Congress is in the process of budget making. One of the most disturbing parts of the House’s plan is the drastic slashing of the Environmental Protection Agency. From news accounts it would appear that the intent is to gut the EPA’s ability to carry out air and water pollution regulations. One amendment offered by Rep. John Carter (R.-Texas) would block money that the EPA would use to enforce regulations that cut the toxic emissions of arsenic, cadmium, and lead in cement plants.
There is incontestable evidence that these and other pollutants in our ecosystem damage the health of every living creature. Do we reduce the nation’s deficit at the expense of the nation’s health? What of the long-term economic costs of debilitating the health of the planet in terms of a sustainable ecosystem and capacity to grow crops? What about the expense of health care related to asthma, emphysema, and cancer that can be attributed to pollution? Are such drastic cuts economically feasible in the long term? I do not think so. Country wisdom would say it is penny wise and pound-foolish.
On the face of it, these proposals strike me as economically simplistic and immoral. Human beings and the earth will be harmed by such proposals. At a deeper level I believe that the earth is, in part, the body of God. John Muir, one of America’s founding preservationists of nature, once said that nature is the conductor of the divine and the primary source for understanding God. In his book Travels in Alaska, Muir wrote, "Every particle of rock or water or air has God by its side leading it the way it should go… The clearest way into the Universe is through a forest wilderness… In God's wildness is the hope of the world.”
When we stop protecting the earth and the many nations of her creatures we demonstrate utter contempt for the Creator. It is egregious blasphemy. On the other hand we worship God in the shelter and nurture of the earth.
