We're all Terrible People

[omega 616]

I have no idea were I read it but "we" give almost twice as much to animal charities than human ones.

I guess it's "whats more cute, a screaming child or a nice fluffy animal?", or maybe we can stop human cruelty by removing the kid from the environment for less than what it costs to rehabilitate and feed a animal.

 

[Vergast]

My goverment allready gives an absured amount of money to forgin nations. It really is an absured ammount when it was reveled yesterday that 2 billion was requrired to cover the very basic cover for one of our nations banks that is 'in trouble'. So i dont give to charites opperating in another country (unless its to help something like what happened in haiti). As a result i give to charities in my country that my goverement isnt funding. Which is seeing eye dogs.

 

[ma55ter_fett]

1. $100 towards the seeing eye dog foundation. Your money pays for a fraction of the training of 1 dog that would slightly improve the quality of life of a blind person.
2. $100 towards starving children. You probably save the lives of multiple children and vastly increase their quality of life.

Why, when presented with these two options, would anyone choose the dog?

So you're really criticizing people for donating to certain charities instead of other ones?

I'm sorry, but that's just stupid. You should be glad that people are being charitable in the first place.

I agree, without a detailed breakdown of how the money will be spent you can't really point fingers (well you can but you just come off as a bit of a self righteous prude.)

How would you know how the money is being spent otherwise?

Who would help pay for the eye-dog training?

Also a seeing eye-dog just so happens to drastically increase the quality of life for a blind person.

Also while it may sound dickish, I would say that paying for children to be fed doesn?t do much to solve the cause, only treating the effect. The money would be better spent on developing the countries where these children live, otherwise you save them from hunger only to thrust them into an adulthood where there are no jobs, no hope of a better future.

 

[Olikunmissile]

I hate human beings, so I would much rather pay for the dog to be awesome.

Took the words out of my mouth.

 

[hamster mk 4]

I don't give to anyone because I have made peace with my status as a terrible person. I am now free to spend money on what would bring me the most happiness without the guilt of knowing I could be bringing some one else more happiness with the same money.

 

[PixieFace]

You really have to look into the specific organization you're donating to, be it for human or animals causes. Some "charities" take ungodly percentages of the money to fill their paychecks and only give pennies to those who actually need it.

I tend to give to animal charities more like the ASPCA because things like animals mutilated by dog fighting, cat hoarding, neglect and general abuse INFURIATES me. Not because, ohhh look at cute widdle doggy woggy!, but because those animals are like children - they are DOMESTICATED animals that were bred to depend on humans for shelter and care. Now there is a staggering overpopulation of animals due to human carelessness of a situation we created. It's disgusting.

I also like donating to breast cancer research because I am *told* that I am paying however much of a percent towards a mammogram. Having a definitive answer like that helps.

As far as donating towards starving people goes, there has also been significant research into the idea that simply giving to poorer countries, like Africa, hurts more than helps. You can give and give and give, but all that does is foster dependence rather than independence. For instance, once a charity moves on after teaching a tribe how to use water wells or other equipment, the tribe more often than not only sells the equipment and falls back into old ways of starvation and poverty. The war lords are the real issues we need to face over there. It's a strange issue.

 

[Markness]

I do. I love animals and hate when they suffer. People on the other hand as you are trying to prove, suck ass.

Really? Really? Animal lives are worth more to you than human lives? You would prefer to gun down 10 children than kill a cheetah? I would definately not employ you as a babysitter. I hope you are picketing that at least 90% of all government spending should be on animal protection rather than law, roads or hospitals which are all rather human needs. Animals are worth so much more!

As for starving kids.
I honestly could not care less about little Ka'lukalakaka MMMMbakok in Whogivesafuckistan. I honestly hope his parents get shot in the face for what they did. They live in a area with not enough food to feed its current population and so decide to put out another mouth to not feed.

It's definately not the childs fault. It's definately not a reason to let that child starve.

If a race is that stupid to move to a area with no food and then decides it would be a good idea to breed like goddamn rabbits then they really do deserve to starve.

Congratz on being the first one to make a racist remark on this thread! I hope you realise how retarded you sound. Just so you know, if you were born into that country, even if you retained your superior genetic makeup, you would do the exact same thing.

 

[Wounded Melody]

I think the RICH people are the terrible ones. Celebrities always go 'donate! donate!' and yet I don't see them giving up half of their wealth or anything. If every celebrity, sports star, etc. gave a million dollars each, places like Haiti could be rebuilt (barring the abuse of the government but that's another topic).

 

[cheese_wizington]

I hate human beings, so I would much rather pay for the dog to be awesome.

So you hate the starving African kid with Malaria and AIDS, no Mother or Father, and two younger siblings.

No, let's just give it to the non-sentient animal that Asian people eat.

 

[mcgroobber]

I'm constantly perplexed by animal charities. People giving money to them should just straight out say they value the continued existence of that particular species far more than human lives.

many people do come straight out and say it like sea shepherds, they ask the people who come on there sea adventures, and what could loosely be called a protest, if they would be willing to die to save a whale, and people say yes

because, and im not saying that i agree with it but, there are 6.2 billion people and we kill off endangered species at a rate that would make them extinct, now by those statistics if there are 6,200,000,000+ people in the world and a few thousand animals of a paticular species, its the people who seem a bit more expendable

now i dont agree with that, because every loss of life is a tragedy

but as Stalin said "One death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic"

 

[Weaver]

OP did you just read Gregory Baum's "social sin" section of Critical Theology? It's like you're channeling his brain.

 

[Admiral Stukov]

As Pimppeter would say:

Yes we are all terrible people. Especially this guy.

Why yes, I totally agree.

Wait, did that just backfire in my face?

 

[Nerf Ninja]

Why don't you try asking this woman what she thinks before you start spouting more claptrap OP?

http://www.dambisamoyo.com/

 

[TheGreatCoolEnergy]

Charitties in general are a good idea at heart, but really have just become a "throw money at it and hope it goes away" solution.

 

[TheGreatCoolEnergy]

As far as donating towards starving people goes, there has also been significant research into the idea that simply giving to poorer countries, like Africa, hurts more than helps. You can give and give and give, but all that does is foster dependence rather than independence. For instance, once a charity moves on after teaching a tribe how to use water wells or other equipment, the tribe more often than not only sells the equipment and falls back into old ways of starvation and poverty. The war lords are the real issues we need to face over there. It's a strange issue.

Good to see somebody with a clear head. Often at times, the corrupt government or militias will steal or break new equipement aswell. On top of this, if we just give them food, it puts local farmers out of business. Most of these solutions just turn out to be band-aid fixes.

 

[Cpu46]

My problem with charity is this:
No matter how much you give to a charity or how long you have supported it if you turn them down once they treat you like a complete piece of shit and try and guilt you into donating.

 

[Markness]

Well considering I am not a psychopath I do not want to "gun down" any living creature. If you do then the problem stands with you.

Nice trolling by infering I'm a psycopath. Also nice work on ignoring the principle of the question. Would you, rather save a child or a cheetah?

And now you just conveniently leave out the part where I said that this kid would grow into a dumbass adult who would just continue the cycle. Hell, Hopeless Bastard just pointed out that the numbers of starving people in these areas is growing because they are relying on us and are not bothering to try to help themselves.

Children in 3rd world countries are not genetically insuperior to westerners of whatever country you come from. Please try and disregard all racism and accept this as fact. The reason they are so many fucked up people in Africa is because they do not get the education and proper nutrition as children that money gives.

And no, if I lived in a area that could not support me I would move. In fact I have done this before, moved town to a place with more job opportunities. And if I was indeed stuck in a area where I was starving then I would at least have the common sense not to bring another child into the world.

Why would you make better descisions thna africians? I'd love to see you answer this without being racist.

So in short, if you are going to take thing out of context, make shit up or just leave out the parts of my argument that you are unable to counter then do not waste my time quoting me. I look forward to intelligent people debating my points. Not people like you trying to pick fights because I dared to have a different point of view.

Can you point out an example of selective reading? I tried to focused on your main points.

OP did you just read Gregory Baum's "social sin" section of Critical Theology? It's like you're channeling his brain.

Hmm, no I didn't but perhaps I will now. Someone else also mentioned someone with the same philosophy. This guy: http://people.brandeis.edu/~teuber/singermag.html I was suprised about how much our views were similar but he focused more on the choice between material goods and people's lives.

 

[zehydra]

Giving money to a charity doesn't make you a better person, it just enables others to use your money for good causes. They're doing the good, not you. For instance, giving blood doesn't mean you save lives, it enables Doctors to save lives.