Posted on 02/23/2005 6:48:56 PM PST by LaserLock
In the last week and a half I've had to call on different large companies to give technical support. Wherever I've been the television is usually on one channel or another and from what I've of the collage everything is focused on our President's visit to meet the heads of those who are supposed to be our friends in Europe.
More often than not the main complaint is not that Bush is an idiot anymore, but rather that he is an evil man. As I'm there to fix things and program things I generally don't get involve. But on occassion I've asked what's the main thrust amongst the people watching these broadcasts in them calling President Bush an evil man.
I'm always surprised that it's not about Iraq anymore, but rather about giving massive help anywhere and everywhere to people dying of aids. The conclusion is that people who are suffering the most from the aids epidemic are hetrosexual couples or hetrosexual.
This simply doesn't ring true for me and I have no answer. So I'm wondering if my learned friends on the FreeRepublic have any facts regarding this statement.
As best I can tell anymore, people that hate President Bush hate him because they want to hate him, and then they just look around for some sort of reason. I think the real reason is that he won and thereby reversed the rising tide of socialist politicians. He heat them and they don't like it.
'beat' not 'heat'. Sorry.
Stop Aids in this country without spending a dime. No drugs and No homosexual sex and you get rid of 90 percent of Aids.
You can't say the same thing about Cancer. And 50 people die of cancer for every one of Aids.
Stop all funding for Aids.
Increase funding for Cancer.
Another reason for the spread of AIDS in Africa is the state of the hospitals in many less developed areas. The needles and other instruments are used for more than one patient without being cleaned or sterilized between uses, so that increases the spread of the disease.
X act ly!
YES!
In other words, in simple math, 61% of those with AIDS are homosexual/drug-abusing males.
23% are either females or children.
15% of heterosexual males that don't use illicit drugs.
Man, what a homophobic disease!
"We're an absurdly rich country, why shouldn't we do what we can to help?"
I would agree that it would be nice for those private citizens who wish to contribute some of their resources to help the AIDS epidemic. They are free to write a check to whatever organization they choose. However, I would not want my tax money used for that purpose; that would essentially be an involuntary redistribution of my resources by the government, otherwise known as socialism.
I would like to reserve the right to make my own decisions on how much I donate to charity, and to which charities I donate. The US government taking my money to donate to people I don't even know is not charity; it is robbery.
If you want to waste your own damn money, go right ahead. But don't throw $15 billion of our tax dollars on African AIDS.
By the way, Nigeria is also an "absurdly rich country". But you don't see them chipping in one thin dime for their "African brothers".
Important summations:
1-3% of Americans are homosexual.
69% of AIDS patients were homosexual.
Only 11% contacted it through heterosexual "sex."
That heterosexual "sex" includes heterosexual sodomy. IOW, heterosexuals doing to each other what homosexuals do to each other.
Less than 1/2 of 1% are children.
Homosexual AIDS patients die much quicker than Heterosexual patients, so measuring how many people are living with AIDS, rather than how many people have contracted with AIDS, inflates the numbers of heterosexuals relative to the number of homosexuals.
In Africa, sodomy, prostitution, and violent sexual assault are all very common. In some African countries, women have typically been raped several times. ALl these behaviors make the spread of AIDS far more likely to occur. There have even been controversial studies suggesting that a black person who is exposed to AIDS is more likely to contract it, but this may be due to factors besides race.
Uganda's anti-AIDS program, much hated by European and liberal intellectuals, has preserved Uganda as a nation where AIDS is exceedingly scarce, surrounded by nations where it is epidemic. Uganda's technique: End sodomy, prostitution, rape, and promiscuity. It works.
Oops. I should have included your name in the "to" field on post #31.
Nigeria is not an absurdly rich country. Their per-capita GDP is only about $1,000. The life expectancy is 53 years old, their birthrate is enormous, and their resources are dwindling.
Basic Statistics
HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report: Supplements
HIV/AIDS Statistics
HIV & AIDS Statistics
Most recent CDC report... it's a PDF and takes a few seconds to load: Cases of HIV Infection and AIDS in the United States, 2003
The one is founded at least nominally on what has always been acknowledged as good and right since the dawn of time. It is characterized by monogamy, protection of the innocent, compassion for the poor, the right to private property, and is woven throughout with monotheistic principle of a personal, just, holy, merciful, and compassionate God.
The other places man at its center: This life is all there is; Cast off restraint; If it feels good, do it, and we'll take care of the consequences; What's true for you may not be true for me. And so on.
AIDS is a consequence of immoral sexual behavior and, in some cases, of drug use. (Less commonly, in can be contracted through certain medical procedures.) All too often, children born to infected parents inherit this horrific consequence. You can see how the two worldviews would look very differently on this situation given the nature of the contraction of the disease: both see AIDS as a tragedy, but with only so many resources to go around, one is more likely to spend them on causes where the victims are not so closely linked to their behavior. The other, it seems to me, boldly stresses AIDS support precisely BECAUSE of its immoral causes.
Cancer kills millions of people. I haven't worldwide figures, but here in the US it is certainly more than AIDS - 558,000 in 2001. And cancer's causes are largely unknown but weighted to behavior patterns that are by no means immoral if somewhat foolish (like smoking). They suffer every bit as much as AIDS victims, if not more.
Sorry I don't have hard numbers, but hopefully this brief philosophical perspective will help you.
Rich blessings,
WE don't HAVE to do ANYTHING.
Aids is a self resolving issue.
We know what causes it and how it spreads.
Choose to engage in risky behavior, get sick and die, end of problem!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.