A husband and wife, supporters of Tibetan freedom, stand poolside each in swimwear emblazoned with the Nike "swoosh". Isn’t it clear that there is something wrong with this picture? Yet it’s a snapshot that could be taken anywhere across the United States and beyond.

In today’s world, it is difficult, if not impossible, to be a consistently ethical consumer. People who generally fight for human rights are likely to inadvertently support slave labor, sweatshops, or other injustices. Being a responsible, or even simply an informed, consumer could be a full-time job -- and cost quite a lot of money. Due to the vast array of products on the market which are either detrimental to human health, harmful to the environment, produced using unfair labor conditions, or in some other way propagating tremendous injustices, we as potentially ethical consumers bear a great burden.

A large blue-collar family goes out to take advantage of McDonald’s thirty-nine cent hamburger. In doing so, they contribute to deforestation in the rainforests of South America, since clear-cutting to provide temporary grazing grounds for cattle is the only way McDonald’s can produce such vast quantities of cheap meat. In the meantime, they are also consuming a variety of hormones and antibiotics, not to mention very little nutrition and far too much saturated fat. That thirty-nine cent hamburger has put them at a greater risk for cancer and other diseases which are rampant today, but it is a well-marketed, cheap, and convenient way to feed a family.

A woman aware of the health benefits of soy and of the adverse environmental and health effects associated with a meat-based diet chooses to substitute meat with tofu in a stir-fry she is making. Current labeling policies keep her in the dark about the likelihood that soy foods contain pesticide residue and have been genetically modified. Through her choice to eat healthfully, she is subjecting herself and the earth to a host of known and unknown hazards.

Sad as they are, these sorts of stories are part of daily life. People who wish to live ethically are barred from doing so to their full potential, not only because of the financial strain it can cause, but also because crucial information is not being adequately disseminated. The FDA recently determined that labeling of genetically engineered foods should be done on a voluntary basis. Therefore, under current regulations, companies that do not use genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are unfairly burdened with the added expense of certifying and labeling their products if they want to attract consumers concerned with the dangerous potential of GMOs. Businesses that are using GMOs are not penalized and, since their more ethical competitors are dedicating additional funds to labeling, can even reap financial rewards beyond those brought by their irresponsible fast money tactics. In the current system, neither businesses nor consumers have anything near a level playing field.

Concerned consumers deserve easily accessible information. We should not have to guess whether rumors are true that L. L. Bean opposes homosexuality. We should not have to wonder whether the food we eat is more toxic than healthy. Consumers have an absolute right to know about both the products they purchase and the ideologies and business practices of the companies that produce those products. The time has come for ethical individuals to stop apologizing for their unwitting failures. The time has come for full disclosure.