Looking out for #1?

[FantasticJones]

This is a compacted version of an argument that me and Weevil had a while ago but I'd like to zone it out there and see what you fine people thought.

Is someone like Michael J. Fox, who is raising money to fight a disease that he has, to be lauded or blasted for self interest?

 

[Blackbich]

LOL - love your sig line, by the way.

Originally posted by FantasticJones
Is someone like Michael J. Fox, who is raising money to fight a disease that he has, to be lauded or blasted for self interest?

Michael J. Fox is raising money for something that's become a cause of his now that he's been affected by the disease. That is typical of most of America. He's not any better or any worse for it. Since my sister was diagnosed with cirrohsis (sp?) of the liver, I've been telling everyone I know about the importance of organ donation. Before, I was a donor myself but never spoke out about it.

 

[*bratcat*]

Christopher Reeve...

 

[FantasticJones]

Re: Christopher Reeve...

would you knock the efforts he has done to create awareness of spinal cord injuries?

No, but I don't deny the selfishness of it either. He deserves about as much personal credit as a guy who raises money for legal bills does.

 

[Ambrosious]

This is a compacted version of an argument that me and Weevil had a while ago but I'd like to zone it out there and see what you fine people thought.

Is someone like Michael J. Fox, who is raising money to fight a disease that he has, to be lauded or blasted for self interest?

He's an opportunistic bastard and should just go and shoot his jerkey little muscled self.

What the fuck kind of argument IS this?

You two gonna pick on Jerry Lewis and his kids next?

Are they really Jerry's kids or is he just saying that to gain sympathy for his cause?

 

[FantasticJones]

Hey, all I'm saying that if these people were really caring, selfless folks they'd be working to fight diseases that they don't have.

Doctor: Fantastic, you have a bad case of Queertrophic Distrophia. It affects 1 in a bajillion people.

Fantastic: Omigod!!!! What's being done to fight this tragic illness? I better start devoting my time to curing this disease for, uh, all the other people with this problem.

as my moronic friend would say: yeesh or yazikes!

 

[Ambrosious]

I think the point is that they aren't selfless workers, well maybe Jerry Lewis is, for the good of humanity, they are fighting this disease for their own benefit, and other people will gain from their name, popularity, celebrity, efforts and zeal, and I have come down with a wierd disease that makes me use all commas as punctuation, tragic, just tragic,,,

 

[KillerMuffin]

The inference here is that selflessness is something that actually occurs. Ghandi and Mother Theresa were selfish in their goals as well. Ghandi wanted freedom too and Mother Theresa wanted to go to heaven.

Get down to the meat of the matter, do the ends justify the motivations? We aren't even talking about the means, merely the motivations. He is helping the Parkinson's cause with his fundraising. That's laudable. He's getting help by donating to research. That's human. It's not like he doesn't give a flying rats ass to people who have cancer, emphysema, or epilepsy. It's just that he doesn't understand how much they suffer quite like he understands how much people with Parkinson's suffer.

Let's put it this way. Michael J. Fox and Co. should be accepted for what they are doing. People who do things because they, and only themselves, will gain should be blasted. If Fox had scientists working around the clock to cure him and then charge outrageous amounts of money to cure anyone else with Parkinson's, then that would be asinine and he should be blasted. As it is, ya'll're making a mountian out of a sidewalk.

 

[Guest]

M. Fox is an asshole. All the millions he raised should be taken out of research and give to FantasticJones to spend in an unselfish manner on himself.

 

[Dillinger]

Does it much matter? Their motivation? Hopefully some good will come from it - even if its not entirely selfless? How many of us do selfless things? Do we quit our jobs and join Mother Theresa?

Yes - they are motivated to save their own health, their own lives. So?

Wouldn't you be? Wouldn't any of us if it was ourselves or someone in our family - or a good friend?

Your question was very particular:

"lauded or blasted for self interest?"

WHY? Why does it have to be one or the other? You have defined the discussion by how you framed the question - thereby skewing the outcome. Of course - we all do that - almost always - its inevitable... but... but... why does it have to be one or the other. I'll answer your two choices:

Should they be lauded? Well - not particularly, not like they're fucking Mother Theresa - but give them some credit at least.

Should they be blasted? Why the fuck would anyone blast them. "Hey Fox... you asshole - just because you got sick now you want to save yourself and, ultimately while you're at it, everyone with Parkinsons? You ASSHOLE! Why don't you just go die and everyone who has Parkinson's along with you!"... BLASTED? Jeez - give me a break. That's blasting. Again, I would say their motivation isn't selfless - but so what? Just because its not selfless you're gonna BLAST them?

You know - lots of people come down with diseases and don't do anything to help. They make themselves comfortable and settle down to wither away. At least Fox and others are doing something, even in self interest.

 

[Barb Dwyer]

Should they be lauded? Well - not particularly, not like they're fucking Mother Theresa - but give them some credit at least.

I don't think people should be lauded for fucking Mother Theresa either.

 

[nasty]

YEAH, what Dillinger said

MJF may be doing it for his own self interest,(and shame on him if he is,)but he's not the only one with this horrid disease,

 

[White_Tigress_]

I feel that it usually takes someone to encounter a devistation in order to do anything about charities.

Like rape, domestic violence, child abuse, etc.....Usually once it happens to you, then you realize the importance. Thats when mothers, parents, or neighbors get together to build a shelter, support groups, or whatever else is needed to build their lives back up.

So what if he is helping for Parkinsons, I haven't heard of anyone else doing that. Same with Christopher Reeve. Hell if I came down with those illnesses right now, I'd be grateful that someone actually did something.

Honestly, I don't see what this thread is all about....seems obvious that people don't look at both sides of the coin before speaking.

 

[Dillinger]

I don't think people should be lauded for fucking Mother Theresa either.

You sure? I think anyone who got into Mother Theresa's pants would, by definition, be a Saint - and therefore laudable.

 

[Barb Dwyer]

Didn't she run the Missionary of the Charities? I do believe that would be considered a mercy fuck. But, I wouldn't joke about these things if I were you. After all, she was married to God. And look where she ended up. Fat lot of good that did her.


*waiting for lightning to strike*

 

[Cheyenne]

I feel that it usually takes someone to encounter a devistation in order to do anything about charities.

Like rape, domestic violence, child abuse, etc.....Usually once it happens to you, then you realize the importance.

I disagree with the word "usually" in your first sentence. I think it is much more common for people to help/donate to charities for which they have no personal connection.

Or did you mean that something has to motivate people to START a new charity? That version I might agree with. To create a new charity from scratch, you must believe very strongly in your cause/issue. That probably means a personal connection of some kind, but not always.

 

[Dillinger]

*waiting for lightning to strike*

Actually... I've been put in charge of lightning... its a tough job, but someone's got to do it.

 

[Barb Dwyer]

Do you prefer Zeus or Jupiter?

 

[Dillinger]

Zeus or Jupiter? Hmmm - let me think now...

Guess I'd kind of on the "fence" on that one... *lol*

 

[Pyper]

Can I call you Thor? And what does your apple say? Something like "kallioti..." ....Damn, I've forgotten how to read Greek.

 

[Oliver Clozoff]

I feel that it usually takes someone to encounter a devistation in order to do anything about charities.

Like rape, domestic violence, child abuse, etc.....Usually once it happens to you, then you realize the importance. Thats when mothers, parents, or neighbors get together to build a shelter, support groups, or whatever else is needed to build their lives back up.

I agree with you here, White Tigress. While Michael J. Fox, Christopher Reeve or any other person suffering from a devastating disease may personally benefit from advances in treatment prompted by their advocacy, the chances are slim. Effective treatments (much less cures) are still very far away for Parkinson's and spinal cord injury. Most of the research they could inspire would be basic science research that might not make its way into practical treatments for a generation, long after they've succombed to their illnesses.

If selfishness is to explain the phenomenon of celebrities seeking cures for diseases with which they themselves have been afflicted, how does one explain the many celebrities who campaign equally vigorously for cures after they themselves have been cured of the disease? Take Fran Drescher, for example. She was diagnosed and treated for breast cancer and is now considered free of the disease. And yet she's continued to push strongly for more research.

What about those who have seen a sibling, spouse, parent, or child suffer and die from a disease and begin to crusade against the disease? What selfish motives could they have (other than, perhaps a psychological need to assuage a sense of guilt born of not being able to save their loved one). Is this a selfish act?

Those who believe Fox and Reeve are acting selfishly, ask yourself this hypothetical question:

If these men woke up one morning and found themselves magically cured of their diseases, do you think they'd forget about their newfound causes?

Doesn't seem likely to me.

 

[beckbabe]

A good deed is a good deed, whatever the motivation.

 

[Dillinger]

Can I call you Thor? And what does your apple say? Something like "kallioti..." ....Damn, I've forgotten how to read Greek.

It says "Kallisti" which means "For The Prettiest One" - its the Golden Apple that Eris Esoterica (Discordia) rolled into a party at Mt. Olympus that got all the Goddesses fighting over who whould have the apple - and led to the Trojan War... (you know the big fight they had when the discovered that there weren't enough condoms to go around).

 

[willywanker]

I gotta agree with Dill on this one.

Why is it necessary to either praise or belittle these people for their effort?

If I or someone in my family had Parkinsons, I would be more than happy to have a high profile person spearheading fund raising and spurring on the research community. Who do you think the media is going to listen to first, Willy Nobody or Mike J.?

Sounds like throwing out the baby with the bath water.

 

[FlamingoBlue]

I think that awareness is the key....

because, for most of us, a crisis due to a disabling or terminal illness is likely the first time we care about who it effects. When you have "it" or know someone close to you that has "it", you become aware that "it" exists. Up close and personal.

For many years I was on the board or headed charities that had no relationship to me, personally. That is until I was interviewed by a newspaper reporter who asked about my involvement. For the first time, I gave it some thought and it became clear to me that my involvement with physically and emotionally handicapped people related to a terrible auto accident that occurred when I was 6 years old. Fortunately, I recovered but I never forgot.

I have never thought about myself as being selfless. I just do what I do because it's the right thing to do, looking inside myself to validate my actions. I suspect that's where Mr.Fox looked, as well.

blue