Pages: 1 2
Church World Service poutingly announced it was “disappointed” in the Durban summit while pledging to remain a “passionate advocate for a more just and adequate climate policy.” Before the Durban summit, the relief group had directly warned President Obama: “It is particularly painful to know that the U.S. stood outside the international community in terms of not ratifying the Kyoto Protocol and that recent U.S. Administrations — including your own — have made various political calculations that are making it difficult to reach a sufficiently strong, binding agreement on emissions reductions.”
The Religious Left is always exasperated that U.S. administrations must heed their own people in crafting policies. And it prefers European governments operating in multi-party systems more susceptible to the demands of extreme environmental groups. The National Council of Churches, the titular parent group of Church World Service, also complained of U.S. failure to act on its favored scared scenarios.
“As people of faith, we believe the United States has a moral obligation to ensure a fair, ambitious and binding agreement is put in place as the Kyoto Protocol comes to an end and that any agreement must provide adaptation assistance for the most vulnerable around the world,” a bureaucrat of the financially troubled and failing NCC intoned.
Finances seem to have prevented the National Council of Churches from dispatching its own activist to the Durban summit. But the United Methodist Church, Episcopal Church, and Presbyterian Church (USA) did send concerned envoys. They also escorted “delegates from around the world to provide testimony to the impact that climate change is having on their communities and families.”
The international Religious Left watched and participated in the Durban summit with equal distress. In Geneva, the World Council of Churches had convened a special conference to explore the ethical imperative of climate change agreements. After Durban, a British Methodist relief official desperately urged a “tiny tax” on financial transactions as one “viable way” of funding international transfer payments in reparations for the ostensible havoc of global warming. “Our overseas partners are already facing dangerous climate change – they simply cannot afford for us to delay reducing CO2 emissions or providing funding for climate mitigation until 2020,” implored the Methodist Relief and Development Fund.
No doubt the international Religious Left would like more than a “tiny” tax to subsidize its ideological commitments. Its exertions to overthrow capitalism through support of Marxist liberation in the 1970s and 1980s have long since collapsed. More subtle attempts of the last two decades to halt international economic growth through extremist environmental demands are now discredited.
Under what guise will the Religious Left invest its next crusade against international market economies? Its slogans may shift, but the coercive, impoverishing goal remains constant.
Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.
Pages: 1 2