What Would Jesus Drive?

[oliveu2cm]

Have you guys seen the news coverage on this?


Church groups: 'What would Jesus drive?'
From the Business & Economics Desk
Published 11/20/2002 5:26 PM


DETROIT, Nov. 20 (UPI) -- A convoy of gasoline-electric hybrid vehicles driven by representatives of religious groups trying to get major automakers to build cleaner, more fuel-efficient cars stopped at General Motors Corp. and Ford Motor Co. headquarters on Wednesday.

Their bumper stickers asked: "What would Jesus drive?"

Religious leaders allied with the Evangelical Environmental Network say it's unlikely it would be a gas-guzzling sport-utility vehicle or an oversized pickup.

"The Risen Lord Jesus is concerned about the kinds of cars we drive because they affect his people and his creation," the group said in a call to action for Christian leaders on its Web site, whatwouldjesusdrive.org.

The network is raising funds by selling "What would Jesus drive?" bumper stickers for $5.

Groups including American leaders of the Serbian Orthodox church, the Episcopal church, the American Jewish Committee, the Evangelical Lutheran Church and other denominations sent letters signed by more than 100 clergy to the Big Three automakers warning their products are polluting the planet and contributing to global warming.

"We write now to ask you in the automobile industry a more explicit question," the letter said. "What specific pledges -- in volume, timing and commitments to marketing -- will you make to produce automobiles, SUVs and pickup trucks with substantially greater fuel economy?"

General Motors said it welcomed dialogue with groups concerned about the environment but said that ultimately the consumer will decide what kind of vehicles to drive.

"For its part, GM has announced several production programs for improving fleet efficiency including: Displacement on Demand; the Allison Diesel-Hybrid bus; the Parallel Hybrid GMC Pickup, the Paradigm hybrid power train for small SUVs, and several other innovative power train technologies," GM said in a statement.

The world's largest automaker said the long-term answer is replacing the internal combustion engine with clean hydrogen fuel cells, which produce only heat and water vapor as byproducts.

New 2001 model cars and light trucks averaged 20.4 miles per gallon last year, the lowest fleet fuel economy in 22 years.

The Wall Street Journal reported that the Bush administration is considering a proposal by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration that would raise mileage standards by about a half-mile per gallon a year between 2005 and 2007.

That would raise overall U.S. average fuel economy to nearly 22 miles per gallon. The current passenger car standard is 27.5 miles per gallon.

GM, Ford and DaimlerChrysler have consistently opposed moves to beef up Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards, which have not changed since 1996.

Representatives of the religious groups also met briefly with Ford Chairman and Chief Executive Officer William Clay Ford Jr., an ardent environmentalist who has criticized the wastefulness of SUVs in the past, and leaders of the United Auto Workers.

The group talked with Ford officials, including Jim Padilla, general vice president Ford North America, for about an hour discussing future products.

"It was an open exchange of ideas," said Ford spokeswoman Francine Romaine. "We are committed to improving the fuel economy of all our vehicles."

The visiting religious leaders were driven around Detroit by Catholic nuns in fuel-efficient vehicles owned by the Servants of the Immaculate Heart of Mary.

Besides making personal pleas to leading vehicle executives, the environmentally conscious grassroots groups plan a television ad campaign in Iowa, Missouri, Indiana and North Carolina this month calling for improved fuel efficiency to reduce U.S. dependence on imported oil.

Copyright © 2002 United Press International

[diamond]

Jeep, there is only one.

DB9

[pax]

Jesus wouldn't drive at all. Most of the time in the Bible He just walked, didn't he? Except for the ride into Jerusalem, I can't even think of any parts where he rode a horse or a mule. Cars in American society are overpriced polluting status symbols.

(And before anyone asks: No, I don't have one. So there. Nyah nyah.)

[speedracer]

I remember that a while ago in Technology Review (a technology general-interest magazine published by MIT, subscriptions for which are free for MIT alumni) was an article that proclaimed that the technology to manufacture a 40 mpg SUV was available, but that there was no market for such a vehicle.

Alas, I misplaced that issue before I got a chance to read that article.

[speedracer]

Originally posted by paxetaurora
Cars in American society are overpriced polluting status symbols.

Except if you're a working adult who lives in the 99% of the country that is not New York, Boston, or the Bay Area, in which case a car is a necessity.

[famous rungi]

Originally posted by paxetaurora
Jesus wouldn't drive at all. Most of the time in the Bible He just walked, didn't he

"have you ever seen a fat apostle?" - dogma

Jesus would drive the donkey of all vehicles; he'd ride a bike

[deep]

Jesus would tool around in a vintage Plymouth because "the Bible says God drove Adam and Eve out of the Garden of Eden in a Fury."


In Psalm 83, the Almighty apparently owned a Pontiac and a Geo. The passage urges the Lord to "pursue your enemies with your Tempest and terrify them with your Storm," although theologians aren't sure how a Geo Storm could be considered terrifying, unless it had those scary shooting flames painted on the sides.

Another scripture indicates that Yahweh favored Dodge pickup trucks. Moses' followers are warned not to go up a mountain until "the Ram's horn sounds a long blast."

God also owned an AMC vehicle. In the book of Exodus, he promised to "send the Hornet ahead of you to drive the Hivites, Canaanites and Hittites out of your way."

Some scholars insist that Jesus drove a Honda but preferred not to discuss it. As proof, they cite a verse in St. John's gospel in which Christ tells a crowd, "For I did not speak of my own Accord."

Debate continues over whether the Lord's Honda had bumper stickers that said, "My other car is a flaming chariot," "Honk if you love me" or "This is my beloved son, in whom I am well-pleased because he was an honor student at Galilee Elementary."

In another transportation-related scripture: Moses rode an old British motorcycle, as evidenced by a Bible passage declaring that "the roar of Moses' Triumph is heard in the hills."

[pax]

Originally posted by speedracer


Except if you're a working adult who lives in the 99% of the country that is not New York, Boston, or the Bay Area, in which case a car is a necessity.

I didn't say they weren't a necessity. I realize that many people "need" cars. All I said is that they're overpriced polluting status symbols.

[pub crawler]

Actually, Jesus would probably be most upset with the fact that a metropolitan area such as Los Angeles has no mass transit to speak of (or worth speaking of). Secondly, I'm sure he would be pissed off about the gas-guzzling SUV's.

[pub crawler]

Originally posted by speedracer


Except if you're a working adult who lives in the 99% of the country that is not New York, Boston, or the Bay Area, in which case a car is a necessity.

Yes, a car is a necessity because our priorities are completely screwed up.

[Angela Harlem]

Jesus would drive a Ute....cos his dad was a carpenter and all...nevermind...

[Dreadsox]

I am betting Jesus would not be anywhere where people had cars. He would be ministering to the poor, feeding the hungry, and performing miracles away from the watchful eye of TV news.

Its another reason why I believe most of us would miss the fact that he was here at all.




Peace

[speedracer]

Originally posted by pub crawler



Yes, a car is a necessity because our priorities are completely screwed up.

Not everyone's workplaces and residences are close enough together that they can ride their high horse to work every day.

[oliveu2cm]

but what about the fact of using Jesus in an (anti)advertising campaign? Can an organization "copyright" Jesus' image? What if it goes too far or they use it out of context..

what would Jesus wear (the new ultralight Nikes!) or what would Jesus drink (Gatorade to help him through the dry warm desert..).. ?

[kobayashi]

Originally posted by speedracer


Not everyone's workplaces and residences are close enough together that they can ride their high horse to work every day.

and it is that way because our priorities are screwed up in this career driven, topsy turvy world....
or so the contention goes. i think.

[U2SavesTheWorld]

Originally posted by oliveu2cm
but what about the fact of using Jesus in an (anti)advertising campaign? Can an organization "copyright" Jesus' image? What if it goes too far or they use it out of context..

what would Jesus wear (the new ultralight Nikes!) or what would Jesus drink (Gatorade to help him through the dry warm desert..).. ?

Yeah....there was a HUGE thing on our local news (St. Louis) about this last night. People here (according the this channel) are outraged about it.....

Has anyone here seen the commercials? They are pretty creepy....probably exactly what you would think they would look like....pastels, clouds, sunrays....and Jesus in the clouds looking down at the road. And then it says, "What would Jesus drive?" and shows the link to the website.

All very odd.

[pax]

Originally posted by speedracer


Not everyone's workplaces and residences are close enough together that they can ride their high horse to work every day.

Yeah, but how much of that is laziness? PLENTY of people drive to work or school--alone--because they simply don't want to walk or take mass transit. I attended a neighborhood high school, for example, in which over 90 percent of the students lived within walking distance (meaning they weren't bused). But the school had a huge parking problem because as soon as everyone turned 16, they started driving to school.

It's the same now at my college. Granted, public transit around here is not so great and we do have commuters who live 15-20+ miles from campus. Okay, they need to drive. It takes me about 25 minutes to walk to school--which I do every day, to and from, unless I can carpool with someone. But there are people who live as far from campus as I do--or closer--who drive, every day, alone, regardless of the weather.

I want neither the environmental nor the financial responsibilities of a car, so I do without one. It can be done. It's not some kind of moral "high horse" that I ride because I walk the walk (literally!). I think everyone would do well to ditch their cars for a while. And the hidden benefit of carless existence: I also don't have to go the gym anymore because I probably walk anywhere from 5-10 miles a week! And I eat whatever I want!

[pub crawler]

Originally posted by speedracer


Not everyone's workplaces and residences are close enough together that they can ride their high horse to work every day.

lol... so you don't care to acknowledge the fact that um, automobile-generated pollution is a problem? Or is it the economy you're concerned about, i.e., the idea that, above all, we need to keep the auto manufacturers in business?

Anyway, my point is directed more to the situation in L.A. than anywhere else. We need better mass transit here. That should be obvious to anyone who lives here or who has visited. It seems to be a very low priority as far as our local government is concerned.

That said, the problem goes beyond L.A., because people are driving gas-guzzlers everywhere in the country. Many SUV's can carry 6 people and tow a boat on a trailer. One doesn't need that kind of vehicle to take 2 kids to school every morning.

[oliveu2cm]

Originally posted by pub crawler

Many SUV's can carry 6 people and tow a boat on a trailer. One doesn't need that kind of vehicle to take 2 kids to school every morning.

Good point!!

[speedracer]

Originally posted by pub crawler



lol... so you don't care to acknowledge the fact that um, automobile-generated pollution is a problem? Or is it the economy you're concerned about, i.e., the idea that, above all, we need to keep the auto manufacturers in business?

Anyway, my point is directed more to the situation in L.A. than anywhere else. We need better mass transit here. That should be obvious to anyone who lives here or who has visited. It seems to be a very low priority as far as our local government is concerned.

That said, the problem goes beyond L.A., because people are driving gas-guzzlers everywhere in the country. Many SUV's can carry 6 people and tow a boat on a trailer. One doesn't need that kind of vehicle to take 2 kids to school every morning.

I agree that driving an SUV in most situations (i.e., on a road instead of in the rough) is stoopid. But you're categorically slamming all automobiles and all automobile drivers because of the excesses of subsets of all autos and drivers. Do you know what percentage of auto emissions is produced by people who are just driving to work? Neither do I, but I bet it's pretty high.

And if the fact that most working people in America live a significant distance away from where they work rankles you---well, there are a number of very difficult social problems that you're going to need to solve if you want to eliminate urban sprawl and get everyone to move back into major cities.

Finally, I grew up in Detroit. The auto industry is fairly important to the city's economic health. Not that that matters though.