obama to butt pluggers- I'm cutting the funding for cooties

[NHSparky]

No, I didn't look at your links. I am not being dense.

Oh, so you're being obtuse WILLINGLY.  Got it.

[Carl]

Soleil,you are clinging to a leftist myth that has no basis in logic,fact or reason but is a desperate attempt to hide the consequences and ramifications of the free sex/drug culture of he 60s.
Liberals don`t give a rats ass about anyones health but are hell bent on pushing a hedonistic and amoral lifestyle.
You have bought into it without thinking of the actual realities of things.

[NHSparky]

You are so argumentative.

If you are saying that people knew back then what we know now about cigarettes, you are fooling yourself.

And you're so deluded.  People DID know there were risks.

Hey, if you don't want to argue, there's an "OFF" button on your computer.

[NHSparky]

Soleil,you are clinging to a leftist myth that has no basis in logic,fact or reason but is a desperate attempt to hide the consequences and ramifications of the free sex/drug culture of he 60s.
Liberals don`t give a rats ass about anyones health but are hell bent on pushing a hedonistic and amoral lifestyle.
You have bought into it without thinking of the actual realities of things.

You mean like telling 10-year olds to go out and bang like bunnies but don't worry about the kids they'll be making?  That sort of disconnect?

Yeah, I hear ya.

[soleil]

And you're so deluded.  People DID know there were risks.

Hey, if you don't want to argue, there's an "OFF" button on your computer.

Right, I got ya. There is a way to have a discussion though without being argumentative.

So many things have come out about cigarettes since then. Risks being one thing. They had labels then. We know much much more about cigarettes, their ingredients, and their real addictive nature today than they had a clue about then.

[soleil]

You mean like telling 10-year olds to go out and bang like bunnies but don't worry about the kids they'll be making?  That sort of disconnect?

Yeah, I hear ya.

I am not all about pushing someone to have an "amoral" lifestyle. Ever. I have morals. I don't push them on anyone one way or the other.

[NHSparky]

Right, I got ya. There is a way to have a discussion though without being argumentative.

So many things have come out about cigarettes since then. Risks being one thing. They had labels then. We know much much more about cigarettes, their ingredients, and their real addictive nature today than they had a clue about then.

Well then, why don't you ****ing practice them then?  I provide you evidence, links, studies, and you ignore them.

Kinda hard to give a shit about someone who pisses and moans about "discussion" when they're acting like a ri-tard, plugging their ears and going, "NYAHNYAHNYAH!!!!"

You want to be taken seriously around here?  LOOK and UNDERSTAND at what people are trying to tell you, instead of playing your bullshit, "No it isn't!" games.

[NHSparky]

I am not all about pushing someone to have an "amoral" lifestyle. Ever. I have morals. I don't push them on anyone one way or the other.

Ah, yes--the, "It's not my problem" type.

[Doc]

I never said anyone "earned" AIDS. In fact I said no one earns a disease.

I said it.....and I mean it......nobody that is homosexual hasn't been aware of the prevalence of the disease for fifteen bloody years at least.......

Therefore, if you engage in promiscuous, random, homosexual sex......you are "earning" the disease......the rates of infection among homosexuals has been well known for decades......

And for the record, HIV can be sometimes managed with retroviral drugs.....once it transitions to AIDS....you're a walking dead person.....

doc

[sofa king]

Let's look at it a slightly different way.......we have a "pot" of research dollars, for the sake of argument let's say 100 billion dollars.......

Should we spend 90% of it to research AIDS, which might effect 10% of the population.......

Or should we spend 90% of it to benefit diseases that will (eventually) effect 90% of the population?

Which would be the most "equitable"?

doc

or how about we look at it in "political reality."

1)  you have your dummys over here.  they will pull the "all dummy all the time" lever in each and every election just because it is what they do.

2)  you have conservatives over there.  they will consider all positions, but then probably as not vote conservative every time (but not always, see "obama" if you have any questions...)



3)  then there is that interesting mix of homos, illegals (don't ask why, but they vote too,) feminists, felons, bums, students (babies, really,) retards, anarchists and whatnot...  that actually get to decide elections.

the american political process is not all that dissimilar to any given episode of the tv show "survivor."

pandering to the fringe, supporting the "cause du jure" is the way to get elected. 

liberals know this more than anyone.  lying, playing on emotion, their "innability to recall" any mis-steps of their policy is how they sometmes win.  yet everytime they do "pull one over" on america, the population quickly recovers and votes them out in the next election cycle.

the only real problem, when liberals do screw the country over in a presidential election, is when their side maybe gets to put a justice on the supreme court.  its a good thing that real americans are a hearty bunch...  and only liberal justices retire or die during liberal periods.  so the supreme court will always be a 5-4 place of business.  good business, smart business.


so.  does the government misspend billions of dollars to attract the votes of the degenerates of society to get reelected?  they do.

is that right?  no way.

will it ever stop?  not as long as there are liberals.  liberals would rather waste it all to save one crack-whore than 10,000 contributing members of society.


and that's the way it is...

[soleil]

Ah, yes--the, "It's not my problem" type.

What should I have a problem with? Men having sex with each other?

[Randy]

Well to be honest, it was a rough year all around. He died in May of 1996. My brother died in August of 1996. My great-grandmother died in November of 1996. Never thought my great-grandmother would outlive my brother. Life is screwy.

It was a rough death for him. Started out as throat cancer that spread. He even had that throat talker thing. Sorry, I don't know the correct term for it, but it was freaky. It made my father give up his long time habbit. It was a slow death for him. Cigarettes.

Wow that was a rough year. Sorry you had to endure it.
You do know that during your Grandfathers 40 years of smoking that there were 31 years of warning labels on each and every pack he choked down.
I smoked for 34 years, 32 of them with warnings. I knew they were bad, I could feel they were bad, there were times I coughed so hard I passed out but that didn't stop me. I was Addicted.

I finally stopped when I had to be hospitalized, put into a coma on a respirator for 8 days. I woke up in an entirely different hospital than the one I went out in, unable to walk or use my hands. It took me 2 months to recover enough to get on an airplane to go home. Another month to get back to work.

I was also cured from smoking. I still have to worry about cancer though. Seems it runs in the family and I sorta put myself at risk. It's nobodies fault but my own. I know that and I'll accept it if it happens.

[NHSparky]

I said it.....and I mean it......nobody that is homosexual hasn't been aware of the prevalence of the disease for fifteen bloody years at least.......

Therefore, if you engage in promiscuous, random, homosexual sex......you are "earning" the disease......the rates of infection among homosexuals has been well known for decades......

And for the record, HIV can be sometimes managed with retroviral drugs.....once it transitions to AIDS....you're a walking dead person.....

doc

And that sometimes is pretty damned rare.  Magic Johnson is an exception, not the rule.

[NHSparky]

What should I have a problem with? Men having sex with each other?

Social mores--if you're not willing to defend them, you have none.

[Randy]

Boy I type slow....

[soleil]

Social mores--if you're not willing to defend them, you have none.

So that is a yes?

[soleil]

Boy I type slow....

Me too! Trying to keep up.

[Doc]

What should I have a problem with? Men having sex with each other?

That would be a good place to start........we tend to look at such activity with disgust for a variety of reasons.....

doc

[NHSparky]

So that is a yes?

(sigh)...seriously, unless you're a natural blonde, this isn't playin.

It goes a whole lot deeper than who plugs who in the ass.  Which is probably one of the reasons society IS in fact going to hell in a handbasket--people just want to close their eyes and pretend it isn't their problem.

[sofa king]

soleil,

as my bud melvin udall once said:

"Where do they teach you to talk like this? In some Panama City sailor wana hump hump bar or is this getaway day, and your last shot at his whiskey. Sell crazy someplace else, we're all stocked up here."

[soleil]

(sigh)...seriously, unless you're a natural blonde, this isn't playin.

It goes a whole lot deeper than who plugs who in the ass.  Which is probably one of the reasons society IS in fact going to hell in a handbasket--people just want to close their eyes and pretend it isn't their problem.

I just don't get that. You want to force your morals on other people. What is right about that?  

[Chris_]

It's not about morals, its about public safety. 

[NHSparky]

I just don't get that. You want to force your morals on other people. What is right about that?  

Sounds like you were asleep in college when you should have been going to your Sociology class.

And FWIW, the gay agenda ISN'T forcing THEIR morals on ME?  Do tell?

[Doc]

I just don't get that. You want to force your morals on other people. What is right about that?  

No....we don't give a damn what they do.....just keep it to themselves (translation: no "parades").....and when you get AIDS, don't cry to us to either pay for your care, or help you find a cure, so that you can go back to your perverted lifestyle without risk of dying from it.....which is really what this is all about.....

doc

[sofa king]

It's not about morals, its about public safety.  You want the Red Cross to spend untold amounts of money testing every single drop of blood they collect?  You can say goodbye to the Red Cross, because they'll be bankrupt.

soleil doesn't give a crap what it costs all of the good people of america.

soleil only cares that all of the degenerates of society get theirs.  they may be 100.  they may be 10,000.

the rest of america, the millions?  f them...