In fact we should care more for the poor family and children in some countries than the celebs. I guess it does make more sense !
yes or no ?
a humanitarian mission
2006-12-05 02:39:17 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
let´s pay your attention to my question carefully pls! do not ask me twice! if you read it carefully, you´ll understand what Iam talking about.
be intelligent thanks and sweet smile
2006-12-05 02:45:32 · update #1
IF YOU ARE ASKING SHOULD WE CARE MORE ABOUT THE POOR & HUNGRY THAN CELEBS THERES NO CONTEST. NOT ONLY AT THIS TIME OF YEAR EITHER!THERE ARE ALSO PEOPLE IN OUR OWN COUNTRY WHO NEED HELP! CELEBS DON'T WANT FOR ANYTHING,BUT I KNOW FAMILIES THAT HAVE VERY SKIM IF ANY CHRISTMAS AT ALL.THE REST OF THE YEAR THEY BARELY GET BY. SO MY ANSWER IS YES.
2006-12-05 02:51:42 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes!
We should care more for the poor family and children in some countries than the celebs.
Celebs care about about money not the the lives of poor
familes in Africa.
I am part african my self. My great x2 grand parents were african
and my other great x2 grand parents were from Philippines.
And it's the 1st time that I have ever visited my cousins in Africa,
and I never knew how poor they were so I:
Gave the following items:
Money
Food
Gifts
My NY hats
Some of our clothes
and finally...
My...
Old game boys (all 6 colours)
2006-12-05 02:44:48 · answer #2 · answered by Factorblue 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes we should. However, the celebrities seem to be a common attraction to us. They are the fantasy us that we want to be. Nobody really wants to emulate poor people. I am a supporter of a newspaper in the Uk called the BIG ISSUE. It helps the homeless make something of themselves and get them off the streets.
2006-12-05 02:42:46 · answer #3 · answered by queenmaeve172000 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Of course it does. I do think we don't even care about poor people and children enough in our own country. Not sure which country you are from. In the U.S. the poverty rate is still much higher then it should be.
12.7% of US as of 2004 deemed at poverty level according to MSNBC.com.
I do believe that means more then one in every 10!
2006-12-05 02:41:12 · answer #4 · answered by ☺ PeeJ ☺ 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The mortality value between infants in some poorer areas of the international is around seventy 5%. in case you have 2 infants, there is stable possibility that they are going to the two die youthful. in case you have 10 infants, there is stable possibility that a million or 2 of them will stay to adulthood. Very unhappy, yet regrettably, real.
2016-10-14 01:35:04 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am not sure I understand your question. But it seems reasonable for us to care more for suffering people. Celebs are not worth our time or effort.
2006-12-05 02:42:35 · answer #6 · answered by Boilerfan 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Why? There are too many people in the world already. Each third world child saved is a potential asylum seeker, welfare parasite or even terrorist. Let nature take its course.
2006-12-05 02:53:33 · answer #7 · answered by Clive 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Who would want to follow Paris? We are called to care for widows and orphans.
2006-12-05 02:42:42 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
YES, Yes we should and so should they, they fortunate ones (celebs)
Best Wishes, jd.
2006-12-05 02:43:04 · answer #9 · answered by johnnydiablo 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
i guess, but why are so many celebrities adopting children in other countries, when there are so many kids that need to be adopted here in the US?
2006-12-05 02:41:23 · answer #10 · answered by stitchfan85 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋