Shimkus Uses God To Ignore Global Warming

In the last post, I wrote about President Obama’s missteps in regards to religious issues. I concluded that people should not be criticizing the President or the government based on religious differences alone. There were some mixed reactions regarding this stance, and I can understand it. Politics alone is a touchy issue, let alone mixing religion in there, too. Nevertheless, I still stand behind my opinion. Coincidentally, this issue of religion in politics came up again during the topic of global warming and what the U.S. can do about it.

Former Vice President Al Gore and Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich sparred off at Capitol Hill last Friday over a bill that would endorse sweeping climate change reform by Congress. Gore, the Noble Prize winner behind “An Inconvenient Truth” which highlighted the severity of the global warming crisis, urged Congress to find the “moral courage” to pass what he claims as “one of the most important pieces of legislation ever introduced in the Congress.”

On the other hand, Gingrich responded by calling this bill a future energy tax to be paid by Americans and major power move for the Energy Department. “Make no mistake about it: This bill amounts to a $1 [trillion] to $2 trillion energy tax levied on a struggling economy, which is destructive and wrong,” Gingrich said. However, Gingrich does believe that global warming is a factor in current weather trends. In addition, he also has outlined his own alternate climate change plan that is not as bold as the current bill, but would take some action against global warming.

Personally, I am in favor of changing the laws to protect the planet from global warming. However, I respect Gingrich’s position that whatever budget allotted for this program must be spent meticulously – similarly to the banking bailout, if the funds are not watched carefully for this program, the costs can easily skyrocket. Both arguments made by Gore and Gingrich were interesting, well-researched, and relevant to the issue at hand.

Unfortunately, I could not say the same thing for another point of view from U.S. Representative John Shimkus, who sits on the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment. He spoke a couple of weeks ago when this climate change bill was first being drawn up. He essentially argued that since God will destroy the Earth, global warming cannot be a threat to the planet.


In his discourse, Shimkus (above) cited Genesis 8: 21-22 about the Biblical flood and stated for the record that: “…the earth will end only when God declares it’s time to be over. Man will not destroy this earth. This earth will not be destroyed by a flood.... I appreciate having panelists here who are men of faith, and we can get into the theological discourse of that position, but I do believe God’s word is infallible, unchanging, perfect.”

And here I find myself in the same position as I was last time – discouraging those who use religion solely as the basis of augmenting a political position. The only reason Shimkus does not believe in global warming is, in a childish sense, because ‘God said so.’ Is this the type of reasoning we want making the laws of this nation – just because ‘my religion told me so?’ At what point can intellectual reasoning be the foundation of the laws we seek to establish instead of just someone’s private religious beliefs?

In a recent news report by the Discovery Channel, researchers published their results of an expedition to the Himalaya Mountains in the journal Geophysical Research Letters. They found that the Himalaya mountain glaciers are currently melting faster than what was predicted. Some of the experts even claim the glaciers could disappear in as fast as 15 years. Hundreds of millions of people depend on these glaciers as their water supply. Former Democratic National Committee Chairperson Howard Dean responded to this alarming report: “We can’t avert this crisis … it’s not our grandchildren, it’s us.”

It is clear that global warming is becoming an issue which the U.S. government needs to make a decisive move on soon. Whether it is the sweeping reform presented in the current bill in Congress being backed by Gore or the limited, economically-friendly outline by Gingrich, the U.S. needs to start taking the proper precautions to combat climate change. But as long as the debate on this important problem facing the planet does not focus on shallow religious-based arguments, I will not be complaining about it.

This article was published in The Collegian, La Salle University's student newspaper.

Obama Cannot Answer Religious Fanatics

Some may consider President Barack Obama to be the “Savior” the U.S. needs in this tough time, but has he gone so far as to replace Christianity in America? Many Christians believe this to be true, after President Obama delivered a speech at Georgetown University, where the White House staff requested that all religious images of Jesus were to be hidden while the President was to be onstage.

It seems that since the 2008 election, religion continually comes back to haunt President Obama. First it was whether or not he was Christian or Muslim during the campaign. Obama also had problems with his former pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Then during the first eleven weeks as President, FOX News reported that Obama had not gone to a single church service since his inauguration.

President Obama took the religion issue further into question, when earlier this month during in a press conference in Turkey, President Obama stated: “One of the great strengths of the United States is [although] we have a very large Christian population -- we do not consider ourselves a Christian nation or a Jewish nation or a Muslim nation. We consider ourselves a nation of citizens who are bound by ideals and a set of values.”

Now, with this controversy at Georgetown, Obama adds another thorn in the sides of many Christians and their view of the President’s beliefs about religion. After 8 years of President George W. Bush’s conservative Christian policies, Obama has wrecked havoc on the religious front. There is so much disdain for Obama, not just on his religious blunders but also on his stances of pro-abortion and approval of same-sex rights, that many right-wing fanatics believe he is out to destroy the country and some even go far as to call him the Antichrist.

There is only one problem with this line of thinking. Is there not supposed to be a separation between church and state? The beginning of the First Amendment guarantees that: “Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion; prohibiting the free exercise thereof …” It should not matter whether or not Obama is Christian or not. If America is truly a free nation, then why would it matter if the President was Christian, Jewish, Muslim, or even a non-believer of any religion? American citizens should criticize on what Obama does with the government from an objective viewpoint, not whether Obama handles his own personal beliefs in the correct Christian manner.

However, the second part of that Amendment also guarantees no law that is: “abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Therefore, people should have the right to say whether or not the President should be Christian or not. It is this Amendment where the duality of protecting our beliefs and our opponents’ views lies. Go ahead and critique what our government is doing – it is your right to do so.

I would encourage readers to keep an eye on President Obama is doing; after all, he may not be the complete “Savior” his voters expected him to be. But if you are going to criticize Obama or the government solely based on religious differences; do not expect me to be standing beside you.

According to a Pew Research Poll, one in ten Americans still believe that President Obama is a Muslim, which is undoubtedly false. The troublesome fact – this survey was not asked during the election; this was done in March 2009, two months into Obama’s presidency. An even more startling fact – one in five Caucasian Evangelical Christians thought Obama was Muslim. Americans still do not know who their President is exactly, and it appears to be that some are not even willing to find out the truth about Obama. Perhaps for these Americans, ignorance is bliss. Nevertheless, it is further proof that religion is a major problem that President Obama cannot seem to answer to the American public.

This article was published in The Collegian, La Salle University's student newspaper.