Should taxpayers fund AIDS drugs?

[JakeStarkey]

And the far right continues to

 

[Arianrhod]

Babies choose to be born HIV-positive?

The mother has it, too, otherwise it can't be passed along.

So the babies should die or the women should be forced to have abortions?

You pay for the drugs on their behalf.

So you create a bureaucracy to make a Naughty and Nice list. Maintaining that bureaucracy to judge each patient on a case by case basis will probably cost you more than just treating everyone who needs these now inexpensive medications.

At least you had the courage to weigh in on the question everyone else ducked.

No need for one. If you want to fund such things, write a check. The government doesn't have to be involved. A list wouldn't be an issue because it wouldn't matter how they got it only that people who think someone else should pay for the drugs did it on their own.

Why do you want the government involved in everything?

I see what happened. Your Conservative for Life collar started giving you shocks for showing compassion to infants and wouldn't stop until you backpedaled.

Feel better now?

 

[Conservative65]

The mother has it, too, otherwise it can't be passed along.

So the babies should die or the women should be forced to have abortions?

You pay for the drugs on their behalf.

So you create a bureaucracy to make a Naughty and Nice list. Maintaining that bureaucracy to judge each patient on a case by case basis will probably cost you more than just treating everyone who needs these now inexpensive medications.

At least you had the courage to weigh in on the question everyone else ducked.

No need for one. If you want to fund such things, write a check. The government doesn't have to be involved. A list wouldn't be an issue because it wouldn't matter how they got it only that people who think someone else should pay for the drugs did it on their own.

Why do you want the government involved in everything?

I see what happened. Your Conservative for Life collar started giving you shocks for showing compassion to infants and wouldn't stop until you backpedaled.

Feel better now?

What you saw is something that expects you to show compassion where you claim it should exist.

 

[OldLady]

Deflection fail. Cancer is natural. AIDs is natural. Death is natural.

You are as strange as Damaged Eagle. Just saying.

AIDS is not natural. One fag screwing another one in the ass is not natural.

Enough of that, all of you! A female friend of mine caught it in the early 90's from a boyfriend who had been a drug addict, and who KNEW he was positive but continued screwing whoever would have him, without using protection and without mentioning he was HIV positive. He was like a biological weapon. He should have been arrested or something. In Africa, where millions continue to die from it, it is not spread by "fags," as you so sweetly term them.

Maybe we had better stop paying for all drugs used to treat STD's--syphilis, gonorrhea (why do all these STD's have to be so hard to spell?), herpes...if sexual transmission is the issue. Serves 'em right, eh?

Most of AIDS is spread by gay male sex. I posted the evidence earlier for unbelievers. That's not to say some can't go on to give it to females.

Do you want to stop paying for treatment of diabetes or heart disease caused by poor eating choices? Various cancers caused by smoking? STD's? Those are all personal choices we make, as well. If you say yes, fine. You probably won't have a very big following because a lot of us are overweight and occassionally slip up on the careful sex thing, but hey. If you want to stop paying ONLY for AIDS treatment because the patients are predominantly homosexual, that's just hateful.

 

[Conservative65]

Deflection fail. Cancer is natural. AIDs is natural. Death is natural.

You are as strange as Damaged Eagle. Just saying.

AIDS is not natural. One fag screwing another one in the ass is not natural.

Enough of that, all of you! A female friend of mine caught it in the early 90's from a boyfriend who had been a drug addict, and who KNEW he was positive but continued screwing whoever would have him, without using protection and without mentioning he was HIV positive. He was like a biological weapon. He should have been arrested or something. In Africa, where millions continue to die from it, it is not spread by "fags," as you so sweetly term them.

Maybe we had better stop paying for all drugs used to treat STD's--syphilis, gonorrhea (why do all these STD's have to be so hard to spell?), herpes...if sexual transmission is the issue. Serves 'em right, eh?

Most of AIDS is spread by gay male sex. I posted the evidence earlier for unbelievers. That's not to say some can't go on to give it to females.

Do you want to stop paying for treatment of diabetes or heart disease caused by poor eating choices? Various cancers caused by smoking? STD's? Those are all personal choices we make, as well. If you say yes, fine. You probably won't have a very big following because a lot of us are overweight and occassionally slip up on the careful sex thing, but hey. If you want to stop paying ONLY for AIDS treatment because the patients are predominantly homosexual, that's just hateful.

Maybe the government should get out of the "healthcare" business altogether. Remember, they have no delegated authority to do so.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Deflection fail. Cancer is natural. AIDs is natural. Death is natural.

You are as strange as Damaged Eagle. Just saying.

AIDS is not natural. One fag screwing another one in the ass is not natural.

Enough of that, all of you! A female friend of mine caught it in the early 90's from a boyfriend who had been a drug addict, and who KNEW he was positive but continued screwing whoever would have him, without using protection and without mentioning he was HIV positive. He was like a biological weapon. He should have been arrested or something. In Africa, where millions continue to die from it, it is not spread by "fags," as you so sweetly term them.

Maybe we had better stop paying for all drugs used to treat STD's--syphilis, gonorrhea (why do all these STD's have to be so hard to spell?), herpes...if sexual transmission is the issue. Serves 'em right, eh?

Most of AIDS is spread by gay male sex. I posted the evidence earlier for unbelievers. That's not to say some can't go on to give it to females.

Do you want to stop paying for treatment of diabetes or heart disease caused by poor eating choices? Various cancers caused by smoking? STD's? Those are all personal choices we make, as well. If you say yes, fine. You probably won't have a very big following because a lot of us are overweight and occassionally slip up on the careful sex thing, but hey. If you want to stop paying ONLY for AIDS treatment because the patients are predominantly homosexual, that's just hateful.

Maybe the government should get out of the "healthcare" business altogether. Remember, they have no delegated authority to do so.

Yet it has constitutional authority to do that, so, no, not going to happen.

 

[Conservative65]

AIDS is not natural. One fag screwing another one in the ass is not natural.

Enough of that, all of you! A female friend of mine caught it in the early 90's from a boyfriend who had been a drug addict, and who KNEW he was positive but continued screwing whoever would have him, without using protection and without mentioning he was HIV positive. He was like a biological weapon. He should have been arrested or something. In Africa, where millions continue to die from it, it is not spread by "fags," as you so sweetly term them.

Maybe we had better stop paying for all drugs used to treat STD's--syphilis, gonorrhea (why do all these STD's have to be so hard to spell?), herpes...if sexual transmission is the issue. Serves 'em right, eh?

Most of AIDS is spread by gay male sex. I posted the evidence earlier for unbelievers. That's not to say some can't go on to give it to females.

Do you want to stop paying for treatment of diabetes or heart disease caused by poor eating choices? Various cancers caused by smoking? STD's? Those are all personal choices we make, as well. If you say yes, fine. You probably won't have a very big following because a lot of us are overweight and occassionally slip up on the careful sex thing, but hey. If you want to stop paying ONLY for AIDS treatment because the patients are predominantly homosexual, that's just hateful.

Maybe the government should get out of the "healthcare" business altogether. Remember, they have no delegated authority to do so.

Yet it has constitutional authority to do that, so, no, not going to happen.

Then you can show me the word healthcare in the Constitution?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Enough of that, all of you! A female friend of mine caught it in the early 90's from a boyfriend who had been a drug addict, and who KNEW he was positive but continued screwing whoever would have him, without using protection and without mentioning he was HIV positive. He was like a biological weapon. He should have been arrested or something. In Africa, where millions continue to die from it, it is not spread by "fags," as you so sweetly term them.

Maybe we had better stop paying for all drugs used to treat STD's--syphilis, gonorrhea (why do all these STD's have to be so hard to spell?), herpes...if sexual transmission is the issue. Serves 'em right, eh?

Most of AIDS is spread by gay male sex. I posted the evidence earlier for unbelievers. That's not to say some can't go on to give it to females.

Do you want to stop paying for treatment of diabetes or heart disease caused by poor eating choices? Various cancers caused by smoking? STD's? Those are all personal choices we make, as well. If you say yes, fine. You probably won't have a very big following because a lot of us are overweight and occassionally slip up on the careful sex thing, but hey. If you want to stop paying ONLY for AIDS treatment because the patients are predominantly homosexual, that's just hateful.

Maybe the government should get out of the "healthcare" business altogether. Remember, they have no delegated authority to do so.

Yet it has constitutional authority to do that, so, no, not going to happen.

Then you can show me the word healthcare in the Constitution?

Since you are not a constitutional scholar or authority, the answer is "why?"

 

[Conservative65]

Most of AIDS is spread by gay male sex. I posted the evidence earlier for unbelievers. That's not to say some can't go on to give it to females.

Do you want to stop paying for treatment of diabetes or heart disease caused by poor eating choices? Various cancers caused by smoking? STD's? Those are all personal choices we make, as well. If you say yes, fine. You probably won't have a very big following because a lot of us are overweight and occassionally slip up on the careful sex thing, but hey. If you want to stop paying ONLY for AIDS treatment because the patients are predominantly homosexual, that's just hateful.

Maybe the government should get out of the "healthcare" business altogether. Remember, they have no delegated authority to do so.

Yet it has constitutional authority to do that, so, no, not going to happen.

Then you can show me the word healthcare in the Constitution?

Since you are not a constitutional scholar or authority, the answer is "why?"

The answer is obvious. It's in my last question. I can understand why you wouldn't know not being an authority on the Constitution. You're the kind that thinks if States, where the authority does lie based on the Constitution, doesn't deal with an issue it automatically defaults back to the feds. Show me in the Constitution where that is so.

 

[Iceweasel]

Deflection fail. Cancer is natural. AIDs is natural. Death is natural.

You are as strange as Damaged Eagle. Just saying.

AIDS is not natural. One fag screwing another one in the ass is not natural.

Enough of that, all of you! A female friend of mine caught it in the early 90's from a boyfriend who had been a drug addict, and who KNEW he was positive but continued screwing whoever would have him, without using protection and without mentioning he was HIV positive. He was like a biological weapon. He should have been arrested or something. In Africa, where millions continue to die from it, it is not spread by "fags," as you so sweetly term them.

Maybe we had better stop paying for all drugs used to treat STD's--syphilis, gonorrhea (why do all these STD's have to be so hard to spell?), herpes...if sexual transmission is the issue. Serves 'em right, eh?

Most of AIDS is spread by gay male sex. I posted the evidence earlier for unbelievers. That's not to say some can't go on to give it to females.

Do you want to stop paying for treatment of diabetes or heart disease caused by poor eating choices? Various cancers caused by smoking? STD's? Those are all personal choices we make, as well. If you say yes, fine. You probably won't have a very big following because a lot of us are overweight and occassionally slip up on the careful sex thing, but hey. If you want to stop paying ONLY for AIDS treatment because the patients are predominantly homosexual, that's just hateful.

It's hateful to speak for others so you can talk down to them.

I take care of myself, exercise, eat good and have done so all my life. You see, I believe I am the best one to take care of myself, not you or the medical profession (that practices no prevention) or especially the government. So NO, I don't like paying for everyone's piss poor decision making. If I fuck up and need medicals or treatments I don't expect/demand that others pay.

Insurance would be a lot cheaper without government calling so many shots, especially if, like autos, good drivers could get better rates. Why should I have to pay a drunk's constant car bashing insurance rates?

 

[JakeStarkey]

. . . . The answer is obvious. It's in my last question. I can understand why you wouldn't know not being an authority on the Constitution. You're the kind that thinks if States, where the authority does lie based on the Constitution, doesn't deal with an issue it automatically defaults back to the feds. Show me in the Constitution where that is so.

So you don't know. Yes, you are not a scholar or authority on the Constitution. I can refer you to some good sites and scholars if you wish. PM me.

 

[JakeStarkey]

. . . . The answer is obvious. It's in my last question. I can understand why you wouldn't know not being an authority on the Constitution. You're the kind that thinks if States, where the authority does lie based on the Constitution, doesn't deal with an issue it automatically defaults back to the feds. Show me in the Constitution where that is so.

So you don't know. Yes, you are not a scholar or authority on the Constitution. I can refer you to some good sites and scholars if you wish. PM me.

 

[Conservative65]

. . . . The answer is obvious. It's in my last question. I can understand why you wouldn't know not being an authority on the Constitution. You're the kind that thinks if States, where the authority does lie based on the Constitution, doesn't deal with an issue it automatically defaults back to the feds. Show me in the Constitution where that is so.

So you don't know. Yes, you are not a scholar or authority on the Constitution. I can refer you to some good sites and scholars if you wish. PM me.

I'm still waiting on you to show me the word healthcare in the Constitution. I doubt all your "experts" can do it either and you refer to them as authorities.

 

[JakeStarkey]

. . . . The answer is obvious. It's in my last question. I can understand why you wouldn't know not being an authority on the Constitution. You're the kind that thinks if States, where the authority does lie based on the Constitution, doesn't deal with an issue it automatically defaults back to the feds. Show me in the Constitution where that is so.

So you don't know. Yes, you are not a scholar or authority on the Constitution. I can refer you to some good sites and scholars if you wish. PM me.

I'm still waiting on you to show me the word healthcare in the Constitution. I doubt all your "experts" can do it either and you refer to them as authorities.

You keep admitting you don't understand. I am here for you, kid. PM me for sources for your learning experience.

I know you are confused.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You can ask Chief Justice Roberts a question in public email.

Write Public Email to John G. Roberts, Jr. (w/o address, contact info)

 

[xotoxi]

Does this include all STD's or just AIDS?

At the moment just AIDS, if we include all STD's it'll get too confusing.

Why just AIDS though? It isn't really that confusing, no more funding for cures for all STDs.

The problem is that AIDS is a very complicated fatal disease so very expensive to research and fund. If you don't have it and your partner doesn't have it, you can't get it unless you screw around...

...or if you are an EMT or a firefighter who is trying to extricate a bleeding AIDS patient from a car accident.

But then again, they chose their profession, so they have to face the consequences of their actions.

If they are professionals then they already know what to do. Nice try Skippy.

"They know what to do"?

What are you talking about?

If a medical provider accidentally has a finger stick, or they are taking care of someone and has exposure to HIV...and if HIV is no longer being researched (as discussed in this thread)...then these brave lifesavers will die because they will have no treatment.

 

[xotoxi]

Hate and fear seems endemic in the 21st Century Conservative.

Very true.

It is almost like they ask themselves: "What would Jesus do?"...and then they do the opposite.

 

[Iceweasel]

At the moment just AIDS, if we include all STD's it'll get too confusing.

Why just AIDS though? It isn't really that confusing, no more funding for cures for all STDs.

The problem is that AIDS is a very complicated fatal disease so very expensive to research and fund. If you don't have it and your partner doesn't have it, you can't get it unless you screw around...

...or if you are an EMT or a firefighter who is trying to extricate a bleeding AIDS patient from a car accident.

But then again, they chose their profession, so they have to face the consequences of their actions.

If they are professionals then they already know what to do. Nice try Skippy.

"They know what to do"?

What are you talking about?

If a medical provider accidentally has a finger stick, or they are taking care of someone and has exposure to HIV...and if HIV is no longer being researched (as discussed in this thread)...then these brave lifesavers will die because they will have no treatment.

We were discussing the transmission of AIDS, please pay attention. The point was that no research should be done, who the fuck said we need to outlaw medical research??????

The point was that government shouldn't be taking money and funding it. The best people to create drugs are.....the drug companies! Not government. Government is wildly inefficient and top heavy bureaucratically and has no business trying to save us from all harm that may befall us.

 

[Iceweasel]

Hate and fear seems endemic in the 21st Century Conservative.

Very true.

It is almost like they ask themselves: "What would Jesus do?"...and then they do the opposite.

Thanks for pointing out that the true hate mongers are you leftists.

 

[L.K.Eder]

Hate and fear seems endemic in the 21st Century Conservative.

Very true.

It is almost like they ask themselves: "What would Jesus do?"...and then they do the opposite.

Thanks for pointing out that the true hate mongers are you leftists.

aha, the true hate mongers are the leftists.

while this can be found in the same thread:

Leave it to the libturds to try to drag babies into it. They corrupt society then try to make decent folks culpable by using children. If you have aids, know it and get pregnant or get someone pregnant you should be thrown in prison.

ALL women with HIV should be automatically sterilised, ALL prostitutes should be sterilised, ALL Junkies should be sterilised.

Don't stop there, sterilize all left loons, maybe we can stop this madness and lunacy

Well yes, all Leftists, Communists, Greens and Antifa's should also be sterilised.