Author Topic: Regarding food and expenses. (Read 6527 times)

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #25 on:** September 17, 2010, 11:40:55 AM »

Quote from: CathMomof7

Gluttony: According to the Baltimore Catechism, gluttony involves more than just eating too much. It also involves being overly concerned with our food--complaining because it's not what we want or what we think is "healthy". Obesity falls under this category of course but so does anorexia. Worrying about how many hormones are in our milk or how many pesticides are on our potatoes, in my opinion, is really treading closely here.

We should be more concerned with our souls getting to heaven than with our bodies living on this earth. Of course, I don't mean we should neglect our bodies. On the contrary, that too would be sinful. We are only asked to do the best we can and be responsible. God requires us to make reasonable choices.

I'd just like to know where you're getting this from. I tried to look it up myself, but I couldn't find it. Please provide your source so I can look at it myself. Thanks!

parentsfortruth · « **Reply #26 on:** September 17, 2010, 12:22:22 PM »

For those of you that believe me to be obsessed....

What if you were eating a food that contained a contraceptive in it due to cross pollination? What if you were pregnant, and had a miscarriage because of it? If you were eating GMO food, you wouldn't even realize what caused it, would you?

I am not obsessed about it. We have a right to know. The farmers have a right to grow their own seeds. The people have a right not to be serfs for the corporations.

If you have 12-13 extra minutes, just listen to this guy. Percy Schmeiser. He has been fighting a legal battle with Monsanto for years, because they found on his conventional field, Monsanto's "patented gene" in his plants. Since they own the patent on that gene, Monsanto sued him. Never once did this man use any of Monsanto's seeds. They blew in the wind, and a judge ruled that Monsanto OWNED his entire crop no matter if they were contaminated or not. Further, they took all the canola seeds this man and his wife have been saving claiming they, too, might contain the gene.

This is a very serious issue. Towards the end of his talk, he talks about the plants that are being studied by the drug companies, and genetically modified to contain drugs like blood thinners (imagine if you just had surgery and ate a plant laced with this stuff!) contraceptives, and VACCINES!

I wish some that accuse me of being overly concerned about my health would just look at the evidence instead of throwing accusations at me. It's not like I just found out about this or something. I've done a lot of research on this, and I'm telling you all this because you're human beings that have the Faith! You know what's been done to the Church. You know about the absolute corruption of the government.

I'm telling you this in charity. I can give you tips on how to better be able to afford things, if you want, but don't dismiss me.

I was poor growing up, and I am poor now (thank you God, because how much attention would I pay to Our Divine Lord if I had a lot of money? Only God knows. I really think it was in His wonderful Wisdom that He kept me poor). I'm pretty good at figuring out how to make things work with the little amount of money we do have.

MaterDominici · « **Reply #27 on:** September 20, 2010, 12:59:18 AM »

Quote from: wallflower

Those who can need to vote with their dollars so that truly natural products can become cheaper with higher supply and demand, but there are many who cannot and who have to wait until that stuff is less expensive. Of course many don't change because they are lazy or stuck on bad habits or stubborn or ignorant, but I know there are some who simply can't afford it. We have to do the best we can and accept that this is the time God placed us in.

:applause:
I know people who fit into each of these catagories and do agree that those who can afford to do so should vote with their dollars. It seems to be many are doing just that ... there are way more options today than there were even just 10 years ago as far as what you can find that's good for you on your average supermarket shelf.

spouse of Jesus · « **Reply #28 on:** September 20, 2010, 01:31:30 PM »

before the invention of refrigators, nobody could eat a great variety of food. Some nations could never see an orange. And in places where oranges grew they couldn't eat it always (only in it's own season they could use anything). before the discovery of america, nobody in asia or europe ever tasted a tomato and many other fruits that grew only in america. nobody could export fruits from one Country to another.
In buddhism eating animal flesh is forbidden. In many cultures milk used to be looked upon as babies food, so no adult could use cow milk. It was for the claf not for a man.
How is it that they did survive?

MaterDominici · « **Reply #29 on:** September 21, 2010, 01:33:06 AM »

What discussions like this boil down to for me is not just "is it bad for you?", but rather, "how bad is it? -- especially compared to all of the other things which are also bad for you."

If there were 1 or 2 or even a dozen things which are out there and should be avoided, it wouldn't take long for even the poorest of people to not have to deal with them as all of the average (or more) income families would simply stop buying what has proven to be bad for them. But, it's not that simple because today almost EVERYTHING has some element that isn't good for you. It goes way beyond food.

We can easily prioritize SOME of the things which are known or suspiciously harmful. One method is if the potentially harmful item costs more and can be done without, just simply avoid it -- an example would be cell phones for most if not all people. Another target area is places where the opportunity to avoid something harmful is just as attainable as the harmful variety -- avoiding HFCS and MSG in any processed foods you use is approaching this point.

After that, I'd need to know what things are the MOST harmful in order to decide which I might put money towards when/if I have it available. How do you know which is worse -- pesticide-laden produce or hormone-filled milk or contaminated tap water or lab-produced household cleaners or ... ??? The list goes on and on and even those with a bit of income to spare toward such things haven't a clue as to where they'd get the most bang for their measly buck.

(As an aside, I received in the mail today the quarterly magazine from the college I attended. Their annual symposium this year is entitled "Food for Thought" including a lecture by Paul Roberts and showings of Super Size Me, Babette's Feast, and Food Inc.)