Subject:
|
Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 10 May 2000 16:00:23 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
496 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Jeff Stembel writes:
> And by saying you don't want our government to spend added money on finding a
> cure for a disease that is infecting millions of people in another country, it
> shows you don't hold nearly as much compassion for human life as you should.
Should?
> Why do you assume that the AIDS research money will cause a rise in Taxes? I
> never heard anything of the sort.
Uh? increased funding of anything requires more money...right? So the money
either comes from increased revenues (taxes) or by taking it from other
government programs. Where do you think it should come from?
> And, since all tax money goes into a pool • of
> funds, just think of your taxes as going to pay for the programs you feel are
> good.
Ah...self-delusion at its finest.
> I'd prefer to save 5 Americans and 5 Africans myself.
This is a perfect example of why the government shouldn't manage our money.
Mike could try to save ten Americans, and you could try to save five of each.
You'd both be happy.
> We are all of the same species, we should do everything within our power to
> help each other.
OK, I get the feeling that Mike feels the government should help Americans
before foreigners for a couple of reasons (feel free to correct). First, he
holds a higher affinity to Americans as a member of the same culter. Second,
the Americans are the ones paying for the federal government, and should thus
be top priority. I agree with the second reason, and disagree with the first
and with your statement above.
So what if random person X is American. If I don't know them, then I don't
care all that much about them. That's a simple fact. I keep track of a few
hundred people who I care for and beyond that they're all strangers. Now, to
Jeff's idea, I apply the same logic. You seem to be indicating that I should
hold members of my own species above members of the other species. Why? I
have six cats. Each of them is wildly more valuable to me than any random
person that I don't know. If I were forced into the magical dillema of having
to choose a human that I don't know or one of my beloved pets to suddenly die,
I'd choose the human. In a second.
Why should I care about a silly mental line that you draw between humans and
other organisms any more than about a sill mental line that some people draw
between whites and blacks, Americans and foreigners, or homosexuals and
heterosexuals? None make any sense.
> Just because no one else wants to help (or help as much)
> doesn't mean we shouldn't. Would you feel the same way if it was the UK
> suffering? How about Canada?
Yes, absolutely to the UK. Yes with reservations to Canada since we're so
closely tied to them geographically. Refugees from the UK (or Africa) are an
absurdity, from Canada or Central America is much more plausible.
Chris
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
| (...) And by saying you don't want our government to spend added money on finding a cure for a disease that is infecting millions of people in another country, it shows you don't hold nearly as much compassion for human life as you should. (...) (...) (24 years ago, 9-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
228 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
