Subject:
|
Re: Libertarian stuff (Was: Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 12 Jan 2000 02:53:58 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1269 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John DiRienzo writes:
> if there was
> a four year old kid on your street with no one, no where to go, that if
> there weren't some government agency for you to call and make the problem
> disappear, you wouldn't do something about it yourself? You would, 99.9% of
> people would. So even if it wasn't the child's fault, the child would
> survive. As said earlier, get real.... if you are going to talk to me.
Okay, lets get very real.
<http://pangaea.org/street_children/kids.htm>
<http://www.unisa.ac.za/dept/press/lar/111/lar3.html>
<http://www.ddc.com/kidsacks/>
<http://www.letthechildrenlive.org/>
<http://www.concentric.net/~Vitnet/MinM.htm>
There are, according to the UN, around 150 million children on the streets at
present. Or is this reality not the one you like to face, instead embracing the
puesdo-reality of a system that is still at this moment hypothetical.
Life-affirming or not, that many street-children suggests that we can't rely on
the innate goodness of man. Which reality is more comfortable to inhabit?
Richard
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
209 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
