But What About?

I suppose you can't possibly live here in the good old U.S. of A. without hearing about the latest oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. In the months and years prior, there was already much debate occurring as to whether we should be doing more or less drilling in our own country. Most of the opponents of opening new lands for drilling protested on the grounds that it would be detrimental to our natural environment. And now that this has happened in the Gulf, all you hear is, "Umm hmm, I told you so! If we drill for oil, we'll face catastrophes untold. It'll kill all our animals. Only heartless, greedy, very bad people drill for oil."

I don't hate animals, and I try my very best to never be heartless, greedy, or very bad. But I have a few questions for all the environmentalists who are vehemently opposed to drilling. First of all, are they saying that they wish we'd just keep buying oil that is produced in other countries? Are they comfortable with all the drilling that takes place in the Middle East, South America, and other places? If so, that strikes me as being rather hypocritical. Is it okay to destroy their natural environment? Do they not care about the natural environments of those places? I for one do not trust each and every one of the foreign oil producing countries to be more concerned about the environment than we are in the U.S. I do not believe for one minute that they are more committed to safety, or being ecologically responsible. My husband has worked extensively with refineries in Ecuador, and I can tell you most assuredly that some of the sights he has seen down in the Amazon Basin would scare the ever-living daylights out of the tree-hugging crowd. He is working to take our American know-how to clean up their oil production. And this story could be repeated all over the globe. Why do we want to place foreign natural habitats in peril? Why not do the drilling here where we have the technology to do it in the safest, most ecologically friendly way possible?

My second area of concern is this: Do the green folks really want to live without using any petroleum products? Here is a partial list of products made from petroleum products. It includes items that touch our lives every single day; some trivial, some life-saving medications and devices. Are environmentalists willing to tell a cardiac patient that she will have to do without the heart valve replacement that she needs to live because if she does get it, there is a chance we might have an oil spill and some trees and birds might be harmed? That seems like a heartless, greedy, and very bad stance to take.

Along that same line, as far as I'm concerned, if they're going to crucify Sarah Palin for advocating drilling for oil in our lands, then the nay-sayers have some very serious life-style issues to contend with. They ought to be foregoing showers using soap and/or shampoo, brushing their teeth and wearing deodorant, and they ought to traveling by horse and buggy. No cars. No bicycles- the tires are made of rubber after all! No airplane travel. The only water travel they should be engaging in should involve canoes and paddles. They probably should just skip the whole traveling thing since then they'd be deforesting our woodland areas. They should just stay holed up in their houses... But wait- opponents of oil consumption shouldn't even live in houses- too many things tied to petroleum products! Forgive me if I doubt their true level of commitment to doing away with all oil production.

Folks, I could go on from now until the third Tuesday in June with more questions. But I'll save us both that agony! I know I've been tongue in cheek regarding a very serious matter. Even though I've presented my thoughts in a light-hearted manner, I am in earnest regarding the questions I've asked. I firmly believe there's a lot more to this business than pelicans, beaches, and Dawn dish-washing detergent (which is made from petroleum- irony of ironies!). May we choose wisely as we care for our planet and the people and creatures in it.