It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Switzerland: Don’t Hurt Veggies’ Feelings

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 05:18 PM
link   
So the Swiss have decided by law, to protect the "dignity" of plants and our moral considerations towards them. This obviously comes as no surprise to those who talk or sing to their potted friends.

And before you laugh and suggest this topic belongs on BTS, consider this:


According to the Journal, the Swiss constitution was amended back in the 1990s -- in order to defend the dignity of all creatures, including the leafy kind, against unwanted consequences of genetic manipulation.

cont...

The excursion into the psychology of plants began with a panel of philosophers, lawyers, geneticists and theologians assembled to establish the meaning of the dignity of plants.

"We couldn't start laughing and tell the government we're not going to do anything about it," an amused Markus Schefer, a member of the ethics panel and a professor of law at the University of Basel told the Journal . He explained, "The constitution requires it."

cont...

The new rules raise such questions as what is a more mortifying fate for a carrot than being peeled, chopped and dropped into boiling water? Do carrots scream as lobsters are said (falsely) to do when being thrown unceremoniously into a pot and boiled alive?

"Where does it stop?" Yves Poirier, a molecular biologist at the laboratory of plant biotechnology at the University of Lausanne asked the Journal. “Should we now defend the dignity of microbes and viruses?"

newsmax

That is actually a good question.

Should EVERY living thing in the universe be protected no matter how small or seemingly insignificant? Where do we draw the line?

And what of vegetarians and vegans who are so on the basis of their moral objection to the killing of animals. What are they to eat now that the Swiss have established that plants have "dignity" and dare I say "feelings."

Swiss Report




[edit on 10/12/2008 by schrodingers dog]




posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 05:55 PM
link   
Putting aside the humorous aspects of the story, the Swiss are attempting to preserve the genetic integrity of plant life, especially when it comes to lab made genetically modified species.

This is better explained here:

Abstract

In addition to obviating the use of synthetic agrochemicals and emphasizing farming in accordance with agro-ecological guidelines, organic farming acknowledges the integrity of plants as an essential element of its natural approaches to crop production. For cultivated plants, integrity refers to their inherent nature, wholeness, completeness, species-specific characteristics, and their being in balance with their (organically farmed) environment, while accomplishing their “natural aim.” We argue that this integrity of plants has ethical value, distinguishing integrity of life, plant-typic integrity, genotypic integrity, and phenotypic integrity. We have developed qualitative criteria to ethically evaluate existing practices and have applied these criteria to assess whether current plant breeding and propagation techniques violate the integrity of crop plants. This process has resulted in a design of a holistic, scientific approach of organic plant breeding and seed production. Our evaluation has met considerable criticism from mainstream (crop) scientists. We respond to the following questions: (1). Can ethics be incorporated into objective crop sciences? (2). What is the nature of the intrinsic value of plants in organic farming? We argue that criteria to take integrity into account can only be assessed from a holistic perspective and we show that a holistic approach is needed to design such ethical notions in a consistent way. The ethical notions have been further elaborated by formulating human responsibility and respect towards crop plants. Responsibility and respect can only be shown by providing crop plants the right to be nurtured and to express natural behavior at all levels of integrity


springerlink



posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 06:02 PM
link   
I find it ironic the Swiss are trying to protect plants while simultaneously endangering every living thing alive with the Hadron Collider.

That being said I'm against geneticly modified crops or anything else that amounts to playing God with no understanding of possible consequences.



posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 06:05 PM
link   
I laughed only because for years now I have told this to Vegetarians who say I should not eat meat .And that the animals deserve to live .

I asked them ..do plants have life in them like an animal does and they even talk to eachother I bet like animals do ..>? they say yes
I asked them what do you think a plant goes through when you cut them off and wack them up then boil them ...and then eat them ..
They say they are just plants ..I said animals are just animals too ...what is the difference if they both have LIFE in them ? They cannot answer that .



posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 06:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Teknikal
I find it ironic the Swiss are trying to protect plants while simultaneously endangering every living thing alive with the Hadron Collider.




There's an innovative way to stop the LHC, establish the rights of particles based on their "dignity." Imagine the poor souls screaming as they are hurled at breakneck speeds.

Still, I'm going to have second thoughts next time I am peeling a carrot.



posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 06:44 PM
link   
Isn't the LHC an international effort?

I love this. Hopefully the vegetarians will reconsider plant feelings the next time they chop something and return to eating delicious animals instead.



posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 08:31 PM
link   
This is just awful.
I can't eat my broccoli because of this.


Does gluten have feelings?



posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 08:40 PM
link   
reply to post by schrodingers dog
 


Interesting post. The question posed do plants have the right NOT to be genetically modified is indeed important. Of course, the idea that my carrot is screaming as I eat him/her, is ok with me. That is the way it works. One can be swayed by a convincing leek now and then to let him/her go free, but other than that...I'm making a salad!!!



posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 08:46 PM
link   
I am against genetically modified foods; the way these plants were for hundreds of years worked just fine.

And, by the time we get our veggies home and ready to eat, they are technically dead. So, we didn't kill them. Whoever picked them and packaged them killed them.....we, the veggie eaters of the world are innocent of any crime unless we picked them and killed them ourselves.

No need to worry about screaming carrots or bellowing broccoli or convincing leeks or crying cucumbers or whiney lettuce we get from the store....


But, if you get them from your own garden, you are a MURDERER!!!



[edit on 10/12/2008 by skeptic1]



posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 08:53 PM
link   
I have to kind of doubt the story a little, given the source.... I think they tend toward tweaking things into a more sensationalized form. But let's say it's true in it's entirety. Would they plan to discard all non-open-pollinated seeds? Hybrid seeds that might not breed true? Would those seeds require a service and a burial?

What about normal attrition of vegetables while in the "care" of a grocer? Would they face charges for having wasted their snappy little lives?

I agree with a ban on genetically-altered fruits and vegetables to an extent, however much of what we commonly eat and certainly the large production of agricultural foods wouldn't be possible without a lot of hybridization.

What of cutting a lawn? Or weeding a garden? or trimming a tree/bush? OMG!! NO more Christmas trees. Well, I usually just dress up a living palm tree anyway.

Interesting story, OP, thanks.



posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 08:56 PM
link   
reply to post by argentus
 


Thanks argentus,
The story is definitely true. If you go to the bottom of the OP you will see the report put out by the Swiss in pdf form including a "decision tree."

Including these two sections:



2.2 Possible positions for a
moral consideration of
plants for their own sake

2.2.1 Pathocentrism: plants count
because they are able to
experience something in
some way as good or bad,
and therefore have their
own interests






[edit on 10/12/2008 by schrodingers dog]



posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 09:01 PM
link   
I totally think of all my garden and herb plants as "people."

Call it hokey but I think it makes them grow better...

I like to think that I'll provide for them while they grow by giving them dirt and water and love, then they'll turn around and provide good food and medicine.

Mutual respect.



posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 09:17 PM
link   
reply to post by schrodingers dog
 


Dangitall SD, you change your AV so often, I don't know I'm talking to you half the time
God forbid, I should actually read who the author is. ha

Thanks, I missed that on the end of the article. Seems to be truthful... I think I just found my new calling..... I will become a mobile plant polling center. I'll hook up shiny little measuring devices and polygraph-like things and test responses to a myriad of questions. Perhaps it will become germaine (pun intended) which political candidates the plants prefer.

Now, I have to confess, I feel a pretty close communion to plants and animals, and I think I'm very respectful in the sense of bush control especially.... If I grow and nurture a plant to provide nourishment for us, I will naturally try to keep it healthy and continually productive, as well as allow some of the fruits to nourish local animals. Those things I grow that are one-time things? Like carrots? Sorry carrots, but it'll be quick, I promise you. We've learned how to preserve seeds for the most part. Carrots elude me.

There was a book I read several years ago called SuperNature...... one segment described the classic live shrimp being dropped into boiling water, while in a room away, various plants were monitored with machines not unlike a polygraph. They reacted in some manner each time the shrimp was dropped into the water (or so it was reported). I thought that was eye-opening.

They were here before I was, and the moment we stop controlling this property, it won't take but a month or two for the house to be rendered invisible. So it goes. They'll just have to wait for their uprising.



posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 09:26 PM
link   
reply to post by argentus
 


I think a buddhist approach is best here.
Let's make it about intent and not the act itself or else we're going to feel guilty every time we walk on the lawn, imagining a thousand little screams and the trees judging us.
Like you I have an ongoing respect and admiration for all living things. Sometimes I feel horrible for killing a mosquito and apologize to the universe fearing karma's inevitable blow. However, one can't survive on Twinkies alone just because they have absolutely nothing natural in them. So snuffing veggies for food I guess is alright. I really shouldn't be watching football right now. It's a holocaust.



posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 09:27 PM
link   
Okay, SD, after reading the Swiss report, and the decision tree and text, it's clear to me that we humans can only evaluate plants within context of their relative value to US, which is clearly speciesentric, and therefore steps MUST be taken immediately to gather opinion polls of the plants themselves.

What next? Bug Bill of Rights? Cockroach Court?

Too many questions?



posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 09:31 PM
link   
reply to post by argentus
 


This is really going to twist the panties of the potheads.
They tend to overthink things like this.

"Dude ...."



posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 09:34 PM
link   
reply to post by argentus
 


I would much prefer a plant bill of rights to that of a cockroach or a spider or a fly. JMO....

But, on plants, why can't we just respect living things, especially the ones that serve a purpose. Don't genetically modify them; don't screw with them. Respect them and the purpose they serve for humanity. And, since they serve a purpose for humanity, then treat them with respect. Care for them, nurture them, and respect them. Respect their environment and their "feelings" to a point.

Basically, don't disrespect them by screwing with them and neglecting them.

And, yes, bugs serve a purpose but they creep me out and plants don't.



posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 10:08 PM
link   
reply to post by skeptic1
 


Unfortunately it is the arrogant nature of humans to attempt to "improve" nature. GM crops are but our latest attempt. If the horrible potential consequences of this course is not enough of a deterrent, I doubt that declaring the "rights" of plants will be.
One can only hope.



posted on Oct, 12 2008 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by asmeone2
I totally think of all my garden and herb plants as "people."
Call it hokey but I think it makes them grow better...
I like to think that I'll provide for them while they grow by giving them dirt and water and love, then they'll turn around and provide good food and medicine.
Mutual respect.


Well I couldn't agree with you more.
Mutual respect however is tough to ascertain.



posted on Oct, 13 2008 @ 01:32 PM
link   
Well SDog's had nothing to eat today because of this.
If I can't get my head around this issue I'm going to be snacking on my keyboard.
It's getting harder to find non sentient food sources.




top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join