If only gay sex caused global warming [7]
Why we're more scared of gay marriage and terrorism than a much deadlier threat

This article from the LA Times [7] is a few days old now, but it's a thoughtful piece about the reasons why we aren't, as a culture, inclined towards graver concern about the threat we're facing from global warming. Worth reading.

He lists four reasons why we aren't already up in arms about it. The title of the piece harkens from this one:

The second reason why global warming doesn't put our brains on orange alert is that it doesn't violate our moral sensibilities. … Moral emotions are the brain's call to action. Although all human societies have moral rules about food and sex, none has a moral rule about atmospheric chemistry. And so we are outraged about every breach of protocol except Kyoto. Yes, global warming is bad, but it doesn't make us feel nauseated or angry or disgraced, and thus we don't feel compelled to rail against it as we do against other momentous threats to our species, such as flag burning. The fact is that if climate change were caused by gay sex, or by the practice of eating kittens, millions of protesters would be massing in the streets.

I think there's something to think about in there. Also, it's worth noting that while global warming itself doesn't offend our sense of morals, the PR trickery going on to confuse the public about this crucial issue ought to. Keep getting the word out there!