Subject:
|
Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 11 May 2000 22:57:22 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
860 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
[snip]
> Please precisely answer with yes or no: Do people need to take
> (moral/financial) responsibility for things that they choose to do, things • that
> entail risk, or don't they? Whenever I pose an analogy that more clearly
> delineates that question, you refuse to answer.
>
> Please precisely answer with yes or no: Is it appropriate in a mixed economy • to
> carry out an cost benefit analysis of various social programs and make the
> decision of which to fund based on which apparently have the most benefit?
> (leaving aside the question of whether we should have a mixed economy in the
> first place, because we already know your answer, yes, and mine, no)
>
> Please precisely answer with yes or no: Is it appropriate in a mixed economy • to
> allocate social program dollars based on which lobbying group contributes the
> most or makes the most noise on TV?
>
> My answers, yes, yes, no.
You'll get my answers once you have answered my question (which YOU have
refused to answer and I am now asking now for the THIRD time) - Most AIDS
victims become disabled, lose their health care benefits and become reliant on
Social Security and Medicaid/Medicare. Is it more fiscally responsible to fund
AIDS research for maintenance drugs and/or a cure to keep victims alive and
working OR to stop funding AIDS research forcing the victims to join the
SS/Medicare/caid rolls?
> Based on your words so far, yours SEEM to be no, no, yes. If you agree with my
> answers you've got some recanting to do. That's assuming you don't squirm away
> again with generalities you accuse me of not responding to. Stay on point.
Not squirming away, just waiting for a response to my question that, so far,
you have squirmed away from twice.
Stay on Point - who brought in the common cold - which I wouldn't even bother
to acknowledge? Who, below, now again raised the dead horse of "There are no
free goods and no ducking responsibility."?
> > Wrong again, I find people who bass every debate they have on their wallet
> > heartless.
>
> > Yeah Lar, right, you have more compassion. Not when every opinion you
> > hold/state is based on how it affects your wallet.
>
> If that's how you choose to characterise it. I prefer to (more accurately)
> characterise it that I base every debate on the notion of personal
> responsibility and the acknowledgement of cause and effect. There are no free
> goods and no ducking responsibility. You've never admitted that point.
>
> Acknowledging that, and acknowledging that in order to make the illusion of
> free goods appear to be happening so that one can appear "compassionate" in
> front of the TV cameras means that we are taking those goods away from someone
> else at the point of a gun does indeed make me more compassionate than you. My
> compassion is for the deserving, while yours is for the rotter. Therefore mine
> is far superior to yours.
>
> ++Lar
Wrong again Lar, you say "yours [i.e. my compassion] is for the rotter". Well
Lar, I have compassion for both the deserving and rotter. I have compassion
for all. You have compassion ONLY for those who meet YOUR criteria for
deserving compassion, and that is unjust and inhumane.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
| (...) I may be wrong, but I think Larry's answer to this question will be similar to mine. If I were to agree that we should be funding SS & Medicaid/Medicare at all (and for the most part I don't) I might agree that money spent on research to find (...) (25 years ago, 11-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Why is AIDS such a big deal?
|
| (...) fund (...) That's a Hobson's choice, and a really unrealistic one to boot. But if it will get you to answer much more important questions, OK. Assuming those are the only two possible alternative answers (which they aren't, there are tons of (...) (25 years ago, 12-May-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | 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)
|
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
|
|
|
|
