• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Ethical question on the Environment.

Should the commons be managed with regard to preserving it for future generations and

  • Total voters
    10
ALiberalModerate

ALiberalModerate

Pragmatist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
32,486
Reaction score
22,733
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Should the commons be managed with regard to preserving it for future generations and preserving the biodiversity on it?

What do you think and why?
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Should the commons be managed with regard to preserving it for future generations and preserving the biodiversity on it?

What do you think and why?
Click to expand...

What do you mean by commons?
 
Cilogy said:
What do you mean by commons?
Click to expand...

Commons would be resources that are not owned by individuals but rather are in the public trust. Examples would be National Parks, Forests, Preserves, and so on.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Commons would be resources that are not owned by individuals but rather are in the public trust. Examples would be National Parks, Forests, Preserves, and so on.
Click to expand...

Oh ok I understand now.

I would say yes, I mean why not? Sounds like a good idea.

At the rate the world is consuming resources like mad men, this is a good thing that should be kept constant.
 
To the greatest extent possible, "common" areas should be auctioned off and transferred to the responsible care of mature adults.

No way should anything that can be shifted elsewhere be allowed to remain in the custody of those overgrown whiny children running Washington.
 
Absolutely. It goes without saying. The way the world is developing these days, our children will be dumbfounded when they see there very first tree at the age of 9 :D

I think parks help preserve wildlife even within city boarders. Financial centre or not, the least we could do is give the enviournment some breathing space under the endless carpets of cement and steel we have everywhere.
 
Within reason, sure, why not? Of course, that means if there is ever a reason they ought not be, I'm not going to stand in the way of progress, but as long as it's not doing anything useful at the moment, by all means maintain it as it is.
 
Of course. It is common sense, that is, unless you hate humanity or if you are a greedy bastard that doesn't have kids, or you hate you kids, or you hate life. Basically, if you are a hater that hates things in a hateful hating manner. Essentially, if you are not worthy of being called a human being because your hate has eaten your humanity and you are consumed by hate that even most haters hate because it is so hateful.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom