+1.

 

Everyone has their own opinions about charities and donation and I really don't have any heartburn wit that.  How you choose to donate, whether publicly, or privately, is your personal right and privilege.

 

As for the 'ice bucket challenge"...let's face it, this was mainly a 'marketing ploy" to get people talking about a very serious issue - and to hopefully persuade more people to donate - and it sure has worked brilliantly from that standpoint.   Donations went from a relatively few million from a few years ago to recently topping over around $65M already this year.   My personal view about people doing the ice bucket thing - which you can agree with or not, which is also your privilege, and I may not agree with your view either, but I respect your right to have it  -  the majority of people doing the 'ice bucket" thing  don't have the "it's all about me attitude";  they are simply doing a pretty silly thing in public that is, as said, "great marketing" that brings awareness to a cause.    If doing something silly in public - like this ice bucket thing, or sitting on a dunking booth board, or getting pies thrown in the face, or whatever - helps a cause that I really care about and maybe even persuades a few more people to donate to it, then hell, yes, I'd do it - and have done it in the past.  I really don't think there is any "right way" or 'wrong way" to donate..it's a matter of individual conscience and personal choice and the bottom line is what matters is that people are getting their needed support.

Well said. My wife volunteered to be a dunk tank victim for her school. It wasn't videotaped for FB but she helped raise $ for them, and had fun. People bought tickets to do it or didn't. I think the IBC is similar in that regard.

For me, this falls under the people can do whatever the hell they want category.  I mean seriously, once you start judging a persons intentions (a person you do not know mind you) where does it end?

 

But for shits and giggles let's just say people are donating their time and or their money to a charitable cause for selfish reasons (which is a contradiction in and of itself but stay with me) who cares?  It's their time and their money to do whatever they want to do with it.

 

The thing I think about is how all the other hundreds of charities must be scrambling to try to find something as good as this, I mean ALS is raking in the fuckin dough!

 

The bombardment of ice bucket challenges is in full effect and is the next big thing.  It is the new Weakest Link, Who Wants to be a Millionaire, American Idol, or Survivor of fund raising.  It is what reality TV was a few years ago; a game changer.

 

And hopefully, all of the other worthy charities will figure out a way to cash in on its popularity.

The thing is, people won't make more donations than before. They will simply give to the hip charity of the day. Once another charity figures out a more fun gimmick, ALS will be forgotten. Having different fun ideas does not mean that people are giving more. The charities are just competing against each others. But I agree with you, and Scotty, that people are free to do what they want and it's good that money is collected for such a terrible disease as ALS.

 

The thing is, people won't make more donations than before. They will simply give to the hip charity of the day. Once another charity figures out a more fun gimmick, ALS will be forgotten. Having different fun ideas does not mean that people are giving more. The charities are just competing against each others. But I agree with you, and Scotty, that people are free to do what they want and it's good that money is collected for such a terrible disease as ALS.

True, but I think most of the people that took the challenge said they donated 50% more than they had done in prior years and planned on donating.  At least that's what the article I read said.  So, apart from their charities, they are contributing extra money to the ALS.  Yes, the ALS will be forgotten soon but for now, it's benefiting greatly from this thing that has spread like wildfire.

 

I think that some Germans in the 40ies also believed that it was ok to do such tests on their prisoners. Hey, why not use the unwanted of our societies, right? After all, it's cheaper than keeping them in prison or mental institutions...

Did I stumble into a RW slightly off track forum post again?

As far as will my donating to ALS hurt another charity I think only if we budget down to the $. At work I donate $10 or whatever to x charity/school, but it doesn't mean that I had that $ earmarked for another group. If they didn't hit me up chances are I wouldn't have donated to anyone.

 

When it comes to choosing between torturing innocent animals or torturing criminals who sit all comfy cozy in a cell.......... you damn right I'd choose the criminals. I'm sorry, but those animals do not deserve the suffering they go through - all in the name of "science".

But again, I am an animal lover.

Andrea, what some societies view as criminals are not criminals in our society. Think of homosexuals in many countries in the world. What if those countries decided to test on them because they view them as less important than animals? It's a slippery slope. Psychopaths and other dangerous individuals have mental illnesses, let's not forget that.

Mike, sorry for holding a discussion here. I'll shut up.

The problem with opening those floodgates is that later, our society (or a different one) might consider someone else as dangerous, be that homosexuals, women, Jews, etc. So, it is hard to give permission to a government to do something because it can be easily expanded.

The problem with opening those floodgates is that later, our society (or a different one) might consider someone else as dangerous, be that homosexuals, women, Jews, etc. So, it is hard to give permission to a government to do something because it can be easily expanded.

Now that I do agree with, the government would definitely go overboard, give 'em an inch they'll steal 100 miles.

 

The thing is, people won't make more donations than before. They will simply give to the hip charity of the day. Once another charity figures out a more fun gimmick, ALS will be forgotten. Having different fun ideas does not mean that people are giving more. The charities are just competing against each others. But I agree with you, and Scotty, that people are free to do what they want and it's good that money is collected for such a terrible disease as ALS.

Can we do this regularly and have a new hip charity every couple of months?