permaculture

["April Sampson-Kelly" <askpv@ozemail.com.au>]

Debate about man-made versus natural is interesting
but not when both sides get offensive.
Permaculture has three ethics:  (yes, I appologise to those who already
know)
1. Care of Earth
2. Care of People
3. Fair Share
so few people know how to express care of people and so many others
would rather there was only their selected few friends left to care for the
earth.
I have had more than my share of insults and have held my own without
fast punches.
This email is global, guys. For many of us, this is our only regular
permaculture discussion group.
(and times like this I am grateful it is!)
There are a lot of people curious how we implement our ethics.  They like to
watch.  and I have seen the
numbers of unsubcribers rise after feuds, ask Larry (of sunsite).
Lets show the world respect for one another and peace.
April


-----Original Message-----
From: Craig Lanoye <lanoye@together.net>
To: unlisted-recipients:; (no To-header on input) <unlisted-recipients:; (no
To-header on input)>
Cc: sanet-mg@shasta.ces.ncsu.edu <sanet-mg@shasta.ces.ncsu.edu>;
permaculture@listserv.oit.unc.edu <permaculture@listserv.oit.unc.edu>
Date: Saturday, 29 November 1997 6:30
Subject: Re: FDA as keeper of truth?....Yikes!


>David Kendra wrote:
>>
>> Craig,
>> Please note that this post is to you from me (note that I deleted the
>> Novartis reference from the organizational affiliation) and is also for
>> the internet community as well..
>>
>> Craig Lanoye wrote:
>> >
>> > If you had to feed one or the other to your children, which one would
>> > you pick?
>> >
>> For the past few weeks we carried on a discussion about the pro's and
>> con's of genetically engineered products in agriculture.  I realized
>> from the beginning that we both looked at the issue from very different
>> perspectives.  I respected that difference, in fact I was hoping to
>> learn something from you about why you believe so strongly the way you
>> do.  Instead what I learned is that you are a very evil person.
>>
>> I put up with the cuts you made about me and the comment that I should
>> develop a tumor.
>
>
>Really, I don't wish a tumor on you.  I'm 100% certain that if you had a
>tumor, though, that  you believed was due to the fact that you have been
>drinking water contaminated with a cancer causing chemical for years
>without knowing,  you would be less inclined to support the use of
>atrazine as an Ag input.
>
>
>  That's okay.  I know that you are frustrated because I
>> didn't fall for your baited questions.  However, you showed your true
>> colors when you posted the above statement asking me to choose which of
>> my children I would feed.  That is inexcuseable.  That reminds me of the
>> Nazi's asking parents which child they wanted to keep and which they
>> wanted to die.  Craig, you can read into that reference whatever you
>> want. Your self-rightousness and resorts of wishing ill on other people
>> in your posts only shows that you are a morally small individual.
>>
>> I truly feel sorry for your family.
>
>
>You should, they live in a toxic world of naturally occurring  plant
>carcinogens that are about to kill them.
>
>
> If in a public forum you wish ill
>> on someone and his family members that you do not even know then I can
>> only imagine how you must treat your family members when they disagree
>> with you.
>
>If you will recall, I was making a point.  Never did I wish harm to come
>to your family.   Take a closer look at it and maybe answer my query
>while you are at it.
>
>
>>
>> Craig, you can respond to this post with any comment you want.  From now
>> on I am going to nuke your replies like I should have once you moved the
>> discussion away from GE and started attacking me personally.  Bringing
>> my family into it the way you did is immoral and unexcusable.
>>
>> I wish you and your family well and hope you have a Happy Thanksgiving.
>> I know you ruined mine.
>
>I'm sorry that you were so affected by the power of a common sense
>rebuttal.
>
>
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Dave Kendra
>> Never would I wish ill of you or your family
>
>       Nor I of yours,  believe it.
>
>It really doesn't matter what you think of me.  Everyone who knows me,
>knows that I am a caring person who tends to speak his mind, and who is
>rarely bamboozled  by  the latest wave of marketing propaganda and
>technological  saviorism.
>
>      It is plain to see that the reason you are backing out of the
>discussion is that  your "sales job" isn't working here with me or the
>others who are concerned about the implications of your
>shortsightedness.  I have exposed your lack of solid foundation.  I have
>reminded you of your lack of understanding of how interconnectedness is
>overlooked in the presentation of your mighty, thoroughly designed, (??
>see the post from "Ecology"  magazine, shows how your GE trials are a
>farce.  Doesn't matter who you have already had them approved by,  the
>"science"  is weak because you failed to take into consideration the way
>the real world operates.  ie:  not the test tube one you are so cocky
>about) risk analysis testing.  I am especially reminded of the claims
>you have made that Novartis Seeds Inc.  is interested in creating
>products that don't harm the environment.  Who do you think you are
>talking to?  Its the "sustainable agriculture" newsgroup here, not a
>gathering of conventional agriculture robots... Is it such a mystery why
>organic sales are exploding,  something is wrong with your message.  Why
>are mega-agriculture corps. scrambling to weaken the organic standards
>?  Sounds like they are going after their market share to me.
>
>     As for your comment on your children, I said nothing to insinuate
>that I would want them harmed.  As a parent, you make choices daily
>about the foods to include in their diets.  I simply asked, would you
>choose natural or synthetic toxins.  Let's say it another way...If you
>have a broccoli with its natural toxins as choice A, and a broccoli with
>synthetic toxins as choice B, what do you do?  You must choose A because
>you ARE a caring parent who wishes to have healthy children..Is this an
>attack on your family?
>By answering the obvious, you become a common caring person, (you are
>instantly yanked from salesman mode to protector of your family's
>future)
>
>    We all understand the power of this simple example (we ALL have
>common sense).  It doesn't surprise me that you would find a way to back
>out of these discussions, by painting me as an evil person.  How can you
>have a prayer of proving your point when I'm always reminding you that
>you are a caring parent before you are a corporate employee?
>
>Craig
>