Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Environmentalism versus Christianity

Rate this topic


Galileo Blogs
 Share

Recommended Posts

(This topic was split from the "Environmentalism versus Christianity: Which do you think is the greater threat?" debate proposal.)

I don't qualify, because I only have 79 forum posts, but I will gladly watch this debate from the sidelines. I am looking for some good quotes from Scripture from Mister Swig to defend his viewpoint!

Edited by GreedyCapitalist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think they're both very dangerous, and I am more fearful of environmentalism in many ways, but I don't think I could debate the point as I think when it comes right down to it, Christianity might be worse. I will be glad to see this debate, though, to clear my own thoughts up on the matter if nothing else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of my favorite authors, Vladimir Bukovsky, was a Russian dissident. He spent 12 years in a variety of Soviet gulag prisons and psychiatric hospitals. The latter was not to treat any sort of mental illness; he had none. It was solely to torture him and other dissidents.

He called World War II [quoting from memory] " the great war to determine the color of our concentration camps, red or brown." His point was that it made very little difference to slave-citizens such as himself which ideology won; their concentration camps were the same.

That is my perspective on this debate. I don't want to imply there isn't an answer. I don't know what the answer is, but whether the concentration camps are green (environmentalism) or red (the blood of Christ), life on earth would still be hell. Both ideologies are evil.

***

A disturbing trend is the union of these two philosophies. Remember the silly campaign of last year, "What kind of car would Jesus drive?" Of course, the only thing Jesus rode was an ass (donkey). Still, the campaign induced environmentalist guilt in all those Jesus-freaks driving their SUVs with "Praise Jesus" bumper stickers on their rear ends. Asses... hmm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no way! socialism poses a real threat today. unlike relligion - which although was around for thousands of years - did nothing to endanger America, because of the seperation of church and state. Environmentalism, and Socialism are NOT seperate from state, unfortunately!

The external threat of hostile soviet states is ultimately caused by America's internal socialist movement supporting these states. The threat from both socialism and from religion is entirely internal. Moreover, there is a dominant and growing infusion of religion into government and government programs. So, what threat did socialism pose to America that religion does not?

Edited by y_feldblum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A disturbing trend is the union of these two philosophies.(environmentalism and religious fundamentalism)

Eventually someone equally as diabolical as Karl Rove will launch a campaign about how pumping harmful effluents into the atmosphere induces homosexuality amongst God's creatures and urges expansive government action as a remedy. This could very well create a political fusion of christian fundamentalism, altruism, socialism and extreme environmentalism. If this hypothetical party of amalgamated evil also touted massive tax cuts (but paid for everything with unprecedented deficit spending) it could win the majority of both Democratic and Republican constituencies.

Edited by DarkWaters
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In all seriousness, I bet Karl Rove is figuring out how to "play" the environmentalism angle. That man defines pragmatism. We got an early taste of it in the Bush administration when he persuaded Bush to enact tariffs on steel imports. Then we got the big whammy with the prescription drug program. If Bush were up for re-election again, he would have him do an "Arnold" and come out big-time in favor of restrictions on greenhouse gases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like nobody wants to debate you, but I would be curious as to why you think Christianity is such a great threat, especially in light of the recent election results and the fact that none of the Presidential candidates we have so far are primarily known for their Christianity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm worried that enviros can seem reasonably concerned with man's life on earth. When they say we should preserve. for example, some forest or jungle, because of potential discoveries of new drugs, they even make a good point. Not good enough, as we all know that an actual fact, such as a city or an industrial park, provides mroe value than any optential facts (or a bird in hand is worth two in the bush).

My great comfrot is that these same enviros later are against using the Pacific Yew tree as a source of chemotherapy drugs. Therefore most sensible people of mixed premises begin to suspect their motives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

none of the Presidential candidates we have so far are primarily known for their Christianity.

The defining tribute of Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney being touted in the news is that he is Mormon.

Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee has been a Baptist pastor for over ten years.

Senator Sam Brownback is very open about his deep christian beliefs.

All three are among the top five "serious" candidates for the Republican nomination.

Senators Barak Obama and John McCain are not primarily known for their Christianity but they each seem to be influenced by their faith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The defining tribute of Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney being touted in the news is that he is Mormon.

Hehe, if that's the best argument the Christianity side is going to come up with, we don't really have a contest. But I'm waiting with curiosity for Mr. Swing's response...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hehe, if that's the best argument the Christianity side is going to come up with, we don't really have a contest.

I suspect that Republicans against Mitt Romney will constantly remind all voters that he is a Mormon. This will make the voting block who primarily vote on their Protestant beliefs extremely uncomfortable because of his subtly different religious views. Furthermore, it will confuse some of the more inept (i.e. many) voters who will inevitably conflate the scandals presently in the Mormon Church with Mitt Romney's integrity. Unfortunately, I fear that this will work very effectively. Similarly, Rudy Giuliani will probably not get the nomination because there are pictures of him dressed like a woman on the internet.

Officially, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon Church) disavowed polygamy at the end of the 19th century.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A disturbing trend is the union of these two philosophies. Remember the silly campaign of last year, "What kind of car would Jesus drive?" Of course, the only thing Jesus rode was an ass (donkey). Still, the campaign induced environmentalist guilt in all those Jesus-freaks driving their SUVs with "Praise Jesus" bumper stickers on their rear ends. Asses... hmm.

The irony.

As an example this caller to Medved's show Friday (in a segment with Chris Horner, author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming) had this to say about global warming:

Yeah, I believe in what the scientists are saying [that global warming is man-made]because it goes hand in hand with what the bible says about people ruining the earth. And the way people are living today; they are polluting the earth. And also the bizarre weather we're having; the extreme tornadoes and snow we're having in California. And I don't trust mankind.

emphasis mine.

Actually envirnmentalism fits nicely with the whole concept that this earth is not ours to do with as we see fit. That we are only "custodians" of it. And the place this sort of thinking is the strongest is in the midst of today's mainstream (not radical) Christianity.

Mister Swig, I'd debate you, but I don't think I can do justice to the claim that environmentalism is the greatest threat. I have a tough time arguing the opposite of the view I see as true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't that some traditional NYC event all mayors have taken part in for some decades?

Of course not. There are no photographs of current New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg or former Mayor Ed Koch dressed like drag queens on the internet. Rudy Giuliani did so to raise disaster relief funds in October of 2001 and again when he appeared on Saturday Night Live.

Even if this was part of some bizarre New York City mayoral tradition, it probably would not matter. Commercials that show photographs of Rudy Giuliani wearing different gaudy drag queen outfits with a matter-of-fact voice over about how he has the most liberal social views of any potential Republican presidential candidate in history will rally many socially conservative registered Republicans against him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I second Moose's point and, a fortiori, the religious right is dying down of late (Note: It's My Party Too; failed attempts at banning gay marriage, stem-cell research, and abortion; the socially liberal Arnold in Cali; the razor-thin victory for Santorum [a devastation for a two-term incumbent]; the lack of religiosity in debates right now; the fact that the most religious candidate, Romney, is behind just about everybody in both general and primary election polls; etc.). Moreover, with key swing-states like Florida, et. al., moving their primary elections to an earlier date, and the fact that Giuliani seems to have more money backing him, it looks like a fairly straight path for Rudy.

Back to the central topic, though, I remember reading that a significantly higher percent of religious people in America and around the world support socialist institutions than the percent of non-religious people. Socialism (and environmentalism) is the product of a corrupt philosophy, and religion is a popular corrupt philosophy. I say religion is root problem in the world today, though socialism perhaps the more immediately threatening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Primaries do not tend to be mudslinging contests. As much as McCain may want to win, I don't think he will stoop to bashing the character of a fellow Republican.

It sounded like the push polls conducted at the 2000 South Carolina primary were pretty ugly. The recent trend in politics unfortunately seems to be more calumniations and diatribes as opposed to constructively presenting agenda.

I most certainly do not think that John McCain's campaign will deign to running such ridiculous attacks. Instead, I suspect that they will come from some 527 supporting Sam Brownback or Mike Huckabee.

At present, I still think that it will be front page news if there are not commercials against Rudy Giuliani that lambaste him for his liberal views and insinuate that he is more liberal than Hillary Clinton during the Republican primary. I could be wrong though.

the religious right is dying down of late
They have suffered some defeats, but most of the major Republican nominees, such as John McCain and Mitt Romney, are still reconfiguring themselves to please religious social conservatives. They would not do this if the religious right was still not of notable significance.

Furthermore, there are still numerous far-right social conservatives in the Senate (e.g. Sam Brownback, Tom Coburn, Mel Martinez, etc.) and two influential far-right religious conservatives among the five serious candidates for the Republican nomination (i.e. Mike Huckabee and Sam Brownback) among the many other religious figures in the government. I recommend that you do not dismiss the religious right as too anemic for our concerns.

the fact that the most religious candidate, Romney, is behind just about everybody in both general and primary election polls
The present governor of Massachusetts is certainly not the most dangerous of the viable Republican candidates. By dangerous, I mean capable of injecting additional detrimental religious influence into the government.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They have suffered some defeats, but most of the major Republican nominees, such as John McCain and Mitt Romney, are still reconfiguring themselves to please religious social conservatives. They would not do this if the religious right was still not of notable significance.

Furthermore, there are still numerous far-right social conservatives in the Senate (e.g. Sam Brownback, Tom Coburn, Mel Martinez, etc.) and two influential far-right religious conservatives among the five serious candidates for the Republican nomination (i.e. Mike Huckabee and Sam Brownback) among the many other religious figures in the government. I recommend that you do not dismiss the religious right as too anemic for our concerns.

The present governor of Massachusetts is certainly not the most dangerous of the viable Republican candidates. By dangerous, I mean capable of injecting additional detrimental religious influence into the government.

Certainly, the Republicans are going to try to garner a few religious votes by throwing crumbs. Why not? It's not a compromise of principles and it may garner a few percentage points. But what I find deafening is the relative silence over religious issues right now. True enough, some states elect extreme conservative representatives, but those are--Martinez excluded--representatives of states which can largely be ignored. And Florida being a swing-state and voting early, it has a very good chance of nominating Rudy. I would hardly call Huckabee or Brownback to be serious candidates--hell, I would hardly call them half-serious candidates. They're just going to sop up the hard-lining religious votes that are still floating around, and leave the majority of the primary elections between the relatively secular McCain and Giuliani. To quote The Clash, Rudie can't fail.

I didn't say Romney was the most dangerous anything--I was talking about the initial topic of environmentalism (and socialism) versus religion. But I do consider any pro-life candidate flatly unacceptable and a threat to American liberty, period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would hardly call Huckabee or Brownback to be serious candidates--hell, I would hardly call them half-serious candidates. They're just going to sop up the hard-lining religious votes that are still floating around, and leave the majority of the primary elections between the relatively secular McCain and Giuliani. To quote The Clash, Rudie can't fail.

Anyway, I hope that you are right about Rudy Giuliani as he seems to be the best that the Republicans can do right now. I think that Sam Brownback is too far right to win the nomination. I still perceive that Mike Huckabee has a good chance to make a strong run as a dark horse candidate, but this is just speculation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

On June 12, 2007, Dr. Peikoff posted an answer to the question of if the "global warming" movement could be a greater threat than Islamic Fundamentalism.

Dr. Peikoff offered a resounding no. Essentially, he argues that the global warming alarmists offer no solution to the problems. Instead, they encourage more sacrifice to nature, lower standards of living and more government control over industry while offering no guarantee that these measures will be effective. On the other hand, religion in general offers a system of ethics that is of supposed divine origin and a promise to live forever in eternal bliss in another existence. He sees no contest as to which idea will recruit more followers.

I think he is dead on. At present, religion is a much greater threat than environmentalism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...