by Brad Nelson 4/1/14
Perhaps put this next blog post in the category of “What does it matter?” After all, what does it matter that many people today have tossed over the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and now subscribe to the god of CO2, baby seals, and dangerous pit bulls? (Yes, read that article by Prager and find out how pit bulls factor into this: The Church of Leftism.)
The Judeo-Christian worldview is that man is at the center of the universe; nature was therefore created for man. Nature has no intrinsic worth other than man’s appreciation and moral use of it.
Worship of nature was the pagan worldview, a worship that the Hebrew Bible was meant to destroy. The messages of the Creation story in Genesis were that:
1) God created nature. God is not in nature, and nature is not God. Nature is nothing more than His handiwork. Therefore, it is He, not nature, that is to be worshipped. The pagan world held nature in esteem; its gods were gods of nature (they were not above nature).
2) Nature cannot be worshipped because nature is amoral, whereas God is moral.
3) All of creation had one purpose: the final creation, the human being.
Whatever one believes about God, the metaphysics of nature-only produces a different man than one who believes nature is just a part of an overall scheme. I love getting out in nature and think we should have ample set-asides for humans (yes, humans) to enjoy. But that’s about the extent of my environmentalism. One can appreciate the virtues of nature without the naive romantic notions.
Every once in a while you’ll read of some city-dwelling environmental wacko who tries “communing with nature” and ends up paying the price for his naiveté. The movie Into the Wild (a Sean Penn film) could be deemed the environmental wacko’s version of “The Ten Commandments.”
And I guess that really is the point of this blog post. There is something inherently goofy about making a religion out of environmentalism, although it is consistent with the utopian nature of the Left. Reality is denied and replaced by a naive romantic view of how things are. Most liberals are probably just a vacation away from joining the fate of Timothy Treadwell who found out the hard way that grizzly bears are not just big stuffed animals.
Even Steve Irwin, who I otherwise was fond of, found out the hard way the nature is not to be trifled with too often. It’s not a warm, cuddly thing superior and pure compared to man. Man may be many bad things himself at times, but it is quite true what Alfred, Lord Tennyson said of “nature, red in tooth and claw.”
But in my view, the religion of environmentalism isn’t based upon a love of nature. It’s based upon a hatred of man which is further based upon a hatred of self. It’s is routinely noted that at political gatherings that conservatives tend to leave the place spotless while those on the Left leave heaps of trash. Occupy Wall Street, glamorized in the press, was actually a smelly, dirty event generally populated by unkempt and dodgy people.
And if there is a conservative throwing thrash out his window, or leaving bottles on the trail, then shame on them. But I highly doubt this is generally the case. It is most likely the adherents of the religion of environmentalism (or at least those who vote for their kind) who are doing so. Me, I pick up some of this trash, but can’t in any way cope with all of it.
That’s not say that legions of low information voters who stylize themselves as hip “Progressives” are self-haters like the leaders of the movement itself. This crowd is accustomed to, and practiced at (if only by sheer ignorance and narcissism), taking the the harsher aspects of the Left and turing them into playthings. These are the ones who genuinely have at least made a “lifestyle” of getting out in nature, even if they harbor little or no hatred for mankind. Still, such a mindset does leave them oblivious to the darker impulses involved in these movements, and thus they keep voting in the environmental wackos such as Obama and his ilk thinking that by doing so they “care” so damn much.
But is the world really placed here for man’s disposal? I don’t know. But the point would be that you see deeply into the heart of the religion of environmental wacko-ism when you note, as Prager did, that:
On February 20, a pit bull attacked a four-year-old boy, Kevin Vicente, leaving the boy with a broken eye socket and a broken jaw. Kevin will have to undergo months, perhaps years, of reconstructive surgeries. A Facebook page was set up to raise funds. But it wasn’t set up for Kevin. It was set up for the dog. The “Save Mickey” page garnered more than 70,000 “likes” and raised more than enough money to provide legal help to prevent the dog from being euthanized. There were even candlelight vigils and a YouTube plea for the dog.
The nonprofit legal group defending Mickey is the Lexus Project. According to CBS News, “the same group fought earlier this year for the life of a dog that fatally mauled a toddler in Nevada.”
This is the trend: Nature over man.
That’s all you need to know. Despite the trappings of “caring” that the Left likes to baste itself in, this environmental wacko stuff is about nature over man.
Have a blog post you want to share? Click here. • (1401 views)