People still react to things through the filter of their own feelings though. Even in a situation where logic is applied, feelings can easily creep into the process and "guide" the logic, even if subtly.
If logic is affected by emotion/feelings, is it still logic?
You wouldn't say there's an absolute logical view? Let's take the example of protecting the environment. Some people believe that since we were given all of these resources, we should exploit them to the fullest in order to benefit ourselves in the present generation. Besides, we'll probably find another planet to colonize and trash after this one so who cares what happens to this one. It's not like the destruction of this planet would have any sort of affect on the cosmological environment. (It's very difficult for me to not write with a bias). Then there are the environmentally minded folk. These people believe that since we were given all of these resources on this beautiful planet, we should do all that we can to ensure their continued availability for, as some Native American tribes say, the Seventh Generation. We can't be certain that another habitable planet exists (while in an infinitely expanding Universe, yes, there are an infinite number of possibilities. Among those is the slim chance that Earth is the only habitable planet) so why not stay on the safe side and ensure that this planet stays around until it ends on its own terms? To me, the latter is by far more logical.
But your examples are coming from different perspectives. There is no absolute perspective. Also, what makes being "safer" inherently more logical? There are certainly instances where taking risks is logical. Again, logic is a tool. It's often used to accomplish a goal shaped by a perspective. In your scenarios, the question is, "how do we best utilize our resources" and it's how the word "best" is interpreted that allows for such disparate views. Logic needs parameters to operate within.