Big Biotech is using you as a lab rat.
The Union of Concerned Scientists, doctors at the American Academy of Environmental Medicine, and many others continue to warn us: Genetically engineered (GE) foods are making us sick. Auto-immune disorders. Liver and kidney damage. Nutritional deficiencies. Allergies and autism. Accelerated aging. Infertility. Birth defects.
Between 75% - 80% of all processed foods on our grocery store shelves now contain GMOs. They're in almost all non-organic foods containing soy or canola oil, corn, sweeteners, artificial and natural flavorings, and in common ingredients like aspartame.
Yet believe it or not, there's no law requiring food manufacturers or food retailers to tell you if the food you buy contains genetically modified organisms (GMOs).
We can - and we must - change this. You can help.
Please help the Organic Consumers Fund raise $150,000 in the next two weeks so we can pass California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act in November, and require mandatory GMO labeling. You can make your secure online donation, or donate by mail or by phone.
We will use your money to pay signature gatherers to collect 830,000 signatures by the April 22 deadline in order to get this initiative on the ballot, and to run an effective PR campaign against Monsanto, Dow, Cargill and the rest of the Biotech Bullies.
GMOs have NOT been proven safe
The FDA has allowed biotech companies to introduce GMOs into our food supply - and into the food supply of the animals we eat - without requiring scientific proof that these organisms are safe.
And increasingly, the facts point to anything but.
After reviewing more than 600 scientific journals, world renowned biologist Pushpa M. Bhargava concluded that GMOs are a major contributor to the sharply deteriorating health of Americans.
Last year, the scientific journal Reproductive Toxicology published results of a study showing that pesticides associated with GE foods - Bt toxin, glyphosate and gluphosinate - were found in pregnant women and their fetuses. According to the study, the women's diets included GMO corn.
Other studies of people who have eaten GE soybeans have found that the pesticide gene used to modify the soy had actually transferred into the DNA of bacteria in the humans' intestines, where it continued to thrive.
That's just the tip of the iceberg.
Who's most at risk? Biologist David Schubert of the Salk Institute has warned that children are the most likely to be adversely effected by toxins and other dietary problems related to GM foods. He says without adequate studies, the children become "the experimental animals."
In other words, lab rats.
California is ground zero in GMO labeling
You and every other person in this country - regardless of your zipcode or political affiliation - have a stake in this fight in California.
Why? Because once food manufacturers and food retailers in California - the 8th largest economy in the world - are forced to admit that the foods they sell contain GMO-tainted ingredients, it's only a matter of time before people stop buying GE food - and food manufacturers stop making it.
We've already seen this happen in the European Union - the largest agricultural market in the world - where there are almost no genetically engineered crops under cultivation. Not because the GE crops are outlawed. But because GE-foods must be labeled.
More than 50 countries, including Japan, Russia, Hong Kong, Australia, South Korea - even China, have either passed mandatory labeling laws or outlawed GMOs altogether. Why hasn't the US? Because Washington's indentured politicians are more concerned about protecting the profits of Big Food and Big Biotech, than they are about keeping your food safe.
That's why we have to win in California. A win in California will effectively guarantee that the rest of us, no matter where we live, will finally have the right to know what's in our food.
I believe we can win in California. Polls there show overwhelming public support for GMO labeling. And after years of lessons learned, and strategies honed, we have built the strongest, most powerful, most impassioned GMO-labeling coalition in history to get this done.
But we need your help, and we need it now.
The Biotech Bullies are going to spend millions to defeat this initiative in California. We can't outspend them. But we have enough science, enough people - and more than enough passion - that if we pool our resources in California, we'll have the best chance we've ever had to take back control of our food. And our health.
The Organic Consumers Association, Organic Consumers Fund, along with other coalition partners, have already raised over one million dollars to get this initiative on the ballot. We need to raise $150,000 more, as soon as possible.
If you've already sent in your donation, thank you! If not, please contribute to this historic and critical campaign today. And then please forward this email to your friends. Share it on Facebook and Twitter. Print it out, hand it to all your friends.
The number one reason to donate today, is YOU. This is a battle for your health. And the health of future generations. Thank you.
For an Organic Future,
Director, Organic Consumers Association and Organic Consumers Fund
P.S.: The Organic Consumers Fund is a 501(c)4 allied organization of the Organic Consumers Association, focused on grassroots lobbying and legislative action. Donations are not tax-deductible. If you need to make a tax-deductible donation, you can contribute to the Organic Consumers Association, a 501(c)3. Your donation to the OCA will be used for general public education and grassroots mobilization.
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)