That title sounds like one of those reality shows about car chases or wild animals – “When Animals Attack!, Part 17″ or something…
I’m an eco-friendly guy to a degree. I don’t recycle everything possible or buy those cool looking light bulbs for every light in the house. But I try to recycle when the opportunity affords and practice energy and water conservation. We don’t make a huge deal of it at our house. We have recycling bins at our church office and I use those. But something happened the other day that really angered me. Claire Grace came home after preschool and began to lecture me about the plastic bottle in the trash can. She then proceeded to tell me about the inevitable destruction of all rain forests and how we needed to do something about that as a family right now! Let me remind you that CG is still 4 years of age (at least for a few more days). Four! That’s a little early to be looking for numbers on the bottom of plastics, isn’t it? So, I told her not to worry about the rain forests and recycling so much. Right now, her main job in life is to “have fun with reckless abandon.” Before you taunt me with accusations of morose parenting, let me explain my logic. You may find it commendable in the end.
Claire Grace got her urgent messages about the environment from two places: public television and preschool. Part of my response to her was to relay the often missed fact that people take various stances on the issue of the environment. Last time I checked, people have a choice to be eco-friendly. Yet, that’s not the message she was receiving. She was being indoctrinated. Come on, Sam – that’s a little harsh isn’t it? Well, look at it this way. Along with the basics of what it takes to care for the environment (something certainly worth knowing), CG was also getting a healthy dose of valuation without really asking for it. Morality was attached to the message of environmental conservation. So, she assumed that my decision to throw a plastic bottle in a standard trash can was an immoral or unethical decision. The inherently right decision would’ve been to find a recycling bin. We use this lingo all the time with secular/social/philosophical themes. After all, we need to “save” the earth, right? Yet, no one likes to point this out…mostly because we get enough righteous indignation from folks without asking for it.
Sadly, those who attach moral significance to the “right to choose ” in one agenda will completely disregard it in other scenrios. The same “choice” of individuality that was denied me by my daughter where going “green” was concerned is forced down my throat when it comes to abortion, for example. Women have a choice. And when the issue of gay marriage comes up, I’m denied that same right to choice used to support abortion when I disagree with same-sex unions. Funny, huh? I’ve never really met the “freedom of choice” police, but evidently that freedom only applies in pre-approved situations. I’m waiting for my manual to arrive in the mail so I can be up to date on which decisions have already been made for me.
I’m a minister. I believe in Jesus Christ. I also believe Christians have a responsibility to the environment. Though I would like for you to believe in Jesus, I cannot make you. It’s your choice. It may surprise you to know that I am totally okay with that. I am constantly amazed at those who malign religion and those who want to “legislate” morality. Yet they have no qualms about applying a similar level of religious “fervor” to their own fashionable cause. All I’m asking for is the same professional courtesy I give you. Please don’t indoctrinate my daughter. She can make the choice to be “green” for herself one day.
I guess it just goes to show that we are all religious about something…
