Monsanto?!
 

What are all your thoughts on Monsanto being a major sponsor of FIRST?

Re: Monsanto?!
 

Anytime we can reach out to businesses and the community to share what FIRST has brought to all of us, we should. Have they showed interest?

Re: Monsanto?!
 

Is their cash any less green than any other business?
I thought their display was well-thought-out and well done. It highlighted the scientific and technological aspects of agrarian careers - something that is often wrongfully forgotten. It was interactive, interesting, and worked for many age groups.
Many people don't realize that many of the biggest historical advances in many technologies - for instance dial-up modems and instant global weather reports - were pioneered by the American Farmer.
Good for them for reminding us that agriculture truly is a cutting-edge sector, and the people who work in it are out standing in their field (ha!).

Re: Monsanto?!
 

They also gave tons of volunteers to Championship.

Re: Monsanto?!
 

We are hoping Monsanto to sponsor us and give us that miracle fertilizer to grow our team and genetically modify our mentor to be super duper mentors!

Re: Monsanto?!
 

They're hardly the only FIRST sponsor with business practices I find distasteful. That doesn't mean that everything they do is wrong, or that they're less valuable as a sponsor to the program. So long as champs is in St Louis, it makes sense to have them onboard.

Re: Monsanto?!
 

So, it's ok for a company that profits off of finding a more efficient way to kill people (Boeing, Lockheed, and their ilk) to sponsor FIRST but not these guys?*

I guess I just don't understand all the hate for these folks. Their money is just as green, their volunteers just as helpful, and their goals are probably just as noble.




*I don't have a problem with these companies either.

Re: Monsanto?!
 

If anything I would bet it is greener, they probable genetically modified it so it would stay green year round and be Round-Up resistant.


I kid of course. There are very few companies out there that have business practices every one will agree with. As long as they are operating within the law then I think it would be a slippery slope for FIRST to decline them as a sponsor based on their business practices.

Re: Monsanto?!
 

This.

Moreover, business practices aside, GM crops are hugely important to modern society and we need people going into agricultural sciences.

Re: Monsanto?!
 

I agree with you totally all though there practice is distasteful you learn from experince that you never turn down a sponsor ship oppertunity money is money.

Re: Monsanto?!
 

I my humble opinion money is not money, when its tainted! I am NOT talking specific to Monsanto there is a huge discussion about and its impact. Depending on which side you are, the resources can be considered as good or tainted. I will not be the judge, jury or executioner. I will leave it to smart people at FIRST to evaluate the ethical part of it and trust they will do a good job. When I seek sponsor I stay from certain businesses who I don't approve off, but this doesnot mean that I am expert in other businesses and know that their money is not tainted. Its my judgement call. As far as Monsanto is concerned I would not mind their presence as long as FIRST has made that decision.

Re: Monsanto?!
 

Speaking hypothetically, why turn down a good deed from a bad person/organization? If, say, the mafia were to donate money and supplies to hurricane relief efforts, should that be denied?


disclaimer: I am not comparing Monsanto to the mafia, nor do I oppose GMOs.

Re: Monsanto?!
 

Wait, seriously? Mafia presumably is an organization that primarily works in illegal industries.

Monsanto is a perfectly legal company whether you agree with their business practices or not.

Re: Monsanto?!
 

As far as I'm concerned every dollar they give to FIRST is a dollar they aren't spending prosecuting a farmer.

I'm not a Monsanto fan, but they're far from the most morally bankrupt American company and FIRST is a pretty darn good cause for them to be giving to.

Re: Monsanto?!
 

The statement was intentionally hyperbolic to provoke thought and discussion of the issue here. It was in response to the post above it, regarding "tainted money," and contained a direct analogy to real world events. I prefaced it with "speaking hypothetically" for a reason.