seeking an echo-chamber, not a discussion.
I didn't say I don't trust Scientists... I said Scientists can be bought... Scientists can also be religious, too. Its hard to trust THOSE Scientists. No, you cannot persuade me by simply implying I should trust the Scientists behind GMOs. But that's just what the Scientists are doing, they're providing the Science for it, not the brand. Monsanto is the brand and they're all over the place, lobbying in Washington, selling GMO crops to major food providers in the U.S. and around the world.
Yes, everyone can be bought, but the initial assumption is that they are not. You trust random documentaries and interested parties over several leading food safety regulators. You do not question questioning of regulators, only the regulators themselves. While anti-authoritarianism may gain you cred points with others, it is not the case with me. I need some evidence.
Pointing out exactly where regulators or scientists made errors, and how those errors detract from the bulk of the evidence that no harm is evident, is the way to go.