When you have a more global view, then you can see how these actually can affect other people. Global warming, pollution, sweat-shop labor, use of resources, etc, all have an effect on the people of this world.

The more electricity we use (inefficient incandescent bulbs), the more pollution we create (since renewable energy should not be forced on us) which affects us all.

Similarly with SUVs- Did you know that if your neighbor drives a hummer, they are actually costing you more money in transportation costs through road maintenance? Hummers exceed residential road weight specifications and actually damage the roads, causing potholes and wear at an accelerated rate, costing more in taxes to maintain these roads. How is that for personal freedom?

Society dictates our rights to life and liberty, so what about my right to clean air and clean water? What about others in foreign countries that are suffering at our expense because of OUR rights to life and liberty? This is a global issue and we need to begin looking beyond our own backyard.

It doesn’t seem contradictory, it IS contradictory.

“…where do we draw the line?” Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness…and property rights. These are as valid to non-fanatics as they are to fanatics.

If I’m polluting upstream then I’m affecting the property rights and liberty of those down stream. If I build a steel foundry or hog farm in my suburban back yard, then I am affecting the liberty and property rights of my neighbors. If I dump raw sewage into a small recreational lake than I am affecting the liberty of those who use the lake and the property rights of those who live on the lake.

If I buy an SUV or conventional light bulb I am not affecting anyone’s liberty or property rights.

If you legislate away my choice to buy an SUV or a conventional light bulb you ARE affecting my liberty and my property rights.

So to answer your question “Are you free to kill or injure your neighbor as part of your ‘free will?’” No, because it violates THEIR rights to life and liberty.

Take a lesson from the NRA or MADD. The NRA believes in the individual right to own guns, but they don’t try to mandate gun ownership. MADD doesn’t campaign against drinking, or driving, just drinking AND driving, because the latter has a much greater chance of violating someone’s life, liberty, or property rights. Both groups have OTHER peoples’ liberty as their foundational belief.

The modern green movement has authoritarianism as their foundational belief. Other peoples’ liberty is not an option. Go green their way or go to jail.

Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness…and property rights. These rights are not just for the fanatics, but for the rest of us as well.

Exercise your freedom in a way that allows others their freedom. Then you won’t be the subject of satire in ads.

On top of that, being green can often be a far more expensive choice, which is exactly why the government SHOULD be involved. But IMO, govt should focus more on business law and less heavily on consumer mandates. This will force businesses to adapt by making the green solution cheaper, and do the work of education the consumer better.

What I think you fail to realize is this is the same kind of reaction people had to dumping garbage in the streams, and being allowed to do whatever they want to and with their land not so long ago. The EPA, California Coastal Commission, Department of Fish and Wildlife, all of these were created by the people in reaction to the harm people were doing to each other.
That is great that you have a lot of open space in your town, but when 95% of the forests in the United States have been cut down in the last 150 or so years, I would say we have a problem.
And lets really be honest here- the government isn’t telling you what to do, they are setting guidelines for companies to produce more efficient products, and in many ways pushing innovation. Incandescent bulbs aren’t going away, actually companies are developing more efficient incandescent bulbs that match the performance of CFL bulbs. Without this push, there would be absolutely no reason to change anything.

Nuclear has the lowest emissions of both C02 since it does not produce any as a byproduct and also releases the least amount of radiation into the air.

But we know that truth and freedom of thought are alien concepts to the hive-mind of the green movement.

I am for helping the environment but I am not for reducing the standard of living in first world countries back to the third world just to make environmentalist happy.

Have your beliefs is fine it is when those views are attempted to be imposed through legislation and regulation is where the contention arises.

In San Jose, they have outlawed shopping bags – paper or plastic. You have to bring your own. That is not something that would ever pass a vote of the people.

I use compact fluorescents in most of my house, but there are some places that they just don’t work – they’re very vibration sensitive, for one thing, and are the wrong thing to put in a garage door opener. But Our Masters Who Be In Washington have decreed that no more incandescent bulbs may be purchased. This is just plain nuts.

The “Green Police” is pretty much where we’re headed.