Entry # 821

Yeah, care for the children who already receive the most damn attention. Everywhere you look, there's something going on to benefit the sprogs - charities, fund raisers, etc. Why not have charities to help the homeless, the elderly, animals, or the environment?

Nooo, help the damn cunt-demons...because they are the future. At the very least, they should have some kind of charity to sterilize all the breeders to keep them from making more brats. I would surely donate to that.

I agree with Cambion. People are making too many more people. When those 3rd world countries stop making so many people, the problem will subside. If you feed 'em, they'll just make more and more and more PEOPLE. Good grief. Soylent Green, anyone?

That is the major problem: feed poor, starving hungry children and in 20 years you have 10 times the number of poor, starving children that were helped out before. I don't think children are the little centric items in third world nations that they are here.
Ironically, it is only industrialization and advances in technology; when children move from become 'required', or 'necessary' (questionable in my mind) to a luxury that anything will really change.
For those of an inquiring mind, google 'malthus'. He wasn't wrong, merely delayed by the industrial revolution coupled with the discovery of the new world.
Sadly, it is virtually impossible to provide birth control for these countries and women. The women, as a general rule, would like to control their fecundity but circumstances and/or culture negate that. Of course, AIDS is doing quite a job on destroying their culture.
I tend to view mankind and it's needs/problems akin to a black hole. Like a black hole, it never fills up; merely grows larger and demands more.

Here's what I noticed--

The stories about people helping critters made me feel good! It really restores my faith in humanity that people would go out of their way to help animals. But when it comes to human relations, it's nothing but depressing shit, most of the time, or the media salivating over celebrities and their latest idiocies.

Until humans grow up, get smart, and actually grow some compassion when it comes to each other, I will prefer stories about animals.

I refuse to give ANYTHING to ANYONE who is anti-birth control. I see these shitty-assed ads on TV for *Christian Children's Fund* and *Save the Children*, and all I want to do is send them a Hugh Jass case o' condoms anmd Depo shots, with clear instructions on how to use them.

This shit is nothing but throwing good money after bad. Anyone who gives to these things is simply enabling irresponsible behavior. Okay, a lot of these poor people don't know any better, never heard of b/c since there isn't any where they live. But it's irresponsible of these religious groups to come in with food and stuff for these people, and NOT teach them to stop breeding so damned fucking much!

After hurricane Katrina hit, I actually gave MORE money to animal rescue efforts than I did to the Red Cross. I give mostly to animal charities anyway...am a member of North Shore Animal League and ASPCA. The sprog charities get way more media coverage than they deserve, so I want to do my part and send the cash to those who need it more...the animals.

Fuck you, Stephen Goodman! The day that these save the sproggen charities pull their heads out of their fundie asses, and realize that BIRTH CONTROL is the #1 need in these areas, then we'll talk about my making a donation.

Until then, I will contribute to save the animals from stupid-assed humans like you.

CF 4 Ever Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
People are making too many
> more people. When those 3rd world countries stop
> making so many people, the problem will subside.
> If you feed 'em, they'll just make more and more
> and more PEOPLE.

It's not just the 3rd world countries that are the problem. It's just as bad when people in 1st world countries like the U.S. have too many children, even if they can afford them. People in the U.S. are responsible for generating more garbage and using more power and oil than people in Third World countries, so it would actually be MORE beneficial for rich Americans to stop breeding.

CF Scorpio Wrote:

> ... People in the U.S.
> are responsible for generating more garbage and
> using more power and oil than people in Third
> World countries, so it would actually be MORE
> beneficial for rich Americans to stop breeding.

AMEN to that!! (Good point.)

We hear alot about 1st world countries and 3rd world countries. Is there any such thing as a 2nd world country? And if so, how come you never hear that term? Just wondering............

The news we seldom hear from the media machine is about the world's children in need. UNICEF recently released a report entitled "The State of the World's Children 2006: Excluded and Invisible." The director commented, "There cannot be lasting progress if we continue to overlook the children most in need -- the poorest and most vulnerable, the exploited and the abused."

I hear and see this shit about how we are supposed to give too often, not seldomly. I have way too much forcibly taken from each of my paychecks already "for the children" and have no say as to how it is spent.

Instead of throwing my hard-earned bucks at baby factories in the Third World and elsewhere, spay and neuter programs would be much more appropriate. Pet parents are encouraged to get their pets spayed or neutered; it's good enough for pets and more than good enough for these overbreeders. If these fuckers had fewer kids, there would be fewer of "the poorest and most vulnerable, the exploited and the abused." With fewer of these parasites, it would lead to "lasting progress," unlike what those with the UNICEF agenda claim.

According to UNICEF's report, more than one billion children suffer from one or more extreme forms of deprivation in adequate nutrition, safe drinking water, decent sanitation facilities, health-care services, shelter and education.

Assholes, this is because they make too many crotchdroppings, not because we give too little. A reduction in the birth rate would cure these problems, not more cash thrown at them. Gimme, gimme, gimme!

Fact is, people in first-world countries show more attention to pets and devote more resources to them than to do the world's poor, disadvantaged and suffering children. We should care for and love our pets, but not at the expense of our children.

Yes, I will continue to pay more attention and willfully give more of my resources to my pets than to irresponsible baby machines anywhere in the world and their products. I have no guilt about it, and there's no way I will change my mind.

Birth control and the education of women in the Third World is also the way to get them out of poverty. If women are educated on how to use protection, then both the AIDS rate and the birth rate goes down. Education also means that they'll teach her how to farm, basic first aid, how to tell is water is clean, etc. Throwing money at them isn't going to help, use that money to teach adult women, that's how to relieve poverty AND have less kids running about!

CF 4 Ever Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> We hear alot about 1st world countries and 3rd
> world countries. Is there any such thing as a 2nd
> world country? And if so, how come you never hear
> that term? Just wondering............

That's a good question.

CF 4-ever, here is your answer:

First, Second and Third-World countries:
http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/third_world_countries.htm

That was interesting! I never knew that!

That IS interesting. I always wondered where the Eastern Bloc fit in, and now it all makes sense!

I just use terms like "developed nations" "developing nations" "underdeveloped nations".

CF Scorpio-thanks for that link about the "worlds". Very interesting and educational!

Hey, that was cool and informative! Thanks!
It's good to have a place where you can rant, be appalled, entertained, supported and learn something at the same time!