gredr

I think the point that people are getting at is that it sort of rubs the wrong way when you advertise as "non-GMO". You're playing to an anti-science, anti-intellectual crowd there. Even if you then say, "oh, we'd totally GMO if it made sense", that's like me introducing my daughter as "Jane, she's not vaccinated", but then, when someone questioned the wisdom of that, explaining, "oh, she's just not old enough yet, I'm totally going to have her vaccinated".

If you're not anti-GMO, why are you advertising as non-GMO?

Edit: thank you for the gold!

How about, "this lettuce has an unknowable number of genes modified over hundreds or thousands of years via selection by growers to make it larger, tastier, and more productive?" Because it has. Humans have been GMing our Os since exactly when we started to cultivate them.

Me, I'm not willing to sell out my intellectual integrity for those extra pennies. Maybe that's why I'm not in the food business.

Did you find any issues on which they disagree with Republicans?

A couple questions. I have astigmatism, and when I got my glasses, I was told that I wouldn't want to wear them while using a computer. I found, however, that they work wonders with the computer! I never take them off! Why would my experience be so different than I was told?

Second, I have been fitted for contact lenses twice now, by different doctors. Both times, I felt like the lenses just didn't help much. I understand that contact lenses for astigmatism are kinda an iffy proposition, but if the prescription was correct, why wouldn't they help?

Bullshit? Yes. Anti-intellectual? No.