Shouting "malarkey" adds nothing but amusement, at best. Referring to Dawkins et al as "The New Atheists" betrays an odd hostility for a self-professed atheist, given that RD and the others have often said that they reject that label, and it's thus rarely used by secular people.Ecurb wrote: ↑February 15th, 2021, 6:36 pmMalarky! The pope -- who leads the Christian Church with by far the most members -- issued an environmental enyclical five years ago, calling environmental degradation "sinful". In his encyclical he wrote (among other things) that Christians "must forcibly reject the notion that our being created in God's image and given domination over the earth justifies absolute domination over other creatures." Here's a Washington Post article about his encyclical: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/act ... vironment/Greta wrote: ↑February 15th, 2021, 4:26 pm
Nope, it's more than fair - it's a call to accountability that is long overdue.
Times have changed. Christians do not revere nature at all, not today (though no doubt a cowed and invisible minority exists in their ranks, too afraid to speak out). Christians, for the most part, see ecosystems and other animals as nothing more than resources for "divine" humans.
Part of this is due to the natural Christian antipathy for science because the latter kept exposing falsehoods in the ancient doctrine.
Today, the vast majority of Christians are vehemently against any political party that aims to reduce the rush of extinctions and destruction of ecosystems. This is indisputable. How often in the last four years have you heard Christians speaking out publicly to protest against extinctions and to protect ecosystems? How many speak out on those issues? I haven't heard of any. Contrast this silence with their noisy enthusiasm for demonising gay people or young women seeking abortions.
Christians have had numerous chances to show how much that they "revere the Earth", and they have failed to do so every single time, and over a period spanning many decades. This is not just the case in the US but in all western countries.
If I seem especially miffed about this, I am. If Christians actually cared about other species and ecosystems that would be a huge boost for the beleaguered natural world - it would be a tipping point that would ensure action. But they will not help. It's too much fun kicking LGBTIQ people.
Let's not assume that the Evangelical and Fundamentlist wings of the Christian movement represent the entire movement, or, indeed, that they march in lock step on environmental issues.
Your response ultimately fails to address the issue. A tepid statement by the Pope about the natural environment once per decade does not compare with the regular incandescent attacks on gays and women's choices by those under him, seemingly sanctioned by him.
When I see Christians vote en masse in favour of the environment - rather than against it, which has long been the norm - then I will believe that Christians care about the environment. At this stage, I see a rush away from the traditional churches to rapidly-growing Pentecostalism, that is now very closely tied to Trumpism. Here's a sample of his evangelist "spiritual advisor" (who appears to have no problems with Trump's anti-environment policies, or shamelessly demanding money so people can buy their ticket to heaven).