A rotating panel of experts from the...

A rotating panel of experts from the worlds of philosophy, psychology and religion offer their perspective on the dilemmas that come with living in Southern California.

Today’s question: A developing scientific consensus says global warming is real and caused in part by human activity like burning gasoline and other fossil fuels. Should we consume less or forgo gas guzzlers?

*

Rabbi Lennard R. Thal

Regional director of the Pacific Southwest Council of the Union of American Hebrew Congregations

“First of all, galloping materialism poses an ethical problem in many arenas, the environment perhaps being the most obvious. When that materialism threatens the Earth and its atmosphere, there is a positive obligation to respond vigorously. More than two millennia ago, the Psalmist wrote words which are still compelling: ‘The earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof.’ It is not ours to abuse! Moreover, Jewish tradition states clearly that we are partners with God in the continuing act of creation. Minimally, this means that there is a religious duty to counter that which is destructive and that, in turn, requires us to oppose whatever jeopardizes the Earth and its atmosphere.”

*

Dr. Louke Van Wensveen Siker

Assistant professor of theological ethics, Loyola Marymount University

“I like to be realistic. If I’m asked to change my fossil fuel habit, I want to know why. Will I suffer if I don’t? Will my kids die? Will I face financial ruin? Will I lose what I love? They say global warming could do all of this. I might get heatstroke. My kids might drown in coastal floods. My farm might be rained out of business. My favorite hike might lose its trees. Of course, they’re talking statistics. Nothing might hit me. But realistically speaking, my fossil fuel habit is risky. Admitted. Now I wish they had treatment centers where you could learn a fossil-free way of life.”

*

The Rev. Ron Benefiel

Senior pastor of the First Church of the Nazarene near Downtown Los Angeles

“Many of us reason that whatever ‘disastrous’ results loom ahead will not materialize in our lifetime or that technology will rise to the occasion. It is simply not our problem, especially if the remedy affects our profitability or is personally inconvenient. Others will wait for legal requirements. Another perspective includes some of us who believe in a Creator God. We understand that God in wisdom has entrusted to the care of humanity the well being of the Creation. We are to be ‘stewards.’ Our response is proactive, personally accepting responsibility for making adjustments in our lifestyles, even if not required and if few others are acting similarly. It is a matter of conscience and faith.”

Compiled by LARRY B. STAMMER, Times Religion Writer