i am pretty sure poverty takes it, though i am not 100% sure on statistics and how direct it is because it is a vague area.

http://www.webmd.com/cancer/news/200...hs-double-2030

this says 8 million cancer deaths in 2007

http://www.globalissues.org/article/...acts-and-stats

this says 26,500-30,000 children die each day due to poverty, again i don't know what they mean "due to poverty" but 26500*365=9,672,500, and the number must be bigger to include adults since that is only children. i assume by "due to poverty" they mean by sources that are easily avoidable with basic medical care, clean water and shelter, but who knows

Sure, but that's stuff like infectious disease, not thirst and malnutrition. WHO report on causes of death.

i see your point but i think those infectious diseases which are now easily curable with access to basic medical care fall under the unbrella of poverty. there is no reason for an average child to die of measles or chicken pox anymore except for poverty. i think we are splitting hairs here and effectively agree

Sounds like it, yeah.

+1

Just about all my ancestors have been done in by it.

Religion does not make my list.

What would this mean? In order to achieve world peace you would have to control/suppress human nature and thus dominate the world, since destroying human nature would mean destroying humans?

So you're a proponent of war then? You think it's necessary to further one's desires and goals through war when they conflict with others? I guess you haven't heard of diplomacy and negotiation then, though, there is the obvious problem with that: having no power puts you in no position to negotiate. Being unique doesn't have to mean than your desires and goals must conflict with those that are not unique, which then results in you having to overpower, kill or dominate whatever/whoever is in opposition to your desires and goals.

Usually wars are started when one ass-hole comes up with an ideology that's naturally conflicting to the politics and way of life (usually out of personal greed or lust for power), and riles up an entire people under him stirring their emotion to the boiling point. Give them guns and their emotions then spill over into a war. That ideology would probably be the desires and goals that you're talking about, but on a much larger scale.

While I do wish we could get along without war, I don't think we can. There are people who will only answer with force. We all know the ass hole at the bar who can't be talked down, the bully on the playground or tyrannical government leaders. You agree with me in your argument. The ability to force people to do what you want is the power. All diplomacy is is forcing getting people to agree to something with the threat of force left unsaid but not out of mind.

It is more than just one bad seed in a bunch that starts a war. That man plays on the desires of a people. A desire that conflicts with another group. The Nazis wanted to take over Europe. They trampled the Europe country side. Were the Americans supposed to just use diplomacy and negotiation? Was war not necessary from the Americans?

They tried negotiating with the Japanese. That turned out really well. They bombed Pearl Harbor while pretending to be our friends. When Hitler started started invading other countries European nations tried diplomacy. Another shining example.

Scarcity of resources can lead to war as well. If there is a finite set of resources, and your loved ones will starve if others are to live, what do you do? If there isn't enough for everyone, do you just let your family die? Or do you infringe upon the rights of these other seemingly innocent people?

Those are shining examples indeed. War must always be the last resort, and in these cases they were.

By resources I presume you mean food? There's plenty of food to feed every person in the world. If it wasn't for money and politics, there wouldn't be "world hunger", of that I'm 99% sure. As for other resources (e.g., fuel), there are plenty for all to share and use moderately. Once again, there's that "human nature" (greed/politics) that tends to get in the way. It seems that the recurring theme of human nature is antithetical to cooperation and helping others, which isn't saying much for us.

eradicate HIV - eradicating religion would do more in terms of std prevention then eradicating any one std. Many pastors, bishops, etc have gone on record saying that if given the chance to eradicate HIV they wouldn't, it's a deterrent to premarital sex. Yes they suck, yes ppl actually think that, maybe even some religion ppl on this board.

eradicate cancers - prob would be muchhhhh closer to eradicating it if religion hadn't prevented the progress of stem cell research, I think Cancer should be pretty cureable w/ in a reasonable time either way.

eradicate wars - you would be eradicating a hell of a lot of future wars if religion was eradicated

religion would be damn close to the top of the list, if not the top of the list, but the list doesn't make sense because if you eradicate wars then you'd have to eradicate religion because some religions think it's god's will to kill some other religions or w/e.

You got any proof to that nonsense? Haha, what a joke. I like the implications that religion is on a pro-HIV stance. Do you think there are more Atheists or religious people helping HIV infected people in Africa?

How cute. Do you know anything about stem cell research or cancer? What makes you believe that curing cancer is this Sunday afternoon drive?

Which war? Wars are about power and control. Religion is just the tool they use to get it.

#1 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4081276.stm and yes some religious people are pro-hiv. When given the choice to eradicate HIV or not, some would choose to keep it as a detremement to HIV. Read the roughly 5 pages of A letter to a Christian Nation on the churchs stance on stds, it's pretty disgusting.

#2 stem cell research might not specifically have cured cancer but it could prob have done as much good, curing countless other ailments, if not specifically cancer by now. Also I think that out of the whole list Cancer seems the most like it will be cured eventually on it's own where as war, religion, etc never will be.

#3 ok so Religion is the tool they use to achieve power and control, sweet. You answered your own question. and do I really need to refer to a specific war? lol. K, I'll start w/ Shiiates vs Sunnis.

Wow talk about a punch in my face, haha!

That sentence would be a lot better without the word "just".

[QUOTE=BillNye;9228521 When given the choice to eradicate HIV or not, some would choose to keep it as a detremement to HIV. [/QUOTE]

too late to edit but I meant detrement to premarital sex.

Unattractive Women

dont give a damn bout the rest.