This is turning into a chat room Esprix me old mate.
‘The list’ is of people who should go ahead and save themselves.
g’night.
Damn, now I have to go look up opprobrium. I’ll be right back.
Ok, that was fun.
Anyway we do deride people for making stupid decisions in other areas of life quite often. For example every time I see someone on a motorcycle without a helmet or wearing shorts and flip flops I think to myself “What a dummy.” I certainly wouldn’t say a helmetless rider deserves to get his skull cracked open but I would say that it was the consequences of his actions. Likewise someone who engages in high risk behavior and contracts HIV is living with the consequences of their actions but I would never say that they deserve the virus. Though I might still roll my eyes and think “What a dummy.”
To everyone else. I do think it is a bit of a red herring to bring up someone abberent examples of people contracting the virus. Sure, that one night stand might result in you getting HIV but unless you engage in such behavior on a regular basis you’re probably safe.
Of course like any other medical problem I don’t have any problems with anyone developing treatments or vaccines.
Marc
I’m not really sure how to react to this…
Yeah, you’re Mother Theresa. Let me call the Vatican to start the sainthood proceedings.
I wonder how many other people who “asked for it” are undeserving of life in your book? To invoke Godwin, I wonder how many Jews “asked for it” by their choice of religion when Hitler gassed them? After all, they could have easily changed their behavior, right?
:rolleyes:
Esprix
I don’t know…I’m more a fan of " you reap what you sow." Sure, lots of people make bad decisions all the time, but the ones that effect other people seem more deserving of scorn and derision, and spreading disease ranks up there with driving while drunk as far as devestating other people’s lives are concerned. Live and let live is fine as long as you’re not hurting other people in the process of enjoying the right to make stupid decisions.
pluralgravity, on behalf of all those Africans (past, present and sadly future) who have died of AIDS, had family members who have died of AIDS, have had close friends who have died of AIDS, knows, works with, or helps African AIDS victims (including Orphans and others): Fuck you.
And I hope in the future you might be able to fathom the horroric toll that AIDS takes for anybody. African or non-African.
Um, this is still GD folks… 
Efrem:
[Moderator Hat ON]
Not in GD you don’t, Efrem.
[Moderator Hat OFF]
Damn it, this is a sign that I am way too used to debating things in ‘The Pit’.
Dude, I’m with you 100% in spirit but this example is not a good one. I believe a great many “Jews” had actually converted to other religions, or were totally integrated into German society, it took extensive background checks to identify a lot of them.
Made possible by compulsory ID cards and the Germans’ love of extensive record keeping. An awful lot of them had changed their behaviour, it didn’t do them any good.
Back on topic. I don’t have the words in this forum to describe Pluralgravity’s OP. An entire continent is facing a viral apocalypse but s/he “doesn’t care”. How liberating it must be, not to have a conscience.
Debating in the Pit=beating each other with insult thesaruses!
Just remember to wash you mouth out with Lifebuoy before you come back to GD!
And just to make sure we don’t all get banned in our vehement opposition to the OP, I started a Pit thread.
Have fun!
Esprix
Man, where will i make my smart remarks now? This is the first GD thread i actually got praise in, but i can swear in the pit. decisions decisions…
so, Brutus and plural, you are ok with compassionate treatment for those you perceive as ‘innocent’ victims of HIV, but not for others.
So, would you then be in favor of a moral evaluation prior to medical treatment for other issues? Cancer eating your lungs, too bad you smoked. Arteries blocked, nearly stroking you out, well, damn you shouldn’t have had that second helping of bacon last Tuesday.
Why stop with cause/effect? why not only allow medical treatment for any illness/condition for those who can demonstrate that they’re a productive member of society, tax paying, no criminal convictions, of the appropriate religious background, eat right, exercise, vote, no sex before marriage, non littering (gotta figure out that whole meat eating/veggie thing, tho’ ) country western listen’in, ?
hell, we’d solve the health care crisis.
I think everyone is missing an important distinction. Advocating, endorsing, or wanting an end to suffering and death is a nice thing. Doing all that you personally can, with your own resources, to help achieve that goal is a compassionate thing. Wanting them to keep suffering and dying, of course, is mean and nasty.
But…
NOT wanting the government to take your money at gunpont (taxes, that is, to you non-libertarians) and spend it on causes not of your choosing is NOT a lack of compassion, it is a preference for personal liberty.
And WANTING the government to take money from other people at gunpoint and spend it on your own personal causes is NOT compassion! It is robbing Peter to pay Paul. Usually works, though, when Paul is sufficiently louder, or has more votes, than Peter.
Ah, yes - curing disease doesn’t actually benefit you, so why should you be forced to pay for it? “I want my tax dollars only to go to research on athlete’s foot - but nothing else! At least, until I get cancer, that is…”
:rolleyes:
Esprix
Tim: diseases that can be spread have the potential to affect everyone. The HIV virus (redundant?) can lie dormant in a host without causing AIDS. This means your average serial monogomist (that is, not a fuck-monkey) could spread the disease to one or two parties.
Like a child.
Yes, if all humans everywhere only had sex with one person ever, and if the monogomous relationship failed then they would not have sex with anyone else again, and if all blood gathered were screened and cleared for HIV, and if all persons who had HIV were unable to bear children, then sure: no one has to rob Peter to pay Paul. Except that this behavior would have to be enforced. Preference for personal liberty? Pshaw. Spending some tax dollars to research a cure or a vaccine is nothing compared to enforcing the above.
You are misunderstanding me. Nowhere did I say that AIDS isn’t everyone’s problem. That’s a whole nuther issue.
I’ll make my point real simple for ya: Spending MY money does not make YOU compassionate. And vice versa…Timmy
And I’ll make mine real simple for you, too, since we’re all such chums now: we’re not trying to steal YOUR money to be compassionate; we’re trying to SAVE LIVES to be compassionate. Stealing money, as you would say, is a whole nuther issue.
Um, ok. Whatever.
Esprix