There’s a lot in the news today, but a small article about some tree-top sitting protesters in California derailed me the most this morning.
The Infamous “Dumpster Muffin”, Treetard Icon (lifted from KTVU.com)
I guess maybe it’s because i grew up in the shadow of these times, but ‘tree huggers’ have always been a part of the landscape to me, so when i hear the news stories, i might be curious as to why they’re protesting, or i might think “smelly weird hippies!”, but something that had never occurred to me until this morning is how absurd it all is.
I can understand a tree being revered by some local person, group, tribe, etc … as being a historically significant landmark (out this way, we had our own “lone pine” that was chopped down by vandals in the late 1800’s), and i can understand wanting to protect an infringement on an ecosystem or whatever …
But these particular protesters don’t seem to be involved with either understandable cause … instead they’re claiming that the trees mark a Native American burial ground (they don’t), or that these trees are living “beings” (debatable. my own religious views include the knowledge that all living things have some measure of spirit or intelligence, but that all things have and know their place … so it’s ok, for example, to kill an animal for food, if it is done with thanks and done respectfully and ‘sparingly’). The thought that limiting your personal productivity in society for 21 months while you sit in a tree, occasionally screaming at those below, for the purpose of saving that tree’s “life” is completely weird! you’re wasting the intelligence and animation that God has given you to prevent an inanimate simple-purposed organism from being harvested. On many levels, trees are no more significant than tall blades of grass or pools of water. Not knowing the treetard in question, but knowing many of her kind, and having debated things with the type, i speculate that she views this tree as an ‘entity’ with a ‘soul’ and that it should be preserved at all costs from ‘death’ … yet she probably feels that an accidentally conceived child – given life and created the mocking, irreverent act of fornication – is merely a “mass of cells” and “not yet life” … that it’s destruction is merely a “procedure”, and unworthy of the excessive battle, strategy, attention, community effort that has been poured into sparing the life of this tree … [it has suddenly occurred to me that it takes less effort to raise a child than it does to elevate Obama to “god”, build a temple in his honor, and cleanse the city of Denver of the filthy homeless, causing me to have greater distaste for those who choose abortion]
But that’s the pick-and-choose, self-serving philosophy of which these people live.
This tree, this oak or redwood (the article confused me), as one of God’s creations, and one without the intelligence granted (or needed) to choose right from wrong, is likely closer to its maker than the monster perched atop it. it probably aches inside, yearning for the mobility to toss that beast from its crown … that unbathed filthy creature, defecating in sacks, which has rooted herself to its head.