Yum. I might convert to Christianity for the next week if it means I can eat chocolate Easter Eggs. (replying to Lisa and trying to ignore Greeny's distasteful remarks)

I think I'll be Apostolic. They seem to have fun jiving around.

muso wrote on Apr 20^th, 2011 at 2:30pm:



What distasteful remarks?

TONY EASTLEY: As you bite into your chocolate Easter eggs this weekend, spare a thought for the exploited children and trafficked labour used in the cocoa industry.

As it is, only three per cent of the global chocolate supply is ethically certified to have been harvested without the use of child or trafficked labour.

A new report released today by World Vision says a small levy on chocolate sales could put an end to the nasty side of the industry.

Alison Caldwell reports.

ALISON CALDWELL: Most of the world's cocoa comes from West Africa where children as young as eight-years-old are taken from their families to work in the cocoa fields of Ghana and Ivory Coast.

World Vision's CEO Tim Costello says consumers should think about them when they buy their chocolate eggs this Easter.

TIM COSTELLO: We're eating cheap chocolate because of trafficked children, child slavery, hazardous labour, and it's so simply fixed. It's simply fixed by as much as two cents extra on a $10 chocolate bar.

So little is being spent on cleaning up the supply chain, it's been a voluntary regulatory process and it's proved to be really an abysmal failure. The prime minister - former prime minister of Ivory Coast spoke out very clearly. He said if the chocolate companies paid fair prices then we could eliminate child labour, that's what it comes down to.

Fair pricing, certification, spending a fraction of what they're spending on advertising chocolate and it's a $100 million industry here in Australia, would clean up that child labour.

ALISON CALDWELL: Things are changing slowly - this year one of the biggest players in the market, Cadbury will sell a fair trade-certified Easter egg.

Fair trade ensures workers in factories and farmers are paid a decent amount for the work they do.

The question is will consumers pay more for ethical eggs? AM visited a supermarket in Melbourne's inner south east.

VOX POP 1: Definitely - even if like grandma could make chocolate here in the area I would prefer to buy it from her instead of big companies that exploit not only children but also our money.

VOX POP 2: Absolutely, yes, I would.

VOX POP 3: I hadn't really given it much thought to be honest.

VOX POP 4: There's certain chocolates that I do buy for that reasons and for the genetically modified chocolate as well.

ALISON CALDWELL: World Vision is asking chocolate companies to put aside two cents for every $10 worth of chocolate sold to abolish the use of child labour in cocoa harvesting. Do you think that would be a good idea?

VOX POP 5: Yeah definitely but I mean then again you never know how much people are sticking to their word, I mean I'm fairly sceptical, how much can you trust - but that's a great idea though. Is anyone doing that?

ALISON CALDWELL: Last night AM checked the shelves of the two major supermarket chains and struggled to find any ethical chocolate Easter eggs.

World Vision's Tim Costello says they're out there.

TIM COSTELLO: Don't just be paralysed - actually choose to eat fair trade chocolate. Choose to say to the supermarkets you get more of this in and you'll have my business. That's better than guilt.

ALISON CALDWELL: Chocolate has replaced coffee as Australia's biggest-selling fair trade product with sales growing from $4.5 million in 2009 to $74 million last year.

TONY EASTLEY: Alison Caldwell.

http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2011/s3196342.htm

Maybe someone can explain to me to connection between chocolate rabbits & eggs with Christian Religions?

Could the connections be “commercialism and exploitation of the week minded?”

It would seem the shops and religions certainly know how to play these cards with effectiveness.

muso wrote on Apr 20^th, 2011 at 2:37pm:




Like what, I posted someone else's opinion in the opening post and supplied the link. I have not put what I think.

If you must know, I think the truth probably lies somewhere in between the opening post and the candy coated religious concoction of Jesus' life. I think a drug habit, a homosexual tendency, or any other attributes of a person has no relevance in God's eye.

Good to know Christians have not lost contact with Jesus' teaching ... let he who has not sinned, through the first stone !!!

How many Catholics will come out of church on Sunday and give chocolate to their kids and loved ones knowing child slave labour has picked the beans that’s made the chocolate.

As  my uncle use to say: you will find more snakes, and back-stabbing hypocrites inside a church than outside one.

No truer words were ever spoken.

muso wrote on Apr 20^th, 2011 at 3:03pm:




So if it was my opinion, what is offensive about thinking Jesus could of been a drug user and/or a bisexual?

As far as I am aware, the candy coated christian version is just a guess considering the men that decided on Jesus' character and tendencies have ulterior motives and never new him personally.

My opinion: its all a load of fictional rubbish anyway, and if someone wants to say a load of stuff about a fictional character, that means diddly squat to me.

Why would I care about someone rubbishing Alice in wonderland or Jesus who are both fictional characters.