I had a discussion today with two of my friends...both of which are very conservative (I have nothing against conservatives in general but it does influence both of these girl's views)....about the Environment...the Environment and Christianity....the Environment and the Government....the Environment and personal responsibility.... One of the girl says that she has absolutely no interest in the environment, that she wants to help people (through politics which is a joke...again nothing in general against politicians...youd have to know this girl). I do not understand how people can put such a solid line between mankind and the environment. The interactions between man and nature are too great. I feel that in order to really help people you can't disregard environmental issues. The well being of mankind is so intricately tied to the success of the environment...and she considers herself a very strong Christian, which I find even more baffling. The frustration is immense and I find it harder and harder to respect this girl who I have considered a friend for a while... Thoughts? Disagree? Agree?
Just because she has no interest does not mean that reality stops, she will still be supported by the environment. Garbage collectors are an essential part of sedentary concentrated habitation. However not everyone is a garbage collector. If the friend is overtly disdainful of the environment, then she is miserable in her own right.
I've noticed the same thing. It's like they consider evironmentalists and the green movement as part of science/evolution and against Christianity. If Christians want to help people then why not be pro environment. You can't trash one without trashing the other.
This reminds me of a Christian song, that has a line something like, "save the trees and kill the children". Something like people are paying a lot of attention to the environment and forgetting the important issues. I agree with Monkey Boy - why can't people do both?
My opinion is that caring for the environment is important because I value humanity. I love nature and I hate to see it destroyed, but I know this has to happen for us to live here. Not overwhelmingly so obviously, but I have no issue with cutting down trees and such to give us space to live. In short, I place ultimate value on humanity, and caring for the environment is mostly (but not completely) a means to that end. The environment should never become more important to us than ourselves, in my opinion.
We should take care of the planet, and I agree environmental support in justified. However I actually disagree with this 'PC' idea of going green or the world will end. Looking at posters and leaflets claiming 'OMFG the world iZ ENDING 50 yearzz 'cos OZ uuu' is stupid. The world has been knocking around like 4 billion years, and nothing has every prompted change so quickly. Astrological change is stupefyingly long, so even if we did pollute we would not feel the effect on civilization for as long as the human race is still on it. And anyways, people never put down rise in global temperature to simple nature. The world has been a ball of flames, a giant friggin' iceberg, it's been through so many different weathering conditions and this is all down to natural changes in temperature. I think it's OK to assume it just a cycle we will face regardless. Plus no one really knows the statistics anyways, everything we have ever seen has been fudged. Politics can matter, and believe me if we were actually on the verge of something catastrophic our politicians will be not only quivering in their boots, but doing something about it. Not saying to disregard all environmental issues, things like plastic product is problematic due to it been unable to biodegrade- and overall I think we should be looking after the earth for the sheer pleasure and joy we get from it in the state that it's in. Last thing. NASA are claiming the O-zone layer is closing once again. How can this be? We haven't cut emissions since the Kyoto Protocol did next to nothing and the Copenhagen SUmmit didn't work anything out. It is closing due to a natural cycle I think everything in the universe exists to. Blah.
The past is no guarantee of the future. The world has never had 6 billion people in it before. We don't know where that will lead.
Undoubtedly the destruction, but still, not very quickly. Nothing does in space, we are not an exception. Think of the sun, when it runs out of hydrogen and starts burning helium instead, it will become a Red Giant. This is destruction on a massive scale, something that should unbalance the sun to it's core- it is extremely unstable but it stays like that for a billion years. Things just happen slowly, whether it's the hostile death of a sun, or the hostile death of a planet. Global warming will never just come to us quite the way people expect. But then, that's only an opinion. I don't want to step on anyones views, it's just my own. I do care about the planet though, so I still abide to keeping it healthy and recycling, for example.
My thoughts are thus: Church and state are supposed to be separate institutions. You said your friend is a Christian. That would make her an EXCELLENT politician. See in a democracy, church and state ARE supposed to be separate institutions, but they ARE NOT! Your friend could not possibly, in any way be a christian, aspire to be a politician, AND care about nature. The three just simply cannot co-exist. Nor should you expect her too. That is fantastic you like the environment. "The well being of mankind is so intricately tied to the success of the environment" They are not tied together, but ARE one in the same. The well-being of mankind IS the success of the environment. After all, have you and your friend forgotten that we, yes we, all-knowing and all-powerful man, are merely animals with tools? Send our way the next ice age, or natural global disaster and we will see then how well we really do against nature. It's like when you first move out of the house. Your so glad to have your own pad and just be out from under your parents' thumb. Then the bills start rollin in and you realise that you don't really have your shit together quite yet...well, man has just moved out of the house.
This is one reason why I consider myself Agnostic now. I use to be Catholic, however I tired of the constant criticism thrown my way because I happen to care about the environment, or the ramblings on from Catholics on how the environment and what's in it was put here for us to use. Without a healthy environment, your just not going to have a healthy population. Just look at the past few years with how bad air pollution has gotten. People can debate climate change all they like, however the vast majority of air pollution IS caused by humans (ie cars, factories, etc). Ironically, I've found that those in the Church that criticize environmentalist for doing little for people, usually do absolutely nothing for people. They think that driving to church every Sunday is good enough for them.
Cognitive dissonance is a term I like to use. The 'environment' and humans are part of the same intricate system of life on this planet. Realistically, one cannot be human and not actually be a part of the environment. It's that ever indulgent meme, the earth is here for us to use as we see fit until we destroy it all. Humanity vs big bad nature garbage. As far as religion, Armaggedonites (aka, most Christian denominations) don't really care because they are anxiously awaiting the destruction of the world anyway. The idea is good to them because it would validate their far flung beliefs. Some might even call it a self fulfilling prophecy.
"Fact": Respecting the "environment" while performing the unaminous act called living is virtually impossible. Imagine humans as a disease infecting an organism, or a cell, if you wish. Whether a human decides to "go green" or litter casually, it does not make that much of a difference in the whole scheme of things. The problem is us as a whole, you can't pin this on "politicians" or "the government." It will only be possible for us to respect the environment if we drop out of society and live wild as the indians once did. Otherwise, I don't see things like "green energy" and "recycling" making any immediate impact.
I completely agree that people have invented this idea of a separation between mankind and nature. Some things I've heard lately have led me to believe that religion could potentially be one of the most powerful tools for conservation. Using Christianity as an example because of your friend: Didn't God create mankind in the Garden of Eden (by all accounts an entirely natural place devoid of gas-guzzlers, iPhones, or pants) where we were free to use our existence enjoying the beauty of the world around us? And after we screwed up and got tossed out, what did He do? HE GAVE US ANOTHER CHANCE! He gave us Earth, the most beautiful, bountiful place we've discovered in all the Universe. God created a place that could support mankind in balance with millions upon millions of His other living creations, and how do we act? We screw it up again. We burn it. We act not only like we're the only part of His Universe that matters, but also like He has our backs as we throw the full weight of our technological civilization to the task of destroying everything He made. Try referring your friend to faith-based environmental groups like Restoring Eden ( http://restoringeden.org/ ). They know how to communicate to religious folk better than I (or maybe you) do.
I still think you're playing a game with imaginary lines drawn in the sand. Destroying nature is absolutely NOT necessary for our continued existence. Sure, getting our population from a puny 6 billion up to 10 billion in the next century is going to require annihilating most of the world's ecosystems, but what kind of insanity is it to assume that's not something we should avoid at all costs?! Humanity & Nature (as we know and love it) Both are unique. One is in danger of being completely wiped out. The other has its head so far up its ass it thinks its entitled to anything it can attach a name to and shove into an incinerator.
Humanity's advance has hardly been going at the pace of astrological change. In case you hadn't heard, less than 200 years of intensive fossil fuel use has already caused change on a scale that has the brightest minds in the world using terms like "brink of destruction." Even if there weren't heaps of evidence indicating an unnaturally quick change in conditions, it certainly isn't "OK to assume." Of the nearly 2 million known species on Earth, we are the only one capable of choosing to destroy ourselves and all the rest. Ignoring our impact or writing it off to forces beyond our control seems a little dangerous. Where did you hear that? A simple Google search will point you to the thousands of scientists around the world who have spent their entire careers recording precise data from rock/ice/wood/etc that clearly show we're in a man-made crisis. I think most of them would be pretty angry to hear they've been working all their lives to learn nothing definitive and been forced to fake their results. I don't think the average person is inclined to look as far as 100 years into the future, and politicians in particular seem unlikely to look further than 2, 4, or 6 years ahead. Despite whatever good intentions a given politician had when they first sought election, getting back into office tends to take priority (which is important if they're going to back up their good intentions for another term after all). I'm going to ignore that you just said O-zone and then spoke like you knew what you were talking about. The hole in the ozone layer was a topic of the day in the 80's. Showing a bit of initiative, many governments of the world agreed to the Montreal Protocol, which banned the CFC's that were tearing the atmosphere apart (literally). The Montreal Protocol has been one of the most effective international treaties in history, while the Kyoto Protocol (put into effect 2005) and the Copenhagen summit (which happened less than a year ago) had almost nothing to do with the ozone hole issue. This is the only reason I don't think you're trolling. You speak like someone who honestly appreciates the value of the world. If that's true, please make an effort to understand issues more pressing than landfills. The 'state that it's in' simply won't last unless we drastically change our habits.
What I want to say is, we can't live without the enviroment. There's no reason to live by only herself. As we all know, the earth is a connected world, we depend on it and it also depends on human.
