Subject:
|
Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 11 May 2000 10:46:33 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
751 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ed Jones writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > [snip a bunch a debate bait]
>
> > But I won't bother debating this with you further as you seem to hold the
> > opinion that those with AIDS should have known better, deserve their fate so
> > let them die. It is an inhumane statement of the "80's ME" generation.
>
> Who says you've *been* debating? Not me. What you've been doing is ducking.
I'm ducking, yeah right. You have repeatedly made the statements in this
thread that those who have AIDS should have known better and deserve their fate
. Yet you neither acknowledge or deny my asertation of your stand.
> Let's be perfectly clear, you've decided to dodge discussion on what the
> appropriate funding level for research is in our mixed economy because you're
> convinced that the disease that impacts you the worst is most important and
> you're not interested in hearing any different facts.
Really, I'm ducking. Your response here is a response to my last post. Where
I stated that as most AIDS patients end up on social security disability and
Medicare/Medicaid. Who pays for that? Isn't it more fiscally responsible to
keep them working and off the SS/Medicare roles?
> In order to complete your dodge, you're trying to paint those people who don't
> just automatically go along with your priority viewpoint as "heartless". Is
> that it?
Wrong again, I find people who bass every debate they have on their wallet
heartless.
> What a crock. But it's the typical bleeding heart response to reality, dodge
> the facts and accuse the other side of not caring. I reject that, you can't
> have the sanction of the victim in this case.
And yours is the typical heartless response of the libertarian who basses
everything on how it will effect his wallet.
> I care more than you do, my friend. I care so much about my fellow man that I
> want things to be done by the use of reason and the rule of law instead of the
> use of pathos and the rule of guns. I know that's a hard concept for you to
> grasp, but there it is. I'm more compassionate than you are because I've got a
> better grasp of the bigger picture.
>
> ++Lar
Yeah Lar, right, you have more compassion. Not when every opinion you
hold/state is based on how it affects your wallet.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
| (...) fate (...) Cite please. I never said precisely that. What I did say is that those who catch it NOW through their own poor choices should know better. I did not make the sweeping generalization you claim. I've never said that those who get it (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
| (...) ^^^^ (...) ^^^^^^ Oh, and one other thing, I'm more of a tenor than a bass. It's a BASEless accusation to charge me with having singing talent, as I cannot carry a tuna in a bucket, but I did manage to be in the choir for our HS production of (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
| (...) Who says you've *been* debating? Not me. What you've been doing is ducking. Let's be perfectly clear, you've decided to dodge discussion on what the appropriate funding level for research is in our mixed economy because you're convinced that (...) (25 years ago, 10-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
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
