I better watch out then, no more moving amendments at diocesan synods on this issue if they will lock me up ;). I'm sure there are better crosses to die on.
But then again, maybe Stephen Harper (who was attacked in this article) might be better to join another political party, pay lip service to global warming, and then build an energy to water (carbon to water) desalination plant, and facilitate the building of a few new coal power stations. That doesn't seem to enrage that many people.
Actually, he was talking about politicians, who do bear greater responsibility for their actions and inactions while in government (not that I think they should be locked up - I'm just pointing out that Suzuki's suggestion, while extreme, is not quite as extreme as you suggest).
Byron, may I respectfully say that you missed my point...
He didn't attack politicians who only pay lip service to the environment (like arguably a number of state governments in Australia), while he attacks those who are actually honest enough with the public to declare concerns, or who dare to align their interests with capitalism.
Further, if by me speaking, the synod (or any other equivalently large organisation) decides not to adopt particular anti-warming strategies, then I would fit only just outside the class of people he is threatening.
3 comments:
I better watch out then, no more moving amendments at diocesan synods on this issue if they will lock me up ;). I'm sure there are better crosses to die on.
But then again, maybe Stephen Harper (who was attacked in this article) might be better to join another political party, pay lip service to global warming, and then build an energy to water (carbon to water) desalination plant, and facilitate the building of a few new coal power stations. That doesn't seem to enrage that many people.
Actually, he was talking about politicians, who do bear greater responsibility for their actions and inactions while in government (not that I think they should be locked up - I'm just pointing out that Suzuki's suggestion, while extreme, is not quite as extreme as you suggest).
Byron, may I respectfully say that you missed my point...
He didn't attack politicians who only pay lip service to the environment (like arguably a number of state governments in Australia), while he attacks those who are actually honest enough with the public to declare concerns, or who dare to align their interests with capitalism.
Further, if by me speaking, the synod (or any other equivalently large organisation) decides not to adopt particular anti-warming strategies, then I would fit only just outside the class of people he is threatening.
Post a Comment