Issue 2 rally: Ohio farmers can no longer just ‘preach to the choir’

Print

ASHLAND, Ohio — Farmers from Ashland County and across Ohio are preparing themselves and their friends for a “yes” vote on Ohio’s Issue 2, which will be before voters during the Nov. 3 general election.

On Oct. 8, a group of farmers, lawmakers and representatives from the area gathered at Ashland High School to rally support for an issue they say is detrimental to preserving livestock agriculture.

At stake is an issue to form a livestock care standards board, to enforce uniform livestock standards across the state.

The issue is being viewed as a preemptive move against activist organizations that want to establish their own standards.

State senator Bill Harris, R-19th, said campaigns against Issue 2 will soon appear, and reminded those in attendance to be ready.

“Be prepared that it’s going to make you look like villains,” he said. “You’ve got to suck it up and get every vote you can to make sure that this Issue 2 passes.”

Officials cast approval

Scott Higgins, chief executive officer of the Ohio Dairy Producers Association, was the featured speaker. He said support from organizations like Farm Bureau, the state legislature and grain and livestock farmers provides a “united front” that brings farmers together.

“They value the economic engine of this state and they value and believe in agriculture and what we do on our farms,” he said. “But I think what’s more important is they value Ohioans to make the right choice.”

Fighting ‘outsiders’

A consistent theme throughout the night was the possibility outside organizations and voices could “dictate” Ohio agriculture, if Ohioans fail to regulate it themselves.

“The last thing we need are for individual organizations to come in here and to tell Ohioans how we’re going to raise our products and how we’re going to provide that product,” Higgins said.

Following him was State Rep. Dave Hall, R-97th, who said for his first year in the Statehouse, he was surprised at the “arrogance” he saw when dealing with Humane Society of the United States.

“Being a first-year representative in Columbus, it was amazing seeing the Humane Society of the United States and their arrogance of how they were going to dictate to you, how things are going to be done,” he said.

Hall said Issue 2 “puts the power into your (producers)’ hands. There’s nothing worse than having someone from outside Ohio dictate how it’s done.”

John Fitzpatrick, organizational director for Farm Bureau in Ashland, Wayne and Medina counties, said producers and consumers should both be concerned.

“Some regulation is coming,” he said. “It’s probably better that we set it, rather than someone else. They (activists) may be after the veal farmers, and the swine farmers and the layers, but they’re coming for all of us and we all need to care about each other.”

Farmers speak out

A couple farmers talked about possible threats to their own operations.

Todd Fike, a Crawford County grain farmer , said organizations like HSUS threaten to take away consumers’ “choice” of food, a concept that will hurt more than just livestock farmers.

“We recognize as grain producers to the livestock industry, how detrimental things could be, should we change the face of livestock and how we do things,” he said.

“As farmers, we provide the most choice of any industry in the state or any industry in the country,” he continued. “If you want meat, you can buy meat any way you want it, you can find organics, you can find the stuff virtually anywhere, any shape or form you want.”

Everyone affected

The evening closed with comments by Steve Caminati of Ohioans for Livestock Care, who said many farmers and people in rural communities already support Issue 2, but now the focus is on urban and metropolitan areas.

“We’ve been preaching to the choir … we’ve got to shift that strategy and we’ve now got to start singing to the congregation,” he said.

Caminati said he’s heard criticism that the issue should not be in the state’s constitution. But looking at the many farms spread across the state, that’s exactly where it should be, he said.

“It’s pretty simple — agriculture is the fabric of Ohio’s identity and I can’t think of something or someone that deserves more protection in the Ohio constitution than agriculture,” he said.

About the Author

Chris Kick lives in Wooster, Ohio. An American FFA Degree recipient, he holds a bachelor’s in creative writing from Ashland University. He spends his free time on his grandparents’ farms in Wayne and Holmes counties. More Stories by Chris Kick

37 Comments

  1. Amy Reynolds says:

    I like this article, lots of truth from State Representative Dave Hall. In Ohio if someone does not like how farm animals are treated they have a right to buy their own, a right to buy ‘free range’ eggs, a right to choose a vegan lifestyle. Obviously many don’t object or the eggs would not sell in grocery stores, to restuarants, to bakeries, etc. Why do some people think they have the right to dictate the ownership and use of animals to others? HSUS thinks they have this right and I sincerely hope Issue 2 passes by a large margin to show animal rights activists and HSUS that Ohioans do believe in freedom- not just their own but others’ freedom to choose and own also.

  2. Sue says:

    Yes we have the right to buy whatever we choose, but who will stand up for the rights of the animals, who in large farms and are not free grazing, are not treated humanely. They unfortunately do not have a voice. Why does the APL and the Women’s League of Voters as well as the Cleveland Plain Dealer oppose this issue?

  3. BD says:

    The only “outsiders” are is big agribusiness that is misleading family farmers, high school students and whoever they can to “rally.” The consitutional amendment would take away the right of the Ohio voter to have any input into minimal animal standards — which is contrary to Ohio legal tradition and Ohio Constitutional tradition and history. They should be ashamed of their greedy money grabbing intent. Whether its jamming animals into cages or getting children to rally for them based on a fear of “outsiders” — its disgusting.

  4. Amy Reynolds says:

    There’s a whole lot of misinformation being spread about Issue 2 also. Opponents are saying it gives the new Board exclusive power to pass rules on how we raise livestock. It doesn’t do that; all it does is set up the Board. There is “enabling legislation” that must pass the General Assembly, that gives the Board their power. That is when everyone can participate in the legislative process, to make sure the enabling legislation is what we want it to be.

  5. Sally says:

    All of the opponents that I have heard or read about are very concerned about the quality of life of the animals being farmed. How can “everyone participate in the legislative process”? Exactly how will this occur? I will not vote “yes” until I can be convinced that Ohio’s animal care policies will have the same high standards that now exist in California.

  6. BD says:

    Amy:
    Oh really its says all that!? Where in its four vague paragraphs does it actually say any of that???? Also why are Issue 2 proponents saying that the Board would have legislative authority over the General Assembly. In addition, if the General Assembly passes the laws anyways, like for all other matters then why do we need a constitutional amendment to create this board? The proponents of Issue 2 are a bunch of misleading liars. I have to say it because a constitutional amendment is not “enabling legislation” if it was it wouldn’t be a constitutional amendment it would be legislation. Vote NO on Issue 2 and stop the scamming with Ohio’s Constitution.

  7. Amy Reynolds says:

    ?!?!?!? How about being rational and learn how the legislative processes work? A ballot is the first step. Misleading liars is a lie- so who is misleading?
    If you follow internet links to information, do your research and put poeple before animals you might see why it’s needed. Free grazing? Do you have a better business plan to feed the people of Ohio while considering the economic impact? Or do we all just go vegan and let the animals “graze”?

  8. Tod Mills says:

    Here are some more things to read….

    SOS site: official language for Issue 2.
    http://www.sos.state.oh.us/SOS/elections/IssueProcBallotBd/BallotBoard.aspx

    A FB article:
    http://ofbf.org/news-and-events/news/468/

    An OSU “fact sheet” concerning Issue 2:
    http://agvanwert.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/issue2factsheet.pdf

    Hope this helps,

    Tod

  9. BD says:

    Amy:

    I guess it was good environmental practices that ruined the American auto industry (all those hybrids and cars with great gas milage the American auto industry produced). It was too much regulation that caused the collapse of the American financial industry, right? It wasn’t greedy hedge fund owners who said no to regulation. Now your’re telling me that minor reforms for farm animals is going to starve Ohioans. It seems that greed, not regulation, is what’s at the heart of all of these problems.

  10. BD says:

    Also, I know how the legislative process works. The people influence whether laws are passed through their legislators (the General Assembly. The General Assembly passes laws (See Ohio Constiution Article 2, Sec. 1). That is consistent with Ohio legal history and tradition. The legislature delegates rulemaking authority to agencies (e.g., EPA, Ohio Department of Health)that creates standards in the Ohio Administrative Code. Issue 2 would create a ‘board by a constitutional amendment that would decide which laws and standards will be established. That is extraordinary. If that’s how all matters were regulated we would have thousands of constitutional amendments. It’s so sad that ordinary people are being so mislead. Vote NO on Issue Two.

  11. Amy Reynolds says:

    Vote YES on Issue Two. Minor reforms from HSUS? Yes, it may be incremntally but allowing them to be an authority on laws concerning animals in Ohio is like a person saying they are a farmer because they’ve seen a cow. Your first comment was regarding the welfare of animals. Where has that been lost in voting yes for issue 2? What it is intended to do is keep farming practices based on science, not manipulated propaganda and videos, pics and “warm fuzzies’ for the animals’ rights. Animal rights organizations are well known for using the same one or two instances to paint a very broad picture claiming all are this way. UNTRUE. I had a person today mention googling veal crates and how it did look bad, so I did the same. Lo and behold! Many websites posted the same FEW pictures. Why is HSUS so irate over not being in control of the animal industry in Ohio? They claim a power grab by big ag while I ascertain it is just the opposite and a temper tantrum by HSUS at not being ‘given’ the role themselves. At least farmers FEED PEOPLE. HSUS recommended the Michael Vick dogs be killed. Research it for yourself unless you already work for them. Let me know how their page for eating “humane” with the link to request vegetarianism info works out.

  12. Thomas says:

    As a Farm Bureau member I worked on our local committee to find ways to fight and defeat HSUS and PETA at their own game.

    My problem with this constitutional amendment is the excessive power it places in the hands of a 13 member group of non-elected bureaucrats.

    This issue should not have been a constitutional amendment. The same objective to thwart PETA and HSUS could have been accomplished by including the key words “agricultural best management practices for such care and well-being” in section 900 of the Ohio Revised Code.

    The big question for me is, “What did it take to twist the arms of all the members of both the House and Senate to make them take such a draconian measure?” If we change the Constitution every time the wind blows from the wrong direction, what value remains in it? What next? Change the US Constitution to remove free speech and religious freedom?

    VOTE NO on ISSUE 2

  13. Elizabeth says:

    There are so many issue with this ballot initiative. Using a constitutional amendment circumvents the normal process of checks and balances that makes our government work. The vast majority of the Board are political appointees, which makes the process subject to abuse by folks who are NOT family farmers. There is no definition of “Family farmer”, and in the absence of such a definition, any privately-held mega farm can be named such. And if the Board does not actually represent the needs of TRUE family farmers, it will take a new amendment to the state constitution to change or overturn it. THIS IS JUST BAD FOR THE STATE, AND WILL BENEFIT ONLY A FEW LARGE ENTERPRISES. YOU DON’T HAVE TO BE A SPECIAL INTEREST OR ANIMAL RIGHTS ACTIVIST TO SEE THAT THERE ARE BETTER WAYS TO ACCOMPLISH PROTECTING FAMILY FARMERS. Vote NO on Issue 2!

  14. BD says:

    Thomas:
    I heard that Issue 2 was led by Strickland and rushed through the House and Senate to pass by summer recess. It looks like no one took the time to ask how it was going to work in terms of being subject to the normal procedures that govern rule-making (e.g, JCARR etc.). A reading of the four-paragraph proposed amendment makes it obvious that the answers are not in the amendment. So now big agricultural can just make all of this up and hope that no one is paying attention again or no one will want to spend the time and money to litigate to protect due process. Issue 2 and Gov. Strickland’s promotion of it is a disgrace. I’m really hoping it goes donw.

  15. As the neighbor of one of Ohio’s industrial farms, Park Farms, and also a Farm Bureau member, I think Thomas is on the correct track in voting No. on issue 2. Amy is, sadly naive about the workings of Farm Bureau, never having experienced the negative side of the livestock industry.

    The ERAC commission set up by the state is totally in control of Farm Bureau and in, my opinon, works to protect the industrial farms. Look at the Buckeyc Egg issue for instance. This was won by the citizens through the Supreme Court, months after the deadline for filing an appeal, Farm Bureau, entered a plea in this case, Buckeye Egg changed its name and went right back into business under the name of Ohio Fresh Eggs; still damaging the neighbors as in my own case, Park Farms is doing the same to my property.

    Would I put any faith in the moral integrity of Farm Bureau on this issue? Not on your life Amy, perhaps one day you may wake up to find an industrial farm impacting your home too…. don’t Farm Bureau to step in to protect your personal property rights or health!

  16. Sorry, that last sentence should have read, Not on your life Amy, perhaps one day you may wake up to find an industrial farm impacting your home too….. don’t expect Farm Bureau to step in to protect your perasonal property rights or health.

  17. ryan says:

    This ballot issue is heavily backed by some of the largest groups representing major agribusiness interests, including the Ohio Farm Bureau and The Ohio Pork Producers Council. The passing of Issue 2 would give this board broad and unchecked power to decide rules on animal agriculture in favor of their interests. The board would have complete unchecked authority to control what family farmers do on their property, and is likely to represent the largest agricultural interests.

    Furthermore, this board would threaten our democracy, taking out all public input in matters that affect the general public’s health and safety. Agriculture policy should be determined through an open process, not through a politically
    appointed board heavily influenced by big industry.

    VOTE NO ON ISSUE 2

  18. jr says:

    The organizations behind this are a bunch of hypocrites…
    Can you imagine their opposition if the utilities industry got together and put forth the suggestion that they form a 13 member board that would decide how electricity would be generated, the rates they could charge…
    Wake up and vote no.

  19. Amy Reynolds says:

    Mary- I’m not sure what your personal isue is with me. When I said I was sorry for your situation you ripped me. I don’t KNOW your whole situation and the story behind it. I am not even a member of Farm Bureau so don’t expect anything from them. For you to take your obvious hatred of Farm Bureau and use iy against ALL farmers is a very bitter and sorry state to be in. I wish you the best even if you don’t wish the same for others and said you’d welcome HSUS into the state. Now how about leaving me out of your personal vendetta against Farm Bureau? I research things for myself and want the best for all Ohioans including good food at a reasonable price but I also want animal rights organizations that have no stake in the Ohio economy, our pet ownership, our businesses or anything to go back to their vegan palaces in the sky while living off donations of the nation and even abroad. Take a look at all the ‘affiliates’ of HSUS including HSLF and international. Talk about big business that doesn’t care about people! You need to check it out for yourself and get past the fluff and emotional pleas and look at fact and science.

  20. Amy Reynolds says:

    I want HSUS kicked to the curb where they belong and Ohio people to decide what is best for Ohio based on science and fact. Issue 2 being on the ballot does not give the board total control immediately and public input is still part of the process. By being a constitutional ammendment it makes it much harder for an outside special interest group to lobby and campaign with emotional pleas to get the general public to fall for their propaganda. They know it, why do you think they have their spokes people publicly saying we shouldn’t do this because otehr states haven’t? Go read about California and Michigan. A Michigan legislator is quoted as saying they knew they didn’t have the money to fight them continuously so “compromised”. Way I was raised you don’t shake hands with the devil and expect to go to heaven. We have nothing in our state constitution to protect us from animal rights groups with more money than any one of us and an agenda that puts a “compassionate” diet as vegan or vegetarian. Read the bios and check out their CEO and top people. After all the hoopla about Farm Bureau I went and looked at their website- no comparison- they are from Ohio with Ohio businesses that produce food for PEOPLE and even animals. They have stuff for children with activities that make sense, not indoctrination into the animal welfare/rights movement. There is no comparison.

  21. Brandon says:

    Dear Editor,
    5 Reasons to Vote No On Issue 2
    For those that are not familiar with Issue 2, it is a proposed constitutional amendment that would form the Ohio Livestock Care Standards Board. The purpose of this board would be to “establishing standards governing the care and well-being of livestock and poultry in this state. In carrying out its purpose, the Board shall endeavor to maintain food safety, encourage locally grown and raised food, and protect Ohio farms and families.” (from the proposed amendment Article XIV Section 1) I do not disagree with the ideal behind this amendment, but I do disagree with this particular political maneuver. I have 5 reason why I feel you should vote no for Issue 2.
    1. There is no guaranteed seat for a production livestock producer. The Board Consist of 13 members: 3 family farmers, 2 veterinarians, 1 food safety expert, 1 representative of a local humane society, 2 members from statewide farm organizations, the dean of an Ohio agriculture college and 2 members representing Ohio consumers. It does not specify that they be livestock family farmers, nor does it specify that the veterinarians be production livestock veterinarians. The intentions of the current Governor may be to appoint Production Livestock Farmers but will a Governor 10, 20 or 50 years from now do the same.
    2. It gives the government more unchecked power. The idea of our founding fathers was that we were to be a people of laws made by representatives of the people, not a people of regulators deciding how we should be governed. Giving this power to a small group of people could allow for regulations that may not meet the standards of the people. If the board sways to far one way or the other we could end up with a livestock system that totally disregards animal welfare, or if PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) or HSUS (Humane Society of the United States) could grab control they could ban animal agriculture and the sale of animal products in Ohio. Also the “annual operating expenses for the Board are estimated at $176,703 for the first year and then $162,280 for each subsequent year.“ According to a fiscal analysis done by the Office of Budget and Management, which will add to more deficit spending by the state. My biggest concern is that this could become more bad PR for animal agriculture and give PETA and HSUS more ammunition to fight with.
    3. This will not stop a ballot initiative like California’s Proposition 2 which banned farrowing crates and layer cages in California. I do agree with those supporting Issue 2, in that by proposing a constitutional amendment instead of adding a law to the Ohio Revised Code, it would slow the efforts of PETA and HSUS from getting a ballot initiative. An individual representing a group for Issue 2 said that “they would have to collect more signature to propose an amendment to the constitution, than to propose a law, therefore slowing there efforts.” The fact is they will still run an amendment to the constitution, that will try to repeal this one and insert their own version of animal care. PETA and HSUS would have to get signatures of 10% of the electors on a petition to present an amendment to the electors (2.01a The Initiative from The Ohio Constitution) There is nothing stopping PETA and HSUS from running another ballot issue after Issue 2 passes. They could still run a restrictive ballot issue like the one in California.
    4. This will not educate people about Production Livestock Agriculture in Ohio. The fact is whether we pass this or not we will still have to face the problem of educating the people of Ohio on the facts of Production Animal Agriculture. The truth is we will always be one election day away from losing animal agriculture in Ohio, until we embrace the need to educate the people of the facts and benefits of animal agriculture. If Issue 2 does pass as a way to delay the efforts of PETA and HSUS, we still must act immediately to increase the knowledge of consumers about animal agriculture production. We must inform the public that PETA’s and HSUS’s goal is not better animal care it is to bankrupt animal agriculture and abolish the harvesting of animals for meat. The following is a statement from PETA’s website “PETA operates under the simple principle that animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, or use for entertainment.” We will not save animal agriculture with ballot initiatives, it will be saved by the decisions of consumers.
    5. Regardless of the outcome, Ohio Farmers will continue to devote themselves to proper Animal Care that will lead to abundant, safe, and efficient production of Animal Products to Feed The World!!!!
    To see the official wording of the amendament, the ballot wording, and the official arguments for and against, the website is http://www.sos.state.oh.us/SOS/elections/IssueProcBallotBd/BallotBoard.aspx. To learn more about animal agriculture and the benefits of animal products in your diet log on to http://www.facesofag.com.

    Thank you

    Brandon Lawwill

  22. DAVE says:

    It’s just another way for these national groups, sticking there nose in our state.
    Telling everybody what they can or can’t do in our state. If there so worried about abuses and life in general they should stop abortion and
    child abuse!!!!!!

  23. Amy Reynolds says:

    I checked out HSUS- humane society of the united states- for myself. They are not our local humane societies (but a good play on the word!). The tactics they used in California were despicable, read about them for yourself:

    http://www.consumerfreedom.com/news_detail.cfm/headline/3571

    Check out their website and see waht their definition of ‘humane’ eating is- vegan/vegetarian. I saw free help for conveting to a vegetarian diet, a tofurkey recipe. They have no stake in Ohio, our animals, people, economy or jobs. The tactics used in California (there’s more unethical incidences) are not what we need in Ohio from a national lobbying group.

    I think it was 2004 we passed a ballot to amend the constitution concerning marriage. How “constitutional” is being used as an arguement doesn’t add up.

    I’m voting YES on Issue 2 because I checked it out for myself. Hope others do too

  24. Joseph Benning says:

    We’re voting YES on issue #2. HSUS Ohio advises against the measure.

    HSUS bragged the intent of their Fall 2008 California ballot initiative is to shutdown the California livestock production industry. HSUS also wants Washington bureaucrats to regulate pet ownership and ban all hunting! http://www.icaw.org/news/?naid=14

    Frankly, if issue #2 passes, Ohio’s legislators will have to work out the actual wording with input from Ohio livestock producers; in lieu of working with animal rights activists.

    If we lose Issue #2, the next ballot initiative may be HSUS’s.

  25. sam says:

    vote yes on issue 2, farmers do take good care of their animals, why wouldn’t they , its their bread and butter and we need to keep the jobs here, HSUS is trying to snowball people who are not familiar with farming and spreading all kinds of lies about how animals are treated, i think the farmers know alot more than the HSUS about farm animals, they only do this where states have voter initiatives, that way they put out their propaganda with distorted facts to people unfamiliar with farming, HSUS goal is for us not to eat animal products in the long run, they are slowly working towards that, vote yes on issue 2

  26. bob says:

    Farm animals are not pets, they are food, Farmers know their livestock is their livelihood and they protect and treat their livestock well and do not need an overseer.

  27. Ken says:

    after reading available info and the comments here i will be voting “NO” to issue 2 .
    i would much rather do battle with the HSUS then a state board if a conflict of interest arose . PETA and HSUS want a no vote for entirely differant reasons from mine and family farmers but i assure you that it will be easier to battle them in court instead of BIG AG and state beruacrats .unfortunatley “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” in this case. VOTE NO

  28. Jarrod says:

    The Humane Society of the United States is an animal rights extremist group. The majority of their budget is spent on lobbying, salaries and advertisement. Issue 2 is a way of keeping animal rights extremist out of our pastures! A board will be created using fact and science and not emotions to make decisions. For those of you who are concerned about government control, you do not want to find out the control that HSUS exerts on any one who owns an animal under the guise of abuse who will you turn to then.

  29. Andrea says:

    For those who are voting no:

    Please note the Plain Dealer editorial board is pushing a “no” vote on this measure — but they’re also saying that when HSUS comes to try their hand at an initiative to tell Ohioans how to run their agricultural industry, that you should vote NO on that, too! Do you understand what they’re saying? When I read between the lines, I surmise that they don’t want this measure to be added to our constitution but that overall, the idea of Ohioans telling Ohioans how to do it isn’t such a bad idea.

    Even if you disagree with Issue 2 being added to our state constitution, on some level don’t you agree that Ohioans should be the ones to make rules for Ohio?

    HSUS is saying if Ohio passes this, we’re not being “progressive” like other states who have already outlawed battery cages, gestation crates and veal crates — interestingly enough, those are the states where HSUS has already shoved its way in. I wonder what the people in those states have to say …

  30. Julie says:

    Ken you have no idea what you’re taling about. PeTA and The HSUS get MILLIONS of dollars a year tax free that they are free to use for lobbists.
    I don’t know a single organization in this state that would have the money and resources to fight them when they plan to change laws here. And they are planning.
    Their goal is and always had been TOTAL ANIMAL LIBERATION. they make no bones about it. In states where they have already passed these laws it has caused devastation to small and large farms and has done nothing to curtail puppy mills.

    I don’t like the idea of changing or constitution either but hell, if we can ban gay marriage why not block PeTA and the HSUS?

  31. Laura says:

    Factory Farming is just pure animal cruelty. Why would anyone want to eat pain and suffering. The goal here is not total Animal Liberation. It is simply minimum humane standards. I don’t know how any of you farmers can sleep at night.

  32. Gary Haws says:

    The majority of ag professionals are against factory farming. Laura, you should meet the Dairy farmers I know. Most of their earnings go right back to the care and nutrition of the herd. Heck, the dairy herds in my area eat healthier than most people.

  33. FED-UP &PO'd farmer says:

    Laura-Please identify the farms that you were ACTUALLY at and what you ACTUALLY saw that was cruel for the animals. Make sure you give the date andyour last name so the farmer can remember you and give their side. We are sick of you animal rights morons accusing us of animal cruely, especially since the overwhelming majority of you havent even been on a farm but are falling under the brainwashing scheme of HSUS. We will be watching for your reply, and will give the farms you have condemned the opportunity to reply. If you havent been on any farm and actually seen your supposed “abuse” we expect, at the very least, you to acknowledge that. HSUS spreads propaganda-NOT facts,and sadly many of you are so brainwashed you cannot think rationally.

  34. annonymous says:

    ok i’m not even old enough to vote but me and my family work and know alot of farmers and i don’t think these people should be able to tell us what to do since we have been doin fine for a long time,and i don’t know about anyone else but i don’t think these people care about what happens to our farmers and personally i think they should look around them and relize how much we do by ourselves. so what the goverment gives our jobs to other countries and now these people want to come and tell us how to produce our goods i don’t think so. so for me i will try and get everyone i know and inform them on what these people are tryin to do to our state, because god made animals to be killed and used for food and other things not just for house pets, the way these people are talking is we might as well just let the farm animals live in our house and everything. they really need to think before they do this because this could dramaticly hurt our state but of course they wouldn’t care because they dang animals are safe. O AND AS FOR LAURA GROW UP THATS WHAT GOD MADE ANIMALS FOR!!!!!!! don’t try to come to our state and control us just because u don’t think its humane its part of nature!!!

  35. Faith says:

    I read through every one of the comments above and I have to say that most had something to say worth my time to read. CONTROL THE FOOD AND YOU CONTROL THE WORLD. It’s so very important to stand up for our local farms and Farmers. Food doesn’t magically appear on the grocery shelves. These are HARD WORKING PEOPLE that grow and raise crops and livestock which feeds the rest of us. I voted YES on Issue 2 (though it did not pass) because even though I do not have a farm myself, I appreciate the few farms and those that run them, we have left and they should be protected and run by those who actually do the HEAVY LIFTING. I’m not a politician so I cant sit here and argue with most of you and won’t pretend I can. However, common sense should be enough for people to stick up for the people that provide our food. You can bet that all of those organizations trying to grab up power over our local farming industry are enjoying a steak dinner anytime they want too on your DIME. Can we afford it? And I would much rather eat my food that’s grown here rather than any offshore company any time! My husband and I drive at least an hour from here to get our beef and chicken. Gas is not cheap but we do it. We do it because we put our money where our mouth is (no pun intended) and actually support AMERICAN (OHIO in particular) FARMERS. Go ahead and land blast me, I’m used to it. The next thing that is coming is the ill-legalization of back yard gardens. Yep, gotta love those democrats and how they claim they love the “poor”, right-o. They will be loving a whole lot more of them pretty soon. But those same politicians will still be enjoying THEIR meat and potatoes, won’t they?

Leave a Comment

Receive emails as this discussion progresses.

eNewsletter

Get our Top Stories in Your Inbox

Recent News