I know so many people who LOVE Ron Paul, but he's been so silent on Monsanto that it's sickening.
Ron Paul is anti-war. Well then, tell him to stop the Monsanto war against the whole planet. People are becoming dead from Monsanto -- every bit as dead from predator drones. Ron Paul's silence on this is worse than gross negligence. He's actually misleading people down the de-regulation, Pied Piper, path over the chemical cliff to Hell, death, and destruction.
Don't tell me that without all the government subsidies that Monsanto wouldn't be able to press on killing humanity either. Even if Ron Paul were to become the President, he'd face a House and Senate that would not simply do everything Ron Paul wants. In addition, there's the rest of the world where Monsanto can still ruin, ruin, ruin!
We cannot wait for a Congress that will end Monsanto before Ron Paul speaks out against Monsanto and for regulating what goddamn chemicals and genetically engineered monstrosities get to be released into the Commons that is the biosphere of Earth and beyond, quite frankly.
Stop just talking about the Fed, the Fed, the Fed. The Fed is only part of the problem.
Stop saying that we need to deregulate everything. Hell, we need to regulate Monsanto out of business.
I'm not saying we leave all the Monsanto workers to die either. There are options, good options.
Ban Monsanto's RoundUp! Experts Say It's Worse than DDT!
Tell the EPA to Ban Glyphosate
Take Action Now!
The EPA is currently conducting a "Registration Review" of glyphosate. Glyphosate is the active ingredient in the herbicide RoundUp. RoundUp is owned by Monsanto, recently named the worst company in the world by the Natural Society. The EPA will be gathering data on glyphosate through the summer of 2012 and making a final decision no earlier than 2015.
The EPA has the power to ban glyphosate, and it should, given glyphosate is:
- worse than DDT
- spawning super-weeds that reduce yields, and
- responsible for a deadly new pathogen that is plaguing plants with new diseases and animals (including humans) with infertility.
Please watch this documentary from Argentina on the dangers of glyphosate. The video, in two parts below, is in Spanish with English subtitles. If the subtitles do not appear automatically, start the video first, then click the arrow on the bottom right and select "Turn on captions." Then, click "Take Action" to send a letter to the EPA that contains links to scientific research that is leading experts to believe glyphosate is even more dangerous than DDT.
Take Action Now!
Tell the EPA to Ban Glyphosate!
The following should appear at the end of every post:
According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":
Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.
Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.
Political Campaign Intervention
Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.
Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.
Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:
- Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
- Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
- Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
- Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
- Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office
Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:
- The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
- Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
- We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
- When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
- It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
- We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
- We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
- When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
- We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
- It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.
And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)