Your assumption seems based on acknowledgement that nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. However, the speed of light is not constant and can be exceeded by some particles. Neutrinos may be one of them. However, travelling so fast does not exclude us from travelling huge distances by "extending" our life spans through travelling very very fast, if not faster than the speed of light.
If I am understanding this correctly, Relativity as describedby Philip Gibbs in 1997 (University of California) seems to have it that large distance space travel for humans is not out of the question. A "relativistic rocket", causes "time dilation" such that "space travellers (could) cover very large distances in their lifetimes. If they accelerate at a constant acceleration equal to the acceleration due to gravity on Earth, they would not only have a perfect artificial gravity on their ship, but would also be able to cross the galaxy in only about 12 years of their own "proper time": that is, they would age 12 years during the journey." In other words (I think!) while the travellers may not move more than the speed of light, they would - in effect - age more slowly than they would on Earth.
Also, other theories suggest travelling vast distances through space without moving faster than light may be possible. Worm Holes, for example, are not an invention of science fiction but of physics; whether or not they could be used for space travel, if they could be created or exist naturally, is a matter some physicists actually debate.
While we may have been duped by "warp drives", while travelling at the speed of light, or above it probably impossible, travelling huge distances across space is .... if we can invent the technology before we become extinct!
So, I come to a similar conclusion as you: We must respect our planet at least for the longevity of our own species ... in case we can't get off it in Time!