This is a pretty heavy handed interpretation. Sure, the definition of agriculture is humans messing with the genetics of plants and animals. Since the first see

This is a pretty heavy handed interpretation. Sure, the definition of agriculture is humans messing with the genetics of plants and animals. Since the first seed was replanted, we have been involved in a process of selecting and mixing desirable genetic traits. BUT. This is all just the application of technology. And like all technologies, not every application of technology is better than the last. There was a time in the pharmaceutical industry when it was OK to mix industrial solvents and addictive substances into a deadly cocktail. Then we dialed that back, said that wasn't so good. Some pesticides and GMOs are looking a little scary, sometimes "is that kerosene in my cough syrup" scary. There is a good compromise with GMOs in my opinion. First we do the genetic sequencing to unravel the secrets. Then we use traditional hybridization to mix the strains for desirable properties without exposing ourselves to the risk of full blown genetic hackery. That's without even bringing up the topic of genetic patents. I find it far more objectionable than software patents but it is rarely discussed. There was a good New Yorker article on it for any patent haters that want to raise their blood pressure. http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/08/27/070827fa_fact_seabrook http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/08/27/070827fa_fact_...