As an international organization to encourage the practice of plurationalism, The Circle of Reason and its local circles provide a unique charitable service -- organizing and conducting volunteer programs and community service projects to encourage those with diverse or disparate beliefs and backgrounds to engage in reasoning dialogue and fellowship across the gulf of human difference, helping us lessen neighborhood tensions, eliminate prejudice and discrimination, and combat community deterioration. Although our members and event attendees stay affiliated with their cherished groups that rely on religious, atheist, biological, ethnic, cultural, economic, political, tribal or ideological kinship, they also join the Circle as plurationalists, to examine their different perspectives and bring them to the round-table of rational discourse -- putting into practice the belief that our public commitment to everyday reasoning will help bring humankind's next major step in moral evolution. We're the place to find, recruit, converse with and encourage -- from all walks of life, all biologies, all beliefs, all societies -- those who are your own kinsmen and kinswomen: What is Pluralistic Rationalism?
Ladies and gentlemen, In just about three weeks from now, on November 5, Washington State will likely pass a ballot initiative to label GMOs. Those numbers may come down a bit, but my hunch is this particular battle is lost.
But as Churchill once said, it is certainly the end of the beginning. The strategy of fighting labelling state by state will have failed, and something new will have to take its place. Today I want to outline to you some ideas about what this something new might look like.
I strongly believe that biotechnology is an essential part of the toolbox to feed the world sustainably in the future.
We need crops that are resistant to new diseases, that can cope with a changing climate and that enable us to feed an increasing human population while minimising the environmental impact of agriculture.
GMOs can deliver on some, though by no means all, of this challenge. They can increase nitrogen use efficiency. They can deliver disease and pest resistance without the need for large-scale applications of agrochemicals.
They can increase productivity and thereby spare land for nature even as we work to double food production by mid-century. And they can address challenges coming at us from global warming such as thermal tolerance limits and drought and flood problems also.
Foods containing GMOs or GM-derived products are no less safe than their conventional alternatives — there is as strong a scientific consensus on this issue as there is on many comparable issues like the science of climate change. There is no safety case and no health case against the current GMOs which are available.
Indeed, GMOs may well be more safe than their conventional alternatives. There is a lot of published science which shows, for example, that GMO Bt corn — because it has less insect damage — is typically lower in carcinogenic aflatoxins mycotoxins than the alternatives.
Organic corn may be very high in terms of this particular risk, in contrast. We will have denied our plant breeders the use of a powerful technology for sustainability and food security, and we will have foreclosed an important and growing area of human knowledge.
This cannot and must not be allowed to happen. And let there be no mistake: They talk about consumer choice, but what they actually want is to remove all choice. They want what I call prohibition based on superstition.
The Public Inspection page on vetconnexx.com offers a preview of documents scheduled to appear in the next day's Federal Register issue. The Public Inspection page may also include documents scheduled for later issues, at the request of the issuing agency. The deeper issue that never sees the light of day is the hypocrisy of the so called “war on drugs”. This of course is a misnomer for the “war on illegal drugs”. Aug 09, · Warning 1: I'm about to talk about an issue that has a lot of nuance in it and no clear "good" answers -- and it's also one that many people have .
Now, as we know, much of the funding and drive behind these GMO labelling campaigns has come from the organic lobby. And I have to hand it to them: They want to wreck biotechnology, and any collateral damage is just fine with them.
Affordable food is no priority for the anti-GMO lobby.
The reason is very simple. They have come up with a winning argument. It may be bad science, but it is good politics. Who can disagree with the right to know what is in your food?
On just about any issue, if you stood on a street corner and asked people whether they wanted to know what was in their food, most people would sign up. It is also a triumph of framing.On teachers’ salaries, at least, the NCES data is data for WAGES only, not total compensation.
Given their civil service protections, automatic, seniority based promotions, extremely generous benefits and pensions, a picture of flatlining wages is inaccurate. The Catholic Church is subjected to a great deal of suspicion, if not outright scorn, when it comes to its treatment of women.
Does the Church treat women as "second class"? In short, does the Catholic Church hate women? Few people would put the question that strongly, yet many believe the answer. Home >Debates > Should cigarettes be banned from society? Arts (1,) Cars () Economics (1,) Education but does that mean we should ban cigarettes just because we do not want it in the hands of our children like many other products on the market today that are only for adult usage only.
Even though the pro argument can . Rastafari, sometimes termed Rastafarianism, is an Abrahamic religion that developed in Jamaica during the s.
Scholars of religion and related fields have classified it as both a new religious movement and a social vetconnexx.com is no centralized authority in control of the movement and much heterogeneity exists among practitioners, who are known as Rastafari, Rastafarians, or Rastas.
Quibble: The term “meritocracy” was initially coined as a negative term in a dystopian science-fiction novel criticizing streaming in British schools.
It subsequently was adopted as a positive term, which the author in question rather disliked. Saturday, October 25, [David Bernstein, 10/25/ PM]Straw Man Criticism: Blogging, and being involved in public debates more generally, leaves one open to criticism, and sometimes the critics even turn out to be right.
But in a couple of recent instances, bloggers have criticized arguments I never made, setting me up as a libertarian strawman.