The Earth Summit/USA/ a 'Christian' Democracy?

by Celtic 27 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Celtic

  Has anyone been following events at the 2002 Earth Summit on Sustainable Development?

  Question.

  If, just supposing that the United States of America was totally true to it's collective overall 'spirituality', would it be able as a country, to live up to the dictates of the country's own conscience, in acting out truthfully in accordance with what God Himself expects of them to provide, to the best of their abilities, i.e. really trying to DO something about it all, rather than, side lining, procrastinating the big issues, whilst at the same time, being the largest consumeristic polluters of natural resources on the planet?

  OR are they as a country proving false to their power and responsibility and ultimately their own so called faith in their God of justice?

  Would you yourself, be prepared to take a 'drop' and/or adjustment in your living standards if such a mechanism could be proved true towards alleviating world poverty?

  Mark Price - Community Action Network UK

  http://www.can-online.org.uk [email protected]
• 

  Fe2O3Girl

  Good Point Mark!!

  Yes, I would be prepared to accept a drop in standard of living, but I am not a multimillionaire President with a huge interest in preserving the US oil and gas industry.
• 

  expatbrit

  Let's all starve together? No thanks.

  Surely it is better to improve the standard of living of the world's poor than to erode the standard of living of the world's "rich."

  Environmental responsibility is not just contingent upon wealth, but upon willingness. As consumers' standards of living improve, they gain more time and knowledge and become more aware of environmental issues, so they put pressure upon corporations to improve their products environmentally. It is the large corporations that have the resources and finances to conduct research that makes products more environmentally friendly (the auto industry is a good example).

  Reducing the standard of living will reduce the "luxury" of having the time to worry about the environment. Not a good thing.

  Expatbrit

  Edited by - expatbrit on 4 September 2002 9:32:7
• 

  MegaDude

  I find it slightly amusing that the person who posted this infers the United States procrastinates on "the big issues" while he himself is a self-admitted procrastinator.

  Perhaps Mark should start with himself first in solving the world's problems. Instead of pointing the finger, he could get off his lazy arse and quit living off public assistance. He could try to get organized with his own life, even though he admits it's a mess. Perhaps he could save what's left of his mind by not taking hard recreational drugs that he brags about taking and enjoying. Oh, wait. That would take self-discipline and personal sacrifice on HIS part. Guess we should forget about it then.

  Mark, if you lean over sideways far enough, your empty head will slide right out of your ass. Start with yourself first. Then ask others to join you in changing things for the better. Otherwise, you come off sounding like a nutter AND a hypocrit.
• 

  minimus

  MEGA DUDE, are you trying to say that Mark should stick to fluff questions?
• 

  MegaDude

  I think Mark is caught up in a delusional fantasy where the United States is the Evil Empire of the world. Of course people like that always point a blaming finger at someone or something else. If a person is motivated to do something good for the world, they should start with themselves first. I find it laughable that a person would call on millions of people to reduce their standard of living, and at the same time are completely unmotivated or are undisciplined to better themselves. But, hey, perhaps it's fun for him to pretend to be really doing something about it. Pass the cocaine, Celtic. Lol.
• 

  Dizzy Cat

  Blimey, bet Celtic didn't bank on that response.

  I have to agree partially with everybody here, including Celtic. It is unfortunate that the USA will not join in the fun at the summit and contribute to a cleaner, safer, environment. I believe it is because of your presidents domestic policy to lend heavy assistance towards industry?

  I do find it sad that the "world leader" will not back down in this area and help out.

  But ..... Megadude, you are right, it does start at home as well! In the UK, we are hardly pure and beyond reproach in this area. Most people will not accept an alternate lifestyle if it means a drop in their standard of living. Myself, partially included. I recycle what I can, but am lazy in this area. I try to consume fairly (being a vegetarian helps as I am a fussy eater/consumer in general). Saying this though, I also like gadgets - computers / hi-fi equip' / consoles etc. So in my own way I support industry by my hobbies and interests.

  It is hard not to be a hypocrite, but I believe in a small way that I do try.

  Did you know, that across Europe the UK is known as "the dirty man" ..... nice eh! But if you visit some of our cities, you'll know why. There is a lack of respect and a lack of culture in England especially and this translates into the way we treat our cities. It has got better slightly where I live, but I still sense the air of selfishness that works against sound environmental policy.

  Ahhh - its a huge problem and one that will not go away easily. We really would all need to pull together, but I can't see it happening.
• 

  Satanus

  I think xpat has a point. The current 'war on terrorism', much as i don't like aspects of it, is going to result in the modernisation and a raising of the standard of living for some of the most backward parts of the world. Course that improvment change can be dinigrated by labeling it as the spreading of capitalism. Oh well.

  As well, it was the US that started china on the road to industrialisation. From what i could find, roosevelt was the first to recognise the potential of china. Nixon/kissenger were the next agents who were pivotal in opening china's door. So, all along it has been the US that has been building china. As china develops into a super power, it will affect all its nieghbors w good, and also some bad. And so, rather than reducing american prosperity, the methods for achieving prosperity are being spread to other parts of the globe.

  As far as reducing consumption in the us/canada, the guilt that is purveyed through the media is causing a spontaneous conscioussness of the environment and it's resources in a growing number of people, especially among the better educated, better off segments of society. Paganism/spirituality works that way as well.

  SS
• 

  Xander

  Paganism/spirituality works that way as well

  An interesting argument has been made in regards to this. IE: Why pagans are so much more earth-friendly as a rule than christians. The general reasoning goes that as part of pagan beliefs is the core teaching that we are, essentially, no better than any other animal or thing, so we must do our best to live in harmony with nature.

  The core of christian teaching, on the other hand, is that man is superior to everything else on earth - being made in the image of the all-powerful divine being and having said all-powerful beings son sacrifice his life on behalf of man alone.

  Obviously, nothing in either belief strictly says you must recycle, or must pollute, or whatever - but you can easily see how the thought process of people can be affected by their religion.

  being the largest consumeristic polluters of natural resources on the planet

  An interesting argument some (luddites) make is that the planet would be better off if humanity just stopped technological progress and industry.

  Realize, of course, that ultimately, no matter HOW clean we become. No matter HOW WELL we treat our environment - the Earth WILL be utterly destroyed when the sun novas. Or, the Earth may again be rendered uninhabitable by an asteroid hit before then (as it has several times in its past).

  So, while I believe STRONGLY in living in harmony with the planet and preserving nature WHENEVER POSSIBLE - this MUST take a back seat to technological progress.

  Else, what's the point? No amount of strict conservationism will save humanity as a species in the long run, only technology and industry can.
• 

  Satanus

  It was the US that brought western europe on it's way to prosperity after the war, through the marshal plan. It was a US general who kept the the japs out of australia. Australians were going to draw a line on their continent, stopping the japanese there. A US general had the audacity to suggest that they keep them out altogether.

  While there is much to criticise about the us, that is generally what happens when people are covering new ground, or, as captain kirk said, going bravely, where no man has gone before.

  SS