Options

Helping to prevent the spread of aids?

124»

Posts

  • Options
    JohannenJohannen Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    Is the way to prevent the spread of aids: give it back to the monkeys?

    Johannen on
  • Options
    werehippywerehippy Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    Johannen wrote:
    Is the way to prevent the spread of aids: give it back to the monkeys?

    The only way we could give it back to them is the same way we got it, and who knows what those crafty little bastards have waiting for us if we try that again.


    And sadly enough, I think this was one of the more intellectually valid comments on the page. Sperm murder indeed. :x

    werehippy on
  • Options
    ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    bone daddy wrote:
    Thanatos wrote:
    snip
    But Thanatos, at least those dead infant-through-five-year-olds got a chance to live.
    Yes, unlike the 20% of all pregnancies that end in miscarriage. Of course, 75% of those occur in the first trimester. So, for purposes of looking at abortion, let's only count first-trimester miscarriages. Which would mean we can only count that 75% of miscarriages as occurring in a mere 90% of abortions. So, we've got 40,000,000 abortions, knock of 10%, and that's 36,000,000. 20% of those would have miscarried anyhow, which is 7.2 million.

    So, again, lowballing things, and assuming natal care hasn't improved at all in the past 35 years, we knock the high end of viable births which have been ended via abortion since Roe v. Wade to 32.8 million. Again, this is using the high end of whatever anti-choice, fundamentalist source Shing is using as a source, versus over 42 million African children stillborn/dying very shortly after birth, using a low estimate.

    Thanatos on
  • Options
    Bliss 101Bliss 101 Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    LadyM wrote:
    Theologically speaking, unborn babies never have a chance to sin and thus go straight to heaven. (Jesus' sacrifice wipes out their Original Sin or somesuch, in Catholic theology at least.) Don't think of it as killing babies . . . think of it as saving souls.

    Derailing a bit, but that's actually not what happens according to Catholic theology. Depending on the school of thought, unbaptized children go to either Limbo or straight to Hell. I don't think Jesus' sacrifice wipes out the Original Sin in any Christian theology.

    Bliss 101 on
    MSL59.jpg
  • Options
    LadyMLadyM Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    That used to be the theory, but I'm fairly sure they revised it so that unborn babies go to heaven. Also, they wiped out the concept of limbo.

    Edit: I wasn't entirely correct. They're in the process of revising it, but it hasn't officially been revised yet. I can guarantee it will be, though.

    Here's an article about it:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/5406552.stm
    The current review of limbo began in 2004, when Pope John Paul II asked the commission to come up with "a more coherent and enlightened way" of describing the fate of such innocent babes.

    LadyM on
  • Options
    bone daddybone daddy Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited December 2006
    Thanatos wrote:
    snip
    We're not even looking at the number of women who kick it due to complications during the pregnancy, delivery, or immediate aftercare, right? Because it's only the babies that count.

    And Bliss, they ditched Limbo to broaden their appeal in countries with high infant mortality and stillbirth rates.

    bone daddy on
    Rogue helicopter?
    Ecoterrorism is actually the single largest terrorist threat at the moment. They don't usually kill people, but they blow up or set on fire very expensive things.
  • Options
    JohannenJohannen Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    werehippy wrote:
    Johannen wrote:
    Is the way to prevent the spread of aids: give it back to the monkeys?

    The only way we could give it back to them is the same way we got it, and who knows what those crafty little bastards have waiting for us if we try that again.


    And sadly enough, I think this was one of the more intellectually valid comments on the page. Sperm murder indeed. :x

    There's some stupid shit in these threads, i'm just here to rip the piss out of it, idiot by idiot. *Salute*

    Johannen on
  • Options
    ThanatosThanatos Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    bone daddy wrote:
    Thanatos wrote:
    snip
    We're not even looking at the number of women who kick it due to complications during the pregnancy, delivery, or immediate aftercare, right? Because it's only the babies that count.

    And Bliss, they ditched Limbo to broaden their appeal in countries with high infant mortality and stillbirth rates.
    See, bd, we only care about people until they're born. Once they're born, they don't really count as life, unless, of course, they manage to get themselves into a persistent vegetative state; then they're alive again.

    Oh, also, if they have a horribly painful terminal illness. That makes them alive again, too.

    Thanatos on
  • Options
    Bliss 101Bliss 101 Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    I stand corrected. I knew they were having second thoughts about the whole Limbo thing, but kinda expected the process to take 100 years or so.

    Bliss 101 on
    MSL59.jpg
  • Options
    LadyMLadyM Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    Thanatos wrote:
    See, bd, we only care about people until they're born. Once they're born, they don't really count as life, unless, of course, they manage to get themselves into a persistent vegetative state; then they're alive again.

    Oh, also, if they have a horribly painful terminal illness. That makes them alive again, too.

    That's true of a lot of people, sadly. My favorites are the ones who rail against abortion, then turn around and complain about single mothers.

    LadyM on
  • Options
    Bliss 101Bliss 101 Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    LadyM wrote:
    Thanatos wrote:
    See, bd, we only care about people until they're born. Once they're born, they don't really count as life, unless, of course, they manage to get themselves into a persistent vegetative state; then they're alive again.

    Oh, also, if they have a horribly painful terminal illness. That makes them alive again, too.

    That's true of a lot of people, sadly. My favorites are the ones who rail against abortion, then turn around and complain about single mothers.

    Or the ones who are pro-life and pro death penalty.

    Bliss 101 on
    MSL59.jpg
  • Options
    bone daddybone daddy Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited December 2006
    They aren't as inflexible as all that, and the church's lifeblood is currently coming from third-world hellholes, which gives them a compelling reason to knock it out of the afterlife. It's not like the concept isn't fairly messy to begin with. I imagine they'll be finished with their revamping before the end of the decade.

    bone daddy on
    Rogue helicopter?
    Ecoterrorism is actually the single largest terrorist threat at the moment. They don't usually kill people, but they blow up or set on fire very expensive things.
  • Options
    CorvusCorvus . VancouverRegistered User regular
    edited December 2006
    Man, what the hell happened in this thread?

    Anyhow, I think a dose of some more horrifying statstics is in order as a palate cleanser:

    [quote=WHO]
    Almost two thirds (63%) of all people living with HIV globally live in sub-Saharan Africa—an estimated 24.7 million in 2006.

    Some 2.8 million adults and children became infected with HIV in 2006, more than in all other regions of the world combined.

    The 2.1 million AIDS-related deaths in sub-Saharan Africa represent 72% of global AIDS deaths.

    Africa’s HIV epidemics are following divergent trends. There is evidence of diminishing or stable HIV spread in most east African and west African countries, along with signs of growing epidemics in a few countries. In southern Africa, only Zimbabwe presents evidence of a strong decline in national HIV prevalence. In several other countries—including South Africa—the epidemics do not yet show signs of abating.

    Across this region, women bear a disproportionate part of the AIDS burden: not only are they more likely than men to be infected with HIV, but in most countries they are also more likely to be the ones caring for people living with HIV.

    Provision of antiretroviral therapy has expanded dramatically in sub-Saharan Africa: more than one million people were receiving antiretroviral treatment by June 2006, a ten-fold increase since December 2003.

    Treatment scale-up efforts have been especially strong of late in some countries, including Botswana, Kenya, Malawi, Namibia, Rwanda, South Africa, Uganda and Zambia. However, the sheer scale of need in this region means that a little less than one quarter (23%) of the estimated 4.6 million people in need of antiretroviral therapy in this region are receiving it.

    Country developments
    Southern Africa remains the epicentre of the global HIV epidemic: 32% of people living with HIV globally live in this sub-region and 34% of AIDS deaths globally occur there.

    The only evidence of declining national adult HIV prevalence in southern Africa comes from Zimbabwe, where both HIV prevalence and incidence has fallen. This appears to be related to a combination of factors, especially reductions in ‘casual’ sex liaisons, along with increases in condom use and later sexual debuts. A combination of increased AIDS awareness, relatively extensive health infrastructure and growing anxiety about AIDS mortality appears to have prompted such behaviour changes. In addition, high mortality rates have contributed considerably to the decline in HIV prevalence.

    In South Africa, some 5.5 million people, including 240 000 children younger than 15 years, were living with HIV in 2005.

    The outbreak of extensively drug resistant tuberculosis in KwaZulu-Natal detected in early September has highlighted the lethal combination of HIV and TB in South Africa, where an estimated 60% of TB patients overall are also infected with HIV.
    [/quote]

    The bolded part about Zimbabwe is perhaps the most revealing for the original topic of the thread, how to lower the spread of AIDs.

    Corvus on
    :so_raven:
  • Options
    Andrew_JayAndrew_Jay Registered User regular
    edited May 2021
    -

    Andrew_Jay on
  • Options
    Knuckle DraggerKnuckle Dragger Explosive Ovine Disposal Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    Andrew_Jay wrote:
    Corvus wrote:
    The bolded part about Zimbabwe is perhaps the most revealing for the original topic of the thread, how to lower the spread of AIDs.
    That it's Zimbabwe really surprises me. Mugabe and his government used to be pretty hostile to even acknowledging that it exists. I'd also question how accurate numbers coming from Zimbabwe are . . . but you're right, that does describe the correct way to carry out a program.

    In Mugabe's defence, a high mortality rate is listed as one of the major factors in reduced HIV prevalence.

    Knuckle Dragger on
    Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion.

    - John Stuart Mill
  • Options
    bone daddybone daddy Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited December 2006
    Corvus wrote:
    Man, what the hell happened in this thread?
    Somebody decided to share that they'd rather see Africa as it is than have it be like the US, suffering under the scourge of abortion.

    bone daddy on
    Rogue helicopter?
    Ecoterrorism is actually the single largest terrorist threat at the moment. They don't usually kill people, but they blow up or set on fire very expensive things.
  • Options
    werehippywerehippy Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    bone daddy wrote:
    Corvus wrote:
    Man, what the hell happened in this thread?
    Somebody decided to share that they'd rather see Africa as it is than have it be like the US, suffering under the scourge of abortion.

    And how condoms are sperm murder. If we're going to paint an accurate picture of the absurdity, you need to get the whole thing. Half measures just won't cut it here.

    werehippy on
  • Options
    bone daddybone daddy Registered User, ClubPA regular
    edited December 2006
    werehippy wrote:
    bone daddy wrote:
    Corvus wrote:
    Man, what the hell happened in this thread?
    Somebody decided to share that they'd rather see Africa as it is than have it be like the US, suffering under the scourge of abortion.

    And how condoms are sperm murder. If we're going to paint an accurate picture of the absurdity, you need to get the whole thing. Half measures just won't cut it here.
    Generally when a reg asks a question like that, they only need the denomination of the coin on the tracks to know the path the train took when it jumped them.

    bone daddy on
    Rogue helicopter?
    Ecoterrorism is actually the single largest terrorist threat at the moment. They don't usually kill people, but they blow up or set on fire very expensive things.
  • Options
    CorvusCorvus . VancouverRegistered User regular
    edited December 2006
    bone daddy wrote:
    werehippy wrote:
    bone daddy wrote:
    Corvus wrote:
    Man, what the hell happened in this thread?
    Somebody decided to share that they'd rather see Africa as it is than have it be like the US, suffering under the scourge of abortion.

    And how condoms are sperm murder. If we're going to paint an accurate picture of the absurdity, you need to get the whole thing. Half measures just won't cut it here.
    Generally when a reg asks a question like that, they only need the denomination of the coin on the tracks to know the path the train took when it jumped them.

    More importantly, is there a picture of a shark on the coin. :D

    Still, I can only hope that someone making that sort of retarded arguement is profoundly ignorant of the reality of life in Africa. That ignorance would hopefully include the problem of male children being used as child soldiers and female children as sex slaves in some conflict regions in Africa, and your general ethnic violence and genocide.
    Andrew_Jay wrote:
    Corvus wrote:
    The bolded part about Zimbabwe is perhaps the most revealing for the original topic of the thread, how to lower the spread of AIDs.
    That it's Zimbabwe really surprises me. Mugabe and his government used to be pretty hostile to even acknowledging that it exists. I'd also question how accurate numbers coming from Zimbabwe are . . . but you're right, that does describe the correct way to carry out a program.

    Well, I suppose he had a change of heart or realized it was in his best interests to change. I suppose a dictator is in a pretty good position to fight a disease when they decide its a problem for them.

    Corvus on
    :so_raven:
  • Options
    werehippywerehippy Registered User regular
    edited December 2006
    bone daddy wrote:
    werehippy wrote:
    bone daddy wrote:
    Corvus wrote:
    Man, what the hell happened in this thread?
    Somebody decided to share that they'd rather see Africa as it is than have it be like the US, suffering under the scourge of abortion.

    And how condoms are sperm murder. If we're going to paint an accurate picture of the absurdity, you need to get the whole thing. Half measures just won't cut it here.
    Generally when a reg asks a question like that, they only need the denomination of the coin on the tracks to know the path the train took when it jumped them.

    Oh, I know he wasn't asking for a blow by blow. I just really feel the need to use the phrase sperm murder at every possible opportunity for the next while. It's something that you can't say enough.


    Sperm murder. Think about it.


    :)

    werehippy on
Sign In or Register to comment.