FacebooktwittermailFacebooktwittermail

Climate Change Catechism

If you want a peek into what sort of moral value system the public schools of America have catechized our children with look up the #ParisAccords. There, especially amongst the young folk, you will see ample apologies to the world for our “*expletive* dumb President”. They have been taught for decades how “taking care of the environment” is one of the most important duties we have. It has been drilled into the youngsters that they shall be rendered righteous members of society should they dutifully and faithfully recycle and live sustainably in order to reduce their carbon footprint. All over social media, as a result of Trump announcing that the USA would be withdrawing from the UN’s climate change treaty, known as the Paris Agreement, the ethics of a generation reared on “green-ism” came into full display.

They felt compelled to apologize and ask forgiveness for the US’s failure to help stop Global Warmi–I mean Climate Change. They’ve been trained to jihad for the earth, and have been taught to think that perhaps one of their primary purposes in life is to stop–or at least slow–Climate Change. Battle they must to stop pollution, to stop mankind from destroying the planet.

Here’s a fine example:

But we should step back and ask, “Why is this so important? What grid guides their reasoning and elicits such an emotional reaction to Trump’s withdrawing us from the Paris Agreement?”

Paris Accord: The Love Child of Darwin & Mother Earth

This morning I actually read through all twenty-five pages of this quasi-treaty, and here is what I distilled from that reading. The Paris Agreement represents a thoroughly secularized view of the earth. These Climate Change beliefs are rooted in the soil of a Darwinian view of nature. In essence, the forces of evolution have finally spawned a planet where life is found in all its abundant forms, but one of those creatures–Mankind–is selfishly endangering every other species’ existence.Mankind is endangering not only his own existence, but also that of every other species.Thus man must be stopped by the machinery of evolution. We must repent of our selfish attempt to oppose evolutionary progress in other species, and surrender to the will of time and chance.

It isn’t unexpected, but it should be noticed that the Paris Agreement never makes mention of “petitioning God Almighty to grant us wisdom as we steward this good world He has given to us.” That sort of agreement might be tolerable. Instead, it makes a peculiar reference to Mother Earth (p 2.), while conspicuously ignoring God Almighty. It notes that some cultures acknowledge our earth’s ecosystems as “Mother Earth” and that climate change is an “urgent threat” (p. 1), to the earth’s systems. Isn’t it ironic that the same liberals who rail for separation of church and state mourn over our withdrawal from a treaty which acknowledges a quasi-deity known as Mother Earth? Should we really be comfortable about legally binding ourselves to honor that deity without being allowed to ask that our Christian worldview of a Sovereign God ruling the world also be acknowledged?

Another issue with the treaty is constitutional. The President along with a two-thirds majority of the Senate is the only way for us to enter upon such treaties.This did not happen with the Paris Agreement. Thus, we are breaking our own laws in order to comply with non-binding “globalist” law. Surely, we can see beyond this particular treaty and realize that we ought not to be signing agreements with other countries which may compromise our own national integrity. I ought not open a new line of credit and max it out in a day without my wife’s knowledge and agreement. That is precisely what this treaty does. It obliges the US to certain requirements and oversight from a UN committee, without our ability to protest whether those requirements are just. For those who want liberty, this should be of great concern. This tweet captured the essence of the problem:

The Agreement obliges sovereign countries decided upon an amount of tax-payer money to donate to this ecological slush fund. Then, “developing parties” (i.e. third-world nations) can apply for these funds in order to subsidize their endeavors to reduce carbon emissions. This is a recipe for corruption. It means US taxpayers foot the bill and have no guarantee or oversight of whether those countries which are receiving those funds are really applying them to their intended end of curbing climate change. Heck, some dictator could shut down all his country’s factories, build himself a mansion, and claim he cut his nation’s carbon emissions by 100 percent.

Another problem is the “chumminess” which leaves those who are climate change skeptics out in the cold. There is no mention of the possibility that the climate change models are wrong. Nor is there provision for what should happen if scientists make discoveries that prove that increased global temperatures might in fact be a good thing (as has been shown by many reliable studies). In fact, if we actually care about scientific reliability, wouldn’t it be in our best interest to also fund opposing views to test their hypotheses? However, this goes counter to the catechism which we’ve been teaching for decades, and to admit our wrong might undo the whole program of climate change alarmists.

An Inevitable Genocide

What is that program? Make no mistake, the goal here is that of inhibiting the experimentation and invention of private enterprise. The Climate-Gestapo (in education, government, and media) has been, is, and forever will be all about a centralizing of power in the UN, and taking liberty from the individual persons, companies, states, and nations. In the Climate Change mantra, notice that the source of the problem is anthropogenic. Since man is the problem, someone has to smack him into alignment. Their worldview does not allow for an Almighty God–who rules the world with sovereign sway, ordaining all things that come to pass–to restrain and guide man, thus preserving this earth for His appointed ends  Rather, the godless solution will always be a faceless bureaucracy, which will decide what’s best for you. This is why Darwinism will always lead to some form of genocide, or in this case population control; some UN committee in the not too distant future (if things proceed they way they are) will be deciding who lives and who doesn’t. This is why the Paris Agreement states in Article 12, that the “education” (i.e. indoctrination into this particular school of thought as it regards our planet) of the public is a clear priority. They must continue to preach their gospel of salvation by ecologically-friendly works. They must proselytize for fresh converts to their godless view of nature.

As Christians, we must not be swept away by false narratives about what this earth is and what it is for. Many Christians have embraced “environmentalism” without realizing they are adhering to a worldview which is, at its root, godless. The climate change frenzy is purely the result of Darwin’s “survival of the fittest.” This base assumption has influenced the Climat-eers’ view of the environment in which we live. The Paris Agreement clearly demonstrates that the UN believes that the universe is a place to be survived. To that end, we must control man. The inevitable result will be the devaluing of human life, because Darwinism views man as mere molecules in motion. Soon enough this will manifest itself as a committee motion demanding population control in all signers of the Paris Agreement. Some UN-ish bureaucracy in the not too distant future will claim the right to decree how many children a family can have, and, believe me, genocide will gladly volunteer to help. Because they do not view man as made in God’s image–and therefore peculiarly placed to represent God upon this earth–thes have no moral reason to restrain the murderous inclination of fallen man.

As Christians, we must insist that the earth is a kingdom to be subdued, rather than a machine to be survived. Man is to take dominion of this planet and use it for the purpose of glorifying God. Man is not a pest to be eradicated from this world, rather we are, in the image of God, to bring order to the chaos and subdue this uncultivated world into a garden kingdom for God’s glory. Contrary to the Climate-Gestapo, I think we need more people on this planet. Double what we have now, as quick as we can reproduce. Imagine, 14 billion people! Now, we’d have to build some cities in Montana and Northern Russia. However, that doubles the likelihood of someone inventing a way to grow meat in a lab; or create a wheat crop that grows twice as fast, year-round, with half the water needed; or someone may invent a way to run our cars on ocean water; or a way to harvest water and minerals from asteroids. A treaty which redistributes US taxpayers’ wealth will not accomplish this; rather, it will be Christian families, Churches, and Schools which teach their children to go take dominion of this world and steward it all to the glory of God.

FacebooktwittermailFacebooktwittermail

FacebooktwitterrssyoutubeFacebooktwitterrssyoutube