Page 19 of 30 FirstFirst ... 9171819202129 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 295

Thread: Should we spend taxpayer dollars on AIDS [W: 139]

  1. #181
    Professor
    zstep18's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Somewhere
    Last Seen
    02-24-14 @ 02:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,770

    Re: Should we spend taxpayer dollars on AIDS [W: 139]

    Quote Originally Posted by Dpetty View Post
    Your making my argument for only having one sex partner even more appealing. Im saying everyone should only have one sex partner, not just every 10th person. If we all only have one, we either wont catch it, or we wont spread it, either way it stops it in its tracks. I thinks its the simplicity of the plan that is throwing everyone off...
    It's not really simple....

    I don't disagree that everyone having only one sex partner would help prevent the spreading of AID's. However, I don't expect everyone to have just one sex partner their entire lives. And even so, there's also the problem of how it would be enforced.

  2. #182
    Professor
    zstep18's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Somewhere
    Last Seen
    02-24-14 @ 02:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,770

    Re: Should we spend taxpayer dollars on AIDS [W: 139]

    Quote Originally Posted by sawyerloggingon View Post
    So old people who get Alzheimer's through no fault of their own should be put behind a young needle sharing drug addict just because he's young?
    How about a young person who made a poor choice in not using protection?

    I don't think they should pay for it by dying from this terrible disease.

  3. #183
    Educator Dpetty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-05-17 @ 10:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    967

    Re: Should we spend taxpayer dollars on AIDS [W: 139]

    Quote Originally Posted by zstep18 View Post
    It's not really simple....

    I don't disagree that everyone having only one sex partner would help prevent the spreading of AID's. However, I don't expect everyone to have just one sex partner their entire lives. And even so, there's also the problem of how it would be enforced.
    It would be enforced by common sense! Im not advocating a law stating we can only have one sex partner. Only small children need to have every faucet of their lives dictated to them. Us mature adults operate on laws of decency and common sense when allowed to. Common sense says if you are going to sleep around with multiple people, you should be tested for STD's OFTEN! Common sense says if you are going to sleep with people who sleep with other people, you would expect the same of them! The fact that the majority of people do neither of those things, speaks volumes to the lack of common sense in this world.

  4. #184
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Where they have FOX on in bars and restaurants
    Last Seen
    09-14-14 @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    14,700

    Re: Should we spend taxpayer dollars on AIDS [W: 139]

    Quote Originally Posted by zstep18 View Post
    How about a young person who made a poor choice in not using protection?

    I don't think they should pay for it by dying from this terrible disease.
    You are answering a question with a question to avoid answering the question I asked you. I was hoping for better.

  5. #185
    On Vacation
    joko104's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    31,568
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Should we spend taxpayer dollars on AIDS [W: 139]

    Quote Originally Posted by Dpetty View Post
    You are the one that brought morality into my comment. Im saying that its good common sense REGARDLESS of your view on morality. Your saying the pros of having unrestricted sex with as many partners as you can find, outweighs the cons of having AIDS.

    False. I am saying people should be able to have consentual sex without fear of deadly disease. STDs do not come from "partners," but from a partner.

    You are really stuck on the sex aspect of this, far more so than the AIDS aspect. There is nothing wrong with being tested for AIDS, nor is there anything wrong with asking your partner to be tested for AIDS, in fact its a very mature thing to do. There is absolutly ZERO danger of contracting AIDS from needles, unless of course your using and or sharing used needles, which i can see no reason for anyone to do.

    Nothing wrong with HIV/AIDS testing, although it is not an assurance nor an assurance a month later.

    The number of medical personnel, dental personnel, EMT personnel etc to have contracted HIV/AIDS establishes that you are wrong.


    Being gay doesnt raise your risk of contracting AIDS if you still only have one partner. Obviously due to the trauma caused to the anus during gay intercourse, there is a greater risk for blood exchange that would result in contracting AIDS if the other person had it, but then again, why would they have it if they only had one partner?

    Because the partner has it at a stage before testing or contracts it later.

    Again, needles are only dangerous if they are used.


    False. Every needle used instantly becomes a used needle - so it is a pointless statement on your part.

    Actually, since that is how AIDS is spread, thats exaclty how it would be irraticated.


    Obviously you are free to sleep with whomever you want and as many as you want. But i think its pretty stupid considering all the things you just said. Its people like you who have helped create the AIDS epidemic we now have. You can make fun of us extremely restrained sexual types, but we are the ones who dont have to worry about our bodies breaking down to the point that we eventually die of the common cold.

    How is it "people like me" who have helped create the AIDS epidemic? I suspect it is people like you. Were you and every person you've even been with tested for HIV and now tested every month since? If not, you are just wrong and - hmmm - blaming me for AIDS. Wow. Naw, that's not judgmental on your part. I'm just responsible for spreading AIDS according to you.

    Here's the fact, Jack. I do not have HIV/AIDS so I have spread it to no one. But it truly sucked all necessary and all lost to avoid it. Really sucked. And my employer required frequent HIV/AIDS testing as well.

    Mature promiscuous people are likely FAR more "safe sex" than such as you - because you don't believe people like you could ever have it or any good-person like you would be with. How many times have you now explained that YOU can't get HIV/AIDS - only people like me can. So you are dangerous to others fool and likely spreader of it, not me.


    If we were having an influenza outbreak, then i would absolutely advocate wearing a HEPA filter, it would be stupid not to. Remember when the swine flu was hitting everywhere? What did everyone do? They wore face masks! Not because they were moraly obligated to do so, but because it was the smart thing to do!

    That is particularly false. Not 1 in 100 people wore HEPA filters

    I havent once said anything about sex being a sin, so i fail to see why you keep bringing it up.


    Actually it doesnt have the ability to become airborne, you have been watching to much tv. AIDS is a blood borne virus, so unless you spit a blood covered loogy in someones face and call that airborne, AIDS will always be a STD.

    Seriously? Herpes is a virus, its the same virus weather its in your crotch or your mouth. It usually exhibits symptoms at the site of infection i.e the mouth through kissing or the crotch through bumping uglies, but its still the same virus, there was no "mutation" involved.

    So you are claiming HIV/AIDS can not mutate. GREAT! Find a cure or vaccine and then it is forever gone!

    Yes but the odds of contracting it any other way are astronomical, and they become even more astronomical as the rates of those with AIDS decline. The problem is idiots there are out there who put their own physical pleasure above all else.
    Evil physical pleasure again? AIDS testing does NOT insure a person does not have AIDS NOR insure that person won't after the testing. I certainly was a strict condom man and other safeguards too - but condoms severely restrict sexual activities.

    "Astronomical odds?" 3,400,000 million children have AIDS. From nurses to paramedics have AIDS. 1 in 5 women will be sexually assaulted and rapists do not wear condoms. People, including children, have gotten it from toothbrushes.

    I could go on.

    There is a risk from deep, open-mouth kissing if there are sores or bleeding gums and blood is exchanged - which the other person may not know of.
    The New York Times reports the first documented case in 1997:

    A woman apparently acquired the AIDS virus from deep kisses with an infected man, Federal health officials said yesterday. They said the case was the first reported transmission of H.I.V., the AIDS virus, through kissing.

    So you need to add "no kissing" and HIV/AIDS testing before anyone kisses anyone else.

    Oh yes, and avoid all contact sports too. That also can pass blood.

    But here's the reality. People are not going to stop having sex. Men are not going to stop raping women either. Or children. Needles are still going to be used. Blood is going to pass between people. Telling people to stop having sex is no solution whatsoever because exactly everyone knows that's not going to happen.


    Sorry about colors, I don't know how to split apart quotes.
    Last edited by joko104; 12-04-12 at 09:03 PM.

  6. #186
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,373

    Re: Should we spend taxpayer dollars on AIDS [W: 139]

    Quote Originally Posted by zstep18 View Post
    How about a young person who made a poor choice in not using protection?

    I don't think they should pay for it by dying from this terrible disease.
    But that's what this thread is about, punishing people for behavior that some don't like. It's like religion only stupider.
    Infants get AIDs from their mother but they want them punished too. It gives some people the jollies I guess.

  7. #187
    Sage
    CriticalThought's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 08:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    18,125

    Re: Should we spend taxpayer dollars on AIDS [W: 139]

    Quote Originally Posted by sawyerloggingon View Post
    So heres the question, should we be funding research to cure these people or worse yet find a vaccine to let them engage in their risky lifestyle with no consequences?.
    Why draw the line at HIV? Why fund cancer research? Obviously people who get cancer lived a risky lifestyle, either by getting too much sun, or living near facilities that produced chemicals or radiation, or by smoking, etc. Why should I be forced to pay so those people can avoid the consequences of their behavior?
    Quote Originally Posted by Bucky View Post
    The economy will improve under this bill. If a few people die, it will be for the betterament of this country.

  8. #188
    Professor

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-03-15 @ 09:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,589

    Re: Should we spend taxpayer dollars on AIDS [W: 139]

    Quote Originally Posted by Dpetty View Post
    AIDS is a bit of a quandry. There will NEVER be a cure found, making it one of the most destructive diseases ever, yet its the easiest to irradicate. STOP having sex with multiple partners! Take the morality issue out of it, and its still good advise. The AIDS virus mutates every time we think we have a cure, and its going to keep doing so.
    And what profound knowledge of microbiology is that based on? The fact that we've never made a vaccine to a virus? The fact that we've haven't already developed antiretroviral drugs that extend people's lives significantly

  9. #189
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,824

    Re: Should we spend taxpayer dollars on AIDS [W: 139]

    Quote Originally Posted by sawyerloggingon View Post
    So old people who get Alzheimer's through no fault of their own should be put behind a young needle sharing drug addict just because he's young?
    It doesn't work like that. There's no reason not to research both. Resources are not unlimited, true, but you also can't just throw unlimited money at any particular disease. Throw our entire military budget at Alzheimer's research and you're only going to speed up the research so much.

    While the disease may not be your responsibility, the results are. You pay for the healthcare of others. You always have and you always will, because the alternative is letting people just die of preventable conditions, or in pain, or whatever, and society has decided that's unacceptable. Maybe you think AIDS patients should be just told to **** off, but you are thankfully a minority in this thinking.
    Last edited by Deuce; 12-05-12 at 04:35 PM.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  10. #190
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,824

    Re: Should we spend taxpayer dollars on AIDS [W: 139]

    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Why draw the line at HIV? Why fund cancer research? Obviously people who get cancer lived a risky lifestyle, either by getting too much sun, or living near facilities that produced chemicals or radiation, or by smoking, etc. Why should I be forced to pay so those people can avoid the consequences of their behavior?
    Not a good example because you can get cancer for basically no reason at all. Sometimes cell division just goes bad all by itself.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

Page 19 of 30 FirstFirst ... 9171819202129 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •