About the Rainbow Gathering in NM (Albuquerque, Santa Fe: house, safety, to move)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I say that the Rainbow Family has the right to peacefully assemble, and it is just plain un-American to oppose it just because you don't agree with their philosophies. Just another instance of this nation turning into conservative, right-wing, knee jerk sheep. It's the Forest Circus that turns it into a bigger deal than it needs to be.
... Rainbow Family has the right to peacefully assemble, ... another instance of this nation turning into conservative, right-wing, knee jerk sheep. ....
Most of the arguments I've seen against the gathering have been on the basis of the environmental impact.
That's hardly one of the pillars of "conservative, right-wing, knee jerk" thought.
Against the Gathering or
For the Gathering..
NO is what I say!!!
You are entitled to your opinion... but this isn't something you get to vote on.
Either the public lands are open for camping and peaceful, legal assembly... or they aren't. It's either everyone or no one. And besides that, the Gathering is much lower impact per capita than your typical forest user.
So what is the problem?
They are already be mercilessly and illegally harrassed by the authorities. If you are actually concerned about freedom and justice, then that is something you should be upset about.
Most of the arguments I've seen against the gathering have been on the basis of the environmental impact.
That's hardly one of the pillars of "conservative, right-wing, knee jerk" thought.
Yea, that's a funny thing, isn't it? Right wing knee jerk conservatives who usually have no interest in environmental concerns, suddenly put on environmental hats and feign mortal concern that the environment might be impacted when it comes to groups they don't like - rainbow/hippies/mexicans - you name it.
Here we have folks who have absolutely no understanding of environmental issues try to claim suddenly that they are experts and make false statements, such as that slit latrines are bad for the environment and will leech into water tables and "sh*t doesn't just go away" and other complete nonsense.
sh*t is compost. Everything that grows on the surface of the earth grows in sh*t. Dirt is made up of dead, decaying, organic matter that comes from rotting trees/vegetation and rotting animals and rotting sh*t and pi*s from animals. Period. Try getting rid of all this rotting material, including sh*t, and there will be no more nutrients for plants to grow in, and the whole cycle will break down.
A few slit latrines in a large forest have no negative impacts, as long as they are located away from streams or where water might flood or wash through. The sh*t is covered with dirt and becomes excellent compost for the forest and breaks down naturally, as has been the case for billions of years. Now, obviously, you wouldn't put slit latrines where there is a watershed that supplies drinking water. Other than that, all those false claims about how the slit latrines will leach into water tables are just that - false claims.
If you right wing faux environmentalists who are screaming that the rainbow gathering is trashing the environment and make such claims about the impact of slit latrines leeching into water tables and other such nonsense, please show us your credentials and back up your claims with evidence. Otherwise, grow up.
10,000-12,000 people in the woods = Probable damage to the woods
How do you define damage? Damage to what? For how long? More damage than if these 10,000 to 12,000 stayed in American Suburbia utilizing 1000 times as much resources and generating way more pollution and garbage as compared to rustic camping in the woods?
So, what kind of damage? 10% of the millions seedlings trampled that will simply be replaced with new growth in a year or two? Some awesome new compost that will be burried and provide awesome new soil/nutrients for the forest?
Please, be specific with such claims. What do you mean by damage, and how long, etc.?
I'm guessing that when the arguements for allowing thousands of people to use the forest won't hold water that the next best thing is to call everyone who advocates responsible use of our environment "rightwingfascistkneejerkrepublican....." yadda yadda yadda.
The responses here from those who believe that trenchs for toilets, digging out springs for water, and stripping the forest of firewood are the best way to provide resources for thousands of people are pretty convincing evidence that they don't know what they're talking about.
For the umpteenth time; portable toilets, water buffaloes, and propane/charcoal/hauled in wood are the correct way to provide for those in the forest. It minimizes the impact, plain and simple. Anything else is a charade and demonstrates the irresponsible behavior of the Rainbows.
Here we have folks who have absolutely no understanding of environmental issues try to claim suddenly that they are experts and make false statements, such as that slit latrines are bad for the environment and will leech into water tables and "sh*t doesn't just go away" and other complete nonsense.
I wonder what people think happens to all the stuff that leaches out of their septic tanks...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
