iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
John Torrey

GET UPDATES FROM John Torrey
 

Why Religious People Must Speak Up About Climate Change

Posted: 03/21/2012 12:35 pm

No one who believes in a God that loves all people should be able to sit by as the wealthy harm the poor on a massive scale. Indeed, the fact that God loves all people should spur us to search for the ways in which God's beloved children are being oppressed worldwide. It seems God demands that the poor be at the center of our analysis of the issues of our day. When viewed in this way, we see that global society has not yet begun to come to terms with the degree of victimization that climate change represents. God sees this victimization and demands that we see it too.

Climate change is almost entirely created by rich and rising countries. The poorest countries in the world have essentially no discernible impact on global carbon emissions. The wealthier a person is, the greater his carbon footprint, and therefore greenhouse gases can be considered essentially a product of wealth. Climate change is thus a problem almost entirely caused by the global rich.

If rich people in rich and rising countries are creating the problem of climate change, who is most harmed by it? It is overwhelmingly poor people in developing countries. The global poor are in double jeopardy when it comes to climate change: they are concentrated in equatorial regions that are the most vulnerable to global warming's effects and they have the least ability to protect themselves from the catastrophic droughts, storms and floods it causes. This double vulnerability is predicted to translate into deaths on a staggering scale. The WHO states that climatic changes already cause 150,000 deaths annually, a number on the same scale as the deaths that resulted from Hiroshima. These victims are poor children, women and men who probably know little about climate change and have no way of advocating their interests.

Scientific consensus tells us that the more greenhouse gases wealthy and rising countries emit, the more poor people will die as a result of catastrophic climatic events. This can and should be viewed as victimization of the poor by the rich on a massive scale. However, in mainstream cultural dialogues on global warming, the problem is rarely posed as one of victimization.

God demands that religious voices be raised to expose the many deaths that will result from rich and rising countries' continued failure to mitigate carbon emissions. It is high time that light be shone on the atrocious crime against the poor that unmitigated greenhouse emissions represent. As moral voices in our societies, religious leaders, groups and organizations have the power to shape social dialogues around climate change. God demands that we lift up the voices of the poor and show the world what is really at stake: nothing less than infinitely precious and highly vulnerable human lives. We have no more time to lose. The time to speak out and act is now.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 11
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
grappler1987
Heaven is a gift, not a reward
08:02 PM on 03/23/2012
"The WHO states that climatic changes already cause 150,000 deaths annually"

Global temperature has gone up dramatically since 1990. Meanwhile, child mortality has dropped by a third (12 million deaths dropped to 7.6 million). That statistic dwarfs 150K.
http://www.unicef.org/media/media_56045.html

Are we sure warmth is bad?
10:33 AM on 03/23/2012
Like man or most in America I have been blessed by having extremely clever people around me all my life and the marvels of materialism. Yet I always looked to escape the complications and perhaps the hard work of complicated things not so much that work scared me but that I loved nature and many of the benefits of slow, relaxed, intrinsic appreciation that I have always felt slowly slips away. Science and technology are increasingly a focus in schools while intrinsic joys and empathy for each other and our natural world seem more left out. Big fan of Chardan and universal consciousness or the idea that what hurts you hurts me and that we are evolving toward this to survive and appreciate. That seems the battle and mostly lost in politics, schools, corporations etc. as pragmatism and the ledger sheets don't add in the hidden costs of losing our ties to nature. Working years and seeing people moved like pawns or parts of an engine i often heard the words of BLEEDING HEART LIBERALS to counter checks on narrow profit focus yet more and more we see the bleeding in our families and neighbors. So we need to direct our schools and politicians to return to a more balanced focus as well. jmo
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
06:54 PM on 03/22/2012
that was funny
10:51 PM on 03/21/2012
In just a few years, the Global Warming Religion will drown Christianity as the most powerful religion on Earth.....in dogma, in propaganda, in brainwashing and, of course, in the loss of human lives.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/scientists-trace-heat-wave-to-massive-star-at-cent,21088/
08:49 AM on 03/23/2012
You do realize you posted a link to a satirical article on the website of a fake newspaper don't you?
08:57 PM on 03/21/2012
I will have to agree with the author that climate change does affect the underprivileged disproportionately.

The question boils, no pun intended, down to is global climate change man made or an act of nature or a combination thereof. Forty years ago we were headed for a new ice age, and then most of the same supporters decided that we were heading for global warming and now its global climate change.

If the current buzz words “global climate change” do not pertain to man made changes then what are the dangers to the underprivileged. If all of the money is spent for no reason, what could the money have been spent on to help those in need?
ubrew12
that crazy uncle from Amarcord
05:52 AM on 03/22/2012
The words 'global warming' and 'climate change' have always been used simultaneously in the scientific literature to describe this phenomenon. 40 years ago about 17% of scientific papers worried about aerosol-caused global cooling, while over 50% worried about CO2-caused global warming. The media trumped up the cooling angle because 'new ice age' made better headlines. Even today: aerosols act to cool Earth, CO2 acts to warm it.

Global warming remediation will costs 75 cents per person per week. For that cost, you can stop worrying about when the oil will run out, have few emphysema deaths, less mercury in your seafood, fewer Appalachian mountains blown up, less methane in your drinking water, fewer British Petroleum's dumping god-knows-what into your Gulf of Mexico, less skinning of Alberta, less need to suck up to Iran and Venezuela, and probably fewer cancer deaths.

And those advantages occur whether global warming is real or not. If global warming is real and human caused (the VAST majority of experts believe this to be so), then that 75 cents per week will return $1.50 per person per week over the course of this century (the return next century is even higher). That's right: doing something about global warming is an investment that promises to double our money. But we're not going to double our money. Why? Because of people like you.

"Whom the Gods would destroy, they first render Mad"
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
06:52 PM on 03/22/2012
666 fans and a reference to gods and madness!
07:19 PM on 03/22/2012
Ubrew12; it seems that the media is still going for headlines instead of facts in “global climate change”. “Himalayan glaciers shrinking” Dr Rajendra Pachauri admitted the claim was an error he got from unchecked research. So called climategate not being covered by the media to the extent that I believe that they should have been because it does not fit the story being pushed. And despite the increase in CO2 levels over the last ten years temperatures have dropped.

Global warming remediation will costs are estimated to be $1.5 trillion dollars as of 2010, but that is a monetary cost and not the cost to the people that these cuts would affect. If we worry about CO2 and spend our money on that then we would not be able to reduce other pollutants so it boils down to what you spend your money on.