The Environment: Taken for Granted

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholicvegan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Catholicvegan

Guest
I know most of the people here are conservatives, so I wonder, do you believe in the destroying the environment? Personally, I think that we out to treasure God’s green Earth, and remember that your house was probably built from trees, and that you drink water and breathe air (preferably clean water and clean air). So, I was wondering what you all thought.
 
We need to be good stewards of the earth God gave us.

No doubt about that. AND…

The quality of the water and the air today is better than it was a century ago. Environmental activists can certainly take credit for this. AND…

The doomsdayers have to get a grip on reality.

We need to protect the HUMANS just a little bit more than the NON-HUMANS, ok???

Putting people out of work, destroying whole industries, or devaluing or annexing people’s property, all in the name of “saving the environment” is not quite right.

There has to be some common ground here.
 
Dear jlw,

Although you might think (by my name her, “Catholicvegan”) that I’m a pierced, hair-dyed, tree-hugging hippie, I assure you, I’m not. I do think that there is common ground where we are, but I think that Bush has only hurt the environment, and that hasn’t helped the economy. Clinton protected the environment plenty, and presided over a huge budget surplus.
 
As a conservative I feel we should conserve what God created.
 
I am glad to hear that, Tom. But although you might think that Bush has more important worries right now, surely you think that Bush could do at least a little more for the environment?
 
40.png
Catholicvegan:
Dear jlw,

Although you might think (by my name her, “Catholicvegan”) that I’m a pierced, hair-dyed, tree-hugging hippie, I assure you, I’m not. I do think that there is common ground where we are, but I think that Bush has only hurt the environment, and that hasn’t helped the economy. Clinton protected the environment plenty, and presided over a huge budget surplus.
Ok. I made no assuptions as to your appearance, etc. Only commenting on the subject as a whole.

Ok. In regards to King Clinton (He ALONE shoud take credit for the 90’s?) Please, step by step, please tell me HOW this is true.
 
The environment will, hopefully, continue to improve. No, Bush is not destroying it just as Clinton can’t take all the credit for the improvements made during his term since most of the efforts were started before he was elected.

If you want to bash Bush and praise Clinton, please start a thread with a meaningful name. Don’t call it conservation in an attempt to hide what it really is!!! 😦
 
40.png
Catholicvegan:
but I think that Bush has only hurt the environment, and that hasn’t helped the economy. Clinton protected the environment plenty, and presided over a huge budget surplus.
I have to kind of agree with you, Catholicvegan. President Bush has not been kind to the environment, in general. He has a different emphasis - jobs and business. Some of his ideas sound good at first, like the Healthy Forest Initiative, but in practice they may not be so beneficial - cutting red tape so trees can be cut down means less analysis about where the trees will be cut, which trees, and who can cut them. In other words, timber companies stand to win, and hopefully those whose houses won’t burn down in a forest fire. But, it’s a potential loss of habitat and ecosystem imbalance for the environment.
 
I’m always puzzled about the complaints regarding Bush and the environment. I hear/read a lot of rhetoric but have seen zero facts presented to back up these complaints.
 
I think the environment is very important, but i think as much as people like to whine and complain, i dont see a whole lot of people who care enough to actually do something, like supporting alternative energies, or by driving electric cars, and using biodegradable materials and what not. I think if these environmentalists want to be taken seriously they need to put their money where their mouth is. the world is addicted to its luxuries, and thus i dont think any thing major will happen to spur our addiction to fossil fuels, the most major pollutants.

but at the rate technology is advancing we have a lot to hope for.
 
40.png
delorean_boy:
I think the environment is very important, but i think as much as people like to whine and complain, i dont see a whole lot of people who care enough to actually do something, like supporting alternative energies, or by driving electric cars, and using biodegradable materials and what not. I think if these environmentalists want to be taken seriously they need to put their money where their mouth is. the world is addicted to its luxuries, and thus i dont think any thing major will happen to spur our addiction to fossil fuels, the most major pollutants.

but at the rate technology is advancing we have a lot to hope for.
One of the two main reasons I think enviroment has gone low on the priority lists of many is that it has become associated with so many wackos and extremists rather than thoughtful and common sense plans. They have a real “perception” problem.

The other is that much of it is disconnected in implementation. We have some who save paper, but you have to strong enough to bind it, tie it up and make a special trip to get it dropped off.

If you are trying to dispose of a computer, one time, I had made 19 calls in two days, city, county and state - couldn’t get anyplace to go.

I think a thoughtful, prudent common sense approach dropping all the extremists as spokespersons and “monitors” with a successful plan to find a way to implement much of it would help.

A certain amount of environmental change is required for man to live; those who want to claim land rights for a snail darter instead of relocating the snaildarters is one example; we also need to understand that over a period of years, certain species do disappear, it’s been so since time began. Extremism in this cause has done what it always does, made normal people lose a lot of interest.

We’ve also got to recognize improvements to the environment; I recall years ago, one mining company having finished with the mind, filled all the driling spaces with water, provided a natural filtration system and stocked it with fish. It became a lovely recreational area for the surrounding residents. We need to thin forest to prevent desructive forest fires, not too long ago the state where I live suffered devasting fire damages because environmentaists had not allowed for proper forest maintenance. UIntroducing wolves back into an ewnvironment fre of them for years where sheep grazers live. Much of it is non-sense.It’s stuff like this that makes people roll their eyes when the subject comes up.
 
The environment is a rather important issue, but it is not a non-negotiable issue. 😉
 
40.png
Catholicvegan:
Dear jlw,

Although you might think (by my name her, “Catholicvegan”) that I’m a pierced, hair-dyed, tree-hugging hippie, I assure you, I’m not. I do think that there is common ground where we are, but I think that Bush has only hurt the environment, and that hasn’t helped the economy. Clinton protected the environment plenty, and presided over a huge budget surplus.
 
I was to through with Clinton when he made sure partialbirth abortion remained legal,I guess it was good he took environmental issues seriously, but then again so did Charles Manson.I don’t think anyone here wants to ignore the environment, but given the"choice" we had this election we chose to vote for the issues that reflects Gods intentions and rules. You have to look at the candidate more in line with Gods law.Every major society that has been destroyed was destoyed from within.God Bless
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top