Total Posts:32|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Britain Will Cut Aid To Anti-Gay Nations

lotus_flower
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 2:49:53 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
http://newsfeed.time.com...

Now only if the US would grow some courage and follow suit...
"Human decency is not derived from religion. It precedes it."
- Christopher Hitchens, God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything
*******************************************************
http://www.bbc.co.uk...
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 2:55:42 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Why is this good news? Aid should not be dependent on a nations laws and and values. I thought aid was given simply to help people? It makes me cringe to think about how many more people may die just because their government is anti-gay and can no longer get sufficient money and supplies. All the while the often times corrupt leaders of such governments will be unaffected while the people ultimately suffer.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 2:58:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 2:55:42 PM, 000ike wrote:
Why is this good news? Aid should not be dependent on a nations laws and and values. I thought aid was given simply to help people? It makes me cringe to think about how many more people may die just because their government is anti-gay and can no longer get sufficient money and supplies. All the while the often times corrupt leaders of such governments will be unaffected while the people ultimately suffer.

Aid that goes to foriegn governments should. Aid that goes to starving people shouldn't. IMO.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 3:01:29 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 2:55:42 PM, 000ike wrote:
Why is this good news? Aid should not be dependent on a nations laws and and values. I thought aid was given simply to help people? It makes me cringe to think about how many more people may die just because their government is anti-gay and can no longer get sufficient money and supplies. All the while the often times corrupt leaders of such governments will be unaffected while the people ultimately suffer.

Most of this "aid" is really a bribe to keep the leaders on the side of the giver of the aid. Most of the money never makes it to these poor people, but are lining the pockets of the administrators and their cronies.

You are really paying off a corrupt cadre of thugs hoping they will help you some how internationally.
quarterexchange
Posts: 1,549
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 5:56:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
What a ridiculous and arbitrary factor to include when deciding whether a nation should receive millions of your country's tax dollars. It would make more sense if Britain chose who to give foreign based on the amount of syllables in that country's name.

I'm against most forms of foreign aid to begin with because most of the nations we give foreign aid to are run by corrupted leaders who simply keep the dough, but all governments have corrupted officials in office regardless of their general stance towards homosexuals.
I don't discriminate....I hate everybody.
quarterexchange
Posts: 1,549
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/11/2011 6:02:04 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 5:56:08 PM, quarterexchange wrote:
What a ridiculous and arbitrary factor to include when deciding whether a nation should receive millions of your country's tax dollars. It would make more sense if Britain chose who to give foreign based on the amount of syllables in that country's name.

I'm against most forms of foreign aid to begin with because most of the nations we give foreign aid to are run by corrupted leaders who simply keep the dough, but all governments have corrupted officials in office regardless of their general stance towards homosexuals.

Even if the concept of foreign aid worked in practice, where if a country shells out millions or perhaps billions of dollars to go to a foreign developing country that country will somehow get back on their feet, you guys have to understand that most 3rd world countries are anti-gay to begin with. Since now no 3rd world country is going to get foreign aid from Britain, since nearly every single 3rd world country is very harsh regarding homosexuality, who is going to get British foreign aid that actually needs it? But again, foreign aid is a sham, but this is for those that think foreign aid even works.
I don't discriminate....I hate everybody.
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2011 4:53:31 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 2:49:53 PM, lotus_flower wrote:
http://newsfeed.time.com...

Now only if the US would grow some courage and follow suit...:

Yeah, agreed.... The US should cut ALL aid to foreign nations, posthaste.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
kogline
Posts: 134
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2011 7:36:07 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
they'll criticize texas for painlessly executing a murderer, then let thousands starve or die of treatable disease cause they don't like gays. i think they should reform how aid is given, like making sure what innomen was talking about doesn't happen, but i don't think homophobia shouldn't be punished by death.
if state farm has perfected teleportation technology why do they still sell car insurance?
lotus_flower
Posts: 454
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2011 7:49:59 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/14/2011 7:36:07 AM, kogline wrote:
they'll criticize texas for painlessly executing a murderer, then let thousands starve or die of treatable disease cause they don't like gays. i think they should reform how aid is given, like making sure what innomen was talking about doesn't happen, but i don't think homophobia shouldn't be punished by death.

But that is just the point. it ISN'T aid that goes to those people. It buys our protection/ allies.
"Human decency is not derived from religion. It precedes it."
- Christopher Hitchens, God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything
*******************************************************
http://www.bbc.co.uk...
thett3
Posts: 14,371
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2011 7:53:20 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/14/2011 7:36:07 AM, kogline wrote:
they'll criticize texas for painlessly executing a murderer, then let thousands starve or die of treatable disease cause they don't like gays. i think they should reform how aid is given, like making sure what innomen was talking about doesn't happen, but i don't think homophobia shouldn't be punished by death.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
kogline
Posts: 134
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2011 9:00:28 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
lol thett have you heard of The Far Side by Gary Larson. i ask cause of your avatar.
if state farm has perfected teleportation technology why do they still sell car insurance?
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2011 10:04:58 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 2:55:42 PM, 000ike wrote:
Why is this good news? Aid should not be dependent on a nations laws and and values. I thought aid was given simply to help people? It makes me cringe to think about how many more people may die just because their government is anti-gay and can no longer get sufficient money and supplies. All the while the often times corrupt leaders of such governments will be unaffected while the people ultimately suffer.

Aid does not normally help anyone, it's modern imperialism.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
visini
Posts: 25
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/22/2011 1:58:03 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
That is great, it is about time that someone close to the US does this. Maybe it will tell the US to stop aiding countries that promote injustice. Just a list of countries that we should stop aiding and trade: Ghana, Afghanistan, Israel, Pakistan, North/South Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Mauritania, Sierra Leone, Ethiopia, Kenya, ect. ect.
I-am-a-panda
Posts: 15,380
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/23/2011 6:09:49 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Cameron probably doesn't care about gay rights records in Africa. He's just looking for an excuse to cut millions from the British budget and look good doing so. The moves a domestic one, not an international one.
Pizza. I have enormous respect for Pizza.
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/23/2011 7:33:51 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/23/2011 6:09:49 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Cameron probably doesn't care about gay rights records in Africa. He's just looking for an excuse to cut millions from the British budget and look good doing so. The moves a domestic one, not an international one.

This.
Veridas
Posts: 733
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/29/2011 6:35:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 2:55:42 PM, 000ike wrote:
Why is this good news? Aid should not be dependent on a nations laws and and values. I thought aid was given simply to help people? It makes me cringe to think about how many more people may die just because their government is anti-gay and can no longer get sufficient money and supplies. All the while the often times corrupt leaders of such governments will be unaffected while the people ultimately suffer.

Aid is intended to help every single person in the country receiving that aid.

If that country discriminates against homosexuality, then it is less likely that homosexuals will benefit.

The basic logic is. "If you can't accept them as equal then we can't accept you as really needing our help"
What fresh dickery is the internet up to today?
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2011 6:02:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/22/2011 1:58:03 AM, visini wrote:
That is great, it is about time that someone close to the US does this. Maybe it will tell the US to stop aiding countries that promote injustice. Just a list of countries that we should stop aiding and trade: Ghana, Afghanistan, Israel, Pakistan, North/South Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Mauritania, Sierra Leone, Ethiopia, Kenya, ect. ect.

Whats wrong with Israel?

Are you Anti-Semitic?
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2011 1:21:07 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 2:49:53 PM, lotus_flower wrote:
http://newsfeed.time.com...

Now only if the US would grow some courage and follow suit...

This times a million.
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave
lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/16/2011 1:27:40 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/31/2011 6:02:24 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/22/2011 1:58:03 AM, visini wrote:
That is great, it is about time that someone close to the US does this. Maybe it will tell the US to stop aiding countries that promote injustice. Just a list of countries that we should stop aiding and trade: Ghana, Afghanistan, Israel, Pakistan, North/South Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Mauritania, Sierra Leone, Ethiopia, Kenya, ect. ect.

Whats wrong with Israel?

Are you Anti-Semitic?

Israel is hateful, murderous, imperialistic, and has no right to exist. I am not anti semetic, but I am strongly against Israel existing, especially if they are taking MY money to fund imperialism and murder.
They are no better than any other theocracy and shouldn't be exempt from criticism.

Genocide is wrong, whether done to Jews, or by Jews.
To blacks, or by blacks.
To Asians, or by Asians.
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/17/2011 2:31:48 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/16/2011 1:27:40 PM, lovelife wrote:
At 10/31/2011 6:02:24 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 10/22/2011 1:58:03 AM, visini wrote:
That is great, it is about time that someone close to the US does this. Maybe it will tell the US to stop aiding countries that promote injustice. Just a list of countries that we should stop aiding and trade: Ghana, Afghanistan, Israel, Pakistan, North/South Sudan, Saudi Arabia, Mauritania, Sierra Leone, Ethiopia, Kenya, ect. ect.

Whats wrong with Israel?

Are you Anti-Semitic?

Israel is hateful, murderous, imperialistic, and has no right to exist. I am not anti semetic, but I am strongly against Israel existing, especially if they are taking MY money to fund imperialism and murder.
They are no better than any other theocracy and shouldn't be exempt from criticism.

Genocide is wrong, whether done to Jews, or by Jews.
To blacks, or by blacks.
To Asians, or by Asians.

Also Israel is quite a rich nation. There gdp per capita is around the same as the US
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Willoweed
Posts: 150
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2011 8:15:32 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/11/2011 2:55:42 PM, 000ike wrote:
Why is this good news? Aid should not be dependent on a nations laws and and values. I thought aid was given simply to help people? It makes me cringe to think about how many more people may die just because their government is anti-gay and can no longer get sufficient money and supplies. All the while the often times corrupt leaders of such governments will be unaffected while the people ultimately suffer.

This is good news because it gives poor countries monetary incentives to stop abusing human rights. Are you against human rights?
quarterexchange
Posts: 1,549
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2011 8:20:43 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/18/2011 8:15:32 AM, Willoweed wrote:
At 10/11/2011 2:55:42 PM, 000ike wrote:
Why is this good news? Aid should not be dependent on a nations laws and and values. I thought aid was given simply to help people? It makes me cringe to think about how many more people may die just because their government is anti-gay and can no longer get sufficient money and supplies. All the while the often times corrupt leaders of such governments will be unaffected while the people ultimately suffer.

This is good news because it gives poor countries monetary incentives to stop abusing human rights. Are you against human rights?

Let's see how that plays out. Let's assume that foreign aid actually works and that when we give foreign aid to countries, the poor and starving get economic relief.

It will take a long time for poverty stricken and socially backwards countries that lie in Africa or South America or Asia to suddenly become very tolerant of homosexuality. Until they do, people will be starving in droves, because you think whether or not someone believes homosexuality is normal should be a determining factor when we decide whether or not to give them food and water.

But foreign aid doesn't work, so I hope the U.S. does follow suit and give less in foreign aid.
I don't discriminate....I hate everybody.
Willoweed
Posts: 150
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2011 9:35:49 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/18/2011 8:20:43 AM, quarterexchange wrote:
At 11/18/2011 8:15:32 AM, Willoweed wrote:
At 10/11/2011 2:55:42 PM, 000ike wrote:
Why is this good news? Aid should not be dependent on a nations laws and and values. I thought aid was given simply to help people? It makes me cringe to think about how many more people may die just because their government is anti-gay and can no longer get sufficient money and supplies. All the while the often times corrupt leaders of such governments will be unaffected while the people ultimately suffer.

This is good news because it gives poor countries monetary incentives to stop abusing human rights. Are you against human rights?

Let's see how that plays out. Let's assume that foreign aid actually works and that when we give foreign aid to countries, the poor and starving get economic relief.

It will take a long time for poverty stricken and socially backwards countries that lie in Africa or South America or Asia to suddenly become very tolerant of homosexuality. Until they do, people will be starving in droves, because you think whether or not someone believes homosexuality is normal should be a determining factor when we decide whether or not to give them food and water.

But foreign aid doesn't work, so I hope the U.S. does follow suit and give less in foreign aid.
1) Foreign aid does work. It feeds millions of people worldwide, and lifts million out of severe poverty, it helps build infrastructure for poor areas, helps modernize food storage saving millions of pounds of food etc etc. You saying it doesn't work is just you being completely ignorant.
2) The reason the UK is withholding foreign aid to these countries is because they lock gay people in prison just for being gay, cause they kill gay people just for being gay.
So next time you post try to make sure that you at least have a clue about what you are talking about.
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2011 10:23:27 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/12/2011 4:53:31 PM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
At 10/11/2011 2:49:53 PM, lotus_flower wrote:
http://newsfeed.time.com...

Now only if the US would grow some courage and follow suit...:

Yeah, agreed.... The US should cut ALL aid to foreign nations, posthaste.

The U.S. should cut all aid to foreign countries, remove our militaries from them, and stop taking all their god-damned resources.
Rob
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2011 11:22:11 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 10/23/2011 6:09:49 AM, I-am-a-panda wrote:
Cameron probably doesn't care about gay rights records in Africa. He's just looking for an excuse to cut millions from the British budget and look good doing so. The moves a domestic one, not an international one.

I'd like to take his a step further, but...

...yeah, forget it. This point is good enough, and I 100% agree.
quarterexchange
Posts: 1,549
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2011 8:15:59 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/18/2011 9:35:49 AM, Willoweed wrote:
At 11/18/2011 8:20:43 AM, quarterexchange wrote:
At 11/18/2011 8:15:32 AM, Willoweed wrote:
At 10/11/2011 2:55:42 PM, 000ike wrote:
Why is this good news? Aid should not be dependent on a nations laws and and values. I thought aid was given simply to help people? It makes me cringe to think about how many more people may die just because their government is anti-gay and can no longer get sufficient money and supplies. All the while the often times corrupt leaders of such governments will be unaffected while the people ultimately suffer.

This is good news because it gives poor countries monetary incentives to stop abusing human rights. Are you against human rights?

Let's see how that plays out. Let's assume that foreign aid actually works and that when we give foreign aid to countries, the poor and starving get economic relief.

It will take a long time for poverty stricken and socially backwards countries that lie in Africa or South America or Asia to suddenly become very tolerant of homosexuality. Until they do, people will be starving in droves, because you think whether or not someone believes homosexuality is normal should be a determining factor when we decide whether or not to give them food and water.

But foreign aid doesn't work, so I hope the U.S. does follow suit and give less in foreign aid.
1) Foreign aid does work. It feeds millions of people worldwide, and lifts million out of severe poverty, it helps build infrastructure for poor areas, helps modernize food storage saving millions of pounds of food etc etc. You saying it doesn't work is just you being completely ignorant.
2) The reason the UK is withholding foreign aid to these countries is because they lock gay people in prison just for being gay, cause they kill gay people just for being gay.
So next time you post try to make sure that you at least have a clue about what you are talking about.

1. No it doesn't. Private charities do a much better job. You have to realize that these countries who take foreign aid are run by corrupt and greedy governments and that when given money or supplies they simply keep it or sell it. These people are not any better off than before foreign aid, other than the government officials driving luxury automobiles.

Regardless, I'm willing to assume for the sake of argument that foreign aid actually works, which is what I said in the beginning, but you simply ignored because you weren't willing to discuss my actual point

2. I know. I'm saying that it's a ridiculous reason to determine whether someone lives or dies assuming foreign aid works. The countries that supposedly "do good" with foreign aid are socially backward and will take a couple, perhaps several generations before they become tolerant of people with differing religions, sexualites, races, etc. By the time they do thousands, perhaps millions would have starved, for equality.

I would also be willing to argue that, assuming foreign aid works, giving aid to anti-gay countries would help that country financially and socially progress much faster than cutting off foreign aid as a form of blackmail. I think that if people are fed, more wealthy, and educated, they will become more tolerant of homosexuals, jackass.
I don't discriminate....I hate everybody.
Willoweed
Posts: 150
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/18/2011 11:35:06 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/18/2011 8:15:59 PM, quarterexchange wrote:
At 11/18/2011 9:35:49 AM, Willoweed wrote:
At 11/18/2011 8:20:43 AM, quarterexchange wrote:
At 11/18/2011 8:15:32 AM, Willoweed wrote:
At 10/11/2011 2:55:42 PM, 000ike wrote:
Why is this good news? Aid should not be dependent on a nations laws and and values. I thought aid was given simply to help people? It makes me cringe to think about how many more people may die just because their government is anti-gay and can no longer get sufficient money and supplies. All the while the often times corrupt leaders of such governments will be unaffected while the people ultimately suffer.

This is good news because it gives poor countries monetary incentives to stop abusing human rights. Are you against human rights?

Let's see how that plays out. Let's assume that foreign aid actually works and that when we give foreign aid to countries, the poor and starving get economic relief.

It will take a long time for poverty stricken and socially backwards countries that lie in Africa or South America or Asia to suddenly become very tolerant of homosexuality. Until they do, people will be starving in droves, because you think whether or not someone believes homosexuality is normal should be a determining factor when we decide whether or not to give them food and water.

But foreign aid doesn't work, so I hope the U.S. does follow suit and give less in foreign aid.
1) Foreign aid does work. It feeds millions of people worldwide, and lifts million out of severe poverty, it helps build infrastructure for poor areas, helps modernize food storage saving millions of pounds of food etc etc. You saying it doesn't work is just you being completely ignorant.
2) The reason the UK is withholding foreign aid to these countries is because they lock gay people in prison just for being gay, cause they kill gay people just for being gay.
So next time you post try to make sure that you at least have a clue about what you are talking about.

1. No it doesn't. Private charities do a much better job. You have to realize that these countries who take foreign aid are run by corrupt and greedy governments and that when given money or supplies they simply keep it or sell it. These people are not any better off than before foreign aid, other than the government officials driving luxury automobiles.

Regardless, I'm willing to assume for the sake of argument that foreign aid actually works, which is what I said in the beginning, but you simply ignored because you weren't willing to discuss my actual point

2. I know. I'm saying that it's a ridiculous reason to determine whether someone lives or dies assuming foreign aid works. The countries that supposedly "do good" with foreign aid are socially backward and will take a couple, perhaps several generations before they become tolerant of people with differing religions, sexualites, races, etc. By the time they do thousands, perhaps millions would have starved, for equality.

I would also be willing to argue that, assuming foreign aid works, giving aid to anti-gay countries would help that country financially and socially progress much faster than cutting off foreign aid as a form of blackmail. I think that if people are fed, more wealthy, and educated, they will become more tolerant of homosexuals, jackass.

1.A) You do realize that the same countries who accept foreign aid form governments accept it from private charities. You do realize this don't you?
B) For every dollar governments give to foreign nations 5% is used up in administrative costs; for private charities it is 30%. Meaning Government foreign aid is more efficient than private charities.
http://www.globalissues.org...
http://www.bargaineering.com...
http://www.charitynavigator.org...
C) You said and I quote, "But foreign aid doesn't work," In English how does that not mean you think foreign aid doesn't work?

2.A) There is a limited supply of foreign aid; not giving foreign aid to one country doesn't mean that you decrease total foreign aid it means you decrease foreign aid to that country. So tell me why you think we should save the lives of people who abuse human rights over saving the lives of people who respect human rights? Do you for some reason think that having more people around who abuse human rights is a good idea if so why?
quarterexchange
Posts: 1,549
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2011 4:58:45 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/18/2011 11:35:06 PM, Willoweed wrote:
1.A) You do realize that the same countries who accept foreign aid form governments accept it from private charities. You do realize this don't you?

B) For every dollar governments give to foreign nations 5% is used up in administrative costs; for private charities it is 30%. Meaning Government foreign aid is more efficient than private charities.
http://www.globalissues.org...
http://www.bargaineering.com...
http://www.charitynavigator.org...
C) You said and I quote, "But foreign aid doesn't work," In English how does that not mean you think foreign aid doesn't work?

You know what screw it, I'm tired of telling you that I'm already willing to accept that foreign aid works for the sake of argument yet you keep making it your main point. Forget it. Again for the 3rd time, assuming foreign aid works, this is a stupid decision.

2.A) There is a limited supply of foreign aid; not giving foreign aid to one country doesn't mean that you decrease total foreign aid it means you decrease foreign aid to that country. So tell me why you think we should save the lives of people who abuse human rights over saving the lives of people who respect human rights? Do you for some reason think that having more people around who abuse human rights is a good idea if so why?

I wholeheartedly agree that there is a limited amount of foreign aid, but you'll be very hard pressed to find a pro-gay country that doesn't need foreign aid. Developed countries are tolerant of homosexuals, developed countries do not need foreign aid. So don't say "oh, we need to cut off aid to them to give aid to people who are tolerant" because that's nonsense. The amount of countries that are poverty strickent and have droves of starving people yet accept homosexuality as a normal social behavior starts with the letter "z" and rhymes with "nero".

Poverty, and ignorance spurs social backwardness. These people can't help it, they grew up all their life being convinced either by religion or society and without an education and being forced to do back breaking labor to get by, that homosexuality is wrong or disgusting. Are you actually going to try and tell me with a straight face that you, a bleeding heart liberal, actually think that being heavy handed and being willing to strave millions of people, is a better way of making these people be tolerant of homosexuals rather than helping these people obtain an education and a little capital?
I don't discriminate....I hate everybody.
Willoweed
Posts: 150
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/19/2011 11:34:26 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 11/19/2011 4:58:45 AM, quarterexchange wrote:
At 11/18/2011 11:35:06 PM, Willoweed wrote:
1.A) You do realize that the same countries who accept foreign aid form governments accept it from private charities. You do realize this don't you?

B) For every dollar governments give to foreign nations 5% is used up in administrative costs; for private charities it is 30%. Meaning Government foreign aid is more efficient than private charities.
http://www.globalissues.org...
http://www.bargaineering.com...
http://www.charitynavigator.org...
C) You said and I quote, "But foreign aid doesn't work," In English how does that not mean you think foreign aid doesn't work?

You know what screw it, I'm tired of telling you that I'm already willing to accept that foreign aid works for the sake of argument yet you keep making it your main point. Forget it. Again for the 3rd time, assuming foreign aid works, this is a stupid decision.
K resolved: foreign aid works and government aid is more efficient than private charity.

2.A) There is a limited supply of foreign aid; not giving foreign aid to one country doesn't mean that you decrease total foreign aid it means you decrease foreign aid to that country. So tell me why you think we should save the lives of people who abuse human rights over saving the lives of people who respect human rights? Do you for some reason think that having more people around who abuse human rights is a good idea if so why?

I wholeheartedly agree that there is a limited amount of foreign aid, but you'll be very hard pressed to find a pro-gay country that doesn't need foreign aid. Developed countries are tolerant of homosexuals, developed countries do not need foreign aid. So don't say "oh, we need to cut off aid to them to give aid to people who are tolerant" because that's nonsense. The amount of countries that are poverty strickent and have droves of starving people yet accept homosexuality as a normal social behavior starts with the letter "z" and rhymes with "nero".

I'm going to list some countries that have large segments of the population that are poor and need aid but yet respect gay rights (IE don't kill or throw gays in prison just for being gay).
India, Indonesia, Papa New Guinea, Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia, Laos, Cambodia, Mongol, Kazakhstan, Nepal, Madagascar, Congo, Mozambique, South Africa, Demn rep of Congo, Gabon, Chad, Niger, Mali, Burkina faso, Cote D'Ivoire, Iraq, Syria, Jordon, Turkey, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, China, North Korea....
That wasn't hard at all.


Poverty, and ignorance spurs social backwardness. These people can't help it, they grew up all their life being convinced either by religion or society and without an education and being forced to do back breaking labor to get by, that homosexuality is wrong or disgusting. Are you actually going to try and tell me with a straight face that you, a bleeding heart liberal, actually think that being heavy handed and being willing to strave millions of people, is a better way of making these people be tolerant of homosexuals rather than helping these people obtain an education and a little capital?
As I said before.
So tell me why you think we should save the lives of people who abuse human rights over saving the lives of people who respect human rights? Do you for some reason think that having more people around who abuse human rights is a good idea if so why?