The Earth and our responsibility towards it. - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

InTheMuss · 04-07-2006, 11:48 PM

I've been wondering about this for some time but I have a hard time expressing it. I am somewhat disheartened to hear the flippant attitudes of so many of our bretheren about the earth.

I feel like we were given our mortal bodies, which are subject to the consequences of our actions, and as such, we should take care of them and reverence them. Likewise I feel like we were placed in a position of stewardship over the earth, also subject to the consequences of our actions; we are given a heed to cultivate, and dress the earth. Why are we not more proactive in meeting this responsibility? Why do so many people not only not meet this responsibility, but maintain an almost cavalier attitude about it. On cougarboard there is an attitude that the environment is a "liberal" talking point and therefore must be unimportant. I read a thread today that man-made global warming was basically only the product of researchers writing what they're getting paid to write.

Is taking care of the environment a gospel responsibility? Does the Lord care what we do to the earth (and to other species) on the earth as an indirect effect of our actions? If so, what is the extent of this responsibility?

Thanks,
InTheMuss

MikeWaters · 04-08-2006, 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by InTheMuss

Is taking care of the environment a gospel responsibility? Does the Lord care what we do to the earth (and to other species) on the earth as an indirect effect of our actions? If so, what is the extent of this responsibility?

Thanks,
InTheMuss

Hence, MOFOE.

bluegoose · 04-08-2006, 03:43 AM

Mike, I think I've come to feel differently, but can you see why some may not take your band of brothers in conservation seriously?

Gotta change the name, man.

MikeWaters · 04-08-2006, 04:13 AM

the name is the best part.

see the history of it, is that it did start as a provocative joke. But then it took off (albeit in a small way in the scope of things).

i've got some militant dudes in that bunch.

purplmonkeydishwashr · 04-09-2006, 05:03 AM

The idea that humans have no effect on global warming is a pretty dangerous idea. While it is clear that the Earth has gone through many cycles of alternately warming and cooling periods, it is also apparent that the rate of warming is higher in this cycle than in previous ones. It is probably fair to assume that the amount of carbon dioxide in the air produced from the burning of fossil fuels, coupled with the loss of forests and wetlands, which lock up carbon, has an effect on the warming rate. Not only is global warming a problem, but we are seeing extinction at a rate comparable to the K-T boundary extinction.

I think that we have a duty to care for Earth, and since God created Earth for us, it can and should be considered a gospel responsibility. That doesn't mean that we should revert to a non-industrialized society, but that we should consider both conservation and restoration of critical habitats, and a more efficient use of natural resources. I don't think it would hurt our efforts at all if we looked at it as a sacred duty.

04-07-2006, 11:48 PM	#1
InTheMuss Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Salt Lake City Posts: 13	The Earth and our responsibility towards it. I've been wondering about this for some time but I have a hard time expressing it. I am somewhat disheartened to hear the flippant attitudes of so many of our bretheren about the earth. I feel like we were given our mortal bodies, which are subject to the consequences of our actions, and as such, we should take care of them and reverence them. Likewise I feel like we were placed in a position of stewardship over the earth, also subject to the consequences of our actions; we are given a heed to cultivate, and dress the earth. Why are we not more proactive in meeting this responsibility? Why do so many people not only not meet this responsibility, but maintain an almost cavalier attitude about it. On cougarboard there is an attitude that the environment is a "liberal" talking point and therefore must be unimportant. I read a thread today that man-made global warming was basically only the product of researchers writing what they're getting paid to write. Is taking care of the environment a gospel responsibility? Does the Lord care what we do to the earth (and to other species) on the earth as an indirect effect of our actions? If so, what is the extent of this responsibility? Thanks, InTheMuss

04-08-2006, 03:43 AM	#3
bluegoose Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Northern California Posts: 2,919	Mike, I think I've come to feel differently, but can you see why some may not take your band of brothers in conservation seriously? Gotta change the name, man.

04-08-2006, 04:13 AM	#4
MikeWaters Demiurge Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 36,365	the name is the best part. see the history of it, is that it did start as a provocative joke. But then it took off (albeit in a small way in the scope of things). i've got some militant dudes in that bunch.

04-09-2006, 05:03 AM	#5
purplmonkeydishwashr Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Roy, UT Posts: 34	The idea that humans have no effect on global warming is a pretty dangerous idea. While it is clear that the Earth has gone through many cycles of alternately warming and cooling periods, it is also apparent that the rate of warming is higher in this cycle than in previous ones. It is probably fair to assume that the amount of carbon dioxide in the air produced from the burning of fossil fuels, coupled with the loss of forests and wetlands, which lock up carbon, has an effect on the warming rate. Not only is global warming a problem, but we are seeing extinction at a rate comparable to the K-T boundary extinction. I think that we have a duty to care for Earth, and since God created Earth for us, it can and should be considered a gospel responsibility. That doesn't mean that we should revert to a non-industrialized society, but that we should consider both conservation and restoration of critical habitats, and a more efficient use of natural resources. I don't think it would hurt our efforts at all if we looked at it as a sacred duty.