Whoever runs the FDA is banking.

In my classmate's commentary, new FDA laws, he responds to the November 30, 2010 decision to enforce new Federal Drug and Administration regulations to help get "safer" food to American's dinner tables. I am glad that he/she decided to write about agriculture in the U.S., because changing the world of agriculture is crucial to our country's future.


She said she is excited that, the FDA "is making more of an effort to protect us from the foods we eat because we can't all grow our own food." This amazes me. Although it sounds good that there will be more inspections and regulations on growing, what is that really saying?


In 2008 the FDA approved the sale of meats and milk made from cloned animals. If that doesn't make your stomach turn, maybe 50 years from now all this cloned meat will have harmful effects on your children, and their children, etc. All of our beef comes from a handful of slaughterhouses--a HANDFUL. All of our corn products (which is pretty much everything we can buy at a grocery store these days) is genetically modified. This bill claims that it's "intended to keep unsafe foods from reaching markets and restaurants, where they can make people sick..."


How about taking into consideration how the food even gets to us? Farmers and people who work in the fields, work to make the fertilizer, work in the slaugherhouses, whatever--are being exploited by the FDA. How about raising inspections on the humane treatment of animals and the workers? Farmers are forced to conform to the FDA's policies on growing crops, but they encourage genetically modified crops to enhance production flow and profit.


What about obesity in America? Sheesh, what an epidemic. I wish the FDA would make a no-nonsense law and require restaurants to offer nutritional information up front like caloric intake, fat intake, etc, but more importantly--where they got their stuff from.


All Americans deserve to have good and healthful food. It's not right that only the rich can afford to buy local, free range, and grass fed. I agree with her that we can't all grow our own crops or raise our own animals, but we can hold our government accountable and support those agriculturalists who are doing what they can to truly improve the health of America.


I just wish that the media would more openly expose Americans to the real problem with the ethics of agriculture in America--whoever runs the FDA is banking. And I just lost my appetite.

Don't Ask, Don't Tell

I know this may seem like I'm beating a dead horse because we have all heard so many arguments for and against the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy regarding hiding the sexual orientation of those less accepted in the military: gays and lesbians, but I really have an urge to speculate and ask some questions!


The law forbidding openly gay men and women from serving in the military was passed in 1993, so it's been around almost 18 years. To alleviate some of the frustration caused with this law, they reinforced the concept of "don't ask, don't tell," meaning that you can be gay and serve in the military, just don't tell anyone about it, or ask anyone else about their sexual orientation. (yeah right, it is a topic of conversation all the time regardless of opinion)


So right now our court system has repealed the "don't ask don't tell" policy, but for some reason our country cannot overcome this. It's a battle between the Republicans and Democrats. Right now everyone is waiting for more Republican support, but the popular view is that they don't want to look at any more bills until some 'other guy's' tax cuts are extended. What happened to making decisions on behalf of the people you represent? Instead, they're waiting on another decision to be made to satisfy their agendas first. This is ridiculous, and familiar.


The Chiefs of Staff all support an "eventual repeal," just not right now for fear that it would disrupt wartime operations. I am not saying that I disagree completely with that, because like anything as old as our military and the military mindset--change is hard to adjust to. Very hard. In the military environment this change would come down from the top of the chain, but just how reinforced would it be?


I was in the military and I worked with men and women, gay and straight. I have seen truly talented and dedicated service members released from service because there were conflicts coming about at work because of their sexual orientation. Why was it such a concern? It was true there were conflicts at work because of it, but that's because other people are conditioned into a mindset that being gay in the military is unacceptable, so they find it unacceptable and are able to find faults in other areas just because they know someone is gay. We are afraid of change. 


It might "disrupt" war time efforts. I don't mean any disrespect to our Generals, but are they really being honest with themselves and with the public? There are so many gay people in the military and in Afghanistan, but does it matter? It doesn't matter if they are gay or straight or black or white, if they want to indulge in their lifestyle, they most certainly will, regardless of law. But should they have to do it in private? Well in my opinion, all of our personal lives should be private, but when you're stuck in a ditch in Saudi Arabia for three weeks just how much of your life gets to be private? I suppose this is why they have the mindset that it could be disruptive.


It doesn't matter what laws exist, there will still be gays and lesbians serving in the military. In our nation's current state, how could they be so selective? What are they implying about class distinctions to the youth and service family members in America? 


Sexual orientation should not effect your job. I understand men and women have separate jobs in the military, some jobs women simply cannot or should not do. However, how does one's sexual orientation dictate their integrity, honor, compassion, patriotism, or even work ethic? Why is this taking so long to be resolved? 


I'm not saying that there won't be problems if this law is repealed, but we don't know until we try. A team is only as strong as its weakest link.