Putting Catholic faith into action on climate change

[4elise]

The “financial concern” expectant mothers have has little or nothing to do with not having insurance. It is the “financial concern” of not having an adequate job to be able to raise the child, and more importantly, not having a husband who contributes financially to raising the child. Far more women who abort do so because their “boy friend” (“boy” may be correct, but “friend” is an oxymoron) wants nothing to do with being a father.

Certainly a big issue - however sadly when the economy has been so drastically hit that I understand that the increase in incidence is among married women who already have children

Nothing I have seen yet can produce a watt of electricity for anywhere near the minimal cost of hydro, coal, gas or nuclear processing. Not solar, not wind, not wave technology, not even methane from cow manure. None of the proposed green methods of producing electricity are economically viable in any major production method, and that is not even beginning to get into the enviornmental issues they cause.

a little logic should show this is nothing but a mantra from the left.

Oil companies make a profit in two major ways: refining what others have found, or finding a new source of oil.

Eugenics results in a lower population.
A lower population results in lower demand.
Lower demand results in lower sales.
Lower sales result in lower profit.
What part of that is not clear?
Oh, I forgot; “don’t confuse me with facts; I already have my mind made up.”.

I’m sorry, I don’t think that was called for, what have I said that you feel is a disregard of facts that would warrant such a reply?

Of course, part of the eugenics movement is to get rid of the poor; and given the percentage rate of abortions among, for example, the black population, which proportionally has a much higher rate of abortion and statistically ranks much lower overall economically, perhaps Sanger is getting her way finally. Amazing that Obama doesn’t even acknowledge the issue. But then, he’s not poor, is he.

Sorry if you thought I was suggesting that the oil company was promoting eugenics - I certainly was not - nor do I support the supposition that Catholics who support the work of the environmental movement support this … there are certainly some who discuss the point of a sustainable population - and I don’t think anyone would argue that you can’t put 500 people in an elevator - so the Church does not teach against responsible parenthood, parents working WITH God to have the number of children they can support. And the counter cultural thing on this issue that Catholic do is remain open to life by using NFP. But this takes education, discipline, selflessness, and faith. Lets work to increase these in the world.

I agree with Bill that it is a false divide - we can be pro life and pro environment - we can be the ones who care about all this!

 

[TEPO]

I’m thinking primarily of some of Sailor Kenshin’s posts claiming that fighting global warming is necessarily linked to eugenics and even Nazism. He has not presented any *logical *reason for this beyond the fact some people have adhered to both. That’s classic “guilt by association.”

Your claims about the Gaia theory are a more defensible version of the same tactic. More defensible because one can easily see why the worship of the earth is linked to attitudes about global warming. But still the same tactic because you do not show why the two are *necessarily *linked.

For that matter, I am not convinced that the “Gaia hypothesis” contradicts any truth of the Christian faith. The earth may in some sense be a living entity created by God–what Christian doctrine does this contradict?

But the main point is that Christians care for the earth for clearly *Christian *reasons–that God created the earth and gave it into our care–just as pantheists care for it for distinctively pantheistic reasons.

Edwin

This is why I have trouble agreeing with you. You make solid attempts to sympathize with non-Christin views. With all due respect, my knowledge of Gaia, and Pantheinism cause me to condemn their spread. I view them as an alternate route from salvation. Their ideas should never be adopted into mainstream govornment, or society. They place God on a lower level than he deserves!

 

[Bill_Cherry]

This is why I have trouble agreeing with you. You make solid attempts to sympathize with non-Christin views. With all due respect, my knowledge of Gaia, and Pantheinism cause me to condemn their spread. I view them as an alternate route from salvation. Their ideas should never be adopted into mainstream govornment, or society. They place God on a lower level than he deserves!

Romans chapter 2

14 So, when gentiles, not having the Law, still through their own innate sense behave as the Law commands, then, even though they have no Law, they are a law for themselves.
15 They can demonstrate the effect of the Law engraved on their hearts, to which their own conscience bears witness; since they are aware of various considerations, some of which accuse them, while others provide them with a defence . . . on the day when,
16 according to the gospel that I preach, God, through Jesus Christ, judges all human secrets.

So, then, even sometimes the Pagans accidentally get a few things right…no?

 

[Contarini]

This is why I have trouble agreeing with you. You make solid attempts to sympathize with non-Christin views.

I care about truth and goodness. If you want to show me that I am wrong, show me how what I am saying is false or bad. Don’t use labels.

With all due respect, my knowledge of Gaia, and Pantheinism cause me to condemn their spread. I view them as an alternate route from salvation. Their ideas should never be adopted into mainstream govornment, or society. They place God on a lower level than he deserves!

How does the hypothesis that the earth is alive place God on a lower level? Isn’t it more amazing to create living things than nonliving ones?

Note that I’m not endorsing the “Gaia hypothesis.” I tend to think that at most it’s a metaphor. And the validity of the climate change theory is independent of the “Gaia hypothesis.” So you should treat it separately rather than, as I said, engaging in guilt by association tactics, which are typically an admission that your case is weak.

I don’t ask you to accept my arguments because you trust me. You don’t have to trust me. You can think I’m a vile heretic, and that’s fine with me. Just think about the logic of what I am saying.

Edwin

 

[TEPO]

Romans chapter 2

14 So, when gentiles, not having the Law, still through their own innate sense behave as the Law commands, then, even though they have no Law, they are a law for themselves.
15 They can demonstrate the effect of the Law engraved on their hearts, to which their own conscience bears witness; since they are aware of various considerations, some of which accuse them, while others provide them with a defence . . . on the day when,
16 according to the gospel that I preach, God, through Jesus Christ, judges all human secrets.

So, then, even sometimes the Pagans accidentally get a few things right…no?

I have to disagree. Gaia and pantheinism do not have the law! They are not behaving as the law commands because they slander Mary, Jesus, and God himself. Their eyes have been darkened. They think they can altar Gods great Creation. They think they are as Great as God. They are trying to reintroduce original sin, thus nullifying the efforts of Jesus!
Wasnt original sin an attempt by the devil to trick man into thinking he could be similar to, or like God?

 

[WinterWH]

Carbon dioxide and methane have nothing to do with global warming or climate change.

Besides as they go up, the temperature goes down.

climaterealists.com/index.php?tid=74

 

[JimG]

I agree that this is not the necessary outcome of working to stop climate change, and indeed that the connection Sailor Kenshin is trying to draw is downright silly (some people no doubt advocate both, but there is no intrinsic link whatsoever). But your confidence in the “independent minded freedom loving people of our country” is misguided. Eugenics was widely accepted in early 20th century America, even including forced sterilizations of the “unfit” in some cases.

Edwin

Eugenics was indeed widely accepted, and I don’t think it was ever fully rejected as a potential solution to national problems. It just became untenable to use the word. Now it’s included in the phrase ‘population control’ because after all, what populations do we want to control? Not the better sort. (To quote the rejected fiancee in the movie Titanic.) And where are most of the planned parenthood clinics located?

 

[TEPO]

. The polls I’ve seen do not indicate that financial reasons are the primary motivator behind abortion–many well-to-do people have abortions. Your argument makes anything that harms the economy an implicit action in favor of abortion. I don’t think we can reason this way. Edwin

realchoicespcc.org/abortion.html

“Why are abortions performed?
Women choose abortion for many reasons, but the most common reasons reported are relational problems with the father of the child, worry about responsibility, fear of financial liability, concern about lifestyle changes, and fear of others discovering sexual activity.”

Anything that effects abortion must be countered

 

[Bill_Cherry]

I have to disagree. Gaia and pantheinism do not have the law! They are not behaving as the law commands because they slander Mary, Jesus, and God himself. Their eyes have been darkened. They think they can altar Gods great Creation. They think they are as Great as God. They are trying to reintroduce original sin, thus nullifying the efforts of Jesus!
Wasnt original sin an attempt by the devil to trick man into thinking he could be similar to, or like God?

I agree with you.( trust me. I know more about the neo-pagans than I should…) I suppose I may have used this a little out of context. The point I was trying to make is that even they recognize the concerns of MMCC. I know that you don’t believe it. But, the Vatican does as has been pointed out many times on these threads.

Muslims are pro life. There are also Muslim terrorists. Does that mean all Muslims are bad? Mormons are pro life. But, their doctrine is fundamentally at odds with mainstream Christianity? Does that make them bad? and for that matter, there are pro life pagans and ultra conservative pagans, too.

I do not condone the teachings of these folks as far as spirituality goes. But, just because they do not agree with the same book we got that doesn’t warrant putting them all in the ‘bad’ category,…at least as far as secular concerns go.

As an exmormon (left @ 14) ex pagan (left 10 yrs ago - and I have friends who are still pagans) and Catholic Convert, one of the things from the secular point of view which attracted me to the RCC (besides the cool iconography and superior results from the rosary) was the idea that we are all God’s children and all have a chance at salvation. There is a quantum view of reality which the church holds which appeals to me very much. As opposed to the more mechanical view of your mainstream fundamentalist types. Which world view tends to see our resources as exploitable to the degree of annihilation. As opposed to the biblical concept of dominion and stewardship.

 

[TEPO]

Muslims are pro life. There are also Muslim terrorists. Does that mean all Muslims are bad? Mormons are pro life. But, their doctrine is fundamentally at odds with mainstream Christianity? Does that make them bad? and for that matter, there are pro life pagans and ultra conservative pagans, too.

one of the things from the secular point of view which attracted me to the RCC (besides the cool iconography and superior results from the rosary) was the idea that we are all God’s children and all have a chance at salvation.

You see Bill, this is where I fail to understand. How can Catholics believe that we are all Gods children…(dont get reactive just yet)
I mean, I understand God made us all, but if we dont accept the teachings of Jesus (the way and the Light), Then we dont belong to God but to the earth.

Sometimes I think that some Catholics would like to see all religeons combine into one. Thus creating one giant community of world peace through a common religeon. You know, I can never support this. Especially if environmentalism is the force that unites them. Catholocism should never allow itself to be watered down. That is protestantism. I wont judge them, but at the same time I can never join them!

 

[Bill_Cherry]

You see Bill, this is where I fail to understand. How can Catholics believe that we are all Gods children…(dont get reactive just yet)
I mean, I understand God made us all, but if we dont accept the teachings of Jesus (the way and the Light), Then we dont belong to God but to the earth.

Sometimes I think that some Catholics would like to see all religeons combine into one. Thus creating one giant community of world peace through a common religeon. You know, I can never support this. Especially if environmentalism is the force that unites them. Catholocism should never allow itself to be watered down. That is protestantism. I wont judge them, but at the same time I can never join them!

Understood.

Let me clarify my statement a little. Some of God’s kids are lost…like sheep in a ditch.

We are all called to do a little evangelizing. And judging from the History of the Catholic Church, even though it has adopted some of the traditions of those whom it “absorbed”, I would say that it has never ‘watered down’ it’s main message. “Catholic” does mean “Universal”.

You are correct to be a bit wary of certain trends as far as the world goes. There are traps and snares. I hope that this discussion as well as others can help us all to avoid them.

 

[TEPO]

Understood.

Let me clarify my statement a little. Some of God’s kids are lost…like sheep in a ditch.

We are all called to do a little evangelizing. And judging from the History of the Catholic Church, even though it has adopted some of the traditions of those whom it “absorbed”, I would say that it has never ‘watered down’ it’s main message. “Catholic” does mean “Universal”.

You are correct to be a bit wary of certain trends as far as the world goes. There are traps and snares. I hope that this discussion as well as others can help us all to avoid them.

I like this tone better. Evangelization; I like the sound of that. We just have to make sure we keep our strength in our traditions!

 

[Bill_Cherry]

What about these new energy efficient lightbulbs?
from a newsletter I receive
"Achieving energy efficiency is important for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. A 2007 study by McKinsey & Company stated that improving energy efficiency in buildings and appliances would reduce carbon emissions by 710 to 870 megatons by 2030. According to a recent study by McKinsey, energy efficiency will reduce GHG emissions by 1.1 gigatons a year, “the equivalent of taking all the entire U.S. fleet of passenger vehicles and light trucks off the roads.”

But these bulbs contain relatively high amounts of mercury? So, I can’t just throw them away? Do I have to send them to a hazardous waste facility?

According to responders in the newsletter the mill gauss measurements (electro magnetic energy) is off the charts! Does anybody else know anything about this?

 

[TEPO]

What about these new energy efficient lightbulbs?
from a newsletter I receive
"Achieving energy efficiency is important for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. A 2007 study by McKinsey & Company stated that improving energy efficiency in buildings and appliances would reduce carbon emissions by 710 to 870 megatons by 2030. According to a recent study by McKinsey, energy efficiency will reduce GHG emissions by 1.1 gigatons a year, “the equivalent of taking all the entire U.S. fleet of passenger vehicles and light trucks off the roads.”

But these bulbs contain relatively high amounts of mercury? So, I can’t just throw them away? Do I have to send them to a hazardous waste facility?

According to responders in the newsletter the mill gauss measurements (electro magnetic energy) is off the charts! Does anybody else know anything about this?

I dont know about the lightbulbs, but I’ve noticed those handy sensores everyone is starting to use in the office instead of the switches… The lights go much dimmer when there is no activity, that way it saves energy. Also you dont have to constantly be flipping switches everytime you walk in and out of rooms. Even the hallway lights increase in intensity in relation to where the person is; and slowly dim as he moves on.
(might just be a california thing?)

 

[Bill_Cherry]

I dont know about the lightbulbs, but I’ve noticed those handy sensores everyone is starting to use in the office instead of the switches… The lights go much dimmer when there is no activity, that way it saves energy. Also you dont have to constantly be flipping switches everytime you walk in and out of rooms. Even the hallway lights increase in intensity in relation to where the person is; and slowly dim as he moves on.
(might just be a california thing?)

I’ve seen those sensors installed on some of the schools I helped build in Az…
Nothing about the bulbs tho? you know, the spirally fluorescent ones…supposed to take the place of incandescent?

 

[TEPO]

I’ve seen those sensors installed on some of the schools I helped build in Az…
Nothing about the bulbs tho? you know, the spirally fluorescent ones…supposed to take the place of incandescent?

Nope, I havent seen or heard of those yet .

 

[4elise]

I’ve seen those sensors installed on some of the schools I helped build in Az…
Nothing about the bulbs tho? you know, the spirally fluorescent ones…supposed to take the place of incandescent?

ehow.com/how_4968125_dispose-spiral-fluorescent-light-bulbs.html

from this site:

Bring your used bulbs to Home Depot, which has a special recycling program for compact fluorescent bulbs. Many True Value and neighborhood hardware stores also offer recycling programs for spiral bulbs.

 

[Bill_Cherry]

ehow.com/how_4968125_dispose-spiral-fluorescent-light-bulbs.html

from this site:

:thumbsup:Thanks 4elise!!
Now for the dilemma over the mercury content…

 

[Bill_Cherry]

New information from everybody’s favorite…NPR!!!

npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=112288478

"Scientists are surprised to discover that a gas produced mainly in agriculture is doing more to damage the Earth’s ozone layer than synthetic chemicals such as chlorofluorocarbons.

The culprit is a gas called nitrous oxide, known in your dentist’s office as laughing gas. But in the stratosphere, it’s no laughing matter."

“I think that limiting nitrous oxide is going to be more difficult than, for example, limiting carbon dioxide emissions. And we know how difficult that is,” she says.

That’s because we need nitrogen — it’s an essential part of protein. Carbon dioxide comes mostly from smokestacks and tailpipes.

“You can get your energy from other sources than carbon, but you really can’t get your food from sources other than nitrogen.”

man… what’s next?

 

[Contarini]

realchoicespcc.org/abortion.html

“Why are abortions performed?
Women choose abortion for many reasons, but the most common reasons reported are relational problems with the father of the child, worry about responsibility, fear of financial liability, concern about lifestyle changes, and fear of others discovering sexual activity.”

Anything that effects abortion must be countered

On your list was also “fear of others discovering sexual activity.” If we all established the great moral principle that All Sex Is OK, then we’d eliminate one cause of abortions, right?

You just can’t follow this logic consistently because it leads to absurd conclusions like this. You can’t eliminate all the reasons people give for having abortions, and your posts don’t indicate that you are seriously interested in trying.

Edwin