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: 3, Interesting) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Monday February 26 2018, @02:15PM (7 children)
So how long is it before these nutjobs realise that the very book they are quoting actually contradicts them, and they decide it's time to re-write the bible?
In fact, they wouldn't even need to do any writing. A quick google image search for "Republican Jesus" with the irony filter switched off would probably provide an entire Holy Book's worth of text.
(Score: 3, Funny) by Gaaark on Monday February 26 2018, @05:03PM (1 child)
I thought they DID re-write the bible: they called it "Gilligan's Island".... but they found it didn't make anymore sense than the bible does.
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 27 2018, @03:52AM
But the bible doesn't have Tina Louise [wikipedia.org] in tight clothes, or that incredibly hot sexpot Natalie Schafer [wikipedia.org]. Yum!
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday February 26 2018, @07:01PM (2 children)
Phyllis Schlafely's gay son who created Conservapedia (because facts on Wikipedia are too liberal biased) proposed rewriting the Bible to be more right leaning. I deliberately put no links here no not be accused of biased links.
Why is it that when I hold a stick, everyone begins to look like a pinata?
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday February 26 2018, @07:05PM (1 child)
I would add that it should be amazing for someone claiming to be a Christian to propose rewriting the Bible given the warning in Rev 22:18-19 [biblegateway.com].
Why is it that when I hold a stick, everyone begins to look like a pinata?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday February 27 2018, @01:49AM
well i think that a gay man that is religious who isn't a priest is already being punished in todays conservative society. he may as well start churning out copies of his ideas.
(Score: 1) by nitehawk214 on Monday February 26 2018, @07:43PM
Careful what you ask for... that rewrite will just codify all the things that jingoistic evangelicals already believe.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 26 2018, @09:26PM
Any form of realization would require at least one brain cell. Add to that that the first rule of imaginary sky penis is not to question imaginary sky penis, and can't really change much.
But they don't have to change the book. They will try to change the context (as mentioned in some of the other comments). Haven't you noticed how much Trump tries to change context? Fake news, locker room talk, etc.