Senator shuns Valentine candy; cites slavery

[contrarymary]

And I thought he was talking about slavery to spending money one doesn't have because Hallmark (or whomever) declared this a romantic holiday:


http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20050210/pl_nm/congress_chocolate_dc

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - With Valentine's Day (news - web sites) approaching, it's fine to be a slave to chocolate, but some U.S. lawmakers want to make sure their chocolate wasn't produced by slaves.

Sen. Tom Harkin (news, bio, voting record), who in 2001 was instrumental in developing an industry protocol aimed at eliminating forced child labor in processing cocoa beans in West Africa, said on Thursday that that agreement was near collapse.


"This Valentine's Day, I am going to buy my wife flowers instead of chocolate. The chocolate companies have the leverage and clout to stop this suffering. But if corporate responsibility is lacking, Congress will be obliged to act," the Iowa Democrat said.


A legislative approach, which Harkin and his allies put aside a few years ago when the voluntary system appeared to be on track, would require chocolate products sold in the United States to be labeled to certify that they met International Labor Organization standards on forced child labor.


An aide to Harkin said the industry had informed him that it no longer planned on meeting July 2005 deadlines for setting up a certification process, but may still meet with him next month for a progress report and to discuss alternatives.


Forced child labor and trafficking on West African cocoa plantations were the focus of exposes several years ago and triggered an international outcry. Human rights groups have reported more recently that children are still being exploited.

I spent 9 years as one of Jehovah's Witnesses who, as you may know, eschew holidays because of their pagan origin.   The reason I personally felt we were all better off not celebrating holidays was because those who do celebrate holidays are, in fact, being slaves to a date on a calendar.  That said, many of us were concientious to the extreme about giving gifts all year 'round.  The rest were cheap bastards who were glad to have an excuse not to spend a few dollars on someone else.

I read in another thread about a young man who was being stressed out over Valentine's Day and concerned about spending money he did not have on his girlfriend.  ?  Whoever he is, I feel for him.   Women in particular, and Americans in general, seem to feel entitled to so damned much these days.

[PROFOUND1]

Hi contrary mary/Berylblue, I prefer the latter as firstly I remember your Berylblue post's and secondly the former insinuate's indicisiveness. BTW I enjoy/enjoyed your post's under both pseudo name's.


That said, I am undoubtedly aware of the "pittance" paid to the cocoa farmer's/harvester's who in some case's aren't paid by their own word's "up to a year later after harvest."


The cocoa "middle men" and ultimately the financially gorged chocolate corporation's parrot the "market price's dictate" dichotomy to their betterment and at the detriment predictably of the farmer's.


Yet, maybe this is mere insular western ideological fanciful speculative supposition --- But what if all the cocoa farmer's formed a united collective combined with marketing and legal infrastructure and withhold their crop "country wide."

As a consequence demand a fair price and working condition's for the cocoa farmer's, I know withholding such a crop is in actuality the difference between living or starvation but no opposition to a such an "affrontery" preclude's such an act to revisit the scene of passivity!

[CaptDMO]

Sheesh,

Honest honey, I was going to bring you chocolates, wine,shoes, and diamonds, but I can't , you see," it's for the children"!

Here, have a cup of coffee or tea to calm you down. I'm going to send the Senator some nice imported cigars to reward his efforts.

.

[PROFOUND1]

YOU patronizing so and so, is that the best you can indulge trying to pretend a vague interest!