Mob Polluters FUDing to Make Big Profits

Mob Polluters who control 25 governments and attorney generals across the United States are attempting to block EPA regulations to limit mercury and other dangerous toxins from power plants. 

25 states urge court to make EPA delay power plant rule

By Timothy Gardnery
Reuters reports Oct. 10, 2011

"The EPA, which is undertaking its most ambitious air pollution regulations in years under Administrator Lisa Jackson, has faced a barrage of criticism from Republicans in the House of Representatives and industry which say the rules will kill jobs and cost companies billions of dollars at the worst possible time."

This is right out of the propoganda playbook:

Fear: "kill jobs and cost businesses billions"
Uncertainty: "worst possible time"
Doubt: Not sure if this EPA pollution regulation plan is right for now.

Hmmm...Republicans don't want any regulations that might jeopardize a businesses profits...I see.  So EPA regulations that would protect people from life-killing pollution isn't as important as protecting a businesses profits?  When is a good time?  Answer: Never - not for Republicans. There will always be an excuse to protect businesses over people. 

It's FUD propaganda.  We are being manipulated.

Read the full story here: Reuters

Mob Oil Reports Record Profits for 3rd Quarter 2011

BP, Chevron, Royal Dutch Shell, ConocoPhillips, & ExxonMobil made combined profits of $101 billion at the start of 2011. Their big profits continue for the 3rd quarter of this year.  And just think, Fortune Financial Analysts had been telling us that BP might "plausibly" go bankrupt after the "nighmare" Gulf of Mexico oil spill in 2010.  Read about record profits here> American Progress

The Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt these companies use to persuade the American people that their dirty energy is the only way to fuel America is also fueling their bank accounts.  Record high oil prices will only enrich these companies, exploit our natural resources and produce pollution that harms our children and warms our planet.  They have the political and public support they need to continue business -as -usual drilling and pollution while continuing to exploit the very people who protect their interests. 

October 27, 2011 Was a Record Tying Heat Day in Texas

MCALLEN INTL AP

HIDALGO

TX

94.0

94.0

2011-10-27

2010-10-27

Source: Record Heat

Global Warming Skepticism: True-Believer Syndrome

If you've read my bio on the front page, then you know that I am a Global Warming Believer.  There is no doubt in my mind that the Earth is warming to the point that our lives are going to become extremely uncomfortable, and that if we don't do something about it soon, our very existence will be in jeopardy. I believe in the validity of the science behind global warming.  There are many prestigious and reputable scientific agencies and research facilities that have helped me come to this conclusion.  The science has been tested with fire, and in every case has come to show that the Earth is warming considerably due to human (anthropogenic) activity.  What baffles me, is how the skeptics never seem to be swayed by the realities of global warming.  No matter how much evidence is shown, tested, or proven - they just won't believe, regardless of the facts. 

While doing some research research yesterday on why people believe weird things, I came upon a syndrome that I believe explains a little better, why people just won't budge from their weird science and ideology.  It's called the true-believer syndrome, and I read about it on the Skeptic Dictionary website.  Before I go any further though, let me say that I don't include politicians (as a whole) in this group of true-believers.  Even though I think that a true-believer could be a politician, I don't think it's all that common, especially in regards to global warming.  Politicians are paid by special interests to enact legislation that supports their beliefs, ideas, science, business, religion etc.  Politicians aren't believers in anything - they just go where the money takes them.  I know all politicians aren't this way, but many of them are, and that's why they waffle on issues and support legislation that, regardless of the evidence, would be harmful to humans and life, but choose to pass it anyway.

So in this group of true-believers, I'm only including people - not politicians.

The following is from The Skeptic's Dictionary:

true-believer syndrome

The need to believe in phony wonders sometimes exceeds not only logic but, seemingly, even sanity. --The Rev. Canon William V. Rauscher

The true-believer syndrome merits study by science. What is it that compels a person, past all reason, to believe the unbelievable. How can an otherwise sane individual become so enamored of a fantasy, an imposture, that even after it's exposed in the bright light of day he still clings to it--indeed, clings to it all the harder? --M. Lamar Keene

True-believer syndrome is an expression coined by M. Lamar Keene to describe an apparent cognitive disorder characterized by believing in the reality of paranormal or supernatural events after one has been presented overwhelming evidence that the event was fraudulently staged. Keene is a reformed phony psychic who exposed religious racketeering—to little effect, apparently. Phony faith healers, psychics, channelers, televangelist miracle workers, etc., are as abundant as ever.

I know that this is specifically talking about the belief in phony faith healers and psychics, but I think this syndrome also fits with Global Warming Skeptics as well.

It is possible that those suffering from true-believer syndrome simply do not believe that the weight of the evidence before them revealing fraud is sufficient to overpower the weight of all those many cases of supportive evidence from the past.

Sounds familiar.  No matter how much that boob Anthony Watts is exposed for being a fraud and publishing trash science on his website, Watts Up With That, people still believe him.  Same applies to the lies put out by Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Michael Savage, and Sean Hannity.  It is proven over and over again that the science is solid on global warming, yet true-believers still hold fast to their heroes.  The article continues...

The fact that the supportive evidence was largely supplied by the same person exposed as a fraud is suppressed. There is always the hope that no matter how many frauds are exposed, at least one of the experiences might have been genuine. No one can prove that all psychic "miracles" have been frauds; therefore, the true believer may well reason that he or she is justified in keeping hope alive. Such thinking is not completely illogical, though it may seem pathological to the one admitting the fraud.

Hmmm...could global warming skeptics be holding out for a true experience?  Maybe they believe that they have found the truth and are holding onto that idea when in fact, it is false?

It does not seem as easy to explain why the true believer continues to believe in, that is, trust the psychic once he has admitted his deception. Trusting someone who reveals he is a liar and a fraud seems irrational, and such a person must appear so to the hoaxer. Some true believers may well be mad, but some may be deceiving themselves by assuming that it is possible that a person can have psychic powers without knowing it. One could disbelieve in one's psychic ability, yet still actually possess paranormal powers. Just as there are people who think they have psychic powers but don't really have any such powers, there may be people who have psychic powers but think they don't.

Yeah, I know, global warming frauds haven't actually come out and said that they are frauds, but they are coming close.  Like the group of senators who recently admitted to anthropogenic global warming, but refuse to do anything about it.  That is an admission of reality for sure...that they refuse to do anything about it, just shows who is paying them for their inaction.

Another type of true-believer is the cult follower.

I think we may have something here...

Devotion to a person... That devotion can be so great that even the most despicable behavior by one's guru can be rationalized. There are many examples of people so devoted to another that they will rationalize or ignore extreme mental and physical abuse by their cult leader (or spouse or boyfriend).

Or radio talk-show host.  Sorry, I had to throw that one in there...

One other type of true believer is described by Eric Hoffer in his book The True Believer. This type of person is irrationally committed to a cause like terrorists attacks on civilians,murdering doctors who perform abortions, or following a guru like Jim Jones even to the point of murder or suicide.

The Republican party is made up of a lot of these kinds of folks who ardently support a religious cause and will cause great harm to others to achieve their goals.  Rush Limbaugh knew what he was doing when he insinuated on his radio show last week that President Obama is a Muslim who has sent troops to Africa to kill Christians.  He's trying to rally this radical base of the Republican party against the President.

One possible explanation for true-believer syndrome is that the belief satisfies an emotional need that is stronger than any other emotional need. Why some people have such a strong emotional need to believe in something that rational people recognize as false is perhaps unanswerable, but it is clear that the kind of beliefs we are discussing here are based on emotions and feelings, not reason and evidence.

That's why a lot of the skeptics arguments against scientists and those who believe in global warming are emotional arguments against them, not arguments against the science.  Like Al Gore flying all over the world in his airplane emitting pollution.  Or saying that the scientists are greedy and need government money to support their research.  Or demonizing the government agencies that also support the science etc. etc. etc. 

Why some people are willing to kill or be killed for beliefs that wouldn't pass muster with most rational folks is even more puzzling. It may have to do with insecurity. Eric Hoffer seemed to think so. He wrote:

The fanatic is perpetually incomplete and insecure. He cannot generate self-assurance out of his individual resources -- out of his rejected self -- but finds it only by clinging passionately to whatever support he happens to embrace. This passionate attachment is the essence of his blind devotion and religiosity, and he sees in it the source of all virtue and strength.... He easily sees himself as the supporter and defender of the holy cause to which he clings. And he is ready to sacrifice his life.

Blind devotion to religion, capitalism, the Republican Party, a radio talk-show host, news commentator, news station, preacher, evil taxes, deregulation...the list goes on and on.  If what we are dealing with here are a bunch of true-believer syndrome people, then we are in trouble.  If no amount of logic or evidence can change their mind, then decisions need to made in spite of these people.  Sometimes the government has to act in the best interests of the people, despite public opinion, which over time (I might add) has been negatively influenced by unscrupulous members in the media and in Congress.  I believe this group is a large portion of the Republican Party, and I believe that the Republicans have learned how to manipulate and control this group to their advantage.  I just wonder if there are enough rational people out there that can decide the next election, and bring more humanistic and altruistic politicians into our government. 

You can read the entire article here: Skeptic's Dictionary: True-Believer Syndrome

Political Watch: Focusing on Sen. John Cornyn

I keep making the argument that Pro-Life should mean respect for life in general.  A lot of focus is made on the unborn child and the evil of abortions,  but according to some politicians, the value for life seems to stop once that life is born.   I made the argument  in my blog yesterday that not caring what kind of world a child is born into is nothing less than cruelty towards that child and that there should be just as much focus on making businesses behave with regards to pollution and harming the environment as there is on putting Planned Parenthoods out of business or making abortions illegal.  A child being born into a polluted unlivable planet should carry as much weight as valuing the life of a child that is still developing inside its mother. 

So my focus lately has been on trying to show the illogical fallacies (the intellectual dishonesty) of those supporting Pro-Life legislation, but not supporting legislation that would regulate and stop pollution and other practices that are destroying our planet and causing great harm to our children now and possibly in the future. 

Yesterday my focus was on representatives from Texas in D.C. who demonstrate this illogical behavior.  Today my focus will be on one senator - John Cornyn.  I'm not going to focus on our other Texas senator, Kay Bailey Hutchison, because she has stated that she is not going to run for another term.  Just as an aside, keep in mind that senators are elected for 6 year terms and representatives are elected for 2 year terms.  Six years is a long time to enact policy legislation that could impact the well-being of our children and our planet.

According to That's My Congress, Senator Cornyn has a Liberal Action Score of 0  on a scale of 0-100.



The two "Liberal" issues that I am personally most interested in are:  Equal treatment of people under the law (which according to many Christian Conservatives would also include the unborn) and, Protection of the Earth's environmental richness, which I also believe goes hand in hand with the quality of life for the unborn and born. 


John Cornyn has been rated 100% by the NRLC (National Right to Life Committee).  At every opportunity he has voted "yes" on pro-life bills and amendments, even when the health of the mother might be in jeopardy. Senator Cornyn has proven that he stands firm on this issue. On the Issue 

However, when it comes to quality of life legislation like prohibiting pollution and protecting our natural resources, Senator Cornyn is not so quick to protect the living or the unborn. 

Consider the following legislation:

S. 228
"isn’t just an admission that global warming is real. It's an admission that the anthropogenic [man-made] hypothesis, that global warming is due in large part to human activities, is correct. Why would this group of Senators drenched in oil money sponsor such a bill? Because, after defining these substances as the source of the problem of global warming, S. 228 prohibits the federal government from taking action to clean them up and regulate their emissions. S. 228 stops any government effort to solve the problem. The most one can say about this head-in-the-sand bill is that it's honest." Senator Cornyn voted for this bill. That's My Congress

S. 940
"Under S. 940 [oil corporations] would have stopped receiving special gifts [U.S. subsidies]  and would have simply been expected to pay their fair share [in taxes], just like the American people do. On May 18 2011, a majority of Senators voted for S. 940, but in a procedural move a minority blocked the bill from proceeding. As a result, American oil companies will continue to rake in huge subsidies [from the U.S. taxpayers aka corporate welfare] while they accumulate gigantic profits. "  Senator Cornyn voted against this bill. That's My Congress
Amendment 4253 "Collins Amendment"
The deregulation of led paint! "Amendment no. 4253 from Sen. Collins (R-ME) barred the use of funds by the Environmental Protection Agency to enforce lead paint regulations against certain contractors. While this may have benefited a small number of businesses, it stopped the EPA from doing its job of protecting the American public from a toxic chemical and probable human carcinogen. The American people should have confidence that the products around them are not poisonous to their families or themselves." League of Conservation Voters

The League of Conservation Voters has given John Cornyn a score of 0% on environmental issues.  League of Conservation Voters

According to the website, Dirty Secrets, Sen. Cornyn has received $2,125,566 from industrial boilers, more than any other U.S. senator. The legislation he supports for these polluters poisons the air and puts an estimated 22,750 lives at risk while also putting 633,131 asthmatic children at risk. 

Believing John Cornyn is pro-life is like believing that Dr. Kevorkian would be a good choice for delivering your baby.

October 25, 2011 Was a Record Heat Day in Texas

WINK FAA AP	WINKLER	TX	94.0	93.0	2011-10-25	1959-10-25
CHILDRESS MUNI AP	CHILDRESS	TX	94.0	91.0	2011-10-25	1959-10-25
MIDLAND INTL AP	MIDLAND	TX	90.0	90.0	2011-10-25	1950-10-25

See all record breaking heat temps here: Record Heat

A Lesson from Baltasar Gracian: Saying 9

Baltasar Gracian was a Jesuit Scholar who recorded his wisdom sayings in a book titled The Art of Worldly Wisdom about 300 years ago.

A lesson from his book comes in wisdom saying #9.  I like to call it - The 9 Plan.

#9 Avoid the defects of your country. Water shares the good and bad qualities of the beds through which it runs; people share those of the region where they are born.  Some owe more than others to their mother country or city, for they were born under favorable skies.  No country, not even the most refined, has ever escaped some innate defect or other, and these weaknesses are seized on by neighboring countries as defense or consolation.  It is a triumph to correct, or at least dissimulate, such national faults.  By doing so, you will be revered as unique among your people; for what is least expected is most valued.  Other defects are caused by one's lineage, condition, occupation, and by the times.  If all these defects come together in one person, and no care is taken to foresee and correct them, they produce an intolerable monster.

Senator Whitehouse Speaks Out against Climate Change Skepticism

Thank you, Senator Whitehouse...

We need more speeches like this from our leaders in Congress.  They are the only government body that can't get it together on this this issue.  We are running out of time.

You can read his speech here: Planetsave

October 24, 2011 Was a Record Heat Day in Texas

PORT ARTHUR AP	JEFFERSON	TX	89.0	88.0	2011-10-24	1967-10-24
CHILDRESS MUNI AP	CHILDRESS	TX	88.0	88.0	2011-10-24	1950-10-24
AMARILLO WSO AP	POTTER	TX	84.0	83.0	2011-10-24	1989-10-24
DALHART FAA AP	DALLAM	TX	84.0	82.0	2011-10-24	1999-10-24

Source: Temp Records

Political Watch: Policymakers Legislation Doesn't Match Pro-Life Values

Since this blog originates in San Antonio, I'm going to discuss my own Representatives in this area, but the issues I'll be discussing impact all of us, and there is a good chance that your own legislator/s voted the same way mine did.

San Antonio is a very conservative city.  There are many churches and many mega-churches.  John Hagee at Cornerstone Church is one example.  The popular author and preacher Max Lucado has his own church here as well - the Oak Hills Church.  Because of the conservative nature of our city, we tend to elect conservative policymakers into the federal government.  By "conservative" I mean pro-life values social agenda legislators.  They are pro-life and pro-business, which means that they will protect the rights of the unborn as well as the rights of the businessman.  However, these two agendas can and do clash with each other fairly often, especially considering today's Congress.  There is absolutely nothing wrong with business in and of itself.  The problem begins when the business seeks to violate certain resources that we as human beings share like: clean water, clean air, and a healthy livable environment.  As I was doing some research on how my legislators voted on certain issues, I was surprised at how little disregard my representatives seem have for the environment and even towards children living in poverty.  I don't know if they realize the inconsistencies in their voting behavior, but  they will support (very proudly) pro-life human values legislation on the one hand, and on the other hand support a pro-business pro- pollution anti-human legislation, and not seem to be aware that these things don't really go together. 

This must either mean three things:
1) They haven't been made aware of this intellectual dishonesty, and are voting oblivious to the fact that pro-life legislation and anti-human legislation doesn't coexist together.
 2) They know what they are doing, and hope that the voter is not educated on the issues, or is not educated on their voting record. 
3) They may not be aware of the details of the legislation they are voting on, but are just voting along party lines to show a unified vote. 

The House Representatives for San Antonio and Laredo are: Charlie Gonzalez (D), Lamar Smith (R), Francisco Canseco (R), Henry Cuellar (D).  Here are some examples of legislation that is in the House or has passed the House that these legislators voted on:

H.R.3 - No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act
Supporters: Republican Lamar Smith, and Republican Francisco Canseco
Comments: This is a Pro-Life bill, and has a strong showing of support from 227 cosponsors in the House.

H.R.374 - The Life At Conception Act
Supporters: Republican Francisco Canseco is a cosponsor of this bill.
Comments: Would "implement equal protection under the 14th article of amendment to the Constitution for the right to life of each born and preborn human person". It has 86 cosponsors in the House.

Contrast the above legislation with the following:

H.R.2273 - Coal Residuals Reuse and Management Act
Supporters: Francisco Canseco, R; Lamar Smith, R; Henry Cuellar, D
Comments: "This legislation passed the House, and if also passed by the Senate, will block federal regulations for the disposal of coal ash, and allow lax state regulations to expose Americans to dangerous pollutants. If you aren’t sure what there is to worry about, think back a few years to what happened in Kingston, Tennessee. Three years ago, a dam holding back millions of cubic yards of coal ash sludge. The sludge flowed out over a huge area, stopping a freight train in its track, knocking houses off their foundations, and filling a nearby river. Local ground water was contaminated with poisonous heavy metals. This kind of devastation is what can happen when coal ash disposal is not strictly regulated." Read more about this story here > Irregular Times

H.R. 97 - Free Industry Act
Supporters: Francisco Canseco, R
Comments: Acknowledges climate change, but proposes to do nothing about it.

H. AMDT. 143 -
Supporters: Francisco Canseco, R; Lamar Smith, R
Comments: "To a majority in Congress, keeping the nitrogen and phosphorus flowing into Florida's waters toxic is more important than saving lives. A legislative amendment was introduced by Rep. Thomas Rooney  in the House of Representatives in February 2011; it blocks the federal government from implementing the EPA's standards for Florida waters. This majority voted to pass the Rooney Amendment." Read more about this story here > That's My Congress

H. AMDT. 88
Supporters: Francisco Canseco, R; Lamar Smith, R; Henry Cuellar, D
Comments: "House Amendment 88, tacked on to House spending bill H.R. 1, prohibits the Environmental Protection Agency from spending any money to enforce its standards regarding the reduction of mercury emissions from cement plants in the United States. After a considerable number of scientific studies and dozens of public hearings and comment periods, the EPA determined that American cement plants emit enough mercury dust into the atmosphere to kill between 1,000 and 2,500 people every year. The cement industry in America can afford to make the fixes EPA proposes in order to prevent those 1,000-2,500 deaths each year: the industry is profitable and resisting imports, which are now as low as they have been for 19 years. Those who voted for H.Amdt. 88 voted to prevent the fixes to cement plants that would protect the environment and save American lives."
Find out how your legislator voted here > Library of Congress

H. AMDT. 131
Supporters: Francisco Canseco, R; Lamar Smith, R
Comments: "On June 18 2010 the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement of the Department of the Interior issued new regulations for mountaintop removal and strip mining. These setting out standards for how strip mines dump the rubble leftover from taking off the tops of mountains and extracting ore. The Interior Department regulation requires that this rubble, laden with deadly poisons and heavy metals, be kept away from streams that sustain wildlife and supply people with drinking water.
House Amendment 131 forbids the federal government from spending any money at all to enforce this requirement. It allows strip mining and mountaintop removal operations to continue to poison the environment and poison people by dumping toxic slag into mountain streams." That's My Congress
Find out how your Congressman voted here: Library of Congress

H. AMDT. 642
Supporters: Francisco Canseco, R; to find other supporters click here > Library of Congress
Comments: "While the world spirals into an ever-hotter and more destabilized climate, funding for scientific research into sources of energy other than offending fossil fuels has been cut by Congress for the last two years in a row. As it is, Edward Royce, who introduced an amendment to cut the alternative energy science budget by another $10 million. That $10 million is an extremely small amount in the scale of the federal budget, but can fund important scientific breakthroughs that in the long term save us money and ameliorate climate disasters. In the end, Royce's anti-science amendment was voted down. "

H.R. 2021
Supporters: Francisco Canseco, R; Lamar Smith, R; Henry Cuellar, D; Henry Gonzalez, D to find other supporters click here > Library of Congress
Comments:  "HR 2021 the JEPA Act, is an effort to speed up offshore drilling at the expense of clean air. If passed into law, H.R. 2021 will exempt icebreaking ships in the Arctic from current regulation under the Clean Air Act, allowing their pollution to expand without restraint. 25 members of Congress crossed political party lines in a vote to approve H.R. 2021."

At the least, their voting record is suspect towards human life; at the most they are negligent and uncaring towards people and the environment.  Actions speak louder than words.  There is a need for businesses, but businesses need to act responsibly towards people and our planet.  Pro-Life shouldn't stop once the child is born.  Having a livable planet for our children should be just as important.  It's an act of cruelty to bring a child into the world, and not care what kind of world it is.

I hope that this information has helped. 

Pandango

Source: That's My Congress was used for most of the information and links in this blog.

October 22, 2011 was a record tying heat day in Texas

HARLINGEN RIO GRANDE AP

CAMERON

TX

91.0

91.0

2011-10-22

1991-10-22

October 17, 2011 was a record breaking high temperature day in Texas

WINK FAA AP	WINKLER	TX	97.0	95.0	2011-10-17	1988-10-17
SAN ANGELO MATHIS FLD	TOM GREEN	TX	97.0	95.0	2011-10-17	1993-10-17
MIDLAND INTL AP	MIDLAND	TX	95.0	95.0	2011-10-17	1964-10-17
ABILENE RGNL AP	TAYLOR	TX	95.0	93.0	2011-10-17	1972-10-17
LONGVIEW E TX RGNL AP	GREGG	TX	88.0	88.0	2011-10-17	2006-10-17

Global Warming and Christian Hypocrisy: Understanding How Christians Think

If Christians can be swayed to support climate change legislation, that would be a big victory for everyone who wants to live on a sustainable and livable planet.  But how do we influence a group of voters that is so conservative and anti-science?  This is why I want to explain how a Christian thinks, and how the Republicans have taken advantage of them.

For years, or at least for as long as I can remember, Republicans have been supporting pro-life policies and legislation.  I can remember years ago during the George H.W. Bush presidency when Rush Limbaugh pleaded with the Conservative Right-Wing folks to consider more issues than just social issues (like abortion) when voting for a president.  That was the year when George H.W. Bush lost his run for second term as president to Bill Clinton in 1992. During that time Bush was considered to be more of a moderate and had supported abortion in some instances.  I know that there were several reasons for why he lost, but he failed to rally a lot of support from conservatives Christians on this important social issue. 

It's taken the Republicans a while, but they have finally figured out how to rally the conservative Christian voters on social issues.  Rallying this group of the Republican base has to do with supporting (and making a big show of supporting) pro-life issues.  You have to understand that there are many many Christian voters who will only vote for a president if he is pro-life.  What the Republican Party figured out is that supporting right-to-life issues is fairly harmless to the businesses that the Republicans represent.  It means nothing to their bottom line, and as an aside benefit, it also means cutting government spending (by shutting down Planned Parenthood clinics).  So they feel they can take the "high road" on social issues, enjoy having the support of a large voter base, and also have the freedom to enact pro-business legislation, knowing that most of the Christian voters only pay attention to social issues anyway.

Christians are obsessed with the pro-life issue.  Most of the Christians I grew up with would only vote for a pro-life president, or not vote at all if their candidate wasn't suitable.  Christians feel that one of the big reasons why the U.S. is suffering economically and politically is because of its social issues: allowing abortion, allowing gay marriage, allowing gays in the mililtary, promiscuous sex, porn, masturbation, prostitution, gambling, belief in evolution, stem cell research, etc.  They believe this is all a turning away from God and will lead us all to ultimate destruction (like the "Roman Empire" a common theme with Christians).  God sees, and is disgusted with our sin and we will all be judged and punished.  Some fundamentalist Christians will completely turn away from a family member or friend who is an "unbeliever".  They will be outcasts.  On their own.  They were warned, and are now on their own path to destruction.  Conservative Christians might say that all the problems we are facing today is not because of man, but it is because of man's sin, and if we only turn back to God, all of our problems will begin to go away, and the U.S. will encounter "healing" once more. 

This is how they think, and you won't change their mind.  For many "believers", Hell constantly hangs over their heads.  Turning from God and their religion could mean an eternity in Hell.  They are burdened with a tremendous amount of guilt for who they are - dirty rotten sinners who will continue to sin (because of the weakness of the flesh) and need/must ask God for forgiveness of their sins daily for their dirty rottenness.  They will only be relieved from their sin at death, when they will finally be perfected and reunited with God and their Lord and Savior Jesus Christ (unless the rapture comes before, which is a whole different story). 

Another burden they carry is that they must devote some time every day to the devotion of God's Word - the Bible. Reading the Bible, memorizing scripture, and praying to God.  A great amount of guilt is placed on a Christian who becomes lax on their "quiet time" and the "reading of God's Word".  Memorizing scripture and praying to God are weapons against the attacks of Satan the Deceiver.  It prepares one's mind for the "battle" ahead.  The temptations of the flesh.

Asking a fundamentalist Christian to believe in Evolution, is like asking a liberal to believe in Creationism, but for a Christian, more is at stake.  They are taught from an early age to believe that everything they read in the Bible is the literal truth.  Every dot and dash and tiddle.  A fundamentalist Christian believing in Evolution would be a turning away from God.  It would be a great great sin, possibly even damnation.  This is not even thinkable to believe in Evolution.  A natural progression of this is that science is an enemy of the Bible as well. That the Earth has been around for millions of years is a serious assault to a fundamentalist Christian's beliefs.  It is to doubt the very genuineness of the Bible.  It's also scary, because if the Earth wasn't made in six days, then what else in the Bible is not true? It is a house of cards, and if one card falls, what might happen to the rest of the house?  They are taught at an early age that you just don't question.  Questioning the Bible is like questioning God.  YOU DON'T DO IT. IT'S A SIN.  Besides, they've read the Bible several times and studied the prophecies, they know how this story is going to end; Jesus triumphant coming down from heaven to gather his flock of believers.  How does Global Warming or Extinction fit into this picture?  Easy answer - it doesn't, at least not for them.  Be devoted, confess your sins, fast, pray, and all this global warming stuff will go away.  Science knows nothing!  It is truly a Dark Ages mentality.

NO COMPROMISE is a common theme that we are hearing in politics today among the Republican right, and it is an important phrase among Christians too, but where did it come from?  Keith Green, a popular Christian singer in the 70's and 80's produced an album titled, No Compromise in 1978.  One of the songs on the album, Make My Life a Prayer to You, has the following lyrics: "Make my life a prayer to You / I wanna do what You want me to / No empty words and no white lies / no token prayers, no compromise."  This is an important theme to Christians, and it's been around a while.  Compromising is seen as "selling out" to God and their beliefs.

The Christian Right is an important political base because they are probably more organized than any other mass block of voters in the United States.  Consider this - what other group in the U.S. (that numbers in the millions) has massive meetings at least once a week to discuss political, moral or social issues?  These people know where they stand on their social issues and they have been programmed from a very early age, and often (at least once a week), to believe in "conservative" issues.  They are taught not to question, only to trust that God has their back.  What a perfect block of voters to win over into one's own political camp!  Hard work is a Puritan ideal - "God helps those who help themselves, so quit being so lazy!".  Not worrying about money or life or healthcare because God will take care of that - if you only believe. The death penalty may be harsh, but it is God's law.  What really matters are the social issues.  God will handle the rest.  To an outside observer, or to someone who hasn't grown up in the church, this all seems very cruel, but it's God's Law, and it tells it like it is.  No sugar-coating.

This also plays right into the hands of Big Business.  As I stated above, it is easy for Big Business to show that they care about social issues like abortion, because that doesn't bother their bottom line one bit, neither do any of the other social issues that Christians support.  "Make all abortions illegal!" Big Business says, because it has nothing to do with how their business is regulated or operated.  Besides, businesses want and need hard workers who will work for pennies, with little benefits or retirement packages.  They need people to believe that it's not all that bad, and that God will work it out for you - "...all things work together for good for those who love God..." Romans 8:28.  Christians are the perfect "worker bees".

On the one side, a Conservative politician will try and show a moral upper-hand by supporting Christian values  legislation or resolutions, while on the other hand supporting and sponsoring legislation that is so detrimental to creation, the planet, humans, and our environment that even a pagan who is not in some way psychopathic would see this as harmful.  Incredibly; however, it falls outside the scope of Christian interests.  If the progressive media can somehow do a better job of pointing out the hypocrisy of pro-life Christians and politicians who support harmful legislation for humans (how can pollution be pro-life?), maybe this could change some minds on supporting legislation that may not be global warming specifically, but cutting pollution is one way of getting what we want in achieving the goal of having a habitable planet for our children, and it doesn't necessarily go for or against science.  Pollution is real; we all see it.  No science needed to believe that.  Understand where I'm going with this?  Pollution bad. Life good. Let's start living...

Pandango