Shortcuts

Connect with us on Facebook!
Subscribe.
[Feeds & Readers]
Follow us on Twitter!

Make us your home page!
Authors, sign in!

« Bishops Are Running the Health Care Reform Show | Main | District of Columbia has the World's First Female Football Coach »


Words

By Ken Poland
March 10, 2010

I received email discussing: Words have meanings and politicians who want to control your life know that. The text of the message addressed the fact that the switch from using “global warming” to “climate change” was not a coincidence. Well, Duh! Words were invented because sign language was rather limiting in carrying on a conversation.The switch from using “global warming” to “climate change” was not a coincidence. Whether you call it ‘global warming’, ‘climate change’, ‘environmental activism’, ’smog’, or whatever else you think of is not the issue that needs to be addressed?

I grew up, in northwest Kansas, knowing that when they said we were going to have thunderstorms, I knew we would have a dirt storm first. Do you not think that farming practices had changed our environment? Farming practices had not substantially changed since the dirt storms of the 1910 and 1911 era. Should we have poo pooed those who said we needed to alter our farming methods? Those people who lived in the highly industrialized area couldn’t hang their laundry outside if they didn’t want it all to turn to a dismal gray color. Do you think the smokestacks belching black coal smoke weren’t changing the environment? Do you think acid rain is someone's imagination? Is the availability of potable water a concern for the future? Do you think the throat burning and eye itching sensations you have when in congested traffic is just your imagination or merely irritation over delay in getting where you want to be? Do you think man has nothing to do with the disappearance of the rain forests? Do you think the demise of rain forests is not going to change the ecology and atmosphere of that area? What about the mushroom clouds and nuclear pollution? Is that not a threat to your environment? Do you honestly think that the combination of all these things cannot in any way effect our global atmosphere? Do you not think we are slaves to the traditional energy companies and systems of today? Has world culture and population not changed the issues you face daily from those your ancestors faced?

The Bible does not literally address any of the issues I have listed. Does that mean we Christians can just go merrily along our way and ignore them? Does the commission we are assigned with in Matt. 28:19-20 only command that we get a patent confession of faith from our brothers? What are all the other things Christ, by his example, revealed to us that we should be concerned about? (vs. 20) Am I my brothers keeper? And, if I am, should I be concerned about what physical condition I am leaving this world in for the generations of brothers to come? If you do not claim Christianity, do you have any moral obligation to protect the environment for your children or grandchildren?

Al Gore seems to be the whipping boy for those who disagree with 'Global Warming'. "He's getting rich with his propaganda." Al Gore, whether you agree with him or not, gets paid by those who invite him to speak. Motivational Christian speakers get paid by those who invite them to speak. Television personalities, Christian or not, collect big time bucks for speaking at rallies. Try getting former President G.W. Bush to come give an address for a meeting. Do you not think he gets a pretty good stipend for his presentation? What he does with that stipend is not the issue. Organize a Tea Party and try getting Sarah Palin to be your featured speaker. Do you think she isn’t going to go home a little richer than she was before coming?

You are right. Words have meaning and politicians know it. Every successful salesman knows that catchy phrases and words have meaning. Every successful Pastor or Evangelist knows that words and how they are used is the difference between success and failure. To declare that my words are unequivocally inspired by God and yours are not, is a little egotistic. Declaring myself as having unerring interpretation of Scripture or scientific data denies anyone else of having that same ability, unless they agree with me!

Declaring that my scientists are smarter than your scientists is a little ridiculous when I don't understand either side's technical knowledge and interpretation.


Comments (4)

Bob Hooper Author Profile Page:

Most words other than what we might loosely term connecting words, carry emotional baggage. And not infrequently, we hear and use them without consciously recognizing that baggage, or "connotation." Good writers are deliberate in choosing precisely the right word to trigger the right emotion. Politicians do the same. You might be interested in what George Lakoff has to say about what he calls "framing." Lakoff believes that more than 90 percent of thought is subconscious and emotional rather than rational. The political "right" (recognize the connotation) understands and utilizes Lakoff's thesis quite effectively. Calling oneself the "right" triggers an association with correctness, while "left" has long been associated with several negatives. In the instance of abortion, those who adopt the label "pro-life" hope to place those who are pro-choice in a "pro-death" category--since the emotional opposite of life is death. I may write more later. Thanks, Ken, for your contribution to the subject.

Peter Tramel Author Profile Page:

Ken and Bob, you are both on to, and mostly "right" about something important, about which I plan to blog soon.

Anthony Victor Author Profile Page:

Mr. Hooper, an error correction if I may. I think you meant to say "the political 'left' understands and utilizes Lakoff's . . . "

I can't wait to read your next attack on the "anti-choice" movement. I think it's time to give the "junk-science" of climate change a rest.

Peter Tramel Author Profile Page:

Wow, Anthony: "the 'junk-science' of climate change." It seems just like the "junk-science" fifteen years ago that said cigarettes cause cancer, except that more scientists think that we are causing rapid climate change, now, than thought, fifteen years ago, that cigarettes cause cancer. What scientific discoveries, or conspiracy theories, do you think that more than 90% of scientists are missing? Don't hold back. It would be nicer if you told us instead of acting like we are stupid for not knowing about it.

Post your own comment

(To create links here or for style, you may wish to use HTML tags in your comments)


Our sponsors help us stay online to serve you. Thank you for doing your part! By using the specific links below to start any of your online shopping, you are making a tremendous difference. By using the links below, you are directly helping to support this community website:

Want to browse more blogs? Try our table of contents to find articles under specific topics or headings. Or you might find interesting entries by looking through the complete archives too. Stay around awhile. We're glad you're here.


Browse the Blogs!

You are here!

This page contains only one entry posted to Everyday Citizen on March 10, 2010 2:42 PM.

The blog post previous to it is titled "Bishops Are Running the Health Care Reform Show"

The post that follows this one is titled "District of Columbia has the World's First Female Football Coach"

Want to explore this site more?

Many more blog posts can be found on our Front Page or within our complete Archives.

Does a particular subject interest you?

You can easily search for blog posts under a specific topic by using our List of Categories.

Visit our friends!

Books You Might Like!

Notices & Policies

All of the Everyday Citizen authors are delighted you are here. We all hope that you come back often, leave us comments, and become an active part of our community. Welcome!

All of our contributing authors are credentialed by invitation only from the editor/publisher of EverydayCitizen.com. If you are visiting and are interested in writing here, please feel free to let us know.

For complete site policies, including privacy, see our Frequently Asked Questions. This site is designed, maintained, and owned by its publisher, Everyday Citizen Media. EverydayCitizen.com, The Everyday Citizen, everydaycitizens.com, and Everyday Citizen are trademarked names.

Each of the authors here retain their own copyrights for their original written works, original photographs and art works. Our authors also welcome and encourage readers to copy, reference or quote from the content of their blog postings, provided that the content reprints include obvious author or website attribution and/or links to their original postings, in accordance with this website's Creative Commons License.

Copyright, 2007-2011, All rights reserved, unless otherwise specified, first by each the respective authors of each of their own individual blogs and works, and then by the editor and publisher for any otherwise unreserved and all other content. Our editor primarily reviews blogs for spelling, grammar, punctuation and formatting and is not liable or responsible for the opinions expressed by individual authors. The opinions and accuracy of information in the individual blog posts on this site are the sole responsibility of each of the individual authors.