because people like you talk about it, that makes it news.
2006-10-26 11:52:03
·
answer #1
·
answered by e260aaw 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
I'll bet the father of this boy would haved thought it was an even better idea for her to adopt the whole family and just take care of them. And she could afford that easy. I'm sure the Dad isn't a bad Dad - just poor. So because she has money - she gets the kid? It kind of seems like "buying a baby" to me. Why didn't she adopt a kid whose parents were dead?
I don't know why the media is ragging on her. But I know why I am!
2006-10-26 12:03:01
·
answer #2
·
answered by liddabet 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is not what she did but how she did it. there are rules and regulations concerning adoptions and they are very tight in the UK; she has seemingly just bought a child. remember he had a father who was a farmer, and as such not an orphan. There are many children who lose both parents and have no opportunity to go to an orphanage and have to work to survive. Plus with madonna's money instead on one child benefiting she could have sponsored several villages, build schools, built hospitals, trained doctors; opened vocational schools, become involved with Marie Stopes family planning to stop the overcrowding which in turn leads to poverty. One spoilt child, who is most likely to be looked after by a nanny as opposed to many families benefitted - so i think the press and the public have the right to be critical.
2006-10-26 13:36:16
·
answer #3
·
answered by Mike T 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
She could have adopted in her own backyard, She didn't have to do the trendy thing. There are plenty of kids here, without any parents, who could have benifited from her kindness. Whats up with the father? He has enough connections to connect with Madonna, but not enough to provide a safe environment for his kid? It,s always about the money, and people say Americans are the only one like that! Blah, Blah, Blah
2006-10-26 12:23:39
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Maybe she meant well only there are other children with nobody why not provide for the child and father and keep them together sorry only I think it's wrong to take the child away from his father into another country why not adopt them both
2006-10-26 12:14:45
·
answer #5
·
answered by Bernie c 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because Madonna is a celebrity thats why its in the media, if this was you or me adopting that child who would know, because it would not get in the media
2006-10-26 12:07:46
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Wait - does she have a new album or concert tour coming up. Yeah - makes sense now. Madonna has and will always be about Madonna. Her shameless self-promotion and nameless ways to attract attention to herself have made her a lot of money and fame and fortune. She's not about to give that up now.
2006-10-26 11:58:04
·
answer #7
·
answered by Republican Mom 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
From what I hear, Madonna actually invited the media to come along with her to exploit this adoption for more then its worth. Once the media found out the adoption is illegal, they ran with it. That's what they do.
2006-10-26 11:56:48
·
answer #8
·
answered by nighthawk_842003 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's a noble action but the wrong one, he should remain the responsibility of the parent who bought that child into the world, if you really want to help she has enough money I'm sure to actually go out there and do some work and improve their standards of living.
2006-10-26 11:53:47
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
I understand that she is just hopping on the adopt a foreign kid band wagon but the kid is going to have a good life and that is more important than any media rant.
2006-10-26 11:53:50
·
answer #10
·
answered by Rod is the coolest guy I know 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, nothing is good anymore.
Killers and abusers have rights to do what they want.
But when people do good, it's wrong. Whether you like Madona or not; This is a good thing she is doing.
Why not complain gay's and lesbians who adopt children?
2006-10-26 19:49:30
·
answer #11
·
answered by TP asking 2
·
0⤊
0⤋