"Helping the environment" does not just begin and end at banning things.
I would accept that logic from a well meaning child, but not a serious adult.
The obvious questions to any reasonable person would be, how much does this actually help the environment, what alternatives are there, and what might be the consequences of doing this. Banning straws never even got close to having good answers to any of these, and yet you were a dumb greedy redneck who hated the environment for pointing it out.
It's clear where the value for this came from, and that was as a tool to bash political opponents with.
Do you really not examine costs and benefits when you think about what motivates people?
