Active RNS subscribers and members can view this content at the RNS Archives website.

(RNS) Twenty-six faith leaders showed their support of the Clean Power Plan through prayer and public witness at the Environmental Protection Agency public hearings. The Clean Power Plan was proposed June 2 under President Obama's Climate Action Plan.


  1. Thanks for not referring to these folks as “religious conservatives,” as that idiotic NYT story on the EPA thing did. It shows how little time that reporter spent around religious conservatives or even reading the work of the folks at the rally.

  2. If a person believes in God or wants to believe they are praying to Jesus I have no problem with that – it would be harmless as far as it goes.

    But when religion recommends the denial of facts it is harmful to society.
    Not only the scientific facts – which happen to be the best facts available – but the facts we took for granted in this country for decades before Creationism and Intelligent Design proponents got the upper hand of the midwest.

    Coal mining “affects nothing as far as our atmosphere,” said [Pastor] Dingess, who did not attend the Washington hearings.

    Pastor ‘Dingus’ is a better spelling for that sort of sweeping irresponsibility.

  3. Hey guys, don’t forget that poor people, limited-income people, have to rely on cheap FOSSIL FUELS to keep their older used cars running, and to keep their heating and electricity costs near a semi-livable level. Poor people can’t afford fancy 2015 hybrid cars, and you can’t stick a big eco-geek windmill on top of their apartment buildings.

    So all you Global Warming Preachers out there, singing your little hymns and worshipping the (expletive deleted) EPA, you better make sure that YOU pay the extra costs that will hit America’s low- and limited-income people when Obama’s pet Global Warming Religion starts passing around the collection plate in THEIR direction !!!

  4. Deacon John M. Bresnahan

    There is an old saying: “Fool me once –shame on you—-Fool me twice- –shame on me.
    You see a good percent of the skepticism about “global warming’ comes from people like myself who remember the media global cooling hysteria of a few decades ago– ginned up by the same liberal politicians, the same mainstream media, the same grant chasing scientists.
    They even had the scientific “proof” in the tons of dust and ash being tossed up into the atmosphere cutting down the suns rays.
    But anyone just raising questions or believing patience and more evidence is needed about the new hysteria of global warming is derided and insulted.

    • @Deacon,

      In this age of the internet nobody has the right to reject facts.
      You cannot ignore FACTS:

      All of the charts are measurements of actual temperatures and they correlate directly to the huge increase in carbon in the atmosphere.


      • Deacon John M. Bresnahan

        Was the global cooling scam or gross mistake not a fact?????
        Some other facts that I have seen lately in the media. Fact. The trend in temperatures over the past 7 years has been downward.
        Fact-the media has not given this anywhere the play they have given warming stats.
        Fact: One event that helped get the global warming hysteria rolling was the fraudulent report of a British scientist (at the University of Exeter I believe). He later excused his fraud as an attempt to popularize the results of his research).
        Facts are not all on the global warming side. And it is not good science for people like Obama and Gore to say –as they have in similar words: “Shut up! we have decided!”: and for scientists to then join a virtual lynch mob. Who knows–maybe the name of one of the scientists who is now going over to the “dark side” is Galileo Galilei.

        • Just 30 years out of date. New technology and methodologies does that.

          After all its not like Bible study where people are expected to make up excuses for prior writings and factual inaccuracies. Unlike yourself, scientists are EXPECTED to revise their ideas based on new evidence.

          Btw since when have you cared about scientific research and methodologies?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 characters available

Comments with many links may be automatically held for moderation.