Why you shouldn't own a SUV: Jesus Doesn't want you to!

[MKSheppard]

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20021129-35162602.htm

Greens use Jesus to drive home a point
Robert Stacy McCain
THE WASHINGTON TIMES Published 11/29/2002

Quoting the Bible, the television ad warns that SUVs hurt children and cause global warming, and concludes with the question: "What would Jesus drive?"

Scheduled for broadcast next month in four states, the ads — with their spin on the "What would Jesus do?" slogan popularized by evangelical Christians — have made headlines as part of a campaign to boost environmental awareness.

The campaign is "calling on people of faith to push fuel efficiency and buy fuel-efficient vehicles," said the Rev. Bob Edgar, general secretary of the National Council of Churches (NCC), which is part of the coalition backing the campaign.

Critics say some of the activists behind this campaign are promoting pagan earth worship and pushing an agenda that has more to do with politics than prayer.

Some leaders of the movement "are Gaia worshippers who say the Bible should be put on the shelf and Earth is the giver of life," says Henry Lamb, author of a 1996 treatise on the movement.

But backers of "What Would Jesus Drive?" say they are acting on biblical principles of stewardship over God's creation.

"For us, environmentalism doesn't start with Earth Day, it begins with Genesis," says Paul Gorman, founder and executive director of the National Religious Partnership for the Environment (NRPE).

In the beginning, however, Mr. Gorman's expertise was politics, as a speechwriter for Sen. Eugene McCarthy's 1968 anti-war campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination.

Prominent politicians, including Al Gore, were "instrumental" in the founding of NRPE in the early 1990s, according to Mr. Lamb.

"Gore in particular arranged prayer breakfasts in Washington [to generate] political and financial support," said Mr. Lamb, executive vice president of the Environmental Conservation Organization, a Tennessee-based property-rights group.

Others active in founding the religious partnership, according to Mr. Lamb, were Vermont Sen. James M. Jeffords and Tim Wirth, then a Democratic senator from Colorado. Mr. Wirth is now president of the U.N. Foundation, created by billionaire Ted Turner to support U.N. population-control programs.

"Population control is certainly a big issue with them," Mr. Lamb said of the religious environmental groups. "They promote choice and family planning."

They were promoting fuel-efficient automobiles in Detroit last week, where Mr. Gorman and others in the movement — including Jim Ball of the Evangelical Environmental Network — met with auto executives.

"I think [industry executives] were genuinely interested in what we had to say," Mr. Gorman said.

"We want people to think of transportation as a moral issue," says Mr. Ball, an ordained Baptist minister who lives in Maryland. His group produced the "What Would Jesus Drive?" ad with funding from the San Francisco-based Energy Foundation.

The ads will begin airing next month in North Carolina, Missouri, Indiana and Iowa. Those four states "have populations we could reach with our limited budgets, and they also have large evangelical populations," Mr. Ball said.

The campaign's Web site (www.whatwouldjesusdrive.org) has already attracted more than 100,000 visitors, Mr. Ball said.

It has also spawned no small number of joking responses, such as the statement that the Almighty owns a Pontiac and a Geo, according to Psalm 83, which urges the Lord to "persecute them with thy Tempest, and make them afraid with thy Storm."

"I've seen them all," Mr. Ball said of the spoofs.

Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson is not amused by the "What Would Jesus Drive?" effort, saying in a statement last week that "the concept of linking Jesus to an anti-SUV campaign borders on blasphemy."

Mr. Ball's group knows how to play hardball politics: the Evangelical Environmental Network spent $1 million in 1996 to lobby against changes to the Endangered Species Act. "Congress and special interests are trying to sink the Noah's Ark of our day — the Endangered Species Act," Calvin B. DeWitt, co- founder of the environmental network, said at the time.

The Evangelical Environmental Network is one of four partners in Mr. Gorman's religious partnership, along with Catholic and Jewish environmental groups and the NCC, whose leader, Mr. Edgar, spent 12 years in Congress as a Pennsylvania Democrat.

"We're here in Detroit to tell the auto industry that we're calling on people of faith to push fuel efficiency and buy fuel-efficient vehicles," Mr. Edgar told reporters in Detroit last week, when the environmental groups met with auto executives.

In his 1996 paper, "The Rise of Global Green Religion," Mr. Lamb traces the origins of NRPE to a movement promoting a "biocentric belief in Gaia" — a conception of the earth as the source of all life.

Beginning in the 1980s, the movement was centered at the Episcopal Cathedral of St. John the Divine in Manhattan, N.Y., where Mr. Gorman spent seven years as vice president for public affairs and advocacy beginning in 1985.

Mr. Gorman was a well-known radio personality in New York. He spent 28 years at WBAI, a public radio station in New York where in 1973 he broadcast comedian George Carlin's "Seven Words You Can't Say on TV," sparking FCC sanctions and a landmark 1978 Supreme Court ruling.

In 1986, a year after joining St. John the Divine, Mr. Gorman co-authored a book with Eastern mystic Ram Dass, aka Richard Alpert, a former associate of LSD guru Timothy Leary.

St. John the Divine was also home to the Temple of Understanding, affiliated with the United Nations. In 1988, the temple co-founded a "Global Forum of Spiritual and Parliamentary Leaders for Human Survival."

The NRPE grew out of the forum, which first met in Oxford, England, where the featured speaker was James Lovelock, author of "The Ages of Gaia."

In September 1993, the NRPE made its public debut with a celebration that included a speech by Mr. Gore, who said the new group would "trigger the beginning of grass-roots [environmentalist] activity in tens of thousands of religious congregations across the country."

Mr. Gorman left St. John the Divine to become executive director of NRPE. Two years ago, Mr. Gorman received a $250,000 Heinz Award for his "major new vision" that had "broadened the base of the environmental movement."

[Evil Sadistic Bastard]

Ummm... how are SUVs not fuel-efficient?
And how do they hurt children?
And don't ALL cars cause global warming, and not just SUVs?

[MKSheppard]

Ummm... how are SUVs not fuel-efficient?

Because they're not 80 MPG cars! That's why!

And how do they hurt children?

Because they're so big they crush all other vehicles, including
MINIVANS!

And don't ALL cars cause global warming, and not just SUVs?

Errrr.......ah.......*head explodes*

This has been your regularly scheduled look into the mind of a whacko
environmentalist

[Vympel]

Owning those massive fuck-off assault vehicle SUVs isn't very smart economically unless you live in rough terrain. Whenever I see someone driving around urban streets in them I get the shits something severe. I almost wish I could push my car's rocket launcher button ....

[Evil Sadistic Bastard]

Yet, if you have a lot of people you need to transport on a regular basis it is quite a bit more efficient than having two cars.

[Vympel]

Yet, if you have a lot of people you need to transport on a regular basis it is quite a bit more efficient than having two cars.

So are vans; which can seat the same amount yet aren't nearly as ridiculous. To use anecdotal evidence, I've never seen an SUV in Australia with more than 2-4 people in it. Most of the time, it's one. And it's a woman- why is that?!

[Evil Sadistic Bastard]

Just checking - why do you consider SUVs so ridiculous, Vympel? It's not a challenge or anything, I just wanted to know.

And why women drive SUVs? Dunno. Maybe it's to feel like the big dog for once.

[Vympel]

Just checking - why do you consider SUVs so ridiculous, Vympel? It's not a challenge or anything, I just wanted to know.

And why women drive SUVs? Dunno. Maybe it's to feel like the big dog for once.

Their massive uneccessary size, the manner in which they're advertised (you will NEVER see an SUV ad in Australia anyway advertising them in suburbia), their lethality on the roads, the fact that they're fuel hogs, etc ...

[Evil Sadistic Bastard]

Ah. I see. Thanks.
I too believe that SUVs are not the best thing to have on the roads. It doesn't move as fast as I'd like it to (no space for engine if you want big space inside), crappy handling, etc. etc. etc.

Not to mention it causes the temptaiton for kids to jump around a play inside, which interferes with driving.

[Mr Bean]

There ARE 38 MPG SCV's avaible however they are not put into production due to lack of demand


The car companys need to get of thier arse and make Hyprid Cars the standered

[Crayz9000]

Well, my family is using a '91 Chevy Suburban for the time being... if only for the reason that our smaller vehicles are currently awaiting some sort of repair. Otherwise we only use it for ferrying large amounts of people around.

I can't say that I like commuting in it. It's like trying to drive a tank through a British hedge maze.

[Peregrin Toker]

Ummm... how are SUVs not fuel-efficient?

Because they're not 80 MPG cars! That's why!

Actually, jeeps are not fuel-efficient for several reasons:

1. They're not very aerodynamic
2. The 4WD system consumes a lot more fuel than a 2WD system would
3. Many of them are quite heavy

All of these spell doom for fuel economy, but most SUVs are available with diesel engines, which tend to pollute less than petrol-driven engines.

Because they're so big they crush all other vehicles, including
MINIVANS!

Actually, there are many quite small jeeps in production, such as the Suzuki Vitara, Toyota RAV4 and the Daihatsu Terios.

[TrailerParkJawa]

Well, Im not into the huge SUV's which some people buy just to drive around town, but there are a lot of SUV's which are about the same size as vans.

Im thinking of buying a SantaFe when I can afford it. The gas mileage is not too bad and it has the kind of room I need when I go skiing with friends.

See Jesus was from the desert and he doesnt ski. So screw him. Ive had a tiny Civic long enough.

[Howedar]

I think Jesus would drive an activity bus, that way he could carry all his disciples.


I am pretty against SUVs though. I think the government should impose some kind of heavy tax on luxuries in SUVs (leather, CD player, power accessories, etc) that might cut down on the unnecessary SUV purchase. I dunno.

[MKSheppard]

Jesus, didn't you get the damn disclaimer at the end? That was a JOKE.

[Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi]

What would Jesus drive? A quadriped.

I can't comment on the idiocy of this campaign.


Anyway, SUVs are actually safer than the other cars on the road, but I fing it dumb when a single guy buys one for himself. People like him think with their ego.

[InnerBrat]

They may be safe when you're in them, but they're NOT safe when you get hit by one, be you in a car, on a bike, or especially if you're a pedestrian.

And women use them for the school run! The driver is so high she can't see kids that run out in front of her, but that doesn't metter, 'coz her kids are safe...

[C.S.Strowbridge]

Ummm... how are SUVs not fuel-efficient?

You've got to be shitting me. Have you checked the fuel efficiency of the average SUV? Compare that to average 4-Door sedan.

And don't ALL cars cause global warming, and not just SUVs?

Yeah, but SUV's are less fuel efficient than cars. Burn more fuel = More Global Warming.

[Evil Sadistic Bastard]

You've got to be shitting me. Have you checked the fuel efficiency of the average SUV? Compare that to average 4-Door sedan.

Well, I wouldn't know. I don't drive. I just wanted to know why they were less fuel-efficient, if at all.

Yeah, but SUV's are less fuel efficient than cars. Burn more fuel = More Global Warming.

Hmmm... That's true. You need more fuel to move the thing. Though the statement seems slightly misleading, it seems to imply that SUVs are solely responsible for global warming.

[Kamakazie Sith]

What would Darth Vader drive?

[VF5SS]

What would Darth Vader drive?

A Canyonero. Its great for running over banthas.

[Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi]

What would Darth Vader drive?

TIE Advanced. Far more power-hungry than any SUV.

And, SUVs shouldn't be singled out for global warming, since they're only about a half to one third as efficnt as other cars, not a thousand times less efficent.

Besides, we had smog and hazardous pollution before the SUV.

[C.S.Strowbridge]

You've got to be shitting me. Have you checked the fuel efficiency of the average SUV? Compare that to average 4-Door sedan.

Well, I wouldn't know. I don't drive. I just wanted to know why they were less fuel-efficient, if at all.

Neither do I. But when you have to lug more weight arround it takes more energy to move the same distance.

Yeah, but SUV's are less fuel efficient than cars. Burn more fuel = More Global Warming.

Hmmm... That's true. You need more fuel to move the thing. Though the statement seems slightly misleading, it seems to imply that SUVs are solely responsible for global warming.

While that is obviously not true, vehicles are needed to transport people, goods, etc. So driving a clean, fuel efficient car has more benifits than costs. Driving a car that's not as clean / fuel efficient has no more benefits, but higher costs.

[C.S.Strowbridge]

Anyway, SUVs are actually safer than the other cars on the road,

I don't think so. They are heavier, which can help in collisions, but they are top heavy. They tip over easier. And since the seats are above the centre of gravity, the more people you have in them, the more dangerous they become.

[SpacedTeddyBear]

"It's OK to drive gas guzzlers, if it helps you get babes."- NO MAAM 5th commandment. ( Married with Children)