Dear all,
The great danger of invoking religion as a tool in conservation and
environmental management is that these holy texts were written at least
1357 years ago (in the case of the Quran) by entirely different
cultures and at a time when there were different constraints on
populations and behaviour. Religious texts were not intended to be used
to solve the debate over sustainability and therefore any interpretation
based on them is likely to be ambiguous. Moreover, a verse can be found
to sustain almost any viewpoint. For example, in Genesis 1:28, God's
instructions to Adam and Eve were (using the 1984 NIV translation):
/God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number;
fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the
birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the
ground."
/
Or when Noah and his family emerge from the ark in Genesis 9:1-3,
/Then God blessed Noah and his sons, saying to them, "Be fruitful and
increase in number and fill the earth. The fear and dread of you will
fall upon all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air, upon
every creature that moves along the ground, and upon all the fish of the
sea; they are given into your hands. Everything that lives and moves
will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give
you everything./
Neither of these passages imply any responsibility to be sustainable, to
control human populations or to protect natural systems. The idea that
the earth would one day be 'full' is not envisaged and no guidance is
given on what to do next. These verses could equally be invoked to argue
against the use of resources for conservation - we have a
divinely-granted right to do what we like with nature.
A wide variety of religious representatives were recently given a
platform at COP17 to present arguments for how their faith could
contribute towards the climate change problem. Of course, only those who
agreed with the scientific consensus were invited to speak, and
personally I believe this sets a dangerous precedent. There are powerful
moral imperatives to support conservation and sustainable resource use;
these exist beyond religion. Recursively examining religious texts to
look for similar statements, then using the religion to 'support'
particular actions, opens up the discussion to doctrinal interpretations
and schisms that have nothing to do with the original problem, nor even
the moral issue at its heart. The debate needs to remain focussed on the
evidence if we are to achieve anything.
Best wishes to all regardless of their faith (or none),
Markus Eichhorn
On 05/12/11 23:11, Martin Meiss wrote:
In addition to the points made by Sarah Frias-Torres, there is this to
consider: Wide swaths of Christian conservatives think the end-times are at
hand. Those who see environmental degradation as a sign of the end-times
are not going to hasten to undo a sign from God. Some progressive
Christians, thinking the world is a gift from God, see it as their duty to
be good stewards of the environment, but others take the mandate from
Genesis to "be fruitful and multiply" as a license for unrestrained
growth. Additionally, other fundamentalists, even if they disapprove of
environmental degradation, don't care very much because they figure
everything will be over very soon. Unlike Ms. Frias-Torres, I have no
respect for those religions that, for whatever reason, think that
environmental degradation is fulfillment of their god's plan. What
contribution can they make?
Martin M. Meiss
--
School of Biology
University of Nottingham
Nottingham, UK NG7 2RD
++44 (0)115 951 3214
ecology.nottingham.ac.uk
This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and may
contain confidential information. If you have received this message in error,
please send it back to me, and immediately delete it. Please do not use, copy
or disclose the information contained in this message or in any attachment.
Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not necessarily
reflect the views of the University of Nottingham.
This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an attachment
may still contain software viruses which could damage your computer system:
you are advised to perform your own checks. Email communications with the
University of Nottingham may be monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
