"In recent years and elections, one might have thought that homosexuality and abortion were the litmus tests of authentic Christianity. Where did this come from? They never were the criteria of proper membership for the first two thousand years, but they reflect very recent culture wars instead." ~ Richard Rohr, a Franciscan Roman Catholic priest

The Detroit Water and Sewage Department is conducting mass water shut offs in Detroit Michigan which will effect over 120,000 account holders over a 3 month period (June-September 2014) at a rate of 3,000 per week. This accounts for over 40% of customers who are using the Detroit Water system and has been dubbed a violation of Human Rights by various organizations. 70,000 of those accounts are residential accounts which could amount to anywhere from 200,000-300,000 people directly effected.

Without water..

..dehydration becomes an immediate threat to Detroit residents. A lack of clean and drinkable water on a scale of this size can effect not only the person but the entire city almost immediately. The onset of dehydration is 1-2 days, which, if left untreated can result in death in as little as 5-14 days from the onset. Making sure Detroit residents have a supply of clean drinkable water is our top priority.

Sanitation is the second concern. With lack of water for basic things like waste removal, food preparation and cleanliness of food preparation tools, disease can become a threat factor in a matter of weeks, if left unchecked disease can spread in 2 months time.

Without water, the threat to the health and safety of Detroit residents becomes immediate, the resulting negative effects of mass water shut offs begin just 2 days after shut off and can become endemic in just 60 days time. When taking the scope into account (120,000 water accounts or 300,000+ people ) the implications become clear; this is a disaster zone – and immediate relief and preparation is needed.

Conservatives Don't Deny Climate Science Because They're Ignorant. They Deny It Because of Who They Are.

Such is the finding of a new paper by Yale law professor and communication researcher Dan Kahan, recently profiled in depth by Ezra Klein in a much read Vox article aptly titled "How politics makes us stupid." Kahan is becoming widely known for his research showing that political ideology interferes with our most basic reasoning abilities; even our math skills, it seems, go right out the window when political passions come into play. In this new paper, though, Kahan isn't showing how dumb we are. Rather, he's doing the opposite: Showing that if you ask the questions the right way, Americans know a lot more about climate science than you might think. (Even conservatives.) "Whether people 'believe in' climate change, like whether they 'believe in' evolution, expresses who they are," writes Kahan.

...

To understand Kahan's analysis, it helps to start where much of his prior research—extensively covered by Klein, myself, and others—left off. Kahan has defined a measure that he calls "ordinary science intelligence," which assesses how good people are at mathematical and scientific reasoning and at questioning their own beliefs. Using this survey tool, he is able to present evidence showing that (1) as people get better at science, they are more likely in general to affirm that global warming is mostly due to human activities; but (2) as soon as you split people up in to liberals and conservatives, that conclusion goes out the window. Actually, liberals get way better in their answers as their science ability increases, and conservatives get considerably worse:


...

Still, those who wish to communicate to the public about climate change will have to grapple with Kahan's assertion that conservatives really aren't ignorant about the issue—they're just highly prone to defend their worldviews when asked certain kinds of questions. If Kahan is right, the implication is that we need to talk about climate science in a way that is entirely devoid of cultural meanings that will antagonize the right.

Later in the paper, Kahan goes on to assert that precisely this strategy is working right now in Southeast Florida, where members of the Regional Climate Change Compact have brought on board politically diverse constituencies by studiously avoiding pushing anyone's buttons. Kahan even shows polling data suggesting that questions like "local and state officials should be involved in identifying steps that local communities can take to reduce the risk posed by rising sea levels" do not provoke a polarized response in this region. Rather, liberals and conservatives alike in Southeast Florida agree with such a statement, which references a major consequence of climate change while ignoring the gigantic elephant in the room…its cause.