AIDS vs. Freaky FoodThe quote above is a summary of the story with the rest pertaining to groups protesting both the bill and, in particular, Senator Bill Frist.

Question(s) for debate:
It seems the distribution of aid may becoming less a humanitarian effort and more so a corporate interest -- in this case favoring those altering the genetic makeup of foods.
Does it seem to you that humanitarian aid is rapidly becoming "corporate aid," with the corporations benefiting more than those in need?
Should we or anybody else refuse aid if we can't turn a profit off of it?
And what are your reactions to this case in particular?

It's a new example for the classic saying,

"Beggars aren't choosers"

Which corporation is doing it, Archer Daniels Midland?

I think it's typical where Mr. Bush is concerned. He's never met a large corporate donor he didn't like.

To conservatives, it might fall under the heading of enlightened self interest.

To me, it stinks. It amounts to human guinea pigs. I'll have to think this over when eating my Chicken McNuggets and fries.

May I ask first how the AIDS bill suggests coercing Africa to accept GM food? This source seems just a bit biased.

Genetically modified food: we aren't talking mutant food here.

Genetically modified simply means it has been artificially engineered for specific qualities rather than cross-bred for the the same qualities.

It is just a matter of expediency.

I just don't get the "Genetically modified" argument at all.

Nice name "Freak Food"--it shows the bias of the author of the article.