Southern Baptists change course after BP spill, call for government regulation of environment

[Ed Barrow]

As the BP oil disaster poisons the waters off the states where many of them live, Southern Baptists are issuing their most sweeping call ever for something they have long distrusted -- government regulation of the environment. And a Louisville seminary dean who helped push through that resolution says the catastrophe has the potential to galvanize conservative evangelicals just like the 1973 Supreme Court decision that legalized abortion.

"In many ways, this ecological catastrophe can provide the exact same awakening for evangelicals," said Russsell Moore, dean of the School of Theology at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and chairman of the resolutions committee at last week's meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention in Orlando, Fla.

In the resolution, passed overwhelmingly, the nation's largest Protestant denomination, with 16 million members, called on "governing authorities to act ... with undeterred resolve to end this crisis."

It also called on them "to fortify our coastal defenses; to ensure full corporate accountability for damages, clean-up, and restoration; to ensure that government and private industry are not again caught without planning for such possibilities; and to promote future energy policies based on prudence, conservation, accountability, and safety."

...

Moore said his argument is a conservative one -- that God ordained governments to restrain evil done by sinful humans. He denounced as "outrageous" the apology by U.S. Rep. Joe Barton to BP for the Obama administration's actions, and called talk-show titan Rush Limbaugh's defense of Barton "reprehensible."

"The Gulf of Mexico catastrophe shows us the failure of both private industry to do what it is right, and government to exercise oversight," he said. "Regardless of what one thinks about the proper size of government, surely we can all agree that the law ought to ensure that corporations don't defraud or harm the populace."


http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20106230410

[rpannier]

1. But... I thought Jesus was coming and we're supposed to exploit all the resources

lest he be wrathful (at least that's what former Interior Secretary James Watt told us)

[Ed Barrow]

10. James Watt is the reason I became a Democrat

I was 13 when the Reagan administration took office and at the time I was too young to understand what a Republican really was. I took one look at what Watt was trying to do and decided I didn't like these guys at all. It was the first time I ever felt truly outraged in a political sense. Over time I came to realize that I agreed with the left on a great many other issues but that was the first one. In a funny sort of way I'm thankful that at that formative moment for me I was able to see this real evil that was absolutely unapologetic in its depravity.

P.S. - I was also raised Southern Baptist. I quit going when I was 17, much to the chagrin of my parents. I never went back.

[davidinalameda]

2. hell must have frozen over

[kentauros]

3. The Ninth Circle of Hell has always been frozen over

:P

[davidinalameda]

6. how can it

with global warming?

:evilgrin:

[kentauros]

9. That's "Global Climate Change"

So, yes, it still can be completely frozen over and full of traitors :P

[davidinalameda]

23. hehe

thanks for the clarification

:bounce:

[kentauros]

24. You're welcome :)

That's the only circle of Hell I ever remember, because it's the first to come to mind when anyone says "when Hell freezes over" or "a snowball's chance in Hell" :evilgrin:

Here's an artistic/informational site that's pretty cool: http://danteworlds.laits.utexas.edu/circle9.html

[izquierdista]

4. How can zombies awaken?

Are they going to stop eating their own brains as well?

[G_j]

5. good

"to fortify our coastal defenses; to ensure full corporate accountability for damages, clean-up, and restoration; to ensure that government and private industry are not again caught without planning for such possibilities; and to promote future energy policies based on prudence, conservation, accountability, and safety."


I'm glad those words are on record for the world to see.
Hopefully some good will come of it.

[lpbk2713]

7. Maybe some good will come out of this after all.

Too bad the Gulf had to turn to shit for it to happen though.

[Marr]

8. Some people have to be kicked right in the head before they'll admit it would hurt.

[Hekate]

11. Well, well, well. It took a catastrophe in their own front yards, but they finally saw the light.

This is a positive development, but it is such a sad thing that so many people (of whatever beliefs) do not have sufficient imagination to imagine that something this bad could happen until it does.

Hekate

[NotThisTime]

12. They want help NOW??? I can't say what I'm thinking... other than they are hypocrites

[loudsue]

13. Oh! How fucking timely!!!

Idiots. They're. All. Fucking. Idiots. Since 1994 these idiots have put republicans in power because they kept "BELIEVING" that republicans would ban abortions. They paid absolutely NO attention to what the republicans were REALLY doing....and of course, banning abortions was never never never going to happen, because THAT was the only rallying cry the republicans had going for them "pro-life"!!! pro-life!!!

I wonder how all those turtles, birds, fish, dolphins, fishermen, boat captains, bait shops, beach rental owners etc. feel about pro life at this moment. It was never "pro life", it was anti-CHOICE. Now nobody has a fucking choice but to be covered in oil and chemicals.

[Amonester]

15. "Now nobody has a fucking choice but to be covered in oil and chemicals."

And it's THEIR FAULT.

Sometimes, I wish there really was a HELL for them to experience it. Because of their never-ending obsession to control other human beings' bodies and lives, their collective vote is quickly transforming the entire Gulf Coast into a lifeless HELL for EVERYONE. :grr:

I have a hard time 'forgiving' them for this, even if it's better late than never. :mad:

[RainDog]

18. exactly.

and the rationale - that god lets govt's punish sinful humans is antithetical to our entire system of govt - god doesn't ordain the govt to do anything. Sin is not a concept within democracy.

as you said, it's too bad they spent 30 years fucking over the American people by backing republicans who worked to remove every regulation.

they should punish themselves, by their own criteria, for being sinful and they should pay the Am. govt for their evil ways.

[NotThisTime]

22. Totally agreed, they'll get no thanks from me for their new enlightenment, the damage they inflicted

lives on, and will live on for decades to come, so they can take their newfound desire and shove it.

[rrneck]

14. Must've dumped their BP stock. nt

[William Z. Foster]

16. why is this not good?

People here talk all the time about how people need to change their minds about political issues. Now they do, and people are still attacking them.

Why is this not a very good thing? I am confused by the negative responses.

[scarletwoman]

28. Because reactionaries aren't confined to only one side of the "liberal/conservative" divide.

We've been well-trained to see our fellow citizens as inherently "bad" and unworthy of consideration, because they root for the wrong team.

Never mind that ALL of us have been gulled into buying this false dichotomy by allowing ourselves to identify with one faction or the other of the Ruling Class, instead of identifying with our own class.

I cringe every time I see someone railing about how "stupid" other people are -- as though *we* are somehow superior and stand apart and above other ordinary people who are suffering under no greater a weight of delusion than we are.

If we cannot conceive of how much we have in common with each and every struggling propagandized victim of the powerful elite, then all our high-minded "liberalism" means absolutely nothing.

sw

[RainDog]

29. it isn't reactionary to note they are responsible for electing republicans

who subsequently deregulated industries, took away the muscle of various agencies intended to protect the environment (Watt, Reagan's man was noted here) and who have FOR YEARS claimed a doctrine that god gave humans the earth to exploit.

- and their rationale for their current change in stance has no more basis in democracy than their stances against women, gays... and none of these stances has changed.

It is a major problem in this nation that people are not held accountable for the damage they have done and do to others.

Of course it is better for them to finally wake the fuck up about the problems of environmental catastrophe. However, to claim that there is no basis for disgust means you must deny the last 30 years of American history.

So, please tell me what propaganda you would like to cite that indicates that people's disgust with the southern baptist convention, for instance, is not grounded in fact.

I would really like to know what it is. It is intellectually lazy to claim that one thing is the same as another when history shows otherwise.

Just because you don't like it if a group is criticized does not mean that group does not deserve the criticism they get.

[scarletwoman]

30. How are we any better when it comes to falling for false promises from "our" politicians?

I'm done with blaming ordinary people for the sins of the elites. Why should we assume that we alone are immune from perception management?

In the bigger picture, if there's a place of common ground to stand on with our fellow citizens, what sense does it make to sling dirtballs at them instead of welcoming their help? What exactly are our longterm goals? To have a permanent class of enemies, or to create a more sane and just society?

On one issue, at least, they are waking up and making a move in the same direction that we have long advocated for. It means that even they can evolve -- and if they can evolve on this one point, why shouldn't we take advantage of that and look at it as an opportunity to possibly change their minds about other things as well?

I'm not interested in punishing people for their past bad choices, I'm interested in encouraging them when they move in the direction of making better choices.

sw

[RainDog]

31. this is an organization that has dedicated its existence to denying others' rights

they began as a pro-slavery group. that was the entire reason for the formation of the southern baptists. they worked AS AN ORGANIZATION to oppose civil rights in the 1960s.

They started schools in the 1970s to protest desegregation.

They refuse to admit that science is correct and they are wrong and they HARM this nation by this position. They DUMB DOWN THIS NATION.

They CONTINUE as an anti-gay and anti-woman group. This is the head of this organization's seminary - a person who HAS TO AGREE to their hateful creed in order to serve in this position.

They advocate and use TORTURE on gay teenagers because they refuse to accept that homosexuality is a part of mammalian existence - across species.

So, again, I applaud that they are not doing something that is as repulsive as they many things they have done AND CONTINUE TO DO. But that doesn't negate what they stand for.

If you want to encourage them, go right ahead. However, it is not reactionary to note the truth about their positions on matters and to recognize the fact of their existence. If you know people who have been abused by their doctrine, yes, you can choose to forgive them but that doesn't mean you cannot continue to point out the things they have done and continue to do to harm others. And you would be wise to remain highly skeptical of them based upon their past actions.

My long term goal is to deny them power because they have shown that they are not worthy of it. My goal is to make it clear that they have nothing of value to say about the lives of others based upon the LONG HISTORY of their repulsive views.

Mandela made peace with the apartheid fascists (who the sbc supported, btw) when they were stripped of power - ONLY when the apartheid power-brokers admitted their crimes. And when they were removed from positions of power. So, yeah, encourage them. But also tell the truth about them. That's what people have done here - told the truth about them.

So, yeah, if the sbc wants to admit their heinous acts.. great.

However, the fact remains that this group is the enemy to many because of their ongoing push to deny civil rights to others. If you want to make peace with them, go ahead. but you cannot expect that everyone will share your desire because their history doesn't warrant trust in them.

You call this reactionary. I call this a consequence of their actions. Cause and effect.

[William Z. Foster]

34. like the Democratic party?

The Democratic party was a pro-slavery group for a long time.

I would say that this move by the SBC could mean the beginning of the end of the bigots' control over the organization. That doesn't deny anything you are saying - all of which is true. The country is permeated by racism and bigotry. When it is out in the open it can be discussed and overcome. The line we hear from too many Democrats - "your cause - which don't get me wrong, I support - is not a priority right now, You cannot always stamp your feet and get everything you want the moment you want it!" may be less offensive and ugly than what comes from the SBC, but is just as much an obstacle to equality - maybe more so because it promotes bigotry while pretending not to.

[RainDog]

35. this is a new talking point, I see... to oppose bigotry makes one a bigot.

that is total bullshit.

it's like reading Animal Farm, in terms of the head-spinning "logic."

people here express their opinions. this is a forum - and that happens.

You assume something is "my cause" when I'm noting "my opinion" and why I hold it. My cause, if you want to call it that, is an opposition to religious intrusion into issues of state.

I realize that's not a priority - because of the potential votes that are available by pretending it's not a problem.

If you think that supporting the goal of reason and an aversion to lies is bigotry - then you have a problem.

[William Z. Foster]

38. please read my post again

You have misread several things in it.

[RainDog]

36. oh, and for you to try to make a comparison b/t the sbc and the democrats...

would indicate that you are cherry picking in my post to support the ridiculous lie that opposition to bigotry is bigotry - because you will notice that I include a long list of abuses by the sbc that continue to this day.

if the democratic party held the views that the sbc does - I would NEVER vote for that party.

If I had been alive while the Democratic Party was the party of racists, I would have been a republican. In fact, the two parties have changed orientation BECAUSE the sbc, etc. has migrated to the Republican Party. Surely you're not ignorant of this recent history. And if you're not, why bother with such an illogical observation - why, yes, of course those who were the bigots in the democratic party and still bigots while they're in the republican party.

So, again, your argument is infantile... current positions of the sbc are not different. if they want to change their positions and tell their congregations that god has told them it's no longer correct to support bigotry than more power to them.

Do I have to like them? no. Is it valid to note that their reasons for this change are as stupid as the ones they use to support bigotry? yes. As I said originally - the concept of sin has no place in govt. It never has.

There is nothing in the constitution or the declaration of independence that discusses "sin." Sin is a religious concept that has no application in democracy. I noted their rationale because it remains as worthless now as it has been from the start.

as I noted originally, according to THEIR belief system - they should punish themselves and pay the govt for the crimes they have perpetrated against the people of this nation to make atonement for their sins.

We have freedom of association in this nation - that means I and others do not have to associate with southern baptists if we find them reprehensible. We do not have to be their friends.

If you want to be their friends - by all means, do. But do not expect that everyone will do as you choose to do. It's great that there are people who are willing to reach out to the sbc - but if that means accommodating their lies - then I will oppose you, too.

[William Z. Foster]

40. exactly

Organizations can change. Maybe SBC is, maybe they aren't. I am not "their friends" nor am I defending them.

I said nothing that could be construed as "opposition to bigotry is bigotry." I said that there is plenty of bigotry among those who identify as Democrats and liberals and that being for or against this or that organization is a lazy shortcut when it comes to battling against bigotry.

[William Z. Foster]

33. what are you talking about?

No one is defending the Southern Baptist Convention, let alone denying anything about them. They made one move in the right direction, and I said that was a good thing.

A year ago Christmas I spoke for GLBTQ equality to a roomful of Warren admirers in a rural AOG church - successfully. that never could have happened had I taken your approach. Those people have been lied to and misled by their leadership. We are the pot calling the kettle black to attack them for that. Our own ranks are rife with hypocrisy and cowardice, and with slavish devotion to leadership no matter where they take us.

I think these frantic efforts to lay all blame for the unfolding catastrophe in the country on various enemies is a form of denial.

[William Z. Foster]

32. thanks

Well said.

[Selatius]

17. Sadly, it took a disaster where countless lives were ruined before they changed their ways.

They should've listened to the warning sign decades ago, but no, they just had to fall in lock-step behind the Republicans like a bunch of goose-stepping morons.

[jberryhill]

19. God Changed His Mind Again? /nt

[appleannie1]

20. And when carbon related global warming cannot be reversed, they will admit it is real.

[Mariana]

21. They want more regulation to protect the environment,

but do you think they're willing to pay for it? HELL no, you better not raise their taxes one cent! These are the same people who were cheerleading the wars AND the tax cuts at the same time. Anyway, they'll change their minds the first time they're told they can't build a megachurch on an environmentally sensitive area.

[JoeyT]

25. Pretty much, yeah.

I don't expect their newly discovered green ways to last out the year.
I imagine they only want to see something done to fix their property values. Other than that the environment can rot for all they care.

[malaise]

26. Bwaaaaaaaaaaah hahahahahahah

These fuckers are always light years behind progressives. Fugg them...who needs their support on anything that matters.

[DailyGrind51]

27. I guess the spill "took them to church"?

[immune]

37. Holier than thou pontificating

hurts my ears no matter who's doing it. Nobody is right about everything all the time even if some others are more wrong than right most of the time, but people DO have the ability to learn and grow if they're given the proper incentive and information. When that information and incentive hits them between the eyes is no time to beat them up, rather its an opportunity to provide more information and incentive to learn some more.

None of us knows it all, otherwise why would we be here? Isn't DU primarily a learning tool?

[DefenseLawyer]

39. Southern Baptists: Wives should be cleaning up the oil spill! n/t