I really don't understand how she can call herself a conservationist and an environmentalist and then vote people into office who do such horrible things to the environment. I would be conflicted about this. I suppose that to her, "fiscal responsibility" and "personal responsibility" are more important to her than making laws that protect the environment. Everyone has their priorities, and I can't expect everyone's priorities to be the same as mine. But that seems conflicting to me. She seems to think that deregulating the systems that manage our country and giving people "freedom" to do what they want will make the country a better place. In the environmental world, we have clearly seen that when men are left to their own devices they do not choose to take care of the environment. Corporations make decisions about money, not help the environment. We need laws that make it financially beneficial to make environmentally friendly decisions, and laws that keep companies and government from exploiting the land.
I also thought that it was interesting that she thinks that the government should rule with religion. She talks so much about the constitution and "freedom," but with a Christian government, would non-Christians living in this country be "free?" Isn't that what the founding fathers were fleeing from in Europe when they came here in the first place? I can't imagine that she's thought through the possible outcomes of a religious state from anyone's perspective other than her own. I wish we'd had more time to talk about that.
And thanks, Paul, for showing the "Cap & Trade" video in class - I'd heard criticism of the Cap & Trade briefly, but the movie outlined things from a great angle! I thought it was a great video. It made me want to read more about Cap & Trade in Europe.
1 comment:
I understand the concern about having less government involvement with respect to pretty much anything. While community activism is extremely important and even necessary to promote the well-being of citizens within a country, governments are still required to regulate what community groups tell it they want. you are definitely right, historical actions do not speak well for less government involvement in promoting healthy environments and work conditions. let's keep working with community groups like this, but not waver in our understanding that governments need to be present and active in enforcing what we tell them to do.
Post a Comment