RSS

Tag Archives: Genesis 1:26-28

Consumers


Man Or Other Animals (MOOA) [courtesy of Google Images]

Man Or Other Animals (MOOA)
[courtesy of Google Images]

•  If you’ve read my previous articles on “Man or other Animals” (“MOOA”), you know that the definitions of “drugs,” “food” and (medical) “devices” found at 21 USC 321 presume that man is merely an “animal” rather than a “man made in God’s image” who is given “dominion over the animals” as per Genesis 1:26-28.  Thus, under Genesis 1:26-28, a man of the Jewish or Christian faiths cannot be treated as an “animal” without violating his freedom of religion.

Therefore, there religious basis for resisting any law that relies on the government’s definitions of “food,”  “drugs” and (medical) “devices”.

•  If you visit the federal government’s Food and Drug Administration’s website at http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/Whatwedo/History/default.htm you’ll find a brief description of the FDA’s history.

According to that history,

“The Food and Drug Administration is the oldest comprehensive consumer protection agency in the U. S. federal government. Its origins can be traced back to the appointment of Lewis Caleb Beck in the Patent Office around 1848 to carry out chemical analyses of agricultural products, a function that the newly created Department of Agriculture inherited in 1862. Although it was not known by its present name until 1930, FDA’s modern regulatory functions began with the passage of the 1906 Pure Food and Drugs Act, a law a quarter-century in the making that prohibited interstate commerce in adulterated and misbranded food and drugs. Harvey Washington Wiley, Chief Chemist of the Bureau of Chemistry in the Department of Agriculture, had been the driving force behind this law and headed its enforcement in the early years, providing basic elements of protection that consumers had never known before that time.” [emphasis added]

Read the rest of this entry »

 
31 Comments

Posted by on December 5, 2013 in "Man or Other Animals"

 

Tags: ,

Evolution vs. Creationism–Comparing Consequences


English: "A Venerable Orang-outang",...

“A Venerable Orang-outang”, a caricature of Charles Darwin as an ape published in The Hornet, a satirical magazine (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I’ve recently made contact with several people with whom I went to high school. I haven’t seen or talked to any of them in most of 50 years. Hard to believe. 50 years?! How th’ hell did that happen?!

One of them (John S.) actually took the time to read a couple of my blog entries. I was delighted.

John then sent an email asking for my opinion on an article about a particular anthropologist. I started to read the article—and I’d like to have responded to the contents of that article—but I was quickly diverted by descriptions of the anthropologist’s dedication to Darwin’s theory of Evolution.

Well, I felt compelled to explain my notions on Evolution and Creationism to John. It wasn’t the subject matter he’d asked for, but he did ask for my opinion on “something”. In doing so, he provided me with a bit of a “soapbox”. For me, that’s an almost irresistible temptation. (In fact, when it comes to soapboxes, I’m kinda like Will Rogers. I never met a soapbox that I didn’t like. I have a little of Archimedes in me, too: “Give me a soapbox big enough and a place to stand, and I could move the world.)

In any case, once I got rolling, I wound up writing over 2,500 words on my notions concerning Evolution and Creationism. That’s too many words to present to just one man by email. Some of that text might be of interest or even insightful for some readers, so I’m reposting here:

Read the rest of this entry »

 

Tags: , , , , , ,