Putting Catholic faith into action on climate change

[4elise]

Looks like India and China are not going along with cutting back on carbon footprint and all the rest. Not likely the United States could cut back all by itself to make much of a difference … especially when the cost to the United States would be such heavy taxation on the people as to cause its bankruptcy.

India and China want growth. It looks like they don’t believe in the need for man-made action to combat climate change … or they believe that climate change is natural and normal.

washingtontimes.com/news/2009/jul/10/killing-cap-trade/

I heard this yesterday on NPR and was disappointed too - I think that it developing nations are at a point where they need the development assistance first - given that, I believe we could get them to sign on -
npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=106437886

*A draft proposal that would have provided developing countries $400 million to cut emissions and adapt to the effects of climate change was dropped from the final declaration at Thursday’s meeting. Without that kind of funding from rich countries, the developing world is reluctant to sign on to carbon limits. *

China’s leader was absent of the G8 to address his trouble at home -

 

[4elise]

Hi Elise:wave:

I believe wine*** is*** good for us…and chocolate, too:yup:…thanks for your work on this thread, and for your* very* courteous and respectful manner!

Ah, thanks! — I think this is exactly the place where we can have a courteous discussion on all topics - even if we find ourselves disagreeing. :tiphat:

 

[Al_Masetti]

Here are some examples of how action on climate change will hurt the poor (and everyone else).

patriotpost.us/pdf/09-27a.pdf

[Scroll around the rest of the Web site while you’re there … www.patriotpost.us some excellent items.]

 

[4elise]

Here are some examples of how action on climate change will hurt the poor (and everyone else).

patriotpost.us/pdf/09-27a.pdf

[Scroll around the rest of the Web site while you’re there … www.patriotpost.us

some excellent items.]

It seems to be an opinion piece that is strongly laden with sarcasm which IMHO only serves to confirm and boost those who have the same opinion, nodding their head as they read it. If it is intended for people who may be swayed on how to address Global Climate Change this tone would seem ineffective at the least and off putting at the worst.

Cap-n-tax is nothing more than a well-executed piece of BHO’s socialist playbook, which seeks to ratify central government administration of the economy by way of regulation and taxation.

You may find this to be a confirmation of your opinion - but for many who have a more middle position whenever I see the word socialist in a piece I know that it is position paper, just like when the other side vilified GHWB - I’m fairly certain, that without too much effort, we could locate opinion pieces that were written over the past eight years that vilify the Bush administration for their approach to ‘central government’

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

From the Patriot Post:

CULTURE & POLICY

Climate Change This Week: Warming Nazis

Has the world gone mad? Vice President Al Gore is now comparing the fight against global warming to our battle against the Nazis in World War II. “Winston Churchill aroused this nation in heroic fashion to save civilization in World War II,” Gore droned. “We have everything we need except political will, but political will is a renewable resource.”

But, then again, perhaps Gore has a point, for the global warming hysterics are appearing more and more totalitarian each day. They have already made it clear that they should be able to tell us what to drive, how to light our homes and how many children to have. Now they have a new target: the wealthy.

In the months leading up to the December meeting scheduled in Copenhagen – and in the face of scientific findings that dispute that global warming is occurring at all – the ecofascists are fumbling to come up with new ways of building their new world order. No surprise, they are now pointing to a study that suggests the rich are responsible for half the world’s carbon emissions, presumably because of the gas-guzzling cars they drive and those big fancy homes they live in. If the study’s recommendations are followed, a Global Warming Police would track each country’s wealthy individuals to assess their level of carbon emissions.

While denying that this is a limousine-and-yacht tax on the rich, Shoibal Chakravarty of the Princeton Environment Institute – one of the study’s authors – nevertheless revealed his true colors: “We are not by any means proposing that. If some country finds a way of doing that, it’s great.” We believe it’s called “cap and trade” – a tax on all Americans.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Here is what ‘saving the planet’ leads to:

Mass slaughter.

 

[4elise]

Church Teaching Resources rom the Catholic Coalition on Climate Change

Catholic teaching on climate change embraces the principles of prudence, poverty and the common good. These three principles form the foundation of our work.

1. Prudence

“Prudence is intelligence applied to our actions … a thoughtful, deliberate, and reasoned basis for taking or avoiding action to achieve a moral good.” —U.S. Bishops

The Coalition accepts overwhelming scientific consensus about climate change. There is nearly unanimous agreement that human actions are creating a warming planet. As stewards of all creation, we must identify wise, careful actions that will reverse this climate change and avoid its potentially dangerous impact on all life—especially human life.

State and local Catholic leaders can play a central role in bringing together scientists, theologians, business and labor leaders, government officials, human service providers and other stakeholders to shape a wise and careful approach consistent with our principles. With such leadership, the Catholic community will answer God’s call to be faithful stewards.

2. Poverty
*
“… any successful strategy must also reflect the genuine participation and concerns of those most affected and least able to bear the burdens … [this] is a moral and political necessity …” —U.S. Bishops*

Natural disasters take the greatest toll on poor people. Inadequate transportation, lack of insurance, poor housing and little if any cash reserves put them on the edge of the precipice. To survive severe storms, prolonged droughts, extended heat waves and other climate-related events, these vulnerable sisters and brothers must receive assistance—both public and private.

The Coalition seeks to find constructive ways to approach climate change from the bottom up. We strive to bring the voice of the poor to the public debate about climate change and ensure that resources are available to the most vulnerable.

**
3. The Common Good**

“Responses to global climate change should reflect our interdependence and common responsibility for the future of our planet. Individual nations must measure their own self-interest against the greater common good and contribute equitably to global solutions.” —U.S. Bishops

Climate change provides an opportunity to act with courage and creativity as individuals, as people of faith, as a nation.

As I learned more about all of these issues / and the impact of factory farming on the environment - I made a connection that as an individual, as a person of faith - moving to a plant based diet made the most sense for me, and I would invite other Catholics to consider the possibility of making this move as an act of faith. Peace

 

[Ender]

4elise:

I’m sorry that you resent this - but it seems that the leadership of our Church has found a place where this is more than a scientific debate, and I for one am grateful for this.

The point is not what I may or may not resent; it is what the Church does or does not teach and she does not teach that the theory of AGW is true.

Church Teaching Resources rom the Catholic Coalition on Climate Change

Catholic teaching on climate change embraces the principles of prudence, poverty and the common good. These three principles form the foundation of our work.

You need to distinguish the ends toward which we are all expected to work from the means used to achieve them. The Church teaches about ends; we are disputing the means.

“Prudence is intelligence applied to our actions … a thoughtful, deliberate, and reasoned basis for taking or avoiding action to achieve a moral good.” —U.S. Bishops

The Coalition accepts overwhelming scientific consensus about climate change.

The coalition might accept the theory of AGW but the Church does not - she has taken no position. I’m quite willing to be prudent, thoughtful, and reasoned … which is why I have come to a different conclusion than you.

“… any successful strategy must also reflect the genuine participation and concerns of those most affected and least able to bear the burdens … [this] is a moral and political necessity …” —U.S. Bishops

Admirable objectives … about which we may - and do - disagree on the best way to achieve them.

The Coalition seeks to find constructive ways to approach climate change from the bottom up.

The views of The Coalition are irrelevant; it is only the views of the Church that matter.

“Responses to global climate change should reflect our interdependence and common responsibility for the future of our planet. Individual nations must measure their own self-interest against the greater common good and contribute equitably to global solutions.” —U.S. Bishops

Absolutely. This is why I oppose the wrongheaded and wasteful approach to reducing CO2 output which will have no affect whatsoever on the climate but will surely be harmful to people.

Climate change provides an opportunity to act with courage and creativity as individuals, as people of faith, as a nation.

Theoretically, yes. I just don’t happen to believe the theory and there is nothing in Church teaching that says I must.

Ender

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Amen…
For me one of the actions we have taken in our family is we have given up meat, poultry, dairy, eggs - learned about the impact CAFO (confined animal feeding operations) are having on the environment - we started a group here on CAF - Catholic Vegetarians and Vegans - there are recipes there if you are interested… Peace

I wish people would show such concern for unborn babies.

Animals and all the earth were given to us by God.

 

[4elise]

I wish people would show such concern for unborn babies.

Animals and all the earth were given to us by God.

For clarity, this topic is ‘Putting Catholic faith into action on climate change’

The comment you are posting in response to:
“For me one of the actions we have taken in our family is we have given up meat, poultry, dairy, eggs - learned about the impact CAFO (confined animal feeding operations) are having on the environment - we started a group here on CAF - Catholic Vegetarians and Vegans - there are recipes there if you are interested… Peace”
is regarding this thread.

I don’t know where you are making a connection between concern for unborn babies with this in light of the thread? If perhaps you are doing so only to ignite a response that might be uncharitable, I am not going to take the bait. Peace

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

No one is setting out bait.

It should be obvious by now that ‘saving the planet’ is a euphemism for culling the unborn, the inconvenient, and eventually you.

If that doesn’t scare you, it should.

 

[4elise]

No one is setting out bait.

It should be obvious by now that ‘saving the planet’ is a euphemism for culling the unborn, the inconvenient, and eventually you.

If that doesn’t scare you, it should.

It is not obvious to me that ‘saving the planet’ is a euphemism for any thing suggested in your post.

What is obvious to me is that many resist considering that there actions are having a negative impact because change is inconvenient, so many prefer to deny that their actions matter and then can go on making self centered choices that fail to consider that we are part of a larger world.

It is also obvious to me that when many people want to derail a discussion they add the pro life card.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Not obvious? It should be.

Obama’s Science Czar: Forced abortions and mass sterilization needed to save the planet (This post in another CA forum)

---

(Ditto for this one):
Senate Panel Also Agrees to Obama’s Plan to Fund Abortions in Nation’s Capital

Washington, DC – Following a vote by their colleagues in the House, members of a Senate committee agreed to President Barack Obama’s request to fund abortions in the nation’s capital. Last week, the Senate Appropriations Committee defeated an effort to restore the Dornan Amendment to prohibit such abortion funding.

Story and action alert at:
LifeNews.com/nat5209.html

Anyone, and I do mean anyone, is the next Terri Schiavo. No one is safe.

It starts with convincing people the ‘planet’ needs saving, and that you can save it by using curly light bulbs. And this falsehood has evidently worked very well to scare people into living like cave-dwellers and eating only raw vegetables. But here, in the realm of eugenics, is where it always, always ends up.

There is no one too healthy or too important to fall under the hammer of ‘planet-saving.’ Now, you do have the free will to hide from their true agenda and to ignore the danger.

But I would be far more afraid of the reality of eugenics than the utter myth of man-made climate change.

 

[Gabriella_San_S]

Obama’s Science Czar: Forced abortions and mass sterilization needed to save the planet (This post in another CA forum)

---

It starts with convincing people the ‘planet’ needs saving, and that you can save it by using curly light bulbs. And this falsehood has evidently worked very well to scare people into living like cave-dwellers and eating only raw vegetables. But here, in the realm of eugenics, is where it always, always ends up.

I’ve been on that thread, and there is such an obvious connection between going green and eugenics in the agenda of this current administration. It becomes more evident each time BHO “taps” another one of his people.
I take comfort in the Holy Father’s leadership, in the recent encyclical.
Can anyone post a reliable commentary on this, please? Have the U.S. Bishops responded formally to this yet? How about the coalition, Elise?

 

[4elise]

I’ve been on that thread, and there is such an obvious connection between going green and eugenics in the agenda of this current administration. It becomes more evident each time BHO “taps” another one of his people.
I take comfort in the Holy Father’s leadership, in the recent encyclical.
Can anyone post a reliable commentary on this, please? Have the U.S. Bishops responded formally to this yet? How about the coalition, Elise?

From what I can find there are many blogs restating that John Holdren is evil personified, and quoting something that they say that he wrote in 1977 regarding his obviously absurd approach to projections of a population explosion that they say he anticipated in the 80’s.

I can’t find anything that is the actual book - ( to get it in context ) - that the blogs say he wrote with two other people - so can’t confirm this as a fact - (i.e. was he saying these things shouldn’t be considered or?? ) if he did write this in 1977 he didn’t write it about climate change - but I can see if one believed that he wrote this - it would be a concern that he might advocate such absurd ideas about climate change -

I’m sure some on this thread will call me many things for saying that his proposals just couldn’t happen - and I don’t believe we need to be afraid of this - but we can live in fear and anxiety - or as the Bishops are calling us to work to keep the needs of the poor and most vulnerable at the heart of the discussion.

So if John Holdren proposes something to address climate change that one believes is not with the poor at the heart we should all speak against it. This however does not mean climate change isn’t real, isn’t influenced by our activities, and can not be addressed.

 

[Ender]

So if John Holdren proposes something to address climate change that one believes is not with the poor at the heart we should all speak against it.

I have no idea what Holdren wrote in 1977 but here is a presentation he made in 2007 titled Global Climate Disruption: What Do We Know? What Should We Do? If you download the PDF and look at page 42 you will see him outline what he sees as approaches we should take to reduce CO2 emissions. At the top of his list is reducing population growth. Given that most of the first world nations are already reproducing well below the replacement rate the only real possibility of reducing population growth is by reducing it in the third world. I would say that qualifies as a plan that “is not with the poor at the heart.”

belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/17661/global_climate_disruption.html?breadcrumb=%2Fexperts%2F140%2Fjohn_p_holdren%3Fgroupby%3D0%26hide%3D1%26id%3D140%26back_url%3D%25252Fexperts%25252F%26%253Bback_text%3DBack%252Bto%252Blist%252Bof%252Bexperts%26filter%3D2007

This however does not mean climate change isn’t real, isn’t influenced by our activities, and can not be addressed.

True. Nothing Holdren says has anything to do with the validity of the theory of AGW; that is something the scientists still have to determine. Since, however, enhanced greenhouse warming as a result of human emissions of CO2 has yet to be proven the Church has no position on the theory - which is the point I’m making. Since we have no obligation to believe the theory we certainly have no obligation to act as if we did.

Ender

 

[4elise]

I have no idea what Holdren wrote in 1977 but here is a presentation he made in 2007 titled Global Climate Disruption: What Do We Know? What Should We Do? If you download the PDF and look at page 42 you will see him outline what he sees as approaches we should take to reduce CO2 emissions. At the top of his list is reducing population growth. Given that most of the first world nations are already reproducing well below the replacement rate the only real possibility of reducing population growth is by reducing it in the third world. I would say that qualifies as a plan that “is not with the poor at the heart.”

belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/17661/global_climate_disruption.html?breadcrumb=%2Fexperts%2F140%2Fjohn_p_holdren%3Fgroupby%3D0%26hide%3D1%26id%3D140%26back_url%3D%25252Fexperts%25252F%26%253Bback_text%3DBack%252Bto%252Blist%252Bof%252Bexperts%26filter%3D2007
True. Nothing Holdren says has anything to do with the validity of the theory of AGW; that is something the scientists still have to determine. Since, however, enhanced greenhouse warming as a result of human emissions of CO2 has yet to be proven the Church has no position on the theory - which is the point I’m making. Since we have no obligation to believe the theory we certainly have no obligation to act as if we did.

Ender

I went through this entire power point and am only more convinced that climate change is happening, and that our actions have contributed to it and can make a difference.

 

[Nino]

free trade,that is not a right wing desire…if it means slave labor products from china low balling our free market products…as you say thats nonsense . as is climate change.I guess the person who placed this topic has never been out of his or her door for years…and if the earth were getting warmer that means more crops and a longer growing season…also since the ruling class.the left,your friend I guess…wont let us drill in alaska or make alternate fuels since the Rockefellers etc have complete control over oil…lets see if ,when the seas rise,if maybe we commoners can buy some waterfront property…I live near million $ stuff like that and do not see any sign of these wealthy folks selling their homes and buying a humble home like mine on a hill…yeh sure…another hoax like the flying saucers,cardiff and monkey trials…all for cottage industries…I did a paper on this and caused no small discussion…all the best…enjoy another no win war in Afgan…

 

[4elise]

catholicclimatecovenant.org/

A very good video here…
From their web site:

*The impact of climate change falls heaviest on the world’s poor. As Catholics, our faith demands prudent action.

Our cars and power plants, more energy consumption and waste—we’re leaving a bigger carbon footprint. Scientists tell us that means more climate change. Here and around the world, it is the poor who will be hit hardest. With more droughts, floods, hunger and joblessness. As faithful Catholics, we have a moral obligation to care for both Creation and the poor. Pope Benedict XVI insists, “Before it is too late, it is necessary to make courageous decisions” to curb climate change.*

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

If you want to live in a substandard manner so you can feel good about yourself (and I say ‘you’ in the generic sense), knock yourself out.

But do not forget that in the name of ‘saving the planet’ each of us is the next Terri Schiavo.

(This article first appeared in the January 20, 1992 edition of Citizen magazine)

How Planned Parenthood Duped America

At a March 1925 international birth control gathering in New York City, a speaker warned of the menace posed by the “black” and “yellow” peril. The man was not a Nazi or Klansman; he was Dr. S. Adolphus Knopf, a member of Margaret Sanger’s American Birth Control League (ABCL), which along with other groups eventually became known as Planned Parenthood.

Sanger’s other colleagues included avowed and sophisticated racists. One, Lothrop Stoddard, was a Harvard graduate and the author of The Rising Tide of Color against White Supremacy. Stoddard was something of a Nazi enthusiast who described the eugenic practices of the Third Reich as “scientific” and “humanitarian.” And Dr. Harry Laughlin, another Sanger associate and board member for her group, spoke of purifying America’s human “breeding stock” and purging America’s “bad strains.” These “strains” included the “shiftless, ignorant, and worthless class of antisocial whites of the South.”

You may choose to live in ignorance of the real agenda.