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

[SsilverR]

nothing would be sacrificed because we don't have rights

rights are something that CANT be taken away ... anytime the government feel like they need to they will treat u like crap and throw all your "rights" out the window

we don't have rights, we have privileges ... because privileges can be taken away .. rights can't

 

[SsilverR]

nothing would be sacrificed because we don't have rights

rights are something that CANT be taken away ... anytime the government feel like they need to they will treat u like crap and throw all your "rights" out the window

we don't have rights, we have privileges ... because privileges can be taken away .. rights can't

I've argued that a dozen times already. Trust me, that argument falls on deaf ears here, because people would rather live oblivious and at peace in the paper-thin security blankets of law and rights.

true ... but sometimes i feel selfish trying to take that comfort and security away from people ... so if they refuse to see it then i won't press on any further .. just say what i gotta say

 

[Zersy]

AIDS is one of the worst diseases to affect humans and currently incurable. What if we did not need to cure it, but simply let it go away on its own? The only way to contract HIV which leads to aids is contact with people who do have it. A simple answer could be, let the people who have HIV/AIDS die.

I am speaking about a mass campaign of testing, quarantine and letting the people who have it finish off their lives without spreading the disease to the uninfected. This could potentially rid human beings of the virus. But, it obviously would involve a lapse in human rights to solve our problems. This idea is pretty unlikely because it involves co-operation of any nation that has anyone with HIV/AIDs living within it. We would obviously have to choose a neutral place for all these people to live and eventually die. I am pretty sure the current number is about 38 million people infected.

This could be the answer to the problem, however unlikely it may be. What do you think about sacrificing some human lives for the sake of the whole? Some human rights violations that would occur are; lack of privacy with all citizens having to be tested for the Virus, Moving the infected from their chosen countries, homes, and families, disallowing breeding within the people and eventually letting them all die. I think I may write a story using this idea sometime in the future. I would like to know how you feel about this,

Note: I am not suggesting this is what should happen.

I think that we should not violate human rights because that just creates a worse problem and besides we should be worried about over populating so we could use a few 100 million people dead...

wow that sounded really dark

 

[Mackinator]

Wow split opinions all round. I don't know what would be best.
Maybe killing so many people is wrong and besides - if it wasnt AIDS something else will crop up. Did you hear about the woman who has developed an immunity to AIDS? Thats pretty amazing.

 

[ShadeOfRed]

I would support this. Human rights, although their intentions are good, fail horribly under the pressure of conflicting beliefs in religion and the value of human life. Breach them, create a man-made and man-supported genocide, and then maybe we'd actually follow them a bit more closely. Mass slaughter humbles even the mightiest of man, I would think.

 

[hotdogoctopus]

Let's do it. AIDS is bad news bears. Plus, the more people that die the better the world will be.

 

[JimmieDean]

If we were to do something like this then could we do my idea to cure obescity and hunger?

Take all the fat people and feed them to the hungry people. That would work too.

 

[Snowalker]

It is impossible.

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

I argee with this man right here. Remember kiddies, DON'T SODIMIZE MONKEYS!

 

[Shapsters]

Meh, aids in population control. I know it sounds horrible, but Africa is over populated enough as it is, diseases and hippos at least keep it down a little. I mean seriously, if there is one thing the world doesn't need, it is underdeveloped countries having more and more healthy babies. Human population needs to be controlled in some way.

 

[AlphaOmega]

My plan was to nuke africa and steralize all people without proper education(smart people breed less then the stupid ones, so we'd be suppirior race after the culling) , but I like this idea better. and it doesnt sound like hitler.

 

[Monocle Man]

I always hear that you can only can get aids through contact with another person with aids.
But how did the first person to get this disease got it?

Surely such a way of getting infected could occur even when the disease no longer exists.

 

[similar.squirrel]

"Is it ok to sacrifice human rights to solve problems?"

This question makes me feel very uncomfortable. I'm too disgusted with humans to care much for death, but one of the reasons I'm disgusted is because of our disregard for one another.
I suppose that's hypocrisy.

I do think that they should be quarantined. In considerable comfort, mind you.

 

[arc101]

The end NEVER justifies the means

 

[Hamster at Dawn]

If we cure AIDS, we'll just discover a new disease that will kill everyone instead. If you're not going to die of AIDS then nature has to find something else to kill you with.

 

[ElArabDeMagnifico]

This idea sounds absurd and lazy to me. It's like "did you know that if every living thing died there would be no problems?! - oh, except, we'd all be dead."