Poll: AIDS, it could be eradicated but human rights would need to be sacrificed.

[Twilight_guy]

If your going to suspend human rights to stop the virus why risk having quarantined people potentially disobeying you? Just shot everyone with the virus and burn their bodies.

I think that suspending human rights to stop a virus is wrong. Why would we let people just die when we can research a cure in the meantime?

 

[sallene]

Yes, sorry, got off topic there.


I would still like to know if people would have an easier time quarantining people with say.. TB(Tuberculosis) than people with aids and why.

Considering they are both diseases that can be easily transmitted to other people in the right condition.

 

[dochmbi]

No. That's a completely unreasonable plan. Besides, the whole point is moot anyway cause in a couple of decades we will have a cure.

 

[Zombie_Fish]

Isn't this what happened in 28 Days Later?

It could work, but if only one person still manages to get away with it then the world would be right back in the same situation except that we would've just broken about half a million human rights laws and would have just broken the law of genocide.

 

[The Infamous Scamola]

-snip-

What ifs... are the worst kind of history. Let's just agree to disagree.

Actually I can, Not everyone in the US goverement during that time were bloodthirsty bastards without morals. Curiosity had nothing to do with it. I can see if you argured selfishness seeing as how it was to prevent further allied casualties, but to say they did out of flippant curiosity is pretty ignorant.


Edit - also, I was going for irony.

Ok, maybe not just out of flippant curiosity, but Hiroshima and Nagasaki were pretty much test grounds for a new weapon, the likes of which had never been seen in earlier history.
How do they say? To kill two birds with a stone? Something like that.

Anyway, as said before, let's just agree to disagree.

 

[Mother Yeti]

You do realize that HIV/AIDS is very treatable (though not curable) with antiretroviral drugs, that the disease is no longer the certain-death scourge it once was, and that it is now fully possible for an HIV-positive person to live a long, healthy life without spreading the virus the others?

Not to mention that there are many politicians, academics activists, writers, artists, and scientists who are HIV-positive, and your ridiculous plan would in many cases keep these people from doing what it is they do that makes the world a better place.

 

[Sergeant M. Fudgey]

It is impossible.

To many lives would be lost and its not 100% fullproof. Plus. Monkeys can still spread it.

Damned monkeys, foiling everyone's plans.

You do realize that HIV/AIDS is very treatable (though not curable) with antiretroviral drugs, and that the disease is no longer the certain-death scourge it once was?

Cancer on the other hand... But Cancer couldn't be solved like this, if anything.

 

[Ignignoct]

You do realize that HIV/AIDS is very treatable (though not curable) with antiretroviral drugs, and that the disease is no longer the certain-death scourge it once was?

SHHH!

We're flaming each other here.

Don't ruin it.

 

[murphy7801]

because you have do alot human cleansing in africa nazi style thats not joke i mean thats only way you will solve the problem international eradication.

 

[martin's a madman]

You do realize that HIV/AIDS is very treatable (though not curable) with antiretroviral drugs, and that the disease is no longer the certain-death scourge it once was?

But the point is it still kills people and because medicine isn't available in every country, the poorest countries with the most infected (like the countries within africa) can't get treated easily.

 

[Mother Yeti]

You do realize that HIV/AIDS is very treatable (though not curable) with antiretroviral drugs, and that the disease is no longer the certain-death scourge it once was?

But the point is it still kills people and because medicine isn't available in every country, the poorest countries with the most infected (like the countries within africa) can't get treated easily.

So the solution would be to send them all off to a modern-day leper colony?

Christ, you people.

 

[DarkFenix]

It sounds rather crude and I'm not a big fan of killing people. On the other hand the disease is making the lives of millions of people miserable in poorer countries where there is very little treatment and they think having sex which children can cure them in some cases. Purhaps we'll get lucky and a cure will be found. I did vote for a quarantine idea though as no one dies they can continue to live and if all are sterile then they cannot pass it on which over time would eradicate it for the most part. (you can never 100% get rid of a disease it just mutates or forms in another animal)

 

[Mother Yeti]

You do realize that HIV/AIDS is very treatable (though not curable) with antiretroviral drugs, and that the disease is no longer the certain-death scourge it once was?

Yeah, if you have health coverage. Africa, not so much.
(Southpark covered this very well in S12E1 "Tonsil Trouble")

So who else is noticing a very creepy racial undertone to this discussion? Sure, let's eradicate a substantial portion of the sub-Saharan African population. It's for their own good, and they don't know any better!

 

[Lord George]

I'm torn between genocide of millions or of keeping a deadly virus around to continue killing thousands. Both seem to cause so much glorious suffering I am truly torn? *sigh* the constant problems that face an evil person every day.

 

[gigastrike]

Why would we kill all these people to get rid of a disease that is managable as is. With medication, we can prevent HIV from spreading wildly inside someone's body and make it pretty much harmless.

 

[lacktheknack]

EDIT: As for the question: As long as it's not my rights that are being taken away, I don't care.

Good irony, it illustrates the problem perfectly.

 

[martin's a madman]

You do realize that HIV/AIDS is very treatable (though not curable) with antiretroviral drugs, and that the disease is no longer the certain-death scourge it once was?

But the point is it still kills people and because medicine isn't available in every country, the poorest countries with the most infected (like the countries within africa) can't get treated easily.

So the solution would be to send them all off to a modern-day leper colony?

Christ, you people.

Again, I did not suggest that it should actually happen.

 

[martin's a madman]

You do realize that HIV/AIDS is very treatable (though not curable) with antiretroviral drugs, and that the disease is no longer the certain-death scourge it once was?

Yeah, if you have health coverage. Africa, not so much.
(Southpark covered this very well in S12E1 "Tonsil Trouble")

So who else is noticing a very creepy racial undertone to this discussion? Sure, let's eradicate a substantial portion of the sub-Saharan African population. It's for their own good, and they don't know any better!

Nobody mentioned race, just people with the diesease whatever colour they may be. Are you trying to start an argument by chance?

 

[Bendebec]

Everyone will die sometime, if the place where the HIV/AIDS sufferers go is a pleasant and lovely place, then these people will live their lives in a tranquil enviroment without poverty or poverty, and a horrible disease will be eradicated.