Dare I say, climate change has become a blasé topic of conversation. The first extreme consequences of a heating atmosphere are being experienced by nearly every living soul across the planet. Severe weather have mutated into unbelievably severe as gyrating shifts in day-to-day weather have become commonplace, and costly damage from weather events continues to escalate. Interesting, but what’s for dinner?

There was an expectation that as the demonstrations of climate change became undeniable, people would embrace the crisis and demand the government act. While the number of people in the United States who believe climate change is real has risen over the past decade, the calls to actions have remained nearly stagnant. The numbers of new voices calling for a government response has not increased the overall numbers of engaged citizens.

An old pattern concerning climate change in the United States is back at the fore. What are we facing this year: inflation at the consumer level, back to the office policies, an ineffectual House of Representatives, a national election with extraordinary consequences, mass shootings, bodily autonomy, and – far down on the list – climate change. The topics at the dinner table served with dessert are a long list of acute crises, and the environment is often relegated to an afterthought: “Oh yes, that too.”

Yet, the persistent pattern has somewhat diminished. What a good consequence of polls it is that many people polled do not care about polls, treating them as noise or even propaganda. More to the proof of the point, those who are passionate to address climate change are not deterred by the other legitimate crises we face, seeing these other items as intimately tied to addressing our heating planet. They are. Even the New York Times is sending out a weekly climate briefing (for subscribers).

A newly released report attempted to verify if climate protests were effective in provoking change. With a couple of nuances, the report found that protests aimed at drumming up popular support and spreading quality information to disengaged people were not useful. However, protests aimed directly at legislators were much more effective. Legislators reacted and often, progress was made on climate bills across Europe and North America.

Our organization has typically put more energy into building relationships with legislators and thought leaders in the political world than organizing large rallies. While the report confirms our choices, we did not always choose based on what we thought was the most expedient. (I wish were that prescient.) We are guided by a religious impulse that is always personal, always seeking connection with our fellow human beings just as we seek an intimate connection with God. Our belief systems illumine our strategic choices to engage our legislators.

We are not seeking to pass one bill although it seems that is exactly what we do when a snapshot is taken on any given day. The religious view of the world is long and deep. Passing one bill is remarkable, but its passage will not change the trajectory of our world. We seek a change in culture, in conversation, in the outlook of what is necessary and important in our world. With a shift in perspective, all bills will take climate change into account. As we seek to transform ourselves into our noblest ideas of integrity, so do we seek to transform the world around us.