^i think you're missing the point. consumption does not mean over consumption

simply moving from a poor 3rd world stuck 150 years ago society into a society that says you get electricity for heating and lighting (something most would say everyone deserves), and going from walking and riding a bike to driving a scooter or a car requiring fuel. going from 1 shirt and 1 pair of pants, to a wardrobe. going from eating literally garbage to eating good healthy fresh food.

where do these things come from? they dont just appear when you want them.

imagine if an additional 2 billion people, tomorrow, moved into developing country status and now demanded gas, oil, electricity, and fresh food. that demand cant be met.

taylor was pointing and quoting with regards to over consumption

in terms of mere consumption even hans rosling is speaking about a gradual move over decades

a massively growing population is a bigger concern than a gradual move of consumption and if done properly alternative methods can be implemented into the 3rd world since the starting point wont be "here's a gas guzzler" (or
"i need a gas guzzler") it could be "here's an electric bicycle" heating and electricity can be given through different means like in Spain where they're using Solar Thermal Plants.

the problem with the 1st world is the shift to alternative energy sources because they're set in their ways, its like tearing down a building; in the 3rd world you can start from anywhere because there's no foundation yet

and if you watched the video it was about bringing the 3rd world not into the 1st but closer to the 1st (2nd world?) and eventually in the future closer and closer to the 1st world

population levels would drop is the idea/goal

Thanks, you get it.

You do not get it. Read the book, I watched your stupid video.

No thanks.

The OP wants to sponsor a "child" as in he may think he is helping a particular person live a better life - when in fact he's helping proliferate a situation that will only create more mouths to feed. It is important to know that.

no, i get it i just dont agree with it; ill take a look @ ure greenpeace book though

Yes, helping locally is great too. If you want to donate your time/money to help your local community I say go for it!

instead of someone overseas, why not help the kids here locally? think about native kids. they need help. big time

Our government just helped them:
Disclose Reserve Politicians' Pay | Canadian Taxpayers Federation

This new law will help them deal with this abuse:
New jaw-dropping reserve pay numbers | Canadian Taxpayers Federation

edit: the fuck i don't remember posting hahahaha

Posted via RS Mobile

You could always "adopt" a local family for Christmas.

My mom has done it for years and a few friends are doing it this year. You don't give cash, but what you buy goes directly to them and you don't have to deal with the "middle" people.

You buy them a xmas dinner, some xmas presents (you get the kids age/sex), some more groceries, a few treats, etc...

Its obviously not on-going like sponsoring a child, but you have more control over how the money is spent. Plus, sometimes you get to deliver it to the family yourself.

I don't really dig the whole religious backed child sponsoring, etc....but at the end of the day, if you are helping someone in need, does it really matter?

i sort of disagree with the whole hating on religion backed 3rd world support.

theres a documentary thread on the internet somewhere (i think it was posted on here within the last year) of a couple who drove a landcruiser thru the asshole of the congo. basically the only places on their journey that were even the slightest bit civilized were the ones around monasteries. look back 150-200 years ago too, much of the land we live on was tamed by monasteries moving in first. its like that thru all of africa. as much as in our todays world, religion may not be as important, it does play a role in developing societies. our culture may have moved on from that need, but there was definitely a place for it 150 years ago which you could aruge is where some of these african countries are now (150 years behind). and the churches have done a ton of work over the last several hundred years in these frontiers.

Agreed.

If you look at many small tribes that are still isolated from society they have their own form of faith/spirituality usually. People need to believe in something, and often make up reasons for the unexplained.

Maybe some think it's better to build a church than to build a well. I don't begrudge that, but I just prefer my small portion of philanthropy to go towards the well. Plenty of people see it the other way, and that's fine too. We all contribute our part, I was just putting it out there for people who feel the same as me but don't necessarily know any better as to where their money is going.

agree

but there are faith BASED organization that doesn't preach and there are faith base organization that do. Don't make it seem like every single one of them is out to spread religion that is not the truth

Nope, I just said to look into who you are going with. World Vision, which is what the OP was asking about for instance, is 100% an evangelical promotion, it's right there in their mission statement. Promoting christianity is their #1 goal, everything else is secondary.

I've been looking for charities that will allow me to sponsor abortions in developing nations. Sadly, I haven't been able to find any.

Its not about being against religion in these cultures...its about not imposing ideals of western religions on them.

All cultures/civilizations/tribes, etc all have some "faith" or "religion"...whether is be animistic, monotheistic, or polytheistic....this dates back thousands and thousands of years. My issue with organizations like World Vision (for example) is that it is a very specific type of religion they promote. They give the give a bible to read, put a cross around his neck, and give him a new "Christian" name.

Now I get that this is a very simplistic and possibly naive way to paint an organization that I have no doubt helps poverty stricken areas of the world...they help provide water, food, medical care, education, etc....but it irks me sometimes when there is an ulterior motive.

Well, with the whole religion thing, I'm christian so I have no problem with what they're doing. However, SP pointed out a very important point, which is that they stated in their mission statement that evangelizing is their priority. I can see why people are all against it, because there is no explicit sign that says religion is promoted with your donations.

For my family now, when we think about donating to certain charities, we like to check out the websites to see their mission statements. It is a hassle, but it is better than finding out later on that you do not agree with their views, or how they used the funding.

you can't fix something, when your own shit is broken.

how about we all put our charitable money toward something within canada, and fix ourselves first.

where might I get more information on this?

Surrey Christmas Bureau

YWCA Metro Vancouver :: Holiday Giving - Presents of Peace

The Salvation Army in Canada | Search Results

Hope for Christmas to Christmas All Deltans Can Share

Elizabeth Fry Society of Greater Vancouver

And I am sure if you go to any church or temple, they have programs as well.

Also, I remember when I use to work for Safeway they had those shoe boxes that you could fill with small toys, crayons, hygiene products, etc.

You bring them back to the store filled and a company comes to pick them up and they are sent all over the world, including Canada.

Not sure if they still do that...

You can adopt me, I'm taking donations for this:
http://sonyps4.com/wp-content/upload...-3d-viewer.jpg

anyone took part in samaritan's christmas project?

Donate a shoebox filled with stuff for a child?