Once she wrested control of the Senate’s Environmental and Public Works Committee from conservative stalwart Sen. Jim Inhofe (R.-Okla.), Sen. Barbara Boxer (D.-Calif.) was expected to aggressively pursue legislation to combat global warming. What wasn’t expected was that she would do it with blessings from the Church.
Last Thursday, Boxer held a hearing that highlighted the growing role of religion in liberal political campaigns—particularly in the name of “environmental justice.” There, a coalition of 35 religious denominations called for an 80 percent reduction in global warming emissions by the year 2050, and bill S.309, sponsored by Boxer and avowed socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders (I.-Vt.), calls for the same.
“Evangelical Christians, Catholics, African Methodist Episcopals, Jews, mainline Protestant Christians, and many other people of faith see the need for action on global warming as a moral, ethical and scriptural mandate,” Boxer said.
She explained, “People of faith contacted us recognizing that science says global warming’s effects will fall most heavily on poor people. All we have to do is look at what happened during [Hurricane] Katrina, even in one of the world’s wealthiest countries.”
The left has been persistently AWOL for years, even decades, concerning "matters of faith" and "people of faith", preferring, instead to avoid joining religion and politics. In fact, much of their base is purely secular, condescendingly dismissive of both faith and religion and absolutely opposed to the point of ridicule of any attempt to include things religious in policy discussions.
So what is one to make of things such as that above? The bluntly obvious thing is to call it what it is, pure political exploitation of a group who is presently useful in an area where Democrats understand a stiff fight looms ahead. And their secular base? Where are they going to go? In terms of pure political calculation, this is a no-brainer.
The secular base is as intensely interested in seeing big government take action on this issue as anyone. So, just as feminists were largely silent about Bill Clinton's decidedly anti-feminist activities because he was, on the whole, useful to them, secular leftists are mostly silent about this attempt to make climate change a "faith based" policy initiative.
But my goodness, when you hear Howard Dean explaining why people do and don't want to go to church, it certainly should give you pause:
His critique follows remarks Democrat National Committee Chairman Howard Dean made at a May 2007 fundraiser in San Francisco: “People don’t want to go to church anymore ... and come out feeling bad because they know someone who is gay. People want to go to church because they know what they can do about poverty, about Darfur, about the environment.”
The question is how long this attempt at exploitation will succeed and whether those being exploited will realize it before they become a part of something, at least in the short-term, that they will eventually regret. We'll see. But it is interesting to note this newfound public expression of faith and the welcoming of it in policy discussions like Darfur and the environment, isn't it? My guess is they wouldn't be quite as welcome in other discussions, like, say, education, would they?
"People of faith contacted us recognizing that science says global warming’s effects will fall most heavily on poor people
So lets build up the industrial institutions of the third world, including power plants, sewers & water treatment, hospitals, roads & bridges, industrial farming technology, suburban homes with solid foundations ect..., and lets maintain this infrastrcuture by bolstering the economic growth of these countries so the people will have high paying jobs and not live in squalor.
Oh, wait. Doing this will result in huge amounts of carbon emissions. Oh well, I guess the poor people will just have to stay poor then. At least they will only have to continue sufferring indefinitely the same way they suffer now.
Oh, wait. Doing this will result in huge amounts of carbon emissions. Oh well, I guess the poor people will just have to stay poor then
As our Blessed Lord and Savior said, "The poor you always have with you”....It’s a pity that they have to remain poor, but we must be the stewards of the Earth and let them remain impoverished, destitute, ill and desperate, because it’s the only CHRISTIAN thing to do.
I guess now that Jerry Falwell is out of the picture, religious involvement in politics is acceptable. Perhaps all those religious folks, thinking the formerly sacrosanct Wall of Separation Between Churh and State is now superfluous, told Sen. Boxer "Senator Boxer, tear down this wall!".
This is Gude Religion versus BadReligion. Gudereligion believes in voting for "D"’s, Badreligion votes "R". Gudereligion worries about Global Warming, badreligion worries about murdered babies. This is all very simple to understand, I am surprised at your inability to distinguish between the two things.
Their intellectual forebears opined that religion is the opiate of the people. I guess the current crop of Dems realize that they need, if not an opiate, at least a date-rape drug for the masses if they are going to get away with all that they want to do in the name of global warming.
Nice site furnished apartment rochestersex moviesanimal gay sex [URL=http://saint.ez-sites.ws/porn.html]digimon porn[/URL][URL=http://saint.ez-sites.ws/bdsm.html]punished[/URL][URL=http://saint.ez-sites.ws/mature-swingers.html]ics[/URL][URL=http://saint.ez-sites.ws/cards.html]best business card design[/URL]