but the cartoon. seriously, is it bad to love the earth? i mean, yeah, we've (people) created religions in the past to worship it, but historically Capitalists and Christians have abolished them (i.e. "civilized the heathens"). see paganism or, well, most indigenous religions. i guess we (civilized americans) wouldn't know what worshipping the earth looks like, because that's only for heathens, and you can't be a heathen with a hummer...can you?
i just think it's sad that it's come down to this...making fun of people for praising the beauty of nature.
more:
"The expressed goal of environmentalism is to prevent man from changing his environment, from intruding on nature. That is why environmentalism is fundamentally anti-man. Intrusion is necessary for human survival. Only by intrusion can man avoid pestilence and famine. Only by intrusion can man control his life and project long-range goals. Intrusion improves the environment, if by "environment" one means the surroundings of man--the external material conditions of human life. Intrusion is a requirement of human nature. But in the environmentalists' paean to "Nature," human nature is omitted. For environmentalism, the "natural" world is a world without man. Man has no legitimate needs, but trees, ponds, and bacteria somehow do." (from: http://capmag.com/article.asp?ID=4643)
i'd beg to differ and say that environmentalism is fundamentally ecological. we, men, need to realize that we are part of a system, and if we disrupt that system, we'll end up disrupting our human nature in some way or another (acid rain, drought, the dust bowl of the 30s, soil nutrient depletion, etc, etc. we know the drill). i think that's pretty fundamental.