Results 1 to 3 of 3
-
04-05-2009 #1
I'm glad this nutty old shrew failed ...
... in her bid to take another child away from his parents.
Yes poverty is horrible but there are desperately poor kids without parents everywhere. Why can't she adopt a poor child in foster care in the U.S. or U.K.? Or even put her resources to wider use through some philanthropic effort, like a school or hospital, or even sponsor a child and his family as immigrants (it is possible with her resources)? Why the high profile attempts to remove a single African boy from his natural parents, so that his childhood would be filled with her excesses and nuttiness? What sort of nontangible gain does this publicity bring for her ego, and how many children does she need?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz...cy-behind.html
Yes I realize for some people she is a gay icon and can do no wrong, but I think she's sick.
-
04-06-2009 #2
Re: I'm glad this nutty old shrew failed ...
Originally Posted by phobun
Honestly, something needs to be done about people like Madonna. If you want a high-profile artist who actually helps, you need look no further than Shakira, whose Pies Descalzos Foundation builds schools, or the lugubrious Mr Geldof.
Madonna was always a talentless tart on the make, and nothing changes.
-
04-06-2009 #3
- Join Date
- Jul 2005
- Location
- The United States of kiss-my-ass
- Posts
- 8,004
Madonna and the Cult of Celebrity Adoption
Madonna, and other celebrities, who get lots of attention for adopting third-world orphans, should deploy their gazillions of dollars instead to support orphanages or villages.
The Material Girl was stymied by a Malawi court today and denied permission to adopt a tiny girl in that desperately poor nation.
That she would use her money to fight Malawi society in its court system is an abuse of wealth, as is the desire to pluck some foundling while ignoring the needs of the rest.
It's hard not to be cynical about Madonna's desire to adopt after seeing her walk-through photo op in an outfit worth more than what a Malawi family of six earns annually.
It's also insensitive to cherry-pick a child, who will live like Marie Antoinette, at the same time ignoring millions of others who starve in orphanages.
For the money Madonna would spend every year providing 24-hour nannies to raise this child, and lavishing it with private schools and the like, she could feed a village or a large orphanage for 20 years.
To Madonna, Angelina Jolie and the others I say if you really want to do good in the world, then do it properly.
Their behavior smacks of narcissism, collecting kids from various cultures like so many global accessories to adorn their own dysfunctional families and, to boot, to be raised by servants.
Oprah Winfrey's done it properly by creating a place where thousands of young females can be uplifted and trained in the hopes they will change and improve their societies.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/diane-..._b_183054.html
"I became insane, with long intervals of horrible sanity." - Poe