Why Not?

Our era of democracy has spawned divisions, deliberation, and debates. Obviously government has served as a catalyst for civilization. At the end of our barbaric nature, we began to conciliate on terms in order to survive. Through extended progressions of our societal behavior, we began to instill fallacies with arguments in addition to our self-inflicted schisms.

On the surface, politics seems to be simply about what we want for ourselves. Greed, rather than goodwill, takes precedent before justice. We have become selfish; we need to be reminded that our goal is "to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity..."

Despite this abundant discord, it only makes sense to agree on the world. Politics, as well as environmentalism, are established in order to dispell and amend the problems at hand. However, keeping the world in mind is at everybody's interest. Why on earth would you quarrel over the eminent importance of this planet? The world is not bipartisan, rather it is one home for every human. Borders do not separate the environment. Treaties and bills do not change the atmosphere, unless they are international and national environmental bills.

So it does not make sense for someone to complain about a bill that is passed about the benefit of the environment. If a rider is attached to a certain bill, please take a look at the larger picture before whining about your own personal interest and tax breaks. It is probably more important that our government works to lower carbon emissions, clean polluted airs and waters, and so on rather than veto the bill or vote no because the riders that accompany the bill do not appeal to one's particular interests.