English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I have a debate in english on malnutrition in children, but I am still undecided on the subject. So I need some input to make up my mind.

Do you believe that it is the government's duty to help prevent malnutrition in children? For example, free lunches in schools, vaccinations, etc. If so, why?

OR

Do you believe that it is NOT the government's duty to prevent malnutriton? If so, why?

When answering, please keep in mind, all the countries around the world.

PLEASE serious answers only.

Thanks for your help and input.

2007-02-03 12:57:28 · 8 answers · asked by lifeisblah13 2 in Politics & Government Law & Ethics

8 answers

yes I feel it is the governments duty to help prevent this with all the children in the US that are hungry. There is enough money that the government waste on a daily basis that this shouldn't be a problem.

2007-02-03 14:30:13 · answer #1 · answered by glamour04111 7 · 0 0

whats up ! 3 others i assumed-approximately whilst examining your article have been: conflict - a lot of 'third international' international places are at conflict with their neighbours - with scant regard for the welfare of their very own voters. Famine - The geography of a undeniable section mat no longer lend itself to getting used to strengthen vegetation and so on - to that end making that u . s . reliant handy-outs Drought - the climate varieties over that distinctive u . s . might desire to be which contain to disclaim popular sustained rainfall - depriving its voters of sparkling water. nicely - this is it (phew) i wish those concepts helped ?

2016-10-01 09:32:56 · answer #2 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

I think that it would help to have web pages on cooking and farming, if you're serious about stopping malnutrition, nothing is so powerful as teaching people to take care of themselves...

2007-02-03 13:26:10 · answer #3 · answered by gokart121 6 · 0 0

No constitution of any nation promises sustinence. The duty of a government is to secure the private citizen's life, liberty, and property. There is nothing else it must do.

Its mummy and daddy's responsibility to nourish their ungrateful sack of flesh. No one else's.

The only organization that tries to bind nations to agreements of this nature is UNICEF, but seriously. Don't make me laugh.

2007-02-03 13:02:31 · answer #4 · answered by Athanasius 2 · 0 1

I believe as individuals we have a moral obligation to help the poor. However, I don't believe that we can prevent it. We can only help ease the effects of the plight.

2007-02-03 13:08:18 · answer #5 · answered by ThinkaboutThis 6 · 0 0

I am for government intervention in supplying food to children. These children are growing and need the food that the school supplies to them. BUT NO JUNK FOOD PLEASE.

2007-02-03 13:00:41 · answer #6 · answered by bumpocooper 5 · 0 0

if the govt doesn't care for it's people than what is the purpose of a govt ?

2007-02-03 13:06:11 · answer #7 · answered by dogpatch USA 7 · 0 0

meu

2007-02-03 13:00:22 · answer #8 · answered by mariofan 1 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers