Wednesday, December 1, 2010

Another Take on the Link Between AIDS and Condoms

If you have been to the Upper Commons on the RWU Campus recently, then you may have noticed that there is a table distributing condoms and a solution to the AIDS epidemic. Not that there is a large population of people with AIDS on campus, but they are distributed mainly spread awareness. Many people would just take this at face value and put no real thought into it and just buy into the the alleged fact that condoms help counter the spread of AIDS. Listen to the video and judge for yourself...

8 comments:

  1. This video is wrong on so many fronts its hard to know where to start. First off to say that the distribution of condoms in Africa is dispersed enough or in high enough quantities to even make a remote impact is ludicrous. Removing condoms from that situation or any situation will not fix the cultural problems, it will only make it worse.
    Now onto the issue of birthcontrol. Can you imagine any major US city if there was not birth control? Not abortion? Every day clinics are packed with young black girls who know if they have the child they are carrying then that child will almost certainly grow up to become a criminal, because how is a 13 year old girl supposed to raise a kid properly?
    There is a real world example of banning birth control. Romania did it in 1966. Do you know what happened? About 20 years later the generation that the law first applied to grew up, and guess what? Crime rate throughout the country skyrocketed, because these were kids raised in households that did not want them, or could not raise them, but were forced to? How is this an improvement? How is greatly increasing robberies, rapes and murder a step in the right direction?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ya, and not to mention even if the kid does not grow up to be a criminal, they will almost certainly become a drain on the government, possibly as a ward of the state and later on, being on unemployment and the food stamp program. I thought Republicans were supposed to be fiscally smart? This seems about as expensive as opening up the boarder.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm sorry but you sound almost as bad as Adolf Hitler. Are you really trying to justify infanticide on an assumption that people will grow up to be criminals? Your not even citing current U.S. statistics..Romania? 50 Years ago? How is this relevant? Romania is nothing like the United States. This is not some second rate nation, this is the United States of America, a nation founded upon Judeo-Christian beliefs and capitalism. Our country has prospered more than any other country in the history of the world.

    I'll just ignore the rest of what you said because it would not happen. People need to take responsibility for their actions. This false sense of entitlement is slowly destroying our culture. If kids want to go out and have premarital and promiscuous sex, they think they then have the option of abortion if anything goes wrong. However, anyone with an education and a set of morals can explain to you the value of human life and how it is sacred.

    Oh, and your last statement. That's a shocker! Another liberal in favor of eugenics. So you're taking an approach similar to China where you have to put limits of children and population. Furthermore, the reason your doing this is to save money? Preposterous! This, if it were even true, would only help grow our economy, as long as liberal politicians aren't in the business of wealth redistrict down the road.

    I suggest you re-watch the video becuase you're not thinking clearly.

    ReplyDelete
  4. If the US had a current statistic I would use it, but thankfully we have not banned abortions yet therefore I have to use statistics where and when they have them.
    Now you are assuming fetuses are infants. They are a bundle of cells that can be manipulated to anything you want in a lab. Are you going to go for the soul argument? As soon as the sperm and egg meet, poof you have an infant? It is you that needs to take a couple science classes.
    So yes, if killing a bundle of cells in a woman's womb stops a serial killer from being born and killing 20 people i think that was a good thing indeed. Fortunately religion is usually kept out of politics, this issue being the exception. And it is capitalism not the Judeo-Christian beliefs that have make us prosper as a country. Would you prefer us to be a theocracy? Enjoy the way Iran is run?
    Do you make any exceptions? If a girl is raped did she choose to get raped? If a 12 year old who is not psychologically developed yet, but is physically developed has sex with another 12 year old did she really choose that? What if the mother will die in giving birth to the child? If you make no exceptions then you are illogical because who in their right mind thinks a young girl chooses to be raped, if you do make exceptions who decides where they stop?
    Banning abortions wont stop them it will just make them done in back corners in a very unsafe way, in doing so your sentencing thousands of women to death.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Sex is amazing. Condoms are a Godsend. They allow me to fornicate with potential marital partners. So instead of blindly jumping into a marriage, I can now have a rock solid (erection joke) idea of how this particular woman will be on a personality level and a sexual level. Sex is a foundation for success in a marriage. Unless your kids walk in on you and the misses in the act, that might be damaging. Regardless, the strength of the American family can be reestablished by a strong sexual/personal/intellectual relationship. These families will raise the traditional family values that we Republicans love so dear. In the end happiness is what matters, happiness and a strong sense of core values established by a family. Family is strengthened by a happy marriage, and that in turn is aided (AIDS joke) by a good sex life. C'mon America! Let us fornicate our way back to a traditional family values society.

    P.S. I feel I didn't stress how amazing Sex is

    ReplyDelete
  6. @4

    Ok, first I'm going to say that I am not defining an "infant" when referring to human life. When the sperm and egg meet and create life, this early human life would not be an "infant" as we know it, but it still would be human life. It has to be, no ifs, ands, or buts.

    I also can't see how you're comparing these beliefs to someone who supports a theocracy. theocracy. They were first advocated by a John Locke(Life, Liberty, Property; if that rings any bells), the founder of the belief of "Separation between Church and State," so I don't know where you're going there. The simple fact is that life is a right that a government should protect, and other humans should not play God and have the right to take this life.

    "Banning abortions wont stop them it will just make them done in back corners in a very unsafe way, in doing so your sentencing thousands of women to death."

    Actually, I know liberals have no sense of personal responsibility, so they always try to blame their own mistakes on others. So no, you're wrong. If they get pregnant, they should not have option of murdering their child. They made the mistake, face the consequences like everything else in life. Murder of the unborn is not an option, and if you think it is then why is genocide not an option in the real world? Answer is that it's not.

    @5

    I'm not even going to take this seriously.

    ReplyDelete
  7. You did not answer the most important question, you did say "They made the mistake, face the consequences like everything else in life. Murder of the unborn is not an option"
    But I asked what if it is not their fault (aka rape) or is someone getting raped their fault in your eyes?
    Earlier in the response you said "this early human life would not be an "infant" as we know it, but it still would be human life. It has to be, no ifs, ands, or buts."
    But what if (as in many cases is true) it is guaranteed that the woman will die if she has the child? Do you say this unborn childs life is more important than the woman? You take away her choice to save her own life.

    ReplyDelete
  8. @6 from @5
    Good because I am not taking you seriously either, I didn't want this to get awkward.

    ReplyDelete