• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Right to Food Amendment

Heyo

Veteran Member
Maine becomes the first US state to recognize the Right to Food in a Constitutional amendment | Universal Rights Group

Maine has become the first state to write in food production and consumption into it's constitution. Bringing cottage food laws to the fore.

The amendment, which 60% of Mainers voted in favor of, declares that “all individuals have the right to grow, raise, harvest, produce and consume the food of their own choosing for their own nourishment, sustenance, bodily health and well-being

Let's get this going in all 50 states.
We had a related problem in Europe. Big pharma (which is also big farmer) tried to patent all seeds and plants and wanted all non approved food to be forbidden from cultivating, harvested or consumed, even in a private garden.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
We had a related problem in Europe. Big pharma (which is also big farmer) tried to patent all seeds and plants and wanted all non approved food to be forbidden from cultivating, harvested or consumed, even in a private garden.

That is a problem with GMO's. They will contaminate neighboring crops since bees have no respect!:mad:

I should see if I can find it, but there was a farmer in Canada that wanted to grow his own rape seed. The owners of Canola, which is a patented GMO rape seed variation sued him because his seeds had Canola DNA in them. Unbelievable. And I do believe that the farmer lost his case. He then had the brilliant idea of suing Canola because their crops contaminated his plants. Let me see if I can find it.

EDIT: @Heyo Okay, it has been too long and I got the story wrong. Monsanto did sue and win. It went to a higher court and they won again, but eventually even though Monsanto "won" they were not awarded any money due to their pollen entering his crop:

Monsanto Canada Inc v Schmeiser - Wikipedia
 
Last edited:

Heyo

Veteran Member
That is a problem with GMO's. They will contaminate neighboring crops since bees have no respect!:mad:

I should see if I can find it, but there was a farmer in Canada that wanted to grow his own rape seed. The owners of Canola, which is a patented GMO rape seed variation sued him because his seeds had Canola DNA in them. Unbelievable. And I do believe that the farmer lost his case. He then had the brilliant idea of suing Canola because their crops contaminated his plants. Let me see if I can find it.
I remember that case differently. Wasn't it so that the farmer sued first?
It was one reason why Monsanto (now Bayer) was so ... unpopular.
 

Viker

Häxan
This thread's four hours old
Like food sat out all night
It has gone cold
Soon to draw bugs
Then to grow mold


:D
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I remember that case differently. Wasn't it so that the farmer sued first?
It was one reason why Monsanto (now Bayer) was so ... unpopular.
Yeah, I edited my post with a link to what happened. My memory failed me. I did tag you so that you would see the edit, but that may not have worked.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
Yeah, I edited my post with a link to what happened. My memory failed me. I did tag you so that you would see the edit, but that may not have worked.
Well, you were right and I was wrong as to who sued first.
Anyway, that case and other attempts of big pharma to control food production resulted in a ban of "patents for life" in the EU (which is still violated in a select few cases).
And Bayer lost a lot of money by buying Monsanto. That corporation was more toxic than their products.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Well, you were right and I was wrong as to who sued first.
Anyway, that case and other attempts of big pharma to control food production resulted in a ban of "patents for life" in the EU (which is still violated in a select few cases).
And Bayer lost a lot of money by buying Monsanto. That corporation was more toxic than their products.

Okay, I understand that businesses need to get paid for their products. But I am not a fan of how patents are applied to life. I also do not like the hype against GMO's. I think that that hype started largely because of their pushing for patents in Europe. They should have found another solution.
 

Heyo

Veteran Member
Okay, I understand that businesses need to get paid for their products. But I am not a fan of how patents are applied to life. I also do not like the hype against GMO's. I think that that hype started largely because of their pushing for patents in Europe. They should have found another solution.
I agree. For me it was never about the technique of GMOs but about the power it gave to the producers.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I agree. For me it was never about the technique of GMOs but about the power it gave to the producers.
Okay, channeling my eastern mystic side:

Monsanto holds on to its species as if they are rope instead as if holding liquid water with one's hands. Squeeze the water and it is gone.
 

The Hammer

[REDACTED]
Premium Member
I agree. For me it was never about the technique of GMOs but about the power it gave to the producers.

My problem is GMOs lead to monoculture crops, which makes our food supply more fragile to pests, weather, disease.
 
Top