2 votes

I oppose government mandated GMO labelling as it is not a libertarian or fiscally conservative position

The federal government lacks constitutional authority to mandate labeling of products containing genetically-modified food. Furthermore, those who do not wish to consume genetically-modified products should be leery of federally-mandated labeling because history shows that federal regulatory agencies are susceptible to 'capture,' where the regulators end up serving the interest of the business they are supposed to control. In the case of labeling, federal agencies could redefine the meaning of 'modified' to allow genetically-engineered food on the market without fully-informing consumers of the presence of genetically- engineered ingredients. Instead of federal regulation, consumers should demand that manufactures provide full information and refuse to buy those products that are not fully labeled. Once producers see there is a demand for non-genetically-engineered products they will act to fulfill that demand.

EDIT: As of right now (which is only 14 hours after making this post), I am down voted -7 and have a number of negative comments below, including one which is very rude. This is despite the fact that what I have written above is a direct quote from Ron Paul himself. I think this just shows how much so many people oppose Ron Paul's words when they don't apppear to be coming out of Ron Paul's mouth.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

He has stated on many occasions his personal dislike

for something that the states might do but he has never stated it was not their Constitutional right.

If abortion was pushed back to the states and my state was pro-abortion then I would have a problem with that and act but I would never say they didn't have a right to do it.

So you'd have to ask him personally if he was actually for the labeling outside of the Federal.. anything but an answer to that is a flimsy speculation.

Edit: Do you understand the object of pushing things back to the states?

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

States do not have constitutional rights. No one does.

What the States might have is the power to do something legitimately, because the People of that State delegated that power to it.

Re-read the 9th and 10th amendments again.

That's exactly what I mean when I say States have

the "right". I've even made that distinction in previous posts on this thread.

This falls within that "right".

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

Not the same thing. I haven't read elsewhere on this thread

but no matter.

The use of the term is entirely out of place.

States do not have rights.

Only individuals do.

No shit? Really, the States are not human beings?

Thanks so much for clearing that up. For a minute there I thought they were alive and created by our maker and therefor endowed with the same unalienable rights as we were.

You're my hero.. You have saved the day.

lol

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

You just can't help yourself can you?

You just have to personally attack people when you lose an argument.

Go fly a kite man.

"You just can't help yourself can you?"

No more than you I suppose. And I didn't lose an argument.. I mocked you because you were being an idiot.

When someone says right.. they aren't always talking about natural rights.. They can mean, they have that option so for you to parade out the obvious as if you've caught someone on something is ridiculous.

As if anyone else thought any different lol

States Rights used in the same manner as I have.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SU58QPUyrPg

I like those dragon kites. Ya know, the ones like this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upXvBXOulEE&feature=related

Cool stuff.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

Words mean things. Mean what you say or be prepared

to be called out on it.

An "option" to do something is not a right. Why do you continually keep using words that don't mean what you are saying? Why do you keep prompting me to point out the obvious?

I'm not an idiot and I wasn't acting like one.

I was making an important distinction.

Thinking that States have "rights" leads to erroneous conclusions. Just like people saying we use "dollars" today when we do nothing of the sort. Using the wrong words perpetuates confusion and ignorance of the core issues.

Using the correct words however leads to clarity and understanding.

That's all I was after.

I mean exactly what I say.. and I stand by what I said..

It's not my job to teach you the many ways that words are used. What about the states right of nullification?

There are things written into the Constitution that give the power to each branch.. That is their RIGHT to exercise which has been derived through the people.

It is a right, just not a natural right. You're the only one that's having issues with clarity.

And you are... an idiot.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/states%27+rights

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

Only Sovereigns have rights. In America, governments

are not sovereign. Sure, morons today THINK they are and they treat them that way, but legally, they are not.

Neither Congress, nor the President, nor the Courts, nor the States possess any "rights."

They have been temporarily granted the privilege to exercise certain powers.

In America, individuals are sovereign, they are the only entities with rights. Anything else is a privilege and a temporary delegation of power.

Pointing to a definition of a vernacular phrase doesn't make me an idiot. I know full well people, you included, misuse that term. The fact others misuse it does not mean you are correct and I am an idiot. It just means you aren't the only one misusing the term.

BLAH BLAH BLAH

This:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/states%27+rights

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

You are repeating yourself.

I'll take that as a concession.

It was worth repeating.. being it is the definition.

Only an idiot would think it was a concession. :)

So let's see.. We have Dr.Paul, Judge Nap, Tom Woods, every fucking dictionary on the face of the planet and sam here thinks everyone ELSE is wrong. lol

I'll take that as a concession because it's obvious that you do not know what you're talking about.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

Why do you insist on attacking me personally?

Does that make you feel good or something?

Why can't you just argue the point and leave it at that?

Why the need to be vicious about it?

Afraid your points don't hit hard enough without the personal epithets do you?

You repeated the same definition. That doesn't prove the definition. It's just a website that someone put up about their opinion of what the phrase means.

And I admitted, yes, some people use this phrase in that fashion. They are wrong.

You've provided nothing about Dr. Paul, Judge Nap or Tom Woods in this regard. Though I have no doubt you will find them using the phrase.

Just because they use it doesn't mean they meant it literally like you did.

And if they did, yes, they are in error as well.

States do not and cannot have rights.

And I'd bet dimes to dollars that if we sat down with those three gentlemen and asked them about this, they'd all say the same thing I am - "yes, people use that phrase colloquially, but Sam is correct, States have delegated powers, they cannot have rights."

I doubt you would find either of those three gentlemen insisting that States were sovereign entities (with respect to People, not other governments) and they they possessed or could possess "rights" as opposed to delegated powers. Those guys are bright enough to know the difference.

Just get over yourself.

You used a phrase loosely, and I pointed that out.

Big deal.

Grow up.

And stick to the topic please instead of personal attacks.

Because you're acting like an idiot.

Do you want the definition to that as well or will you brush that one off too?

Just shut up already lol

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

I do not endorse infringing

I do not endorse infringing state's rights. I oppose labeling on a state level, much as you oppose abortion on a state level. You are correct in that I did make an assumption that Ron Paul agreed with me, but this was based on his justification for his position on labeling at a federal level. State government is just as prone to regulatory capture as federal government.

Support Rand, Amash & other liberty candidates? Check out: http://www.LibertyConservatives.com/

Then you do what Dr.Paul states..

You fight it on the local level or you fight it on the Federal level.. I prefer the local level and the beauty of his plan.. If you don't like it.. You MOVE to another state.

The states will catch on and provide a free market solution in government as well.

To say it's unconstitutional is bullshit though and hypocritical. You may not like it that the states have the power but that's the way things were meant. There are great reasons for that.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

It's good thinking

However, when the agencies have been captured, the corporations have bought and corrupted judges and legislatures, falsified and misrepresented science, controlled media through legislation (food libel laws) and legal threat, nearly cornered global markets in seed, by acquiring most seed companies, with intent to control global staple crops, legally and technologically overturned norms relied upon since the beginning of agriculture (saving seed), with technology that permanently alters the genome of food crops in ways that nature cannot (goats crossed with spiders to produce spider-web-goat-milk for use in kevlar), and humans cannot control, while claiming ownership of the lifeforms in perpetuity, wherever the dna may travel in nature, it's not inappropriate that citizens turn to referendums, within the context of current government practice, with the hope that bringing a little sunshine into the marketplace, a little bit of information, in the spirit of common sense, will provide some balance, with the onus on those who have corrupted or controlled all of the normal institutions that support free and fair markets.

This reminds me a little of

This reminds me a little of George W. Bush when he said "I’ve abandoned free market principles to save the free market system."

If these corporations are so powerful, what's to stop them manipulating this? There's already so many exemptions in Prop 37. You say the agencies have been captured - if they are, then the corporations don't need to worry at all about Prop 37.

Support Rand, Amash & other liberty candidates? Check out: http://www.LibertyConservatives.com/

If the corporations are so powerful?

So, you really don't know?

They have to stop anything that will let the cat out of the bag. If the public comes to the conclusion that GMO is frankenfood, as is the sensibility in Europe, the game is essentially over.

Corporations are made of "legal fiction" filed at statehouses.

Incorporate now!

  • Personal liability protection
  • Lower tax rate from profits spread between owners and corporation
  • Easier to seek outside investment

Disclaimer: Communications between you and Corporation-R-Us... The mighty Corporation of Oz! are protected by our policies, attorney-client privilege & all rights reserved. We are not a law firm, attorney or much of anything else. We cannot provide any kind of advice, explanation, opinion, or recommendation about possible rights, remedies, defenses, options, selection of forms or strategies. Did I miss anything? No privileges either.

Disclaimer: Mark Twain (1835-1910-To be continued) is unlicensed. His river pilot's license went delinquent in 1862. Caution advised. Daily Paul

Sure, GMO might be

Sure, GMO might be frankenfood. But if you support GMO labeling, you support tobacco labeling, because tobacco is not good for you. People should educate themselves. You are saying you want the government to decide how people think. I'm sure you don't feel the same way on other issues, so why do you on this one?

Support Rand, Amash & other liberty candidates? Check out: http://www.LibertyConservatives.com/

and if nobody says anything

what's to stop them then?

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

People voting with their

People voting with their wallets by buying food that labels itself GMO-free, while still leaving the option open for those who are happy with consuming GMO to consume it.

Support Rand, Amash & other liberty candidates? Check out: http://www.LibertyConservatives.com/

how would you know it was really GMO-free?

I mean if the government is restrained by your own standards from doing anything then whats to keep them from doing whatever they want.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

How would you know if

How would you know if unlabeled products with Prop 37 are GMO-free? You seriously trust the government?

Support Rand, Amash & other liberty candidates? Check out: http://www.LibertyConservatives.com/

No but my chances in this case are better if it's on the table

versus the flip side which is knowing nothing. At least this way we can see the bills and see where the loopholes are and maybe fight it...if there are any.

That has yet to be proven.

Patriot Cell #345,168
I don't respond to emails or pm's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=qo8CmO...
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution, inevitable.

This is a State mandate

The states have the right to impose GMO labeling. It is in the interest of the people to know what they are putting in their mouth....How many people even know what GMO foods are? This more than a warning label, it's an education process for the thumbed down population..............

Just because it's done at the state level

... doesn't mean it's good. Was Romneycare good?

The whole idea of giving the states all powers not defined by the Constitution was not to prevent bad decisions, but to move these decisions as far from the federal level as possible.

I look forward to the first day a local farmer is shut down because some big producer alerted the authorities that he/she wasn't labeling their products correctly for GMO. I look forward to the time when local farmers and small businesses are crushed under the expensive regulations and legal hoops they need to jump through in order to get that "GMO free" sticker. It will be nice to say "I told you so" to all of the pretend libertarians who trust in the free market and the intelligence of individuals to take care of themselves, except when it comes to GMO because GMO is... different somehow.

A revenge based

argument that regulations cut both ways? When small farmers are crushed by prop 37, we'll know who was the true libertarian?