FDA keeping us safe?

I posted this link because I believe that you can see two very distinct discourses at work. You have the discourse of the FDA telling us that our food is safe. The fact they have put their stamp of approval on products at our local grocers can ensure that what we are consuming is safe and uncontaminated. And for so many Americans,  we have believed this to be true. It hasn't been until as of late that a new voice is rising up with a different belief system. There is a new movement in America of people who want to shed light on the truth about food, where it comes from, and more importantly, whether it's safe or not. This is the second discourse that we see which is being sounded out by filmmaker by Robert Kenner in this documentary, Food, INC.

Never ever....

One of the rules I was taught early on as a writer, and managed to never follow, was in regards to run-on sentences. I think I was either misinformed or I just simply misunderstood what a run-on sentence was. My belief was that it was a sentence that was very, very long; it was a sentence that had two different ideas. (Kind of like that, maybe?) That idea is close to the truth but not completely correct. So as a young writer I tried my very best to keep my sentences short and to the point. The only thing was that writing like that didn't feel natural for me. I am a big talker and an outward processor, so I constantly have many ideas coming forth onto my paper; ideas that I think make sense in one complete thought or sentence. (Kind of like that. I can't help it.) Then, after a couple more English courses in my academic career, I had my "aha" moment. I realized it wasn't that I couldn't have the very, very long sentences that I loved so dearly, I just needed to punctuate it right! Maybe that was why the teacher was always writing "run-on" in red pen on so many of my papers? I began to punctuate and the red began to disappear.  Alas, all was right in the world; I could have my cake and eat it too.

This is a good rule and I think it should be followed. I think the lack of punctuation in these sometimes long,and sometimes short, run-on sentences causes the thought to lack clarity. It can be rather confusing and also distracting. I have no examples of times that you can/should ignore this rule but I guess anything is possible?

Another rule I remember being taught was one that we read about. "Never, ever start a sentence with 'and' or 'because.'" This too troubled me in my youth because I felt like there were appropriate times in which it was essential to start with "because." I felt that it helped emphasize my point more clearly. I am convinced now that it was just my teachers intention to help us understand writing in a more simplistic way. It's possible that it was easier to just say "don't start a sentence with 'and' or 'because,' than to explain sentence fragments and complete thoughts. Maybe it's because there are so many rules and so many exceptions to rules, that this seemed like the best method? Whatever the reasons, I don't believe that it is wrong to start sentences with "and" or "because." However, I do think it is necessary to have a complete thought and not sentence fragments.