The goal is to keep the oil in the ground, to not be burned or to be made into plastics.

It's not just plastics. Practically every substance we use and rely on to maintain civilisation as we know it has a petrochemical or fossil fuel base.

I understand the not burning fossil fuel thing, but why can't it be seen like another mineral resource?

Because that's still geological carbon entering the overall cycle on the surface. The air and ocean are giant buffers of it. When it's needed it needs to be pulled from there somehow (such as by felling trees or directly extracting CO2). Unfortunately that's not economical when it's legal to tap the giant lakes of it sitting underground.

Many of the other things (plastics esp) are byproducts after refining for fuel. If the fuel isn't consumed, the byproducts would become cost ineffective.

Don't "worry" though. Oil consumption is going up not down.

Just don't have kids.

If the cure is as bad as the disease, then why intervene?

Isn't the main source of helium from oil production? It's not like we have fusion reactors turning H into He.

The main source of helium is natural gas production, not oil

Okay, but while technically correct, it does nothing to change the situation. They are punching holes in the ground to extract the sweet sweet nectar. They have to store what has been extracted. When that storage is full, what does one do? Stop the input into the storage.

The amount of activity required for helium is insubstantial compared to the amount of natural gas being extracted globally. And the amount of natural gas extracted pales in comparison to total combined gas, oil, and coal.

Helium extraction doesn't pose a notable environmental issue on its own.

Well primarily the goal is to ensure that we don't build any homes for people or any clean energy. There's a reason a group of people funded by an oil heir are anti-nuclear.