Comments chermak has made

  • A prophet for our times

    Jabailo,

    You comments do much to further the public discourse.  I hope you continue to enlighten Grist readers with your impregnable wit.  If only political leaders would read your comments, we could abandon discussion of environmentalism once and for all.  Keep up the good work!On Martin Who? posted 2 years, 9 months ago 7 Responses

  • Corporations Could Help

    Of course corporations are solely focused on the profit motive.  But that doesn't mean that environmental interests can't converge with corporate interests.  Corporations have the potential to make money from sustainable technologies.  And we need corporations that have such large amounts of money to invest in developing  sustainable ways to produce energy.  The government sure as hell isn't doing that now, and won't under the Bush regime.  Even though corporations are concerned with money, they can still help the environmental cause.  In fact, engaging in such enterprises makes them look good becuase it seems as if they have social consciences.  Corporations must still be watched carefully, but they have the potential to contribute positively to environmental issues.On Romance blossoms between big biz and enviros over a candlelit dinner posted 2 years, 9 months ago 4 Responses

  • Green Beer

    I live in Fort Collins and make it to the New Belgium Brewery often.  I would encourage others to go if they are in town.  They are the most environmentally conscious company I know of.  They are 100% wind-powered and seem to consider the environmental impacts of every business decision.   Check out their committment to sustainability:

    http://newbelgium.com/sustainability.php

    Plus, they make some damn good beer.  Try 1554 and if you get to the brewery, drink some La Folie.On New Belgium beermakers to brew algae-based biodiesel posted 2 years, 9 months ago 3 Responses

  • Editing

    Sorry about the editing, I'm new at this.  Let me say that again.

    Even though the outcomes are uncertain, it is reasonable to believe that future generations will be negatively affected.  As long as we believe this and we value future generations, then it is clear that policies which facilitate global warming are wrong.On Some inconvenient truths posted 3 years, 4 months ago 24 Responses

  • One more thing

    Even though the outcomes are uncertain, it is reasonable to believe that they will future generations will be negatively affected.  As long as we believe this and we value future generations, then it is clear that policies which facilitate global warming are wrong.On Some inconvenient truths posted 3 years, 4 months ago 24 Responses

  • Ethics

    I think the reason people are having such a difficult time with the phrasing of global warming as a moral issue is that the morality may be obfuscated by the sheer scope of the problem and scientific uncertainty (I don't mean to suggest that crazy James Inhofe is correct.  I mean the uncertainty as to what the exact effects of global warming will be.)

    Most will agree that burning babies is wrong.  This is a clear-cut issue where direct harm is inflicted upon a sentient being.  But global warming is not so clear-cut.  It is difficult to say that driving an SUV is wrong in the same way that buring babies is.

    However, we know that global warming is happening and we know that it will likely have disastrous consequences for humanity (not to mention other species!).  It is clearly a moral issue that must be addressesd.

    But given the scope of the problem, I don't think it helps to classify individual actions as right or wrong.  But it does make sense to say that policies which reward companies for drilling are wrong.  Refusing to take part in Kyoto is wrong.  These political issues must be framed as moral issues and are more important, I submit, than consumer choices.  While consumer choices could have big effect if everyone started biking, a bigger effect could be had by people demanding government action.On Some inconvenient truths posted 3 years, 4 months ago 24 Responses

  • Ethics 101

    I'm finishing up my masters degree in philosophy, and I find it very interesting what people think about morality.  I am interested in ethics (and especially environmental ethics), but I am certainly no Christian.  How can this be?  It seems many of the comments above from people who believe that morality should not be a part of environmental activism are assuming that morality depends on religion.  Well, I thoroughly disagree.  In fact, religion often serves as a copout for critical thinking about moral issues.  If I just turn to the Pope for all my moral advice, why should I even bother thinking?

    Morality is much broader and more important than wedge issues of abortion and gay marriage.  Morality is concerned with how we ought to live, and how members of a society can best live together.

    The fact is that all political issues are moral issues.  It just baffles me how anyone could think that environmental issues are not moral issues, as I sit here writing my thesis on ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS.

    And even though I am firmly against organized religion, environmental issues can and must be framed to appeal to all groups.  Christians must be stewards of the land.On Talking point: Fossil fuel morality posted 3 years, 4 months ago 22 Responses