I’m not one for OT all that much, but apparently there is mention of Steve Irwin feeding crocs while holding his infant son in his arms.
Not the greatest of ideas, I admit.
But what strikes me, is why do we get all upset over two dangling babies when each day 27,000 children die of starvation and disease? EVERY DAY!
It amazes me…the priorities we have.
Life just doesn’t make sense sometimes.
Mike
Because parents don’t starve their children on purpose or infect them with disease. All said tho, I am not one of those who is making a big deal about his actions. But there is a difference between misfortune and endangerment.
Aren’t WE as a species doing that? Allowing it to happen?
I think that Steve Irwin was probably thinking that he was just doing his job and wasn’t in much danger. How many of us have dangled our infant children over the computer keyboard without even thinking about the danger we were putting them in? 
Mike
I think he knows what he’s doing.
Also, his wife was standing not far away when this happened. She apparently thought is was kinda cute and was reported to have giggled during the event. I think if the mother of the child trusts Irwin to do it then we should back off with our judgement.
Seth
I think it honestly didn’t occur to Steve Irwin that the baby might be in danger, as he was in reasonable control of the croc. Given the number of times I’ve seen him slip or stumble when working with the crocs, however, I would think perhaps he might want to think about it before doing it again…sure he had a good grip on the baby, but he still could have dropped him, and to Murray (the croc), I doubt a baby looks all that different from a chicken.
Lots of people are terribly concerned about world hunger. My father-in-law has given his entire life and career to that very cause. Watch TV sometime and see the ads for Christian Children’s Fund (through which we sponsor a child), UNICEF, and other such organizations. The concern is out there. The difference is, sadly, that starvation isn’t news. It happens every day, in every country in the world (including our own). It may not make the front pages of the papers, but it’s still an issue for a lot of us. We do what we can, but sometimes the problem just seems overwhelming. We see something like Steve Irwin playing with crocs with his baby under his arm, or Michael Jackson dangling his son over a balcony, and we say “Now THERE’S something someone can do something about!” and so it makes the news and the newsgroups and the discussion sites, but that doesn’t mean that people aren’t equally concerned with the children who die of malnutrition, unnecessary disease and the effects of war every day.
Redwolf
Although the exception rather than the rule, it does get reported from time to time, up to several times a year, where partents are found to have purposely starved their children.
It is also my feeling that the 800 MILLION that was spent on the current Mars exploration is exactly the kind of thing that could be eliminated to resolve some of these problems. How many meals does that equal? How many homes could that build vs the number of jobs lost from eliminating some of the more frivalous space things. Keep it closer to home.
There was a pervious thread (I couldn’t find it, but I think Cranberry authored it if anyone else wants to try a search) where it was pointed out that the space program is not frivalous. Numerous technologies have been created with help from NASA’s work that we would not have otherwise. I’m not saying that these technologies outweigh the millions of starving. I’m just saying that there are quantitative benefits to space exploration.
Seth
I agree with slowair in the larger more philosophical sense but I think the public doesn’t think about the starving, the abused, the diseased, the dead, because from day to day the people who are very bad off in the world are sadly quite easy for the rest of us to ignore. Enter a man like Steve Irwin or Michael Jackson who have a high public profile and a platform from which to speak from, and the picture changes. As soon as it happens, everybody on Earth is talking about it, and Gloria Allred is filing suit.
All while millions of other kids are starving, being abused, and dying of AIDS and cancer and very few people are even paying attention.
We spend our money on all sorts of things less important than ending world hunger. If we are going to pick something to eliminate, why cut space research, rather than something far less important?
I mean, all of us on this thread spent our money on personal computers and internet connections. We’ve all probably blown much more money on music than each of us has contributed via taxes to the Mars program, or in fact all subsidised scientific research. How many of us have DVD players or game consoles, or cable TV? Isn’t this a lot more money than we just collectively contributed to explore the planet Mars? The public blew more than 800 million dollars just going to see Peter Jackson’s LOTR! Is that incredibly irresponsible of us? How many meals is that?
At my old university, a campus bible-study group decided one day that skateboarding was anti-Christian, because kids were skateboarding when they could be spending that same time in Bible study (“You guys are putting a piece of wood above God,” shouted one of them to the skaters in the MLK commons.) This is the same fallacy of resource allocation: an activity is bad simply because we could instead be doing something more valuable.
Caj
I guess I didn’t make my point too clear.
What I was trying to get across is that people like Erwin and Jackson dangle a baby and the world holds it’s breath.
But each day thousands of children die because they didn’t get enough to eat or something as simple as clean water or vaccinations.
Why does it get people in a tizzy over these two babies when so many DIE each day?
The big picture! Not whether they thought they were actually putting their babies in danger. Doesn’t really matter when you compare this to thousands dying each day.
I don’t understand.
It’s because things like this send chills down the spine, as should the thought of children living and dying in miserable conditions. Every child is important, the neglected and malnourished as well as the children of celebrities. These children didn’t ask to be held out of a window or taken into a dangerous reptile’s pen. Just because someone is a celebrity doesn’t give them license to be an idiot, even though some celebrities apparently think it does.
If these two kids aren’t important by this reasoning, then what is a little gay-bashing or racially-motivated homicide compared to the millions slaughtered by tyrants? Just a drop in the bucket…
Come on, guys, wrong is wrong.
Robin
Yeah, yeah, he knows what he’s doing, blah, blah , blah. Look at it this way: If it was YOUR one month old baby, would you let him do it? Hell NO!, and no one else would either. He was only able to pull this off because he “owns” the baby.
Being the Very Good Libra that I am, I can see both sides of the story… While I shudder at the thought of what could have happened, I think that some people, like Steve Irwin, are so immersed in their life’s work that they truly live it and don’t see things the same way that others do. What seems dangerous or unreasonable to most of us, does not seem so to them-- just another day. In Irwin’s case, he does crazy stunts with reptiles day in and day out, and has become so attuned to these animals, that I honestly don’t think it occurred to him that it could be dangerous for his child. Plus, I doubt he would have done the same stunt with a croc he had just found out in the wild. I figure that he probably just wants his child(ren) to be as comfortable as he is around these animals, and figured that doing it from birth would be the thing to do. Perhaps not an idea any of us would have had… :roll: 
I agree with slowair though, it’s a shame that people can get outraged over extreme (publicized) sightings of children in peril, but can’t work up the same emotion for all children who suffer on a regular, daily basis.
Just a tuppence or two,
Andrea
It is much easier and more fun to blast Irwin for what he is doing than to blast ourselves for what we are doing.
Truer words were never spoken… the wisdom of Bloom is once again exposed.
Best,
Andrea
Uh, yeah it is. Crock-for-brains is accustomed to exploiting animals. It probably seemed reasonable to do the same with his child. I noticed he held the chicken in his right hand, when he dangled it over the crocodile. Is he right-handed, perhaps? Wouldn’t want to take a chance with any fingers :roll: .
-I think “Dangling Babies” would be a great name for a rock band.