It has no specific impact on anything.
This statement sums up the most fantastic and surreal aspect of this debate. The same as the USDA's take on GM crops ("they are no different than ordinary crops".) If that were actually the case than why produce them? If these "foods" are no different than hybridized or heirloom stock why waste all that money and grief making and then defending them. Obviously they are different, and quite possibly in ways we are not fully aware of. That is the risk.
And as far as GM crops being created for good reasons (feed the starving, etc.) the vast majority of commercial GM crops are designed to withstand massive amounts of specific pesticides (Roundup Ready anyone?), or to produce their own bug toxins, not to bring goodness to people's plates. Monsanto is definitely not in it for humanitarian reasons, even if the scientists they hire might be.
Freedom of choice is good, no?
Not when it impedes your bottom line.
If it has syntax, it isn't user friendly.