Fine, brand the ones who have AIDS.

Whether the person has AIDS doesn't make the slightest bit of difference to whether anyone else can catch HIV off them.

OK wtf is with BRANDING people with AIDS.

During WWII and possibly a couple of years before, the Jews were ordered to wear the Star of David in order to show that they were Jews, else they were murdered. Because of the propaganda the Nazi put on Jews, they were avoided like a deadly disease....

Hmm.... sound familiar?

It's kinda embarrassing that someone has to have something that shouts who they are to the world. In this case, because of the slight over exaggeration of the press over AIDS, no doubt people would avoid people branded as having AIDS as Germans did to the Jews.

So before you start taking away millions of peoples' dignity, I suggest first thinking about how the Jews felt. Savy?

Also, there is a human rights issue here somewhat related to the "embaressment" issue Nero brings up.

Oh, but they're diseased, they forgo their human rights in the eyes of our angry mob here.

Ah, there's the term. XD Embarrassment was just a simplified version for the kiddies. =P

Sentynel wrote:Oh, but they're diseased, they forgo their human rights in the eyes of our angry mob here.

Now, now, we didn't say that. We live in a society that puts the group before the individual; therefore, those with HIV should be somehow segregated from comuntiy, following the model used to avoid leprosy in Jesus' times. (Ring a bell?)

wrote:Jesus' times.

Those two words being key here.

They still do it, in Africa and stuff. (<<had to endure a 20 min talk on the curing of leprosy)

Doesn't mean it's right...

Kat wrote:Now, now, we didn't say that. We live in a society that puts the group before the individual; therefore, those with HIV should be somehow segregated from comuntiy, following the model used to avoid leprosy in Jesus' times. (Ring a bell?)

You still haven't provided ANY reasonable argument for segregating an entire segment of society because a tiny percentage might spread a disease that cannot also be applied to any number of other groups nobody would dream of segregating, nor for why it's acceptable to criminalise an entire group because of the actions of a few of their members under any circumstances.

ILoveSent wrote:

Sentynel wrote:Oh, but they're diseased, they forgo their human rights in the eyes of our angry mob here.

Now, now, we didn't say that. We live in a society that puts the group before the individual; therefore, those with HIV should be somehow segregated from comuntiy, following the model used to avoid leprosy in Jesus' times. (Ring a bell?)

I'm sorry, did you just refer to a 2000 year old method?

OK, why do you keep wanting to segregate someone from the pack just because he's ill? It's not even contagious unless someone gets drunk. (This is a joke ffs)

wrote:They still do it, in Africa and stuff. (<<had to endure a 20 min talk on the curing of leprosy)

Africa has one of the lowest HDI (human development index) overall, and possibly the only country to have a stable government is South Africa. And just because leprosy had been mostly taken out doesn't mean we should follow the same steps taken to eradicate AIDS. Smallpox was taken out a lot more humanly.

So if we wait for the cure to AIDS instead of killing/isolating everyone with AIDS, I think we'll take that method. It's how we delusionally think we we're less barbaric than in the Medieval Ages.

Nero wrote:And just because leprosy had been mostly taken out doesn't mean we should follow the same steps taken to eradicate AIDS. Smallpox was taken out a lot more humanly.

Actually, the reduction in leprosy is almost wholly down to antibiotics. It's nothing to do with segregating sufferers.

Sentynel wrote:

Nero wrote:And just because leprosy had been mostly taken out doesn't mean we should follow the same steps taken to eradicate AIDS. Smallpox was taken out a lot more humanly.

Actually, the reduction in leprosy is almost wholly down to antibiotics. It's nothing to do with segregating sufferers.

Oh. I just inferred that it was segregating sufferers, from Kat's statement.

If the governments of the world segregated one group, it would become a trend. As long as we're branding the HIV group, why not brand the herpes group? While we're doing that, let's go ahead and brand everyone with conjunctivitis, and so on. It's just abad idea, think of the revolts and turmoil it would cause.

Returning to the original thread's topic briefly, here's an introduction to Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper for those of us who may not know much about Canada's politics.
(Warning: reading this page may require industrial-strength sarcasm defences to avoid the spontaneous stunning of cats within the radius of, say, London.)

Apollo wrote:If the governments of the world segregated one group, it would become a trend. As long as we're branding the HIV group, why not brand the herpes group? While we're doing that, let's go ahead and brand everyone with conjunctivitis, and so on. It's just abad idea, think of the revolts and turmoil it would cause.

because herpes and conjunctivitis dont kill people anywhere near as often as aids does.

According to Wikipedia, herpes has a massive list of effects, many of which are or can be fatal, though it doesn't kill as many as AIDS (you may wish to avoid looking at the images on said page, incidentally..). Regardless, why not segregate flu sufferers? Flu is much more contagious and kills far more people than AIDS, and can form epidemics which kill more people in a couple of years than HIV ever has, by a long way.

Well, yes, but flu can usually be fended off by our immune systems.
AIDS? Not so much.

We do segregate flu sufferers. They get locked in bedrooms my their families until they get better.

Dansariki wrote:Well, yes, but flu can usually be fended off by our immune systems.
AIDS? Not so much.

Its when the new strains emerge that pandemics form and in the past have killed millions of people, as Senty said more than AIDs.

wrote:We do segregate flu sufferers. They get locked in bedrooms my their families until they get better.

You what? There are still people carrying the flu virus walking the streets you know...