*g*.
Lets just say you and I have differing views.
If we live long enough we'll find out who's right.


>>Last time I hear, Polio isn't something you can avoid.
>>Tuberculosis isn't something that you see coming at you.
>>Rabies, yeah you can be out for a jog and get bitten by a dog or some rodant or whatever.
>>
>>Many diseases can't be seen or avoided. If it's going to happen, it's going to happen and there isn't much you can do to stop it.
>>
>>But things like AIDS and other STD can be avoided easily, don't engage in activities that are risky. But still, unfortunatly, there are a lot of innocent victims of AIDS.
>>
>>I just feel more compassion for the innocent victims of any disease. And not as much for those that bring it on to themselves.
>
>Ah, here we are. They brought it on to themselves. How cute. Specially for the slaves of this century (and numerous previous ones), the prostitutes. The 99% that I estimated in my other message. They brought it on to themselves? Not even funny.

They're slaves? I think you've been watching too many Barretta reruns.
Ok no joking here. If they were force into it, I'd say they innocent.
But there are so many that do it becuase they're "working" their way through school.

>
>Curiously, the ultimatum doesn't exclude rapists. IMO, they are the only ones who should be pushed to the end of the line each time someone else catches it. Though, they also shouldn't be denied treatment.


I agree. Lets hang'em :)


>
>>Unfortuately as long as people do what people do, AIDS will always be here.
>>
>>I'm praying for a vaccine.
>
>Whatever works, even prayer.

It's just a figure of speech, like "holy cow". I'm not even reglious. I'm just not "religious-phobic". :)

>
>>>Whoever conceived the idea of denying treatment to part of the population has an excess of religious bigotry, of chromosomes, or of both.
>>
>>It's not about denying treatment. It's about priority.
>
>Sorry, but I think you're wrong here: "Much of the spending is being channelled to programmes that advocate abstinence, rather than condom use, and cannot be used for abortions or to treat prostitutes." - quoted from the article which started this thread. So, money is denied to any program that treats prostitutes, or does abortions.


Abstinence until... whenever, is bad because... what? Isn't that the safest/surest way to avoid STD.


>
>>Yeah, I guess I'm just a cruel SOB.
>
>No, you won't get the pleasure of being insulted here. This forum is a civilized place - unless your assertion that you've been called "a cruel SOB" is treated as foul play. Besides, Hilmar said "whoever conceived the idea..." - surely it wasn't you, was it?
>
>You may imagine that we're telling you that you're this or that, but it's just that your definitions are hollow, your priorities are based on strange foundations and that the whole thing you're trying to defend doesn't hold water too well. So, no personal attacks, just exchanging ideas.