impious

Holy shit am I speaking French
Can the atheist evolutionist hold any position concerning GM foods than they require testing?
In short , no they can not on any other grounds then personal preference .
Its relational, not political

rlogan

I think people have tried to politely answer you. There is no "athiest evolutionist" position. There is no club or organization by that name. No meetings. No philosophy.

"Evolution" pertains to facts concerning descent with modification. Many who adhere to this set of biological principles are athiests, yes.

But it does not mean they have "positions" on pre-marital sex or teen-age smoking across the board.

We are already eating genetically modified foods.

I think your question is political in nature. There is a page for that.

judge

Good post rlogan!

Impious......
I am creationist but am unaware that there is any creationist or even theistic position on GM foods. Perhaps there could be a case that gene transfer should only happen within kinds but as creationists are unable to define kinds this seems largely irrelevant.

I am interested are you theistic or creationist, if so what is your take on GM foods and why?

impious

[Q]I think people have tried to politely answer you. There is no "athiest evolutionist" position. There is no club or organization by that name. No meetings. No philosophy.
[Q/]
HOLY SHIT
A Person who has no belief in THE SUPERNATURAL and construes evolution given the evidence be fact has what problem with GM products other then the fact they have not been adequately tested?
No answers yet

impious

You either did not read my original post or you are deliberately being ignorant. I am addressing the question to fellow atheists.
Thanks for your further understanding

rlogan

impious, your verbage is so vague and informal it is difficult to respond.

Where do caucasians "sit with" earth? Can you give me the athiest "low down" on language please? What's the Mid-Atlantic "scoop" with the biota?

It just is not that difficult to pose a question a little more specifically, if RufusAtticus isn't addressing your concern.

I have no idea what you mean by "other then the fact they have not been adequately tested".

We have been modifying foods genetically since the dawn of man. So? What testing are you talking about?

We are more efficient about modifying things since we can sequence genomes, yes. So?

Generally I want tasty food. Economical. Those are my tests. If you put food in front of me that tastes bad and costs a lot - I'm opposed to that.

That's my position on GM foods. Needs to taste good and be economical. Of course, if it attracts the babes, I'll pay a little more.

Jabu Khan

I'm an atheist and an evolutonist, though I don't see the one-to -one correspondance. My opinion is that since nearly everything we eat is a product of genetic modification and most of the species of plants and animals we eat did not exist before man or were greatly altered through agriculture. Whats the difference?
I think the real issue here is what will industrial farming be willing to get away with, through GM or whatever other means, if they continue to go on unregulated for the most part.

NottyImp

Food attracts babes? Why didn't somebody tell me?!

I'm with the crowd here - the questions only makes sense if you pre-suppose a set of beliefs that "atheist-evolutionists" hold in common about GM food.

braces_for_impact

Damn, I missed my "evolutionist atheist" memo this week. How am I supposed to know where I stand on the important issues?

Like GM foods...

Racism...

The winter olympics...

And blondes versus brunettes?

Duvenoy

If I understand the question (probably not), Impious wants an opinion.

Well, I can't speak for any other "atheist evolutionist" but here's mine: I don't care. As long as the foods taste good and won't cause me any gastric distress, or worse, they're fine with me.

On a side matter, why must an evolutionist also be an atheist?

doov