U2 Feedback

U2 Feedback (https://www.u2interference.com/forums/)
-   Free Your Mind Archive (https://www.u2interference.com/forums/f290/)
-   -   What Would Jesus Drive? (https://www.u2interference.com/forums/f290/what-would-jesus-drive-68573.html)

oliveu2cm 11-21-2002 09:04 PM

What Would Jesus Drive?
 
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 11-21-2002 09:14 PM

Jeep, there is only one.

DB9
:dance:

pax 11-21-2002 09:54 PM

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 11-21-2002 10:07 PM

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 11-21-2002 10:09 PM

Quote:

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 11-21-2002 10:28 PM

Quote:

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 :D

deep 11-21-2002 10:32 PM

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 11-21-2002 10:40 PM

Quote:

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 11-21-2002 11:42 PM

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 11-21-2002 11:44 PM

Quote:

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 11-21-2002 11:44 PM

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

:wink:

Dreadsox 11-22-2002 06:09 AM

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 11-22-2002 07:27 AM

Quote:

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 11-22-2002 07:36 AM

i loved the movie dogma!
 
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..).. ? :eyebrow: :shrug:

kobayashi 11-22-2002 07:40 AM

Quote:

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 11-22-2002 09:09 AM

Re: i loved the movie dogma!
 
Quote:

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..).. ? :eyebrow: :shrug:

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.
:shifty:

pax 11-22-2002 09:57 AM

Quote:

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 11-22-2002 11:12 AM

Quote:

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 11-22-2002 12:33 PM

Quote:

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!! :up: :up:

speedracer 11-22-2002 05:04 PM

Quote:

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.

pub crawler 11-22-2002 10:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by speedracer


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.

I'm slamming the American paradigm with respect to public modes of transportation more than anything. SUV's are an easy target -- though in fact, I have nothing against people who drive them. I have a number of friends who drive SUV's. I borrowed one last spring to take a bunch of kids snowboarding. Heck, I'd love to own one myself if they weren't so wasteful.

The point is, we collectively, as a society, need to change our carefree attitude with respect to using up natural resources and creating harmful auto emissions.

Quote:

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.
I'd agree.

Quote:

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.
I wouldn't even consider "centralizing" industry and office space -- simply because I think it would be unworkable (though for me it has little to do with urban blight and more to do with the fact that there is no need to centralize, in my opinion).

It's really this simple for me: if we Los Angelenos had a bus system that was anywhere close to being efficient, I'd use it. However, it takes me an hour-and-a-half to get to work by bus from where I live, when I can drive there in 20 minutes.

If I lived in Chicago I would use the L train to get around. Unfortunately, we have nothing like that here. The worst part is that nobody is coming up with any significant solutions.

On a national scale, sure, a lot of people have to drive a long way to get to work and in many instances it might not make sense to expect people to use public transportation even if it were available (e.g., if one had to drive to some remote location, you're not going to build a railway to get them there). But if we're this irresponsible in L.A. with respect to public transportation, then I suspect the situation is comparable in other large cities.

We Americans need to fix the problem, and it ain't gonna happen until our attitude toward public transportion (many of us refuse to use it) and an ever-dwindling supply of natural resources (we just don't care because the natural resource issue seems to be so far removed from our daily lives) changes.



*edited to fix tags

theSoulfulMofo 11-22-2002 11:05 PM

I thought Jesus drove a mule, made by Hosanna Motor Co.

speedracer 11-23-2002 10:18 AM

pub crawler,

I'm not an urban planner, but it seems to me that most of the population that lives in cities doesn't live in the cities proper, but in the associated metropolitan areas. (Looking up a few figures, the city to suburb population ratio seems to average to about 1:4.) It also seems to me that there's only so far that mass transit systems can extend out of the city before they become inefficient. And since the major routes for such systems (buses, subways, commuter trains) tend to head in or out of the city, they're really not too useful for people who need to travel from suburb to suburb instead from suburb to city.

The better solution, as others have indicated in this thread, is for automobile manufacturers to develop more efficient/less polluting automobiles. (Of course, they need to have economic incentives to do so--i.e. they need to be able to manufacture inexpensive cars, the government needs to promote such R&D, etc.)

And just in case you were curious, I live and work in Cambridge, MA. I walk (15 minutes) or take a bus to work every day. I don't own a car and don't miss it. But if I lived in, say, Lexington, I'd probably drive 5 miles every morning to the Alewife T (subway) station, park my car there, then take the T for the last mile to work.

melon 11-23-2002 10:41 AM

Allow me to put in my input...

Having grown up near Detroit, MI and now living in Boston, MA now, I can comment on both cities relevant to this discussion. First off, we have little choice now--we have to find a viable alternative to driving, not because of anything to do with pollution, but everything to do with traffic and that we flat out don't have more room to build new and bigger roads. As it stands, the U.S. has enough trouble barely maintaining its existing roads, let alone make new ones.

Why do people live in the associated metropolitan areas of cities? Well, in Boston, for instance, you have zero incentive to! Affordable housing is a fallacy, and, unless you want to live in a condo ($250,000+) or rent the rest of your life, the fact is that you're going to move to the metro areas to buy a house...unless you want a shitty, overpriced house ($600,000+) in the city.

As for Detroit, it is an utter failure, partly because it refused to address public transportation itself. The auto industries recognized very early on in its existence that public transportation was a threat to it and bought up commuter train systems with the explicit purpose of dismantling them. As it stands, it is one of the least visitable cities, coupled with the aftermath of the 1960s race riots, which hollowed out the city completely. But Detroit can no longer sit on its ass either; some of the older suburbs are starting to suffer the same decay as the city.

So what is the real solution ultimately? Like Europe, we are going to have to invest in a real high-speed train and commuter rail system, because--like it or not--pedestrian traffic is vital for the survival of a city. People aren't going to want to drive into all that traffic, so they can just as easily drive into a suburban mall for much of their needs. Do I ultimately expect the end of driving? Hell no. But it is my expectation that we can vastly reduce the number of those driving, because it is apparent that when given viable public transportation, people will stop driving.

Melon

cass 11-23-2002 01:23 PM

right now
 
I hope he is sittiing in the back seat of a humble old 4 cylinder Toyota ( my 17 year old borrowed my car for the weekend, St Christopher is in the glove box)
Jesus has appeared in my dreams occassionally. He never even looks at the cars or even wonders what they are!! I don't think he's a petrol-head.
He did say( or was it one of his colleagues?) "the meek shall inherit the earth" So with cars having gained such prestige status here recently, that's a few folk claiming what they think is a prize now. Sorry posers, you've had what you thought was your fun.

Let me visualise...Jesus, son of Mary....he'd either have a fuel-effiecient mini-bus so he could pick up all the poor local kids and take them on outings or he'd suggest we use the collective intelligence his old man had hopes we would put to good use and come up with modes of transport that didn't steal our future.
Some combination of solar and hydro power.However it operates...it would be pink and U2 would be playing on the stereo, a "steering wheel thumper" ( someone used that term here ages ago..I still get a laugh, thanks)
honk if you're jesus.:wave:

pub crawler 11-23-2002 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by speedracer
pub crawler,

...since the major routes for such systems (buses, subways, commuter trains) tend to head in or out of the city, they're really not too useful for people who need to travel from suburb to suburb instead from suburb to city.

True enough, but I think we ought to look at suburb-to-suburb systems -- particulary in a place like L.A. which is essentially one giant suburb (though one could also effectively argue that L.A. is one giant urban area).

Quote:

The better solution, as others have indicated in this thread, is for automobile manufacturers to develop more efficient/less polluting automobiles.
I agree, though from my perspective the solution would still involve bettering public transportation systems as well.


Quote:

And just in case you were curious, I live and work in Cambridge, MA. I walk (15 minutes) or take a bus to work every day. I don't own a car and don't miss it. But if I lived in, say, Lexington, I'd probably drive 5 miles every morning to the Alewife T (subway) station, park my car there, then take the T for the last mile to work.

You're doing your part. I wish I could say I don't own a car.

pub crawler 11-23-2002 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by melon


So what is the real solution ultimately? Like Europe, we are going to have to invest in a real high-speed train and commuter rail system, because--like it or not--pedestrian traffic is vital for the survival of a city.
That's what I'm sayin'.

Quote:

...it is my expectation that we can vastly reduce the number of those driving, because it is apparent that when given viable public transportation, people will stop driving.

Yes, yes and yes. :)

pub crawler 11-23-2002 01:59 PM

*sigh* I really think I need to get involved in politics and, specifically, the issue of public transportation because I am the only person in this nation that will make change happen. :| :huh: :rant: :slant: :hmm:

Blue_Angel 11-24-2002 02:35 PM

haha foray!

Danospano 11-25-2002 08:10 AM

I agree with everyone who said that Jesus wouldn't drive at all. Then again, we don't know.

As for the arugment dealing with miles per gallon: I think it's a joke. There IS tecnology that would allow a 40 m/p/g SUV, but the gas and oil companies wouldn't make as much money off of it, so it's "unmarketable". I think people would be more than glad to drive electric/hybrid cars, but the car manufacturers are the ones who have some qualms.

UltravioletU2 11-25-2002 09:25 AM

:mad: Bullshit. :mad:

Yes, we need to have more economic cars for the environment and the future. Yes, I believe technology makes it more than possible, but it's the fuel and oil companies who hold the reins.

HOWEVER,

I am so sick and tired of Christians who plan bullshit marketing strategies like this. Talk about turning people away from Christianity. Give me a break. "Jesus wouldn't drive an SUV". Perhaps if He was here today in a small town and some guy came in his gas guzzling SUV and begged Jesus to cure his sick kid who resided 20 minutes outside of the small town, Jesus would hop in and save the kid.

I guess all I'm trying to say is that Christians strive to be like Jesus...but let's get the basics down (love your neighbor) before petty things like cars.

Yes, we need to protect our environment and cars are a good starting point. It becomes a problem when Jesus becomes the centre of the marketing ploy.

I am a Christian, by the way. A Christian who feels that we as Christians are the biggest turn offs to Christianity because of stunts like these.

:mad: :grumpy:

hiphop 11-25-2002 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by UltravioletU2
:mad: Bullshit. :mad:

Yes, we need to have more economic cars for the environment and the future. Yes, I believe technology makes it more than possible, but it's the fuel and oil companies who hold the reins.

HOWEVER,

I am so sick and tired of Christians who plan bullshit marketing strategies like this. Talk about turning people away from Christianity. Give me a break. "Jesus wouldn't drive an SUV". Perhaps if He was here today in a small town and some guy came in his gas guzzling SUV and begged Jesus to cure his sick kid who resided 20 minutes outside of the small town, Jesus would hop in and save the kid.

I guess all I'm trying to say is that Christians strive to be like Jesus...but let's get the basics down (love your neighbor) before petty things like cars.

Yes, we need to protect our environment and cars are a good starting point. It becomes a problem when Jesus becomes the centre of the marketing ploy.

I am a Christian, by the way. A Christian who feels that we as Christians are the biggest turn offs to Christianity because of stunts like these.

:mad: :grumpy:

Yeah, you´re right, I agree.

Jesus drives a Harley. He got long hair, remember?

nbcrusader 11-25-2002 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by UltravioletU2
I am so sick and tired of Christians who plan bullshit marketing strategies like this. Talk about turning people away from Christianity. Give me a break. "Jesus wouldn't drive an SUV". Perhaps if He was here today in a small town and some guy came in his gas guzzling SUV and begged Jesus to cure his sick kid who resided 20 minutes outside of the small town, Jesus would hop in and save the kid.
I agree with you completely. It really irkes me when people take a worldly concern and slap a "Christian" label or use Christanese terms in an effort to substantiate their cause. :mad:

pub crawler 11-25-2002 12:39 PM

Are you going to tell me the Christian Right doesn't spiritualize political issues?

melon 11-25-2002 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pub crawler
Are you going to tell me the Christian Right doesn't spiritualize political issues?
Well, we all know that we're going to hell if we disagree with them! :rolleyes:

Melon

nbcrusader 11-25-2002 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by pub crawler
Are you going to tell me the Christian Right doesn't spiritualize political issues?
No. I have no plans to wear an "I am the Christian Right" button.

Melon - I know you know your theology better than that (yes, I know it was sarcasm)

U2Bama 11-25-2002 08:38 PM

Quote:

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.

That says it best. I love the "high horse" part. I would lose my balance if I rode around on such a high horse yet managed to point my finger at people who were violating the dogmas of political correctness.

For the record, I drive a 1996 Jeep Cherokee with nearly 140,000 miles. It gets 16 miles per gallon in the city and 19 mpg on the freeway. If you don't want to be my friend because of this, then it is my loss.

Even if we had mass transit in my sprawling metropolis, it would be impractical for me to use it for I often get unscheduled calls from potential customers wanting me to come meet with them on short notice, sometimes about 10 miles away and sometimes about 90 miles away.

What would Bono drive? What would The Edge drive? What would Adam Clayton drive? What would Larry Mullen, Jr. drive? Is everyone certain that none of those lads have a Land Rover or Mercedes G-Wagon in their collection? Might want to check up on that.

~U2Alabama

speedracer 11-25-2002 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by U2Bama


What would Bono drive? What would The Edge drive? What would Adam Clayton drive? What would Larry Mullen, Jr. drive? Is everyone certain that none of those lads have a Land Rover or Mercedes G-Wagon in their collection? Might want to check up on that.


I think motorcycles typically get 50 miles per gallon. If you don't mind the higher fatality rates, motorcycles are a more environment-friendly option.

pub crawler 11-26-2002 02:48 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by U2Bama


That says it best. I love the "high horse" part. I would lose my balance if I rode around on such a high horse yet managed to point my finger at people who were violating the dogmas of political correctness.

For the record, I drive a 1996 Jeep Cherokee with nearly 140,000 miles. It gets 16 miles per gallon in the city and 19 mpg on the freeway. If you don't want to be my friend because of this, then it is my loss.

Even if we had mass transit in my sprawling metropolis, it would be impractical for me to use it for I often get unscheduled calls from potential customers wanting me to come meet with them on short notice, sometimes about 10 miles away and sometimes about 90 miles away.

What would Bono drive? What would The Edge drive? What would Adam Clayton drive? What would Larry Mullen, Jr. drive? Is everyone certain that none of those lads have a Land Rover or Mercedes G-Wagon in their collection? Might want to check up on that.

~U2Alabama


That's great, that's nice that you drive what you drive, Bama. I'll dare say that millions upon millions of people drive cars that get the mileage your car gets or worse.

The point is, we as a society need to work on the problem of diminishing natural resources and the contamination of our environment. But I know you know that.

Klaus 11-27-2002 09:25 AM

The Problem is:

People are willing to pay for luxury things - even for extravagant colors but not for fuel efficency.
The only way i see to change this is the government, since humans kill the planet with their behaviour.
(for example high taxes for polution/gas consumption)

Klaus

V Nura 11-27-2002 09:34 AM

Mercedes and a Beamer. ..no question


and deep


LMAO

ouizy 11-27-2002 12:23 PM

Jesus would drive a pimped out Cadillac Escalade.

I think it would be white with black tinted windows.

It would have a light gray leather interior with seat heaters.

it would have an X-Box and DVD hook-up with satellite internet availability on its flat panel screens installed in teh back of the headrests.

it would have a very loud sound system, that would play U2 Cd's out of its 100 disc changer located in the trunk.

This huge SUV would run on water and give off no emissions because, well, he is Jesus.

UltravioletU2 11-27-2002 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ouizy
Jesus would drive a pimped out Cadillac Escalade.

I think it would be white with black tinted windows.

It would have a light gray leather interior with seat heaters.

it would have an X-Box and DVD hook-up with satellite internet availability on its flat panel screens installed in teh back of the headrests.

it would have a very loud sound system, that would play U2 Cd's out of its 100 disc changer located in the trunk.

This huge SUV would run on water and give off no emissions because, well, he is Jesus.

:up:

:lmao::lol::lmao::lol:

Oh my, that was good, very good!

joyfulgirl 11-27-2002 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by 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."

:lol:


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:54 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com