I can’t completely take credit for this post. I’m going to take an idea that Hollee had the other night and expand on it. Since I do fancy myself a writer, I will change about 20 percent of what she said and then claim it as my own. That’s what we do. We steal.

Looking at everything going on with current environmental concerns and policies, I fail to understand the lack of ability to grasp simple science by conservatives. What I’m hearing is a lot of fear mongering and claims that this is all about liberal control of Americans. I’m also hearing a lot of grown, educated adults simply discounting the evidence placed before them in the name of capitalism, when the fear should be placed on irreversible damages to the planet that sustains us.

Here’s an analogy. Decades ago, the American public had a very different view of cigarette smoking. Despite government warnings, millions of Americans ignored the dangers and lit up. As time has gone on and we learned more about the dangers of cigarette smoking, lobbyists and donations from big tobacco went to work to keep government regulations at a minimum. In the meantime, healthcare costs continued to rise for non-smokers as a result of issues caused by those who chose to smoke.

Today, while millions of Americans continue to smoke, laws have been put into effect to protect the health of others, such as smoking in public places. These rules are mandated by the government and generally aren’t scoffed at by non-smokers.

This is similar to environmental issues. The Earth is like a person. When foreign chemicals and toxins are introduced into its environment (such as cigarette smoke inhaled into the lungs), negative impacts occur (such as emphysema and lung cancer). You would sound foolish to now state publicly that the inhalation of cigarette smoke does not cause any negative impact to the human body; however, this is what people were saying just a short time ago. Similarly, to state that introducing toxic chemicals into the Earth’s atmosphere does not cause any negative impact, should sound equally foolish.

Environmental rules and regulations mandated by the government are necessary to protect those who choose not to purposefully damage the planet. The laws that are going into effect do not impair the day-to-day function of normal Americans but rather protect us. Corporations whose very existence results in environmental devastation will rape the Earth in the name of the almighty dollar if government does not step in. Just as big tobacco would risk the health of all Americans in the form of second-hand smoke rather than allow the government to decide where people can and cannot smoke.

I don’t think I’ve ever heard a non-smoking conservative complain about taxes on cigarettes. It seems their defense of basic American rights without taxation is selective to only the issues that suit them. Like cigarette taxes, environmental taxes and policies, such as cap and trade, will not only be a deterrent to those who wish to make unhealthy choices, but it will also help offset the costs of damages caused by those who make those choices at the expense of others.

Also, similar to cigarette smoking, many people who smoke are trying to quit. Such is the case with many Americans and our dependence on environmentally damaging resources, such as oil. Every smoker knows that each puff has the potential to cause devastating effects to their body. Such is true with many and their environmentally unfriendly habits. As Americans, we feel that we have the right to do whatever we want at whatever cost to the rest of the world. This egocentric view of our place in the world (both in the human world and the animal kingdom) will come back to bite us, just as the general opinion of the adverse health effects of smoking has.

The biggest complaint I’ve heard from the right is cost. Taxes will increase and costs of goods and services of companies forced to pay penalties will increase. My belief is that this is a short-term effect and things will even out in the long run, as we lessen our dependence on dirty fuels and increase awareness and usage of clean-energy-producing options. I don’t understand the concern with short-term tax and cost increases with disregard for long-term costs that are sure to arise as we decimate the planet beyond repair. Surely, if you look back at cigarette smoking, had taxes, penalties, and rules been put into effect earlier, millions of health care dollars, as well as lives, could have been saved.

Why does the right continue to ignore simple science? How can anyone deny that introducing toxic chemicals into the natural environment is not healthy? The same people who have been taking money from large corporations who need this denial to make a profit, I suppose. The more things change, the more they stay the same.