View Poll Results: Your vote on this proposal would be?

Voters
44. You may not vote on this poll
  • yes

    9 20.45%
  • no

    25 56.82%
  • no, but I would vote yes on labeling

    8 18.18%
  • undecided

    2 4.55%
Page 4 of 23 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 224

Thread: The DNA Protection Act of 2013

  1. #31
    Count Smackula
    rathi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    10-31-15 @ 10:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,890

    Re: The DNA Protection Act of 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by DNAprotection View Post
    Hey genius, the proposal does no such thing...maybe you should read stuff before leaping to conclusions?
    Sec 3(c) allows for continued medical research and applications in strictly controlled environments etc, as it should be when using technologies that you dont fully understand as of yet.
    You have absolutely no business telling people about "technologies they don't fully understand" given the level of ignorance displayed in the bill. Even the layman is aware that insects fall under the subset of animal and listing both is redundant. Ironically enough, your bill also fails to mitigate the worst risk of genetically modified organisms, as it doesn't cover viruses or bacteria.

    Biotechnology does require considerable oversight and restrictions, but they should be decided by those well informed about the issue, not luddites spouting the naturalistic fallacy.

  2. #32
    User DNAprotection's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    cali
    Last Seen
    04-19-13 @ 10:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    85

    Re: The DNA Protection Act of 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    I know they are different and at the same time, similar.
    You're assuming, at least as far as that paper you pushed goes, that natural equates to good/right/correct/whatever.

    I don't care if fish genes are inserted into any other plant/animal, to reach the desired effect.
    It doesn't bother me in the least.

    A lot of the hullabaloo behind GMO's, is similar to the anti vacciners, anti irradiation groups, etc.
    I simply don't care to read your biased material and fear based propaganda.
    Harry again you are inaccurate in your assessment of my position.
    I dont claim that "natural equates to good/right/correct" in the sense that you state such, for my its simply a numbers game, 'nature' inherently has all the numbers and though we are part of nature we as a species have yet to know and understand all the numbers. Equations are a funny and exact science Harry, get one number wrong or missing and it causes a chain reaction that effects everything.

  3. #33
    User DNAprotection's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    cali
    Last Seen
    04-19-13 @ 10:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    85

    Re: The DNA Protection Act of 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by rathi View Post
    You have absolutely no business telling people about "technologies they don't fully understand" given the level of ignorance displayed in the bill. Even the layman is aware that insects fall under the subset of animal and listing both is redundant. Ironically enough, your bill also fails to mitigate the worst risk of genetically modified organisms, as it doesn't cover viruses or bacteria.

    Biotechnology does require considerable oversight and restrictions, but they should be decided by those well informed about the issue, not luddites spouting the naturalistic fallacy.

    Well I'm glad your confident, can be a healthy thing, but should try to be correct because it helps to...
    The USA defines 'insects' separately from 'animals', thus laws need to be written accordingly...see endangered species act for standing example

    ps...please learn definition of organism...thank you<3
    Last edited by DNAprotection; 01-20-13 at 09:30 AM.

  4. #34
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: The DNA Protection Act of 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by DNAprotection View Post
    Harry again you are inaccurate in your assessment of my position.
    I dont claim that "natural equates to good/right/correct" in the sense that you state such, for my its simply a numbers game, 'nature' inherently has all the numbers and though we are part of nature we as a species have yet to know and understand all the numbers. Equations are a funny and exact science Harry, get one number wrong or missing and it causes a chain reaction that effects everything.
    Nature is not a living entity by itself.
    Sometimes "nature" makes bad stuff for humans, (i.e. see venomous snakes, spiders, bacteria and virus.)

    I have no problem with reasonable restrictions for GMO's, that ensure their safety and quality.
    What I have a problem with is people, who have the same mindset as anti vaccine, anti irradiation, etc, all backed up by huge biased information and a terrible understanding of science.

    Going by your system, we would of been left, in the stone age.
    No thanks.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  5. #35
    Sage
    Quag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Earth
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,015

    Re: The DNA Protection Act of 2013

    Reminds me of when automobiles first came out, There were laws saying you have to have someone walk in front of the vehicule because they were so dangerous with the 5mph speedlimit!
    At one point peopel thought you would die if you went over 100mph.
    Someone at some point decided to limit the size of the bore on IC engines, thinking this would limit their size as they had decided a certain bore/stroke ratio was the optimal resulting in longer stroke engines to get around it.
    The world is replete with examples of people who know squat about technology being afraid of said technology and trying to make laws to suspend/curb/ban said technology.
    A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.
    Winston Churchill



    A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.
    Winston Churchill

  6. #36
    versus the world
    Surtr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    The greatest planet in the world.
    Last Seen
    06-10-14 @ 03:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    7,017

    Re: The DNA Protection Act of 2013

    I'm for it simply because we need to be working towards reducing and controlling the human population, not proliferating it with altered freaks of science and nature.
    I love the NSA. It's like having a secret fan-base you will never see, but they're there, watching everything you write and it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside knowing that I may be some person's only form of unconstitutional entertainment one night.

  7. #37
    User DNAprotection's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    cali
    Last Seen
    04-19-13 @ 10:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    85

    Re: The DNA Protection Act of 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Nature is not a living entity by itself.
    Sometimes "nature" makes bad stuff for humans, (i.e. see venomous snakes, spiders, bacteria and virus.)

    I have no problem with reasonable restrictions for GMO's, that ensure their safety and quality.
    What I have a problem with is people, who have the same mindset as anti vaccine, anti irradiation, etc, all backed up by huge biased information and a terrible understanding of science.

    Going by your system, we would of been left, in the stone age.
    No thanks.
    Not at all Harry, firstly nature is indiscriminate and is geared to operate or give notice to all the aspects of symbiotic life on this planet when it puts the numbers in sequence.
    Humans on the other hand are not yet capable of calculating such equations let alone doing so absent of all that impedes or motivates our judgement.
    Nature works by the numbers while we humans as a part of nature still only work with the numbers that we like or can see at this point etc...changing life equations is entirely non-comparable to marketing a new product or learning about fire because all such examples have limited consequences if bungled or even if purposefully intended to do harm, whereas the same cannot be definitively said about GE/GMO technologies due to the chain reactive nature of the effects of such.

  8. #38
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: The DNA Protection Act of 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by DNAprotection View Post
    Not at all Harry, firstly nature is indiscriminate and is geared to operate or give notice to all the aspects of symbiotic life on this planet when it puts the numbers in sequence.
    Humans on the other hand are not yet capable of calculating such equations let alone doing so absent of all that impedes or motivates our judgement.
    Nature works by the numbers while we humans as a part of nature still only work with the numbers that we like or can see at this point etc...changing life equations is entirely non-comparable to marketing a new product or learning about fire because all such examples have limited consequences if bungled or even if purposefully intended to do harm, whereas the same cannot be definitively said about GE/GMO technologies due to the chain reactive nature of the effects of such.
    Yea, all you're doing again, is the naturalistic fallacy.

    "Nature" has done things, that have had irreversible and dire consequences for many species on this planet.
    You're assuming, that most things done by "nature" are correct, rather that just are.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  9. #39
    User DNAprotection's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    cali
    Last Seen
    04-19-13 @ 10:18 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    85

    Re: The DNA Protection Act of 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Yea, all you're doing again, is the naturalistic fallacy.

    "Nature" has done things, that have had irreversible and dire consequences for many species on this planet.
    You're assuming, that most things done by "nature" are correct, rather that just are.
    Harry your speaking of nature as if some mystical reasoning force that does this or that...from my view its not like that at all.
    Nature just goes by the numbers, it is human judgement that extrapolates that into being 'good' or 'bad' based on our particular perceived need.
    Nature works for the balanced needs of all and some times those numbers add up to a species going 'extinct', that's only 'good' or 'bad' from a human perspective, nature was only playing by the numbers.
    No doubt if humans decide to start changing the numbers with no complete understanding of why or how the numbers are what they are then I'm guessing that we've got some big surprises coming our way...such surprises can even equate into extinction.

  10. #40
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: The DNA Protection Act of 2013

    Quote Originally Posted by DNAprotection View Post
    Harry your speaking of nature as if some mystical reasoning force that does this or that...from my view its not like that at all.
    Nature just goes by the numbers, it is human judgement that extrapolates that into being 'good' or 'bad' based on our particular perceived need.
    Nature works for the balanced needs of all and some times those numbers add up to a species going 'extinct', that's only 'good' or 'bad' from a human perspective, nature was only playing by the numbers.
    No doubt if humans decide to start changing the numbers with no complete understanding of why or how the numbers are what they are then I'm guessing that we've got some big surprises coming our way...such surprises can even equate into extinction.
    Which single species did natures numbers add up to during the "great dying?"

    It's very unlikely that humans will have the same effect with GMO's, than did "natures" great dying.
    Sorry, but your post is still filled with the naturalist fallacy.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

Page 4 of 23 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •