It doesn't take much to become a parent. It takes effort to become a doctor. What does it take to become an environmentalist?

I ask the question because I'm not certain there are notable qualifications among environmentalists. Hawaii has many environmentalists trying to save the state's limited physical resources from urban sprawl and human decadence.

To become a parent one needs merely to father or birth a child. I suppose adoption also qualifies one to be called a parent.

To become a doctor or an engineer or a teacher requires more than becoming a parent, tough perhaps less than becoming a good parent. There's all those years of college that are required to achieve the state sanctioned license. Time, effort, money. No such license is required to become a parent.

Perhaps there should be a license requirement to become an environmentalist. Then we could keep track of them. You know, in case they lose their way.

I've often heard that the religious in the US are typically conservative-- for example, the religious right. Environmentalists are often pegged as left-leaning. Are there no liberal relgionists? Are there no conservative environmentalists? It stands to reason that envrionmentalists would want to conserve, so why is it that conservatives use but don't conserve?

If one is an envrionmentalist, does that make them an activist by default? An envrionmentalist, so it would seem, focuses attention on conserving and protecting the envrionment. If action is involved, would that not also make them an activist?

Activist is a more general term. One can be a political activist, and environmental activist, perhaps a human rights activist, but not a sports activist.

In sports, you're either a spectator or participant. So it is with politics. Spectators may observe politics, may even vote, therefore showing some involvement and participation, but attempting to become a politician makes one a full participant.

I think we need classes, courses, students, graduates, and licenses for all of these.