Environment: Difference between revisions
Fractalguy (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Fractalguy (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[File:Environment-jungle-forest-montains-trees-oceans-savannah-swamp-desert.jpg|thumb|You can either have idyllic forest scenes or 50 billion people driving SUVs, not both.]] | |||
Protecting the environment is good. | Protecting the environment is good. | ||
Latest revision as of 10:32, 27 January 2024
Protecting the environment is good.
So is creating a psychological environment where your incentives encourage your life choices and direct your "willpower" towards your goals. But that's not the usage being discussed on this page.
Overpopulation is bad, but not in a racist way.
Nature is good.
Sustainability and Renewable Energy are good.
The fact that any of this is up for debate is worrisome. The only way this is going to change is through a fundamental shift in core beliefs and the generating equation that leads to belief in dominion over the environment.
Since most progressives are on board with this, here are some videos that explain why this important to those that need to hear it. It is important for secular people to familiarize themselves with the scripture that supports environmental stewardship if they want to sway the people who most need to be persuaded.