Melinda Gates is donating $560 million dollars to so that poorer countries can have better access to contraceptives.
Here's the linkhttp://www.chicagotribune.com/health/sns-rt-us-contraception-gates-melindabre86a1du-20120711,0,2461524.story
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Melinda Gates is donating $560 million dollars to so that poorer countries can have better access to contraceptives.
Here's the linkhttp://www.chicagotribune.com/health/sns-rt-us-contraception-gates-melindabre86a1du-20120711,0,2461524.story
That's nice. Will it fix anything?SolidSnake35
Africa has a very high rate of STDs, births, and death as a result of those births.
It could save many lives
[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"]That's nice. Will it fix anything?toast_burner
Africa has a very high rate of STDs, births, and death as a result of those births.
It could save many lives
preventing people from being born in order to prevent them from dying is not really saving lives, it's actually kind of dumb.MEANWHILE! In the Halls of Congress, republicans try to block access to contraception in our own country.
[QUOTE="toast_burner"]
[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"]That's nice. Will it fix anything?whipassmt
Africa has a very high rate of STDs, births, and death as a result of those births.
It could save many lives
preventing people from being born in order to prevent them from dying is not really saving lives, it's actually kind of dumb. And 800 women dying every day as a result of pregnancy complications (according to the article, also the leading cause of death for teenage girls in the developing world) is saving lives?foreign aid to 3rd world countries actually hurts them more than it helps them. multinational corporations that all this money is going to, will not be employing any africans.
And the problem in africa is poverty, all the rest stems from that. People need to let africa be and develop on its own.
I bet those people would rather have that $560 million go towards food and clean water and medicine than contraception.
whipassmt
I agree with you completely. Plus, statistics have shown that people will almost always reproduce more if they are poor.
Exactly. She's being anti-Catholic.buh buh y she pushin her beliefs on othuh people herpaderpderp
Aljosa23
[QUOTE="toast_burner"]
[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"]That's nice. Will it fix anything?whipassmt
Africa has a very high rate of STDs, births, and death as a result of those births.
It could save many lives
preventing people from being born in order to prevent them from dying is not really saving lives, it's actually kind of dumb.Go troll elsewhere.
800 people die a day due to complications giving birth. Preventing a birth isn't causing a death.
preventing people from being born in order to prevent them from dying is not really saving lives, it's actually kind of dumb.[QUOTE="whipassmt"]
[QUOTE="toast_burner"]
Africa has a very high rate of STDs, births, and death as a result of those births.
It could save many lives
toast_burner
Go troll elsewhere.
800 people die a day due to complications giving birth. Preventing a birth isn't causing a death.
and thousands upon thousands die from hunger...[QUOTE="toast_burner"][QUOTE="whipassmt"] preventing people from being born in order to prevent them from dying is not really saving lives, it's actually kind of dumb.
kingkong0124
Go troll elsewhere.
800 people die a day due to complications giving birth. Preventing a birth isn't causing a death.
and thousands upon thousands die from hunger... Yes, thousands of people die every day from hunger, and that's horrible. But what does it have to do with this? Or am I missing something?[QUOTE="kingkong0124"][QUOTE="toast_burner"]and thousands upon thousands die from hunger... Yes, thousands of people die every day from hunger, and that's horrible. But what does it have to do with this? Or am I missing something? Her money would be better spent combating hunger, rather than handing out contraceptives.Go troll elsewhere.
800 people die a day due to complications giving birth. Preventing a birth isn't causing a death.
IdioticIcarus
[QUOTE="kingkong0124"][QUOTE="IdioticIcarus"] Yes, thousands of people die every day from hunger, and that's horrible. But what does it have to do with this? Or am I missing something?IdioticIcarusHer money would be better spent combating hunger, rather than handing out contraceptives. Not if her goal is to help women dying from birth complications and maybe prevent unwanted pregnancies.
good luck with that.....
Not if her goal is to help women dying from birth complications and maybe prevent unwanted pregnancies.[QUOTE="IdioticIcarus"][QUOTE="kingkong0124"] Her money would be better spent combating hunger, rather than handing out contraceptives. kingkong0124
good luck with that.....
I have no idea what that means.[QUOTE="IdioticIcarus"][QUOTE="kingkong0124"] and thousands upon thousands die from hunger...kingkong0124Yes, thousands of people die every day from hunger, and that's horrible. But what does it have to do with this? Or am I missing something? Her money would be better spent combating hunger, rather than handing out contraceptives.
Why bother trying to cure AIDS when we can be looking for a cure to cancer?
[QUOTE="toast_burner"]
[QUOTE="SolidSnake35"]That's nice. Will it fix anything?whipassmt
Africa has a very high rate of STDs, births, and death as a result of those births.
It could save many lives
preventing people from being born in order to prevent them from dying is not really saving lives, it's actually kind of dumb. Suffering a slow, painful, HIV/AIDS riddled death is so glowing, isn't it?That's the problem with a lot of those charities. It rarely finds the people in need.I wonder how much of that $560 million will actually end up helping the affected countries, and how much will be in the hands of people in positions of power.
Mike-uk
[QUOTE="whipassmt"]preventing people from being born in order to prevent them from dying is not really saving lives, it's actually kind of dumb. Suffering a slow, painful, HIV/AIDS riddled death is so glowing, isn't it? Contraceptives don't necessarily prevent HIV/AIDS. Only condoms have been shown to be effective for that - well abstinence, but that's not practical lol. But other forms of birth control such as the birth control pill only prevent pregnancy but not STDs.[QUOTE="toast_burner"]
Africa has a very high rate of STDs, births, and death as a result of those births.
It could save many lives
DroidPhysX
[QUOTE="whipassmt"]preventing people from being born in order to prevent them from dying is not really saving lives, it's actually kind of dumb. Suffering a slow, painful, HIV/AIDS riddled death is so glowing, isn't it? suffering a slow, painful death via starvation is just as bad.[QUOTE="toast_burner"]
Africa has a very high rate of STDs, births, and death as a result of those births.
It could save many lives
DroidPhysX
[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"][QUOTE="whipassmt"] preventing people from being born in order to prevent them from dying is not really saving lives, it's actually kind of dumb.Suffering a slow, painful, HIV/AIDS riddled death is so glowing, isn't it? suffering a slow, painful death via starvation is just as bad.kingkong0124
You make it sound like it would have been better for her not to donate any money.
[QUOTE="kingkong0124"][QUOTE="IdioticIcarus"] Yes, thousands of people die every day from hunger, and that's horrible. But what does it have to do with this? Or am I missing something?IdioticIcarusHer money would be better spent combating hunger, rather than handing out contraceptives. Not if her goal is to help women dying from birth complications and maybe prevent unwanted pregnancies. or STDs. Also if less people are being born then that equals less people who need to be feed.
really when you think about it kingkong0124's way only treats a symptom, and Melinda's treats the problem.
suffering a slow, painful death via starvation is just as bad.[QUOTE="kingkong0124"][QUOTE="DroidPhysX"] Suffering a slow, painful, HIV/AIDS riddled death is so glowing, isn't it?toast_burner
You make it sound like it would have been better for her not to donate any money.
no, i'm not. It's just that something like combating starvation would be better, considering the fact that all developing countries have extremely high birth rates in comparison to developed countries.[QUOTE="Mike-uk"]That's the problem with a lot of those charities. It rarely finds the people in need. Its easy to blame the charities, we must blame ourselves. Human beings, well at least a substantial amount in positions of power are corrupt. It is much easier for these people to give into temptation.I wonder how much of that $560 million will actually end up helping the affected countries, and how much will be in the hands of people in positions of power.
sonicare
I'm not sure why anybody would care what the pope has to say anymore.I'm suprised the pope hasn't condemned/excommunicate/declare her a witch.... might happen though:P
ExtremeGamer93
[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"][QUOTE="whipassmt"] preventing people from being born in order to prevent them from dying is not really saving lives, it's actually kind of dumb.kingkong0124Suffering a slow, painful, HIV/AIDS riddled death is so glowing, isn't it? suffering a slow, painful death via starvation is just as bad. Which is why we need to fix both? I highly doubt her money is the only one that's going to Africa. I'm sure there are millions of dollars all going to food, medicine, clean water, etc.
[QUOTE="sonicare"][QUOTE="Mike-uk"]That's the problem with a lot of those charities. It rarely finds the people in need. Its easy to blame the charities, we must blame ourselves. Human beings, well at least a substantial amount in positions of power are corrupt. It is much easier for these people to give into temptation.I wonder how much of that $560 million will actually end up helping the affected countries, and how much will be in the hands of people in positions of power.
Mike-uk
Which brings me to another important issue at hand, should people get the same kind of tax credit for ALL charities? I mean lets compare this to the charity some one like say Romney "gave".. This was too the Mormon church which was mainly to build more churches.. AND to affect the prop vote in California to ban gay marriage.. Should the person who donates millions to help starving children should be treated the exact same as the person who "donates" a building to a Ivy League school?
[QUOTE="IdioticIcarus"][QUOTE="kingkong0124"] Her money would be better spent combating hunger, rather than handing out contraceptives. Serraph105Not if her goal is to help women dying from birth complications and maybe prevent unwanted pregnancies. or STDs. Also if less people are being born then that equals less people who need to be feed. In the short term yes. But in the long term it means less people growing and harvesting crops and less offspring to take care of their elders. Economically speaking children are investments, not burdens.
[QUOTE="toast_burner"]I'm not sure why anybody would care what the pope has to say anymore. Well I'm sure the Catholic's would.[QUOTE="ExtremeGamer93"]
I'm suprised the pope hasn't condemned/excommunicate/declare her a witch.... might happen though:P
Mike-uk
bingo
Its easy to blame the charities, we must blame ourselves. Human beings, well at least a substantial amount in positions of power are corrupt. It is much easier for these people to give into temptation.[QUOTE="Mike-uk"][QUOTE="sonicare"] That's the problem with a lot of those charities. It rarely finds the people in need.sSubZerOo
Which brings me to another important issue at hand, should people get the same kind of tax credit for ALL charities? I mean lets compare this to the charity some one like say Romney "gave".. This was too the Mormon church which was mainly to build more churches.. AND to affect the prop vote in California to ban gay marriage.. Should the person who donates millions to help starving children should be treated the exact same as the person who "donates" a building to a Ivy League school?
Well to a certain degree different donations are treated differently under Federal law. For instance donations to political campaigns are not tax deductible, but donations to the local soup kitchen are. As far as Romney's donations to the Mormon Church, I don't know what they do with the money they receive, but I am pretty sure the Mormons do indeed feed the poor and provide health-care for the sick.Its easy to blame the charities, we must blame ourselves. Human beings, well at least a substantial amount in positions of power are corrupt. It is much easier for these people to give into temptation.[QUOTE="Mike-uk"][QUOTE="sonicare"] That's the problem with a lot of those charities. It rarely finds the people in need.sSubZerOo
Which brings me to another important issue at hand, should people get the same kind of tax credit for ALL charities? I mean lets compare this to the charity some one like say Romney "gave".. This was too the Mormon church which was mainly to build more churches.. AND to affect the prop vote in California to ban gay marriage.. Should the person who donates millions to help starving children should be treated the exact same as the person who "donates" a building to a Ivy League school?
Well personally, and I can only speak for myself, I would hold the person donating to help starving children in a higher regard than the person donating money for a building an Ivy League school.[QUOTE="toast_burner"]I'm not sure why anybody would care what the pope has to say anymore. Well I'm sure the Catholic's would.That answers who not why.[QUOTE="ExtremeGamer93"]
I'm suprised the pope hasn't condemned/excommunicate/declare her a witch.... might happen though:P
Mike-uk
[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]
[QUOTE="Mike-uk"] Its easy to blame the charities, we must blame ourselves. Human beings, well at least a substantial amount in positions of power are corrupt. It is much easier for these people to give into temptation. whipassmt
Which brings me to another important issue at hand, should people get the same kind of tax credit for ALL charities? I mean lets compare this to the charity some one like say Romney "gave".. This was too the Mormon church which was mainly to build more churches.. AND to affect the prop vote in California to ban gay marriage.. Should the person who donates millions to help starving children should be treated the exact same as the person who "donates" a building to a Ivy League school?
Well to a certain degree different donations are treated differently under Federal law. For instance donations to political campaigns are not tax deductible, but donations to the local soup kitchen are. As far as Romney's donations to the Mormon Church, I don't know what they do with the money they receive, but I am pretty sure the Mormons do indeed feed the poor and provide health-care for the sick. True but they also use it to build massive buildings, and they also spent considerable amounts of money to affect the prop 8 vote in California? With this kind of sway why should these said church be tax exempt and why should his donations be considered the same compared to some one who say donates to the red cross? It honestly shouldn't, this is a way in which people can avoid getting taxes by throwing money at certain organizations that may have a political agenda or do something that is completely not about helping people.Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment