Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Why Organic Can't Fulfill Our Food Supply Ideals [View all]NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)71. "You mean the era before "we'll do whatever we want because we can"?"
To say that's an attitude taken by the scientific community is utterly outrageous. It takes the work of countless thousands throughout history who have worked to improve the human condition and slanders them by conflating them with their contemporary small number of Dr. Frankensteins.
If scientific advances provided a way to perfect humans: make us all equally beautiful, intelligent, healthy... generic, would you support it?
What you're talking about is eugenics, and the scientific community knows that. With the exception of utterly vile racists, that is absolutely nobody's goal.
If you're referring to advances that improve the human condition, like gene therapy to treat inheritable conditions or voluntary modifications to improve strength, endurance, etc., then no, I would have no significant objections.
How about trans-species hybrids
Behold the abomination of science that is...
...the mule, offspring of a male donkey and female horse. Hybrids are not a modern phenomenon.
If you're talking about human-animal hybrids, then no, that's just gross.
modifications for efficient factory workers?
You're going to have to elaborate on that, because that's very vague. What sort of modifications, genetic, medical, technological?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
106 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
And none of that distraction has anything to do with the BS that is "organic" food marketing.
HuckleB
Mar 2015
#20
I don't understand why these continual promotions for commercial interests are allowed here.
Zorra
Mar 2015
#97
It's true that food produced under NOP certification can use synthetic substances
Major Nikon
Mar 2015
#34
I think the majority of all agriculture isn't currently using drip irrigation
Major Nikon
Mar 2015
#69
It's classic anti-GMO framing. You're not fooling anyone who actually cares about reality.
HuckleB
Mar 2015
#28
Ag products that use chemicals I imagine, as it's DuPont, which is a chemical company
gollygee
Mar 2015
#36
So anyone who has any connection to the organic industry can be summarily dismissed?
Major Nikon
Mar 2015
#66