This may be getting a bit far afield (depending on how closely Gale Norton
follows in James Watts shoes), but the articles below by two Christian
scholars may be of interest.
Susan Bratton Power, 1983, The ecotheology of James Watt: Environmental
Ethics, v. 5, p. 225-236. [S.B. Power is at Whitworth College in Spokane, WA]
Janel M. Curry-Roper, 1990, Contemporary Christian eschatologies and their
relation to environmental stewardship: Professional Geographer, v. 42, p.
157-169. [Curry-Roper is at Calvin College]
Karl
***************************
Karl V. Evans
cmekve@aol.com
In a message dated 1/3/01 8:52:30 AM Mountain Standard Time, SteamDoc@aol.com
writes:
<< I suppose this is not off-topic since stewardship of creation is on-topic.
Since Norton (for those unfamiliar, she has been nominated as Secretary of
the Interior by President-elect Bush; the Interior Department, among other
things, manages most of the land owned by the U.S. Government) is from my
home state of Colorado, I can offer a few thoughts.
Of course it depends on one's view of what is "bad." From my point of view
(concerned about stewardship of creation but not as "left" on the
environment
as Greenpeace or even the Sierra Club), I would say "somewhat bad, but
probably not as bad as some fear."
What has people scared is that Norton's first job out of law school was
working for James Watt at his Mountain States Legal Foundation (see
www.mountainstateslegal.org), which fought for the rights of corporate
America to pillage the environment in the West. Watt became Reagan's
Secretary of the Interior, was highly controversial and confrontational, and
was eventually canned. Watt was influenced by a belief that the Second
Coming was near, and he dismissed the idea of stewardship for future
generations, saying that Jesus would return before the future generations
arrived. He was later implicated (and I believe convicted, though I could
be
wrong) on some charges of corruption; I don't recall the details. Watt was
a
disaster not only for environmental stewardship, but also for public
perception of Christians in politics.
Gale Norton has taken pains to distance herself from Watt. Certainly in
style, but also in substance to some extent. While she is no
environmentalist by any stretch of the imagination, she did act as Colorado
Attorney General to punish illegal polluters and to get the Rocky Flats
nuclear site cleaned up. She lost a Senate primary a few years ago because
she was too "moderate" for the conservative-dominated Colorado Republican
Party.
So, the accusation that she will be "James Watt in a skirt", as one
environmental activist put it, is unfair. But clearly she will carry out
the
policies advocated by Bush in the campaign, which means no concern for
energy
conservation, much less concern for environmental protection, and more
emphasis on increasing energy production and removing regulation of private
use and exploitation of land. I think that's somewhat bad, but your mileage
may vary.
>>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jan 05 2001 - 00:24:21 EST