Carol Allen Anfinsen

The Environment – Political Football, Balancing Act, or Both?



Posted: Tuesday, May 24, 2011

by Carol Allen Anfinsen
AnfinsenArt

I discovered I was an environmentalist the day I wept over a dead mouse caught in a trap in our garage. I suspected I was one, as a child, when I found and cared for every stray cat in our neighborhood. I acknowledged I was one as I cared for a baby bird that had fallen from its nest. Even today, if an insect or a critter is in my house, I’d prefer to return it to the great outdoors rather than cause it harm. I believe destruction without justifiable cause is not only careless and stupid, it’s evil. 

I believe each life is precious whether plant, animal or human. Politically, I’m a conservative; go figure! Which also means I consider human life just as precious as any other, if not more so; and that makes me a staunch right to life supporter. I believe we have a moral obligation to protect and preserve all life, if at all possible. 

Here’s how I see it. The earth was created and prepared for our first parents, Adam and Eve. And although they were made last, God gave them dominion and power over the animals, and responsibility over all the earth. The “earth and the fullness thereof” were made for man, not the other way around. (Genesis 1-2) 

The authority of stewardship applies to us today as much as it did when it was given to our first parents in the Garden of Eden. God commanded Adam and Eve to dress the garden and to take care of it. There were components in that admonition that required thoughtfulness, perseverance and respect from Adam and Eve.

Then God instructed all of his creatures to be fruitful, to multiply and replenish the earth. This command alone implies respect for life in order to fulfill it. How can we multiply and be fruitful if we’re hell bent on destroying life? How can we respect life and the world God has given to us if we are dead-set on desecrating and destroying it? 

So when I see beer bottles, pop cans, wrappers, and plastic bags filled with doggie-doo littered along the highways I’m angry. When I see someone’s half-eaten sack lunch, or an auto ashtray full of cigarette butts scattered across the sidewalks and streets where I live and walk, I become an activist! 

Today’s generation seem to think that “somebody else will pick up after me;” just like dear old mom and dad, costing the community thousands of dollars for maintenance alone. Even avid recyclers sometimes revert to slothfulness and toss junk out of their car windows forgetting that someone else must get paid for picking up their trash. 

But before I start sounding like a radical, let’s define our terms:

  1. Environmentalist = “human ecology” concerned with the quality of human life and environment.
  2. Ecologist = science of interrelationships of organisms and environment (perfect example: the PBS Nature program about Salmons)
  3. Botanist = study of plant life
  4. Biologist = laws, phenomenon relating to organisms or group (perfect example: the PBS Nature series about Bears)
There is much overlapping in these sciences because we are all interdependent on each other for survival. But it is critical to remember that the earth was prepared for man’s use not the other way around. We are not merely evolutionary pawns in a “survival of the fittest” game. We are creations of God who have an explicit mission to preserve, nourish and protect what has been given to us. 

This stewardship requires balance and common sense. Many years ago, when I lived in the State of Washington, I saw hillsides that were bald from harvesting trees for lumber so that society could build houses, furniture, and make paper for man’s use. In the process, habitats were destroyed; enriched silt flowed down the mountainsides when it rained; the forests were ravaged. 

Today this desecration no longer happens. Was the instigator corporate good will or regulations? I don’t know. Except that now when an area of trees is harvested, new trees are planted in their stead. These trees must be in place before the next area can be harvested. As a result, the hillsides are replenished. New habitats are formed and maintained; the lush forest floor preserved. 

If we could depend on companies to preserve and protect the environment as zealously as they work for profits there would be no need for regulations. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. 

I have a great deal of respect for the biologists and scientists of the world. I know they were created by God for a purpose, and they are passionate about their cause. Without them, our world would be a far less safe and beautiful place to live. But have they gone too far, or is it that they’re being used? 

Unfortunately, some biologists and environmentalists have a strangle hold on government and use their causes to receive needed financing and additional funding even when their “good intentions” are at cross purposes with common sense and the good of human society. Their premise for requesting funds is often based solely on “what if” or “this could be a problem,” rather than on proven knowledge. Animals and nature have long shown their resilience and adaptability. We must use reason and common sense as we place their preservation and well being over that of humans. 

Politicians often use environmental causes as a political football to receive votes and donations. They see the environment as another way to create regulations for the sole purpose of bringing additional revenues in to fill government coffers. Their agenda is based not on what’s good for the species, the area, the environment, but “how much is it worth?” This is not stewardship. This is gambling at the people’s expense. 

Many threatened species have been revived and rejuvenated because someone cared; and sometimes to our detriment. Canadian geese, once at risk, are now becoming a nuisance in some quarters. Sand cranes in parts of the country are becoming so prolific they’re considering open hunting for brief periods of time to keep their numbers down. Environmentalists who have worked tirelessly to preserve their numbers are now seeking to stop what they consider a reckless decision. Who will win is anyone’s guess.

But even if we’re not personally engaged in the destruction of life or of the environment ourselves, if we allow suffering, death, or annihilation to happen can we remain guiltless? Can we stand by and watch millions of babies each year be aborted without taking a stand to protect them? Can we watch habitats, streams, rivers, oceans and species be destroyed without helping to find a solution? Can we simply ignore evil wherever we find it and do nothing? 

Human beings always want to control their environment. They want to control the earth and everything on it. Some sincerely believe global warming is real because they believe that man is so powerful he can change the climate of the earth and control all life on it. This arrogance has led many scientists to support global warming even when the science itself is flawed and has been challenged in many quarters. 

When are we going to learn that God is in control? He created the earth. He has a plan for the earth and its inhabitants. We are like specks of flotsam but for him and his plan of grace and salvation. Yes, we must be good stewards of the earth and of the environment, but we must be equally cognizant of God’s will for us today and in the future.

This Article has been viewed 363 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
No comments yet.
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.