Quote:
Originally posted by wonderwench
Yes, I would call it a violation of your property rights to have your land and crops contaminated by bio-engineered pollen. You are using a rather extreme example - and one with which the law has not kept up.
My comment about property rights has to do with how capital is employed within reason. Just because someone may not like a product for aesthetic, environmental or whatever reasons, unless they can show a real impact upon their own liberty or property rights, then the owners of the capital should be able to proceed with production.
|
Okay, let's use a universally accepted, presumably inocuous product as an example. I don't drive a motor vehicle, yet those who do drive pollute the air I breath, thus creating a potential health threat that undermines the steps I might take (as a matter of personal liberty) to protect my health. Moreover, since what goes up must come down, the acid rain is once again contaminating my organic cornfield. Granted, that probably wouldn't affect the marketability of my produce now that the current corporatist administration has rendered the "organic" food label all but meaningless, but let's say for the sake of argument that these are both valid concerns.