I think the constitutional mandate this falls under is providing for the common defense...
What a joke! The Constitution is subject to "interpretation" eh? Don't "uphold" it, interpret it. The rest of your reply is all supposition.
Woudl you rather they are lifted up and helped to their feet by US, or by those who would use them against us?
They're dying! How much of a threat can they be if they're bedridden?
In return, we get a continent more stable than it has ever been in recorded history, a decline in the influence of our enemies, and the satisfaction of knowing we did something worthwhile to help our fellow man...
MORE supposition. You've given nothing that is factual, just opinions.
BTW, which continent? Ours? I think not. It isn't the federal government's job to make any area, much less a whole continent, "stable" except for the United States of America!
Do we get material rewards? Probably not, but that's not what life is about anyway.
It's all so you can "feel good"? What a load of BS! Donate your own money if you want to do something, quit allowing the taking of my money for something I don't agree with. If they all die off how can thay be a threat to anyone?
Unbelievable!
Unless those with AIDS are brought here to have sex or pass the disease on in some other manner I don't see how their "epidemic" will become ours.
Could you explain yourself a bit further. I simply don't see how you get from A to B.
Secondly, where is the Constitutional authorization for this expenditure? Thirdly, what "bang for the buck" are we getting for all of this "Aid for AIDS"? Where, or what, is the return on the investment?
176 philman_36
Hmmm... let me address your points one at a time, so everyone knows where I stand....
<"Unless those with AIDS are brought here to have sex or pass the disease on in some other manner I don't see how their "epidemic" will become ours.">
1. It can become our epidemic as people from Africa, fleeing the death, starvation, and chaos of their homes, seek out new lands, such as Europe (where they are now being turned away from), the US, etc... They end up here, no matter how much we don't like the idea of a porous border, where they put a strain on our healthcare system, law enforcement, and welfare systems... They bring the AIDS with them, etc....
No sale. We are perfectly capable of defending our borders.
<"Secondly, where is the Constitutional authorization for this expenditure?">
2. I think the constitutional mandate this falls under is providing for the common defense - Islam, the fastest growing religion in Africa, is a threat to our nation, it's people, and our way of life. If we do NOT do what we can to help, someone else will fill the void - Personally, I'd rather it be us. I don't LIKE the idea of it, but I see it as a necessity. There is simply no other option. An Africa under the influence of Islam is a potential danger to us - Those with no hope of a future, no hope of living much longer makes a GREAT place would be willing, if not eager, recruits as suicide bombers, etc... if they know their family will be cared for... Woudl you rather they are lifted up and helped to their feet by US, or by those who would use them against us?
Again, no sale. You are using 'defense' and the 'general welfare' clause as an excuse to mandate pre-emptive meddling in foreign states, - in the affairs of others.
<"Thirdly, what "bang for the buck" are we getting for all of this "Aid for AIDS"? Where, or what, is the return on the investment?">
3. In return, we get a continent more stable than it has ever been in recorded history, a decline in the influence of our enemies, and the satisfaction of knowing we did something worthwhile to help our fellow man... Do we get material rewards? Probably not, but that's not what life is about anyway.
Allowing our government to ignore our constitution for the "satisfaction of knowing we did something worthwhile to help our fellow man", will continue to allow liberalism to replace our liberty.
Look deeply into your claims of being a 'conservative', chad.