Environmentalists are ultimately nothing but obstructionists
Charles Martin Cosgriff
Wayne County Conservative Examiner
There is a report on AOL this morning which demonstrates the irony involved among the various liberal movements. It is a rather delicious irony, too.
Proponents of solar power have been seeking permission to place solar panels in the California desert. Environmentalists, notably the Sierra Club, argue that the area selected is not good because it would threaten the habitats of the desert tortoise, the Western burrowing owl, and bighorn sheep.
The environmentalists like the idea, but explain that it is simply planned for a bad spot. Perhaps; yet why does it always seem as though no matter what other folks do environmentalists always find something to gripe about?
It's a sign of the schizophrenia of the left. They want solar power, until it threatens an animal habitat. They want wind power, until they discover that birds can get hurt when flying into the fan blades of a typical wind farm. They want a wide respect for human rights, until those rights clash with that old bugbear (and completely nonexistent moral axiom) animal rights.
People are more important than animals, and nature is remarkably resilient. Move the turtles and owls and sheep if you must, because if the area in question is a good place for the solar panels then setting them up for human use is more important than leaving the area alone for animal life. As animals, they don't know what they're missing or getting anyway. Yet real live human beings could miss out on real honest human needs.
If the choice is between animals and people, humanity holds the trump card. There's no sense in not playing the ace up your sleeve.
Wayne County Conservative Examiner
There is a report on AOL this morning which demonstrates the irony involved among the various liberal movements. It is a rather delicious irony, too.
Proponents of solar power have been seeking permission to place solar panels in the California desert. Environmentalists, notably the Sierra Club, argue that the area selected is not good because it would threaten the habitats of the desert tortoise, the Western burrowing owl, and bighorn sheep.
The environmentalists like the idea, but explain that it is simply planned for a bad spot. Perhaps; yet why does it always seem as though no matter what other folks do environmentalists always find something to gripe about?
It's a sign of the schizophrenia of the left. They want solar power, until it threatens an animal habitat. They want wind power, until they discover that birds can get hurt when flying into the fan blades of a typical wind farm. They want a wide respect for human rights, until those rights clash with that old bugbear (and completely nonexistent moral axiom) animal rights.
People are more important than animals, and nature is remarkably resilient. Move the turtles and owls and sheep if you must, because if the area in question is a good place for the solar panels then setting them up for human use is more important than leaving the area alone for animal life. As animals, they don't know what they're missing or getting anyway. Yet real live human beings could miss out on real honest human needs.
If the choice is between animals and people, humanity holds the trump card. There's no sense in not playing the ace up your sleeve.
