Overview
Recast climate change as a moral and faith issue, not a scientific or environmental one. Catalyze a broader coalition of allies around this moral common ground.
Participants | Objectives
Participants
Tover Anderson
Carlos Brandao
Christiane Citron
William French
Benjamin Hill
Andrew Huemmler
Peter Jipp
James Martin-Schramm
Evonne Marzouk
Sallie McFague
Danielle Meitiv
Stephen Nodvin
Michael Northcott
Stuart Price
William Rauckhorst
Frederick Stoss
Wood Turner
Objective
- Moral framing. While the “new energy” vision would broaden the coalition, another distinct kind of reframing is needed to advance action on climate
change. This reframing would not seek to package climate change with another issue set, but would treat the issue singularly and in the context of values and morality.. - Authenticity.Particularly given the current partisanship in the United States, the moral implications of the climate change issue need to be drawn out so that authentic, conscience-based leadership can emerge. Values provide a basis for common ground
and ultimately are critical to underpinning action on issues like climate change. Accordingly, this recommendation calls for reaching across typical divides and finding a basis for collaboration with communities, business, conservatives with environmental interests (such as fishing, hunting, hiking) and religious groups in an effort to reshape the politics and significantly boost public understanding and urgency on climate change. - New voices. In recasting this issue, one intended outcome is that
politicians may hear stronger and more informed messages of concern from newly engaged citizens and will thereby associate climate change less with special interests or advocacy groups. - Harness the idealism of youth.Young people today are showing increasing idealism about public service and are, in the words of some at the Conference, “desperate for a cause.” As such, a moral framing of climate change would be likely to harness this
motivation more than a number of alternative framings. - Avoid alarmism.The message of “urgency” on climate change may risk a backlash in some religious communities, according to one religious leader at the Conference. Communications about the risks of climate change can appear to be hyped and alarmist,
and may thereby be discounted heavily among some religious denominations. In this view, the preferred message and approach should combine a methodical pursuit of what is feasible in today’s power configuration, along with a slower buildup of outside support for more substantial action in the future. - Expand boundaries over time.The route of fashioning a moral appeal may create the greatest potential for expanding the boundaries of what is politically possible over time.



1 comment
April 6th, 2007 at 2:30 pm
Richard Jordan
One example of how tough this would be — the General Convention of the Episcopal Church adopted the Millennnium Development Goals as official Mission policy. The Presideng Bishop has supported them (the MDGs)enthusiastically.
Do mainline or other clergy even care or know what the official mission of their church is?
Please, let’s get real, I have not heard from the lips of anyone at my church event the words “climate change” in a sermon.
Why? The clergy I know just want to attract new parishioners who can bring in money, to be quite honest.
Richard Jordan