SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
In a recent interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network, Scott Pruitt, EPA Chief, said that the Bible tells people to use all the resources available to us, including fossil fuels:
"The biblical world view with respect to these issues is that we have a responsibility to manage and cultivate, harvest the natural resources that we've been blessed with to truly bless our fellow mankind".
According to Vox: "But as far as his biblical assertion goes, Pruitt's words reflect a wider trend among American evangelicals, who largely have not embraced scientific thought on environmentalism or global warming."
The Trump administration has used a variety of excuses to legitimize its record-setting rollbacks on environmental protections: calling global warming a hoax, or arguing that the economic consequences of increased regulation would outweigh their benefit.
The latest justification? The Bible.
In an interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network, a media outlet that also seems to double as a propaganda arm of the Trump administration, Environmental Protection Agency chief Scott Pruitt said his Christian convictions led him to conclude that America should use gas and coal freely because natural resources exist purely for man's benefit.
[...] That's why evangelical groups have, therefore, been historically resistant to environmentalist causes. Creationist lobbying groups frequently fund initiatives like the Louisiana Science Education Act, which mandates a "balanced" (and climate change-denying) approach to teaching environmental issues in public schools.
Please read the linked article as it explains the connection between contempt for science and protecting the environment and the beliefs of evangelicals.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday February 26 2018, @06:38PM (2 children)
Does make you wonder how many left-wings are actually right-wings in disguise. Racism seems very common across what we think of as the political spectrum.
It might not be the best idea ever to delegate the definition of racism to Richard Spencer.
Woosh. Even I saw that one.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 26 2018, @10:10PM (1 child)
1. You're a moron trying to equate movements for racial justice with racism. Yes there are a ridiculously small number of liberals who have embraced hatred but that is not the same as racism and is statistically insignificant anyway. Sorry bub, false equivalence for the looooose.
2. No one delegated you're just being stupid again.
3. So it was in jest? You mean the whole "And if..." was pointless? Failed reading comprehension for the looooose!
Khallow everybody! Don't forget to pick up your crosses and gasoline on the way out!
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday February 27 2018, @02:09AM
What does "racial justice" mean? For example, the ACLU says [aclunc.org]:
I have no problem with that. But when people assume that you're enjoying "privilege" merely because you're part of a particular ethic group, demand reparations from people of particular ethnicities for wicked deeds that were committed by long dead people, or simply excising a double standard and excuse some racism based on the ethnicity of the believer, they aren't engaging in racial justice. All those behaviors are often exhibited on the left-leaning side (in particular, concepts like "check your privilege", "microaggressions", and the myth of the helpless disadvantaged).
Yes.