Let me get this straight, you think that the UN is trying to bring in a new world religion and is running an agenda towards this end supported by the Codex Alimentarius?

The Codex you describe as "the UN global strategy to manipulate and control agriculture, food and supplements".

Good luck with that. I'm sure a lot of people believe you.

Fools who have rejected Father God worship mother earth and all the debauchery that go with it. Talk about self righteous nonsense. And then the usual 'The answer lies in education and self-regulation of our own consumerism.' The world has never been more educated.

In the past, if God had a face, it would have gone red by what people did in His name.

Things have not changed that much, and so would Gaia feel deeply ashamed had she been aware of the coercion which people dare enact in Her name.

If we are all Her children, then so are also the "polluters", so are the ones who use up her energy, so are the ones who use her natural gifts and so are the ones who lean towards God's gift of science instead.

Just found a balanced approach in http://www.krishna.com/mother-earth-day , it says: "when we exploit the earth, plundering her resources for ungodly purposes, we become thieves", but who is to say which actions are godly and which are not? that's can only be determined in our heart of hearts, intimately between each one of us and God, certainly not by gross intervention by the law of the land.

Also nicely stated there: "Humanitarian relief efforts and charitable causes to "save the rain forest," for example, address only the symptom, not the cause of the problem" - the problem is greed and avarice. The law of the land can indeed reduce prosperity, but it has no power whatsoever in reducing greed and avarice: only faith in God can do that. We thank God for granting us access to His aspect of Gaia. It does not please God or Gaia if we use their name in vain.

"Also nicely stated there: "Humanitarian relief efforts and charitable causes to "save the rain forest," for example, address only the symptom, not the cause of the problem" - the problem is greed and avarice."

Oh here we go again - more religiosity.

The problem is public ownership of rainforests, and the unwillingness of those who claim the higher value of rainforest conservation. to put their money where their mouth is and *buy* them*.

To my mind the point at which an ideology becomes a religion is the point at which people start to get killed for it. Environmentalism passed that point long ago:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/09/01/maryland-police-respond-hostage-situation-man-gun-enters-building/

http://www.infowars.com/argentinian-couple-shoot-kids-kill-themselves-over-global-warming/

Suzeonline well put. It is not a difficult concept - protecting the environment and aiming for sustainability is really about human innovative capabilities and about survival - it is biologically ingrained. There is no need to call it Mother Earth or revert to pagan worship.

Innovation and ability to adapt is the key to human survival. Whether it be cavemen working out how to deal with marauding mammoths or foresight in planning for sustainable living,particularly when faced with new challenges of natural disaster or population growth.

Greed and avarice are ultimately not in the interests of the whole but man will inevitably work it out. Consumerism is not the panacea of human happiness or survival and indeed there is a new consciousness around those concepts. Sometimes enlightenment might need an impetus or a compelling event such as man-made disaster or exposure of widespread corruption, or dealing with the aftermath of war.

It is not akin to religion to suggest human wellbeing or survival is dependent on the interaction with the environment.

The environment is not supernatural it is there for all to experience and see. There is no faith based dogma only disagreements on how much the environment can withstand or the ways in which humans might adapt.