Obama Links Faith to Environmentalism

Sun Oct 14, 2007 2:31 PM EDT
advertisement

WEST DES MOINES — Democrat presidential candidate Barack Obama said Sunday that his religious beliefs influence his plans for how to protect the environment.

Speaking before religious leaders and others at what he called an "interfaith forum on climate change," the Illinois senator said God has entrusted humans with the responsibility of caring for the earth, and "we are not acting as good stewards of God's earth when our bottom line puts the size of our profits before the future of our planet."

"It is our responsibility to ensure that this planet remains clean and safe and livable for our children and for all of God's children," he told about 200 people gathered at the downtown public library. "But in recent years, science has made it undeniably clear that our generation is not living up to this responsibility. Global warming is not a someday problem, it is now."

Last week, Obama released a plan to combat global warming that calls for an 80 percent reduction in U.S. carbon emissions by 2050.

Obama said he would force industries and power companies to clean up their operations. He would institute a "cap and trade" approach that would require polluters to buy allowances, essentially putting a price on pollution and creating an incentive to cut emissions.

He said $150 billion from the sale of allowances could help drive the development of environmentally friendly technologies, including the next generation of biofuels, expansion of a delivery infrastructure and fuel-efficient vehicles.

"We've heard promises about energy independence from every single president since Richard Nixon, but we are actually more dependent on oil today than ever before," he said.

Obama said many of his rivals have talked about the issue but "have taken a pass on it in years in Washington."

He said he would ask the biggest carbon-emitting nations join the U.S. in creating a global energy forum to develop climate protocols. He would also share clean energy technologies with all nations.

Obama also challenged individuals to do their part to help the environment, and he called for making government, businesses and homes 50 percent more energy efficient by 2030. He said he wants all federal government buildings carbon neutral by 2025.

Among other White House hopefuls, New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has said she is intrigued by a carbon auction system but has stopped short of endorsing it. Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut has proposed taxing polluters for their carbon emissions. Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, who has pledged to have a carbon neutral campaign, also proposes a "cap and trade" system that aims to reach the 80 percent reduction in carbon emissions by 2050.

On Sunday, Edwards and Sen. John McCain picked up environmental endorsements from Friends of the Earth Action and Republicans for Environmental Protection, respectively.

Meeting the threat of global climate change will take hard work and faith, Obama said.

"Not a blind faith, not a faith of mere words, not a faith that ignores science, but an active searching faith," said Obama, a member of the United Church of Christ. "It's a faith that does not look at the hardship and pain and suffering in the world and use it all as an excuse for inaction or cynicism, but one that accepts the fact that although we are not going to solve every problem here on earth, we can make a difference."

Despite the event's environmental focus, Obama also addressed the Iraq War and a House proposal for a tax to cover war spending. He said he agrees there's no such thing as a free lunch and that tax cuts and war spending can't coexist for ever.

"The only reason we haven't been feeling the pinch is because China and South Korea and Mexico have lent us money," Obama said. "I believe in the basic principle that you pay for what you've initiated. I would say that the idea of a war tax is probably a little late. I would have liked to have seen that suggestion before we spent $600 billion."

___

On the Net:

Obama: http://www.barackobama.com/

© 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
  • 5 Votes
  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top

Published to:

Related Articles
Obama: Religion Influences Environmental PoliciesThe Seattle TimesMon Oct 150Comments
Obama Reaches Out to Religious VotersAssociated PressTue Oct 161Comments
What's this?
Who's leading the conversation?
This visualization below allows you to see the impact that each user has on the current conversation. The top row contains the group of users who have had the most impact, the 2nd row the group of users who have had the 2nd most impact (et cetera). Users with similar impact are grouped together, and the average score of the group is shown to the left of the group. The author of the article is also shown on the left, in their corresponding group. Each user's score is based on the number of comments the user has made plus the number of votes their comments have received. The scores are calculated relative one another, so while their absolute value is not particularly important, their relative difference does indicate a larger difference in impact on the conversation.
0.7
{"commentId":1107364,"authorDomain":"masterfink"}
Master Fink

If you said aside all the religious crap, this is probably the most promising thing I have ever seen a candidate promise yet.

He's right that it takes faith, but it isn't religious faith that's necessary -- it's faith in humanity.

{"commentId":1107364,"threadId":"163361","contentId":"1024532","authorDomain":"masterfink"}
    Reply#1 - Wed Oct 17, 2007 4:31 PM EDT
    {"commentId":1117984,"authorDomain":"jamesmatthewbass"}
    Matt-197301

    Whatever your opinion on religion (I imagine yours and mine aren't so different), this marriage of the two provides significant benefits.

    Tying the Save the Earth movement to Religion asks people to make a commitment to the earth like they would to their faith. You just do it. You don't find excuses, you don't compromise, you just commit. While that kind of blind faith in some matters is problematic, it is not so problematic in this context. The problem of blind faith in religious matters is that there is no way to prove who is right, and it never ends, rarely yields any long-term positive results. In this context, a commitment would result in obvious changes—less smog in our cities, fewer extinct animals, fewer wars that are related to our need for security over fuel interests.

    Strangely, religion could pursue an agenda of international peace and better human conditions directly through tying up its land holdings (some 14-15% of the land on earth is controlled by one of the "big" faiths) in sustainable developments, and controlled harvesting of resources, and in uses that benefit the poor, and quality of life for everyone, over time. The "strangely" part of this is related to the fact that religions don't seem to do that. Also strange: that every major religious figure (Buddha, Jesus, Muhammad) had some wilderness experience directly related to the development of their philosophies/ faiths. If the wilderness can create such commitment, such people, why wouldn't religion be interested in protecting these "holy sites?"

    {"commentId":1117984,"threadId":"163361","contentId":"1024532","authorDomain":"jamesmatthewbass"}
      Reply#2 - Sun Oct 21, 2007 2:04 PM EDT
      {"commentId":1117989,"authorDomain":"jamesmatthewbass"}
      Matt-197301

      Whatever your opinion on religion (I imagine yours and mine aren't so different), this marriage of the two provides significant benefits.

      Tying the Save the Earth movement to Religion asks people to make a commitment to the earth like they would to their faith. You just do it. You don't find excuses, you don't compromise, you just commit. While that kind of blind faith in some matters is problematic, it is not so problematic in this context. The problem of blind faith in religious matters is that there is no way to prove who is right, and it never ends, rarely yields any long-term positive results. In this context, a commitment would result in obvious changes—less smog in our cities, fewer extinct animals, fewer wars that are related to our need for security over fuel interests.

      Strangely, religion could pursue an agenda of international peace and better human conditions directly through tying up its land holdings (some 14-15% of the land on earth is controlled by one of the "big" faiths) in sustainable developments, and controlled harvesting of resources, and in uses that benefit the poor, and quality of life for everyone, over time. The "strangely" part of this is related to the fact that religions don't seem to do that. Also strange: that every major religious figure (Buddha, Jesus, Muhammad) had some wilderness experience directly related to the development of their philosophies/ faiths. If the wilderness can create such commitment, such people, why wouldn't religion be interested in protecting these "holy sites?"

      {"commentId":1117989,"threadId":"163361","contentId":"1024532","authorDomain":"jamesmatthewbass"}
        Reply#3 - Sun Oct 21, 2007 2:06 PM EDT
        {"canLink":false,"threadId":"163361","isPrivate":false}
        Leave a Comment:
        You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
        Newsvine Privacy Statement
        As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
        {"threadId":"163361","contentId":"1024532"}
        Start TrackingStart Tracking
        Stop TrackingStop Tracking
        Back To Top | Front Page