>This appears to be something that religious groups known to support our president condone. If a person abstains from relations with a prostitute then there will not be the possibility of transmission of infectious diseases. Prostitutes would than have to find other work.
>
>The practicality of such an approach is doomed to failure. There is no understanding of reality or compassion in this approach. It is a holier then thou attitude. You must suffer because you have sinned! In the process of dictating morality, many more will suffer!
I see several problems with this radical approach. First, does the sin of the prostitute entitle her to die by AIDS? That is a very doubtful assumption. Similar for the clients. As you say, no compassion.
Second, and with regards to the reality aspect, if I were to sin with a prostitute, and catch AIDS, then who will suffer? (Hint: I am married, and have two children.)
I heard that Brasil was very successful in stemming the AIDS epidemic, through such controversial measures as distributing large amounts of condoms. It would seem that to Lula et. al., the welfare of the people are an important priority.
Difference in opinions hath cost many millions of lives: for instance, whether flesh be bread, or bread be flesh; whether whistling be a vice or a virtue; whether it be better to kiss a post, or throw it into the fire... (from Gulliver's Travels)