Why do so-called celebrities receive so many accolades for their efforts in helping third world children when there are countless children here in the U.S. that have nothing? Shouldn't charity begin at home?
2007-02-07 02:06:30 · 17 answers · asked by bushido1971 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Community Service
People don't understand why celebrities spend time with other kids from other countries, It's because they don't have the resources that we do to survive
2007-02-09 15:07:19 · answer #1 · answered by Russell B 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Excellent question! I think when these celebrities have the opportunity to be in the 3rd world countries and they see the devastation and starvation, their hearts break and I guess they feel compelled to do something about it.
In the USA, there are so many resources that parent(s)/caregiver(s) can call upon for all kinds of help. But if I had the money to do so, I would first look for the needs right here at home and do whatever I could to help. So, yes, my feeling is that charity should begin at home. And there are many celebrities who do support "home" charities.
2007-02-07 10:41:27 · answer #2 · answered by Jimmy Crack Corn 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The reason I think why they help kids from 3rd world countries is because not enough people realize/believe that these kids should recieve aid. They do it to direct attention there; in the U.S. kids always have a chance to be helped by agencies or w.e. they are having trouble with but in a country like Sudan I doubt they'd be find a shelter that's as half as nice as one that's in the U.S. Also, more people in the U.S. are capable of helping those impoverished kids themselves than people from 3rd world countries - they don't need the celebrities nearly as much. That's just what I think anyways: it's more than about adopting some random kid, it's more about directing attention there to make people realize that the problem may be much bigger than they thought.
2007-02-10 23:26:40 · answer #3 · answered by mistyca_dragon 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I completely agree. I understand children in other countries may not be as well-off as some might consider us, however there are children in America that could use some help. After hurrican Katrina, how many celebs ran down to new orleans to offer any kind of comfort to children that had lost their parents in the tragedy, maybe ANgeline Jolie should give one of them a chance before some random 3rd world kid a home. Granted what celebs do in other countries is wonderful, and with the exception of Angelina Jolie, most celebs go over as a publicity stunt making reality TV shows or something on MTV about it. It's stupid. Help American children if you live in America first, then do whatever the hell you want.
2007-02-07 10:43:32 · answer #4 · answered by Drew 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, they should spend more time helping the US kids. After all, isn't this the country they live in and the country that helped them get super rich?! I'm not saying they shouldn't help out 3rd world countries at all. For the most part, if it wasn't for the US, these 3rd world kids would have a higher death rate than they do now. But come on already! Spending 40 million dollars on a center in Africa and not doing anything like that for the kids here in the US is just ridiculous! Our kids need help here, too! So, help out already!
2007-02-10 22:32:17 · answer #5 · answered by Erica M 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I absolutely agree with you and I don't understand why people look outside our country and spend so much time and effort and money when there are children in our own back yard that need us. Charity starts at at home because I strongly believe that we should take care of ourselves so that we are in a better position to help others and that goes for communities as well as individuals.
I also believe that it's mean and heartless in a way because here are children right here that are in need and they have to sit there and look in from the outside as other children are getting helped while they remain in their suffering. What kind of message does that send???
2007-02-07 10:16:32 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think that celebrities should spend more time helping children in their own country. There are so many celebrities who think it is some sort of FAD to adopt a child from a 3rd world country, not that their efforts aren't recognized, but shouldn't we save our own children first before we worry about everyone else's?
2007-02-11 00:10:42 · answer #7 · answered by tink_0218 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree with you that charity should indeed begin at home. But if you look at the bigger picture, i think if celebrities do in fact help kids from third world countries their efforts would put well -to -do people in 3rd world countries to shame for not wanting to help out their very own countrymen.
2007-02-07 10:36:23 · answer #8 · answered by rennieboy 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
People dont understand that impoverished children here in America are not the same as those who are in 3rd world countries. Children in America have the priveledge of having organizations and laws that protect and take care of them. 3rd world country children dont have that oppurtunity.
We are talking about children who live below the poverty line...it is not the same thing. These celebrities are doing these children a favor, fulfilling dreams for these children that they themselves thought they didnt deserve to have. Im not saying that American children are not deserving but children in 3rd world countries need all the help they can get. I can talk all I want all I can say is you have to it to believe it, you have to hold a child who is so malnourished and underweight its inhumane and have that child die in your arms. Like I said you have to see it to believe it.
2007-02-11 01:17:26 · answer #9 · answered by Ange 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's all about the publicity they get for it. It's also a "feel good" story: Isn't it so nice how someone is doing something nice for those unfortunate children "over there".
Yes, charity begins at home, but people do not want to see what is in their own back yard.
2007-02-07 10:15:20 · answer #10 · answered by moonshadow 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋