Date: 3/23/2004 4:57:00 PM
From Authorid: 58334
I wouldn't give my life  |
Date: 3/23/2004 5:02:00 PM
From Authorid: 62100
I think that we need to find a way to do so..yes. Didn't have top think about it..I mean, in our country alone even, we still have homeless who have no idea where their next meal is coming from..and we are supposed to be the richest country in the world..not to mention the horrible conditions in other countries.  |
Date: 3/23/2004 5:08:00 PM
From Authorid: 30051
Can't say that I would give my life..I have wee ones to think of.  |
Date: 3/23/2004 5:27:00 PM
From Authorid: 28899
Without a second thought. Half of the children that die in the world every day probably die of hunger. So, yeah.. Ignoring the real issue of sustainable resources, and sticking to pure idealism, the end of my life would absolutely be worth the continuation of so many others.  |
Date: 3/23/2004 6:51:00 PM
From Authorid: 37101
I would not give my life to world hunger. The world is already an overpopulated place. And taking one life to save millions - maybe billions - would result in over-crowding and would cause our resources to be consumed that much more quicker. As horrible as it is to say, world hunger (along with other factors like disease and such) are necessary for population control. -  |
Date: 3/23/2004 6:52:00 PM
From Authorid: 37101
Plus, solving world hunger is only a temporary issue. If we were to solve world hunger, somehow, it would only make us eat up our resources that much faster and cause world hunger for future generations. -  |
Date: 3/23/2004 7:55:00 PM
From Authorid: 6867
I would like to say that I would, but somehow getting rid of world hunger would cause other problems, upset some sort of balance. So, no I don't think I would...I have a child who has noone but me. If i was all alone, it might be a different story. Love Yourself,  |
Date: 3/23/2004 8:15:00 PM
From Authorid: 45630
If everyone gave their life to end world hunger then their would be onone to eat the food that we do have.  |
Date: 3/24/2004 9:07:00 AM ( From Author )
From Authorid: 62344
2 pro 4 con. Ive noticed that most people that say yes do so without a doubt and the people that say no have doubts. Having children is definetly a factor. Yes the world has many problems but at least ending one problem is a start.  |
Date: 3/24/2004 3:41:00 PM
From Authorid: 36079
First off if this was legite of course, but nothing is legite in todays society if anything can go wrong it will. If you were to say would I give of my life in a non litteral sence but meaning I will devote my whole life to end wold hunger, well that would be a joy, and if I had the extra funds to help out even more all the better. Some people talk about over population I think if the rich didn't take up so much space and have so many cars and money, etc I think it would be ok. But it would be impossible if not immoral to regulate that, but businesses and rich people should probably step up on this issue, after all they will probably get it all back in deductions anyway.  |
Date: 3/24/2004 3:51:00 PM
From Authorid: 24924
Nah, I'd hit up Mel Gibson for a few million, I'd hit on Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, and Billy Graham, and several other RICH evangelists, for several million more. I'd definitely go after the BUSH'S for a few million! But the MOST (billions) would come from all the many many MEGA-CHURCHES we have in this country, especially the Roman Catholic Churches world wide. IF (oh what a dream it is!) ALL the churches would stop building and building more and more and more fancy smancy churches and cathedrals, and make an all-out solidarity effort, they could wipe out world hunger TODAY! ahhhh....'tis nice to dream, isn't it. the odds are that I stand a much better chance of winning a huge lottery.  |
Date: 3/24/2004 7:28:00 PM
From Authorid: 36079
Liberty you are right on that issue, they should build churches for more space not for looks, and spend the rest on the people. Although the churches do a good work, nice churches doesn't glorify God more then doing his work.  |