Sunday, December 28, 2008

Not too far into the future...


And we thought the photographer that built a fire under it for just the perfect shot was bad.
Thanks Steve Benson

14 comments:

Bryce and Mandy said...

What a great cartoon. Perfect, I say.

okbushmans said...

Who cares? Find oil where you can! Drill baby drill, right? It is dirt, we're talking about! What if the cure for cancer was hiding underneath that beautiful arch? Would there be an outcry? What if tree-root stem cells that would cure Alzheimers were buried underneath some redwoods in California? Why is it outrageous to use what the earth produces, but logically and ethically safe to use embryonic stem cells for 'possible' cures?

Jen said...

Didn't we already talk about this?

Lula O said...

I posted this because it was in the paper yesterday. And I'm on an environmental kick of late.

Everyday seems to bring some new revelation that just pisses me off, and having hiked to this particular arch at least a half dozen times, it drives the nail in deeper.

Avert your eyes if it bothers you.
I cannot look away.

Lula O said...

And OKbushman, why don't you tell me what you REALLY think. Please don't hold back on my account.

If you lived there, this would bother you. You have the luxury of distance. It's the whole - Not in MY backyard - issue.

Think about that.

okbushmans said...

We just drove through Moab, drove past many National Parks, and enjoyed the scenic route. It was my backyard, and my extended families front, side and backyards. I spent many summers enjoying natural playgrounds. We drove through those places without seeing a single oil derrick until beautiful Oklahoma and Texas, but I guess they're coming.

But really, what's the difference? Why cherish dirt, plants, animals more than a human embryo? Both are done in the name for the common good? Why is so much effort put into protecting the earth, yet so difficult to determine when life begins?

Jen said...

Speaking of being on an environmental kick, my husband and I had many discussions since the Global Warming posts. I default to him A LOT because he seriously is SOOOO smart and very well read--I mean who really reads text books for leisure reading--HE DOES! It's a bit scary and boring, but I find all his knowledge interesting...I digress. I don't know if you are and extremist or not and I'm certainly not calling you one--caring about the environment doesn't equal extremist in my mind, however I do have some questions or thoughts on the matter. I mentioned that I didn't know the full extent of global warming--who does? not that it wasn't/isn't happening (but we are also having a global cooling). But in my mind the universe is sooooo huge and I really don't know what is universal vs. man made (only 100 years of temps. on the books--who knows what happened naturally before that) and my hunch based upon my studies is that it is soooo much bigger than us (not to say we can't help with pollution or recycling or lowering energy usage etc.) but the whole idea of what causes global warming etc. So, where I get all crazy is when mandates and HUGE expenses are incurred when I don't even believe that we can do anything or much about it (can we really save the polar bears by cutting down on pollution? I'm not being sarcastic, this is an honest question). It's sooo much bigger than us. Why should I be federally mandated to purchase a certain light bulb (I realize this hasn't happened, but I wouldn’t put it past the extremists to push for something like this) to "save" the planet from Global Warming....or is it Climate Change?

These ideas are fascist (yes, coming from a conservative that sounds hypocritical, but if you truly understand fascism you would actually agree. Ideas of fascism come from the right and the left) Fascism doesn't equal concentration camps. When the fascists in Germany first starting making laws and mandates they sincerely in their hearts did it for "the good of the people". I would say it's similar to the idea of outlawing trans fats. Sure, it's better for us to not eat trans fats, but why should there be laws outlawing restaurants from serving it? Can't we just be educated and decide for ourselves? So, when we start making laws and mandates that are "for the good of the people" or in this case, the environment, then we start running into fascism and allowing the ideas of fascism to enter into our country. Also, like Bushamans mentioned embryos. If we are erring on the side of being safe for our environment, why can't the left see that we should err on the same side for life? If we are constantly checking and balancing science, shouldn’t the same be done for human life? I'd rather save a child than save an arch--but why can't we do both?

We need to have self-reliance and self-discipline. It should not be mandated.

Jen said...

P.S. I was being sarcastic when I wrote my first comment ;)

Bryce and Mandy said...

I love how a cartoon about wanting to protect a national park turns into abortion talk. Come on. Don't you have anything else to talk about? I'm just so sick of abortion always being republicans fall back argument. Can't we talk about anything without that being brought up?

okbushmans said...

I didn't once reference abortion. I brought up embryonic stem cell research. Only to point out how ironic it is that people get SO worked up about polar bears, dirt, plants, and find embryo's disposable. And I feel like each side has a noble issue. Lula is obviously very passionate about protecting our earth, she writes about this issue a lot. None of us disagree it is a priority to do our part. It is a noble issue that the democrats or liberals have that most people agree with, to an extent. Conservatives or republican's care about the sanctity of life, whether abortion or stem cell research, etc. Many of you agree with us, but it is an issue we write about and are passionate about, just as environmentalism is for you.

And honestly, my first comment about 'it's just dirt, right?' was completely tongue-in-cheek. I was playing the devil's advocate to make a point. What is the difference? I have never understood it. And I was hoping, even if you don't agree with it, you could shed some light on it. (Just like in my comment about Bush's thought process regarding deregulation. Don't agree with it, but I can explain it.)

Now that my devious plan is out in the open, you can dispell those evil thoughts you were having about me....well, we all know, that won't happen! :)

Jen said...

Thank you Bushmans for defending what I was thinking when Mandy made the comment. I would say that there has been slightly more talk about the environment than there has been about abortion. I guess I'd like the see the same amount of passion from each of you regarding life. I understand your stance, king of, but I just don't see you defending it--it's more excuses as to why you don't defend it politically with policies than why you would defend it. I'm not saying that you don't, but I just haven't heard it. Most of the discussions re. abortion have been me talking out about it and the rest of you either playing devil's advocate w/a side note that you think it's wrong, or explaining why it's useless to do anything about it because no one is going to change their stance. Why is saving the environment a useful cause to speak out on but no one can do anything about the abortion thing so let's just move on to other issues?

Ok, I really didn't mean for this to become about abortion, but it just came up.

Lula O said...

I'm going to be brief because I'm old and lack the energy. I post - most of the time - about what's in the news at the moment, leaning heavily on subjects I'm interested in.

Sorry. Nothing I can do about that. It's your choice if you read it or not. Currently, I don't see a need to post - Hey I'm against abortion. How about you?

If, however, some new legislation popped up or some new medical fact about human life was in the news, like when I did the post on stem cell research, then I'll let the ranting flood gates release their flow.

When human life begins is a philosophical question I doubt can ever be answered. It will be debated until the end of time. I'm too tired, so until then, preventing unwanted pregnancy is more realistic. To me. Early sex ed, cheap birth control, etc. Supporting and voting on such measures is where I can make a difference.

It is the same with our environment. Prevention. Making a difference in little ways. Recycling, reusing, throwing a fit when our government just takes without asking.

You worry about it when it's our money. I worry about it when it's our land.

I don't see much difference.

Since I've been reading the Moms site, I've seen no posts on abortion. If you don't talk about it then why do I exactly? Perhaps I missed it.

So much for being brief...

Jen said...

I'm glad to hear that, and thank you for the clarification. I guess that's what I haven't heard from you and why I've been a bit perplexed on the issue.

Mandy, to call it a "fall back" arguement is just false. We have talk and debated many other issues and abortion hasn't come up everytime. While abortion/birth control is a major issue that concerns me, it's not the only concern. Even if it was, what's wrong with being an advocate on saving lives?

Bryce and Mandy said...

I don't care if you are an advocate for saving lives. Good for you. It only bugs me when it is brought up in a conversation that has nothing to do with it, which happens quite often on this site. I already know how you feel and you know how I feel. Why keep bringing it up? We are on the same side. I just don't see why we have to rehash it so often when it isn't the topic of the original conversation.