Report this comment as spam or abuse

Report this comment as spam or abuse

if Madonna wasn’t selfish and greedy and REALLY wanted to do the right thing, she would have set up a way to help this father and child out, NOT taken this man’s son.

She has enough money to make this happen AND is donating millions to the orphanage anyway. Who says the child would have MOST LIKELY DIED, especially if she is filtering money in to the orphange where he is staying.

And just because there is a possibility that a child might die, does NOT make it right to by pass laws so that rich and famous people (possibly even predaphiles) can to take children home whenever they feel it suits them.

Madonna saying she saw him being held by an HIV positive girl and was mesmerized by him reminds me of someone going to a pet store and falling for a PUPPY.

This child is NOT a puppy.

You say Madonna saved him from death at a young age, possibly. Not every child dies and because she took him away, we will never know. Maybe he would have grown up to be a leader in his country and made changes that saved millions of lives. No one will ever know what WOULD have happened because instead Madonna bought him and took him from his country.

Just so we are clear, let me use your logic in a scenario.

I say that because Madonna snatched him like a puppy in a pet store, that he will MOST LIKELY grow up with no morals and die in his teen years from being messed up emotionally and overdosing on drugs.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

Report this comment as spam or abuse

Report this comment as spam or abuse

Just because she is loaded from selling her body and soul for money, does not make her a good mom to a child from a completely different culture. Sure the child will have a better life pysically by living in healthier Western country , but the most disturbing thing about the way this was handled is what others have stated and that is that wealthy people are treating these children like they are goods to be bought and sold.

No wonder human rights groups are worried about the bigger picture. If someone with such known loose morals as a celebrity has enough money and power to pay off the government to skirt the laws, who is to say that the same corrupt government won’t be lax enough NOT to start selling these children to RICH, powerful wealthy pedaphiles.

I mean come on, if someone with Madonna’s known past morals ….or better yet…. lack of morals can pay them off, who is NEXT in line for his or her sex slave bought under the table?

We can not ignore the BIGGER picture here.

Although her intentions were good, skirting the laws of the country that are set in place to protect these children was wrong.

Also, there are so many actual ORPHANS out there, why don’t these celebrities actually adopt orphans, not children with living immediate family members. How sad for the father to have Madonna sit in front of him and tell him she is taking away his only surviving child. Sure he wants the child to have a better life, but NO PARENT wants to have a stranger take their child forever.

ADOPT A DAMN ORPHAN and help the guy who can’t afford to care for his child out, but don’t TAKE HIS CHILD AWAY FOREVER. How greedy and selfish.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

http://metadish.com/news/stephanie-adams/martin-siegel-and-stephanie-adams-trying-to-let-their-frivolous-lawsuite-whither-and-die.php

I don’t think it’s tax deductible. =( Boo, and no one took my picture of me PayPal-ing the guy and stuck it on Cele|bitchy for people to praise me.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

However, I think those who have said something in about their charitable giving has done so in defense of themselves since others are telling them to, “Go give to charity and stop complaining.” I don’t think anyone would have said a word about it had they not been accused of not giving.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

and another thing…isn’t trumpeting your charitable inclinations on this small forum, doing exactly what celebs do in the wider forum of world publicity?

Report this comment as spam or abuse

I agree with Bono, too. Honestly, I love that celebrities donate money, time and energy. I especially appreciate the ones that do it quietly under-the-table and not to gain recognition. Of course, that’s a dilemma since I can’t really SAY which ones are doing it. It’s the ones that are so publicly giving that it’s for the attention. I will give that a few celebrities are stalked SO MUCH by the press that I don’t know if there WOULD be a way to give their time without the press finding out. But, for the most part, those celebrities we see in the press giving to charities are doing it for the spot light. At least that’s my two cents.

And, while I think adoption is a great thing, I don’t view it quite as a charitable cause. It affects the life of a child deeply and forever (hopefully for the better). It’s not just throwing $$$ at a cause and walking away. It’s affecting a life that really doesn’t have any say in the matter. I’m not saying this boy is worse off with Madonna than he is back home. But he’s not a charity, it’s a change in life for him, Madonna and her family. I think it’s bigger than charity and really shouldn’t be called charity work. Work is something you leave at the end of the day or can walk away from. Adding an addition to your family is a HUGE step and a BIG deal and shouldn’t be taken lightly (not that I’m saying Madonna has, although going to work out the day your kid comes home isn’t the best choice). It should never be for the fame, the applause, the spotlight, because it makes you feel good–it should be because you love the little fella and want to have a new member of your family. It should be for no other reason than that. So I’m really hoping Madonna thought about this and contemplated on it LONG and HARD before she did it. I hope she didn’t jump into it and did it for all the right reasons. And above all, I really hope she has one hell of a nanny, cause looking back at Madonna’s life and career, I think she’s a nut-case!

Report this comment as spam or abuse