In­ac­tion im­moral

The London Free Press - - LETTERS -

re­gard­ing lor­rie Gold­stein’s on­line col­umn Fed­eral Liberal and Tory cli­mate plans are

fan­tasy (Nov. 24).

Is it fair to say “our level of emis­sions has noth­ing to do with our moral­ity?”

thirty years ago sci­en­tist Michael Op­pen­heimer is­sued a cli­mate warn­ing; now he is dis­traught at how our col­lec­tive fail­ure to act is caus­ing “an amount of suf­fer­ing that is un­con­scionable and should’ve been avoided.”

In many ways, our de­pen­dance on fos­sil fu­els is like a drug ad­dic­tion. If we want to avoid the truth of the harm we are caus­ing, we wel­come the lies that sug­gest what we’re do­ing is okay.

Yes, the liberal car­bon-pric­ing plan is in­suf­fi­cient. By now only dras­tic ac­tion can save a liv­able fu­ture. My MP, elizabeth May, re­minds us it’s not too late. Yes, tak­ing ef­fec­tive cli­mate ac­tion is hard, “but to save the lives of our chil­dren, what would we not do?” Jan Slakov

Salt Spring Is­land, B.C.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada

© PressReader. All rights reserved.