im confused about your position and response, I assume that the side - god has his reasons - means you dont think that starving children is horrible, that it is justified. but you seem to argue against religion so I was confused about what i perceived to be a contradicton. can you clarify?

The picture's meaning is still strong.

The captions summarily say (If you just skimmed through them with confused rage) "Where is God if he lets children die like this and wants to play with toast instead."

1. the news tends to express negative events in the world more than positive ones - thus one should not look to the news and see this as an unbiased perspective on the general condition of humanity. The world and humans are pretty messed up but perhaps not quite as horribly as the news might suggest by the nature of its content. News shows display horror for ratings and to point out the problems of the world that need to be dealt with. Good things tend to be boring and not shown because they dont help ratings and are not important insofar as motivating necessary response to imbalance in the world.

2. You dont know the circumstances of the situation - it is very likely that the parents were dead either by war, disease, or famine. Many of the circumstances around the photographs like these are a combination of the three. My grandfather lived in Africa during this period of time seeking to ameliorate the suffering by fighting famine and attempting to bring infrastructural support and thus stability to the region.

3. The vulture does have to eat too, humans are animals so i agree with you there.

4. dying is not the problem - it is not the point of the picture - the point is to illustrate the unnecessary suffering that an all powerful and all good god allows to happen in the world - thus illustrating that human action is required and that faith in god is an excuse for inaction.

5. Definitely not photoshopped, and even if this specific picture was, my grandfather took many images of children, as well as adults, that were suffering and dying for the same reasons as mentioned before.

For more information, you should look up The Manzanar Project - a project run by one of my grandfathers collegues. This particular project was targeting famine in Eritrea

I mean, I understand the desire to look at the light side of every situation as to not offend any and continue your point parade,

but making light of dying children, even ignoring that it's a bit hypocritical that few even who truly are emotionally swayed by such pictures do enough about it, is not putting your faith in a good light at all.

It actually highlights the ability religion has to harden the heart of followers via justifications, while those without faith are the ones left with the more charitable heart by comparison.

1. What makes you think that the human race is worth saving? Have you seen the news lately?

What makes you continue to believe in God then if he is such a jerk?

2. Mature adult humans have free will and personal responsibilities.. Why didn't the parents exercise those things?

It is highly likely that:

1. The child is orphaned.

2. The parents are obviously too poor.

3. There simply isn't enough food to go around.

3. The vulture has to eat. Humans are not above animals.

Oh, I thought Christians see humans as a superior creation to God.

Are you not swayed or sympathetic to this picture, do you only care that the vulture is hungry and is planning to eat that poor dead child that is rotting on the hot, dry ground?

4. What's so bad about dying?

I'm pretty sure a poor, young child, starved into bone and skin, being left into the searing hot sun, dying with excruciating thirst and hunger is BAD.

ESPECIALLY, when GOD doesn't give a crap.

5. It's probably Photo shopped. ;)

It's a Well Known, Famous Picture and there are hundreds more like this.

It was not Photoshopped.

http://africanhistory.about.com/b/2006/04/12/the-journalist-the-vulture-and-the-child.htm