@lumos I have a friend, he's quite the genius really, yet he has leukemia
A more efficient and less intrusive "cure" than chemotherapy would be quite useful for the Western world
... and world hunger wouldn't be nearly as much of an issue if the places where people can barely afford to sustain themselves wouldn't be having so many kids that they're unable to provide for, so it's pretty much a problem they cause for themselves.
It's not a problem they cause for themselves, that's how poverty works. They're uneducated, usually don't have access to birth control. It's also very common for people in such cultures where poverty is a huge thing to feel like kids make their lives complete - family is very much a focal point in their lives. Even if it does put a strain on them due to lack of resources. Not to mention that sexual assault is more common in these places, many women are forced to give birth due to the fact that they might not have access to safe abortions, and it goes against their beliefs. It's not as simple as "oh they're just fucking around and causing this problem themselves", it's about poverty, social constructs, lack of education, lack of access to birth control and safe abortions etc.
A very large percentage of women who give birth in those countries, were impregnated due to rape.
And it's not the children's fault that they were born into hunger.
Regardless, even in the case of consensual sex, the reason that they have kids in those countries is precisely because they can barely sustain themselves, so they want kids, so that the kids can help them out.
@lumos@mistixs thanks for verifying that THEIR problems are nowhere nearly as much a priority as essentially finding the next "antibiotics"-level medical technology breakthrough for the slightly more civilized part of the world, where most kids aren't born from rape into a family that cannot sustain its own children.
Most people who die from cancer are old, so even if their cancer was cured, they don't have much more life to live. By contrast, if you cure hunger, then you're saving the lives of many children who have their whole lives ahead of them, who can use their rescued lives to help develop a cure for cancer.
@mistixs In terms of generalities, the Western world is far more important than the Africans, because the people here suffering from cancer are educated individuals.
"thanks for verifying that THEIR problems are nowhere nearly as much a priority" Not once did I say or imply that. I asked you out of curiosity, but then you went on to basically say that "it's their own fault" which it isn't, so I wanted to let you know how and why it's out of their control, essentially. If world hunger was ended and they got access to food and clean water, resources and time could me focused on getting them an education, cleaning up their countries and making sure that people have access to birth control and abortions. Then the birth rates would slowly decrease. I'm not trying to argue about the actual question asker posted, and I'm not saying you shouldn't choose to prioritize a cure for cancer. I'm merely trying to educate you on what poverty means and how much it affects different aspects of people's lives, not just "oh they don't have money, that's all".
@mistixs People in the Western world have enough nourishment and opportunities, yet people still end up being homeless on the street with NO ONE who's willing to help them.
The Republic of South Africa is doing just fine, and they're also in Africa.
Don't believe 'em. I belong to a place where poverty, hunger and overpopulation is a major problem. They are certainly not raped. They reproduce so fucking much.
While I may agree with them that they don't opt for abortion but government supplies free condoms in civil hospitals. They're just lazy.
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
39Opinion
Curing cancer will have a greater beneficial impact
Hunger's a much worse way to die than cancer, so solve world hunger.
Fuck cancer.
Just pops outta nowhere and fucks with people.
Solve world hunger, because there are already cures for cancer buy they are just being repressed
Neither. The world is already overpopulated. We don't need to make it worse.
Cancer but its a REALLY hard choice
Curing cancer is far more important.
How is it more important?
@lumos I have a friend, he's quite the genius really, yet he has leukemia
A more efficient and less intrusive "cure" than chemotherapy would be quite useful for the Western world
... and world hunger wouldn't be nearly as much of an issue if the places where people can barely afford to sustain themselves wouldn't be having so many kids that they're unable to provide for, so it's pretty much a problem they cause for themselves.
It's not a problem they cause for themselves, that's how poverty works. They're uneducated, usually don't have access to birth control. It's also very common for people in such cultures where poverty is a huge thing to feel like kids make their lives complete - family is very much a focal point in their lives. Even if it does put a strain on them due to lack of resources. Not to mention that sexual assault is more common in these places, many women are forced to give birth due to the fact that they might not have access to safe abortions, and it goes against their beliefs. It's not as simple as "oh they're just fucking around and causing this problem themselves", it's about poverty, social constructs, lack of education, lack of access to birth control and safe abortions etc.
A very large percentage of women who give birth in those countries, were impregnated due to rape.
And it's not the children's fault that they were born into hunger.
Regardless, even in the case of consensual sex, the reason that they have kids in those countries is precisely because they can barely sustain themselves, so they want kids, so that the kids can help them out.
@lumos @mistixs thanks for verifying that THEIR problems are nowhere nearly as much a priority as essentially finding the next "antibiotics"-level medical technology breakthrough for the slightly more civilized part of the world, where most kids aren't born from rape into a family that cannot sustain its own children.
The cure for cancer is much more important.
Most people who die from cancer are old, so even if their cancer was cured, they don't have much more life to live.
By contrast, if you cure hunger, then you're saving the lives of many children who have their whole lives ahead of them, who can use their rescued lives to help develop a cure for cancer.
@mistixs My friend with leukemia is 20.
I'd say that's not exactly "old".
I'm talking in generalities
@mistixs In terms of generalities, the Western world is far more important than the Africans, because the people here suffering from cancer are educated individuals.
1) The people in Africa can *become* educated if they had enough nourishment and opportunities.
2) There are plenty of people hungry/starving in the Western world too.
"thanks for verifying that THEIR problems are nowhere nearly as much a priority"
Not once did I say or imply that. I asked you out of curiosity, but then you went on to basically say that "it's their own fault" which it isn't, so I wanted to let you know how and why it's out of their control, essentially. If world hunger was ended and they got access to food and clean water, resources and time could me focused on getting them an education, cleaning up their countries and making sure that people have access to birth control and abortions. Then the birth rates would slowly decrease. I'm not trying to argue about the actual question asker posted, and I'm not saying you shouldn't choose to prioritize a cure for cancer. I'm merely trying to educate you on what poverty means and how much it affects different aspects of people's lives, not just "oh they don't have money, that's all".
could be focused*
@mistixs People in the Western world have enough nourishment and opportunities, yet people still end up being homeless on the street with NO ONE who's willing to help them.
The Republic of South Africa is doing just fine, and they're also in Africa.
@lumos It's true, the lack of clean water IS a problem :/
I'd say I'd be willing to choose that over the cure for cancer; the ability to create pure water globally.
But world hunger is not as concerning to me as cancer.
Don't believe 'em. I belong to a place where poverty, hunger and overpopulation is a major problem. They are certainly not raped. They reproduce so fucking much.
While I may agree with them that they don't opt for abortion but government supplies free condoms in civil hospitals. They're just lazy.
Curing cancer
Definitely cure cancer.
I'd choose to cure cancer.
Getting virgins laid >
Which game is it?
I think I've seen it?
Saints Row 4
Did you finish playing this game?
Ok I'll think and then :P
I'll get back to you 😶
Cancer because there is a cure for hunger. Food
Cancer.
Can't eat when you are dead
Damn not sure which is more beneficial
I'd cure cancer
What game is this from?
Solve world hunger
2 private opinion(s)Only the asker and the opinion owner can see it. Learn more