'Tab for a Cause' (not that I believe too strongly in their commitment, yet trust it does no harm) is a simple project that allows one to donate 'hearts' to several charities. I was looking at the eight options given, each concerning one of these issues: famine, health, education, human rights, access to clean water, and conservation of nature. Speaking for myself, I view these matters as intimately connected, without exception existing--persisting--due to lack of respect and of equality (both of which I would again argue to come down to the same: lack of culture).
I am convinced that such an outlook is more helpful: by delineating the issue it does so for the solution as well, it restricts to a bare minimum the chaos of trying to control many factors, and hopefully resists tracking symptom rather than cause. But it is about this that I wish to ask: why might one not agree?