Going nuclear?

Going nuclear?

This article surveys our energy problems and the global food and starvation crisis caused to a major extent by the biofuel fiasco. The solution the article lifts up is nuclear energy! It does not pollute the air like other fuels. It is pretty much inexhaustible. And yet, people fear it irrationally. A nuclear power plant does NOT set off an atom bomb. It’s not like on the Simpsons, generating three eyed fish and irradiating the community. The radiation can be managed pretty easily.

Do you buy that argument, that environmentalists, in blocking the building of new nuclear energy plants, are harming the environment?

Or can another case be made against nuclear energy, that it violates the basic building block of matter in a profoundly unnatural and so immoral way?

At any rate, when the left ridicules President Bush, pro-lifers, creationists, and social conservatives in general for being “anti-science”–whether their stances are valid or not– can we include anti-nuclear activists in that group?

"... our own death and new life in baptism, is not "food" but self-deception.You're going ..."

Flame’s New Book on Church Fathers ..."
"Being made whole and satisfied with God's provision of his own life to us---through baptism, ..."

Flame’s New Book on Church Fathers ..."
"I don’t know about kindergarten, but it was commonly preached at the middle school down ..."

New Rulings on Porn, Parental Rights, ..."
"Hmm, the children's books idea is worth unpacking. I think part of the reason why ..."

New Rulings on Porn, Parental Rights, ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!