It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Indiana Shut Down Its Rural Planned Parenthood Clinics And Got An HIV Outbreak

page: 10
26
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 02:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t


How does that work? Hospitals aren't allowed to turn away any patients that walk in off the street even if they have no insurance.

The same way I guess that hospitals deal with illegals...they tread water financially until they have to close due to the amount of debt they hold.
The law requiring hospitals to not turn away people is about as Un-Constitutional as it gets.
Forcing private businesses to do something is Govt control.



originally posted by: Krazysh0t

You know what isn't my responsibility? Waging wars in far away countries that pose 0 threat to me and my family's wellbeing, but our government does it anyways. Until the government stops waging unnecessary wars on the taxpayers dime, I have a hard time believing the inconsequential amount of tax money spent on needles and condoms is even worth comparing.

So yet again...the whole BS thing of "we we spend money on wars..so why not this".
I am totally not for wars either.
Regardless...the Govt is wasting money that they have stolen from the tax payer in both instances.





originally posted by: Krazysh0t

What world do you live in? The government spends the money on whatever it damn well pleases. You are certainly free to offer some suggestions on its usage, but the government isn't obliged to listen to you.

And those in Govt are supposed to be bound to the voter.


originally posted by: Krazysh0t

My comparison is to show that if things like heroin weren't illegal then this wouldn't be a problem.

Legality doesn't have anything to do with people using dirty needles.




originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Why does it matter anyways? If they want to destroy their lives. Fine. I just don't want their carelessness to go on and infect healthy people when they have sex with others.

I have stated time and time again...I don't care if they do. My tax dollars funding it is the issue.



originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Yes, I already know you have zero empathy for drug users. Sad, but you are entitled to your opinion.

Yes, zero empathy, where as empathy means I can relate to their situation.



originally posted by: Krazysh0t

By you saying this, it makes me think that you have a serious misunderstanding of how addiction works. The impression I get from you is that one can just stop cold turkey and never have to worry about it again with just a small bit of willpower. You should read this article:
Addiction as a 'Brain Disease'


Under the disease model of addiction, the brain's motivational center becomes reorganized. The priorities are shuffled so that finding and using the substance (or another substance that will produce similar effects) becomes top priority as far as the brain is concerned. In this sense, the drug has essentially taken over the brain, and the addict is no longer in control of his behavior. An alcoholic won't, for example, have trouble deciding whether or not to get in his car and drive to the store to get more alcohol -- the urge will be irresistible.

Again, I am well aware of addiction. I grew up with a Drug Abuse counselor as a parent.
I went through many of classes while in LE.



originally posted by: Krazysh0t

The money is already done stolen from you and you are pitching a fit on how it is being spent rather than it being stolen in the first place.

Actually, I am pissed at both. Both need to stop.


originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Of course not. Don't create a strawman here. Nothing works 100% well. The idea is to minimize the problem. There is very rarely ever a solution that takes care of the problem 100%. In this case, you choose the idea that causes the least harm to the whole for the least amount of money. It is a simple economics/ethics issue and you are dragging your feet because you are opposed to the simple idea of treating drug users like humans.

When did giving free needles and condoms equal treating someone as human?

So, since your hypothetical scenario is just that, it doesn't justify stealing from me to give free stuff to others.



How about this. since it is "education" people are needing. Let's do some simple PSAs for them.
Here are some titles.
"Sharing needles can give you HIV".
"Using drugs can ruin your life"
"Having unprotected sex can get you HIV and/or pregnant"

That about covers this issue. Now, use a small about of money, make some flyers and have them passed out to the community.

No need for tax payer money to go to supplying people the means to do drugs or have sex. I mean, if it truly is about educating people and not enabling them, this should be the fix.




posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 02:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: macman
No need for tax payer money to go to supplying people the means to do drugs or have sex. I mean, if it truly is about educating people and not enabling them, this should be the fix.

Sure...gotta work at least as well as the war on drugs. 'Fix'...nice choice of words, eh?



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 02:32 PM
link   
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

I am not for the "war on drugs".


And the use of the term is very much intentional.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 02:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: macman

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa


You at the very least (without going though the thread) have proudly pronounced that you have a burning disregard for basic human life. In my book that can simply be translated to 'hate'.

And there is the Progressive redefining of terms and words.
You really need to stop telling me what I feel and think about people.
I never stated Hate.

I hate a Govt that steals from me to give to others.

I have no respect for those that cheat the systems and take from these programs.

I have no respect for those that choose and chose to partake in drugs and continue on with drugs.

I have even less respect for those that give excuse upon excuse as to why they can't do something.

I don't hate drug users. I have no respect for them. Way big difference.


So you don't hate anybody, you'd just like to see certain people die in the gutter infested with aids and hepatitis?

Yeah mate, I'm the politically motivated one refining words and terms, right?




Ummm no...First World is not defined as such.
Running water.
Sewage treatment.
Garbage collection.
Non-dictator driven Govt.
Schools.
Basic freedoms.

That is 1st world.


Thailand (for example) has all these things. Would you define that as a first world country?

A country also has to provide basic healthcare for all of its citizens to be defined as a '1st world' country. Even if the conservative fanatics refuse to allow the government put an official word to it.



Well, it seems that the wishes of many are being listened to...you know the tax payers and funding has been pulled.


lol, I wouldn't laugh just yet brother. The US still spends more money on social healthcare than any other country in the world (except for a few European countries) and that fact won't change anytime soon. Maybe if the hardcore conservatives one day wake up and realize that there's no getting around it and that its just a cost that come with the privilege of living in a '1st world' country, then it may allow the government to be a little more efficient, when it comes to social healthcare spending.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 02:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck
I am not for the "war on drugs".
And the use of the term is very much intentional.

Nice that we agree on something, then.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 02:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: macman
The same way I guess that hospitals deal with illegals...they tread water financially until they have to close due to the amount of debt they hold.
The law requiring hospitals to not turn away people is about as Un-Constitutional as it gets.
Forcing private businesses to do something is Govt control.


But not all hospitals are private...


So yet again...the whole BS thing of "we we spend money on wars..so why not this".
I am totally not for wars either.
Regardless...the Govt is wasting money that they have stolen from the tax payer in both instances.


I fail to see how helping people is a waste of money.


And those in Govt are supposed to be bound to the voter.


Find me a politician who truly cares about the voter. I'm pretty sure one of those is as real as Santa Clause.


Legality doesn't have anything to do with people using dirty needles.


Actually, it has quite a bit to do with it. Because heroin is illegal, needles become controlled items. Users trying to buy them could implicate themselves. And that's for the people brave enough to take the risks. Many will just not bother trying to obtain a clean needle because of the negative stigma surrounding usage. It's the same reason many don't seek out rehab or help with addiction because in order to do so, you have to admit you were breaking the law.

It's an awful spiral of hopelessness. The system deems you a criminal, so many government sponsored outlets will either require you to become arrested first or don't do enough to help you. Plus the negative stigma attached to being classified as a user further prevents people from seeking out assistance.


I have stated time and time again...I don't care if they do. My tax dollars funding it is the issue.


Again. It's not like your tax money is paying for the drugs. Consider this, the person has already BOUGHT the drugs. He's spent all his money on the drugs and no money on a clean needle. Needles are cheap, it's easy to just give him one so that he doesn't end up contracting HIV.


Yes, zero empathy, where as empathy means I can relate to their situation.


So not only can you not empathize with these people, you refuse to even relate to their situation so that you can see things from their side?


Again, I am well aware of addiction. I grew up with a Drug Abuse counselor as a parent.
I went through many of classes while in LE.


Then how can you show such a naive attitude towards how it works? You should know intuitively that addiction is more than just the result of a few poor decisions in one's life. That addiction largely stops becoming a choice and becomes a way of life. That addiction especially addictions like heroin aren't overcome by just quitting.


When did giving free needles and condoms equal treating someone as human?


It's a public safety issue! Without those things, STD's and HIV can more easily be spread. It doesn't take long for those things to cross from the realm of the users to the realm of the non-users either.


So, since your hypothetical scenario is just that, it doesn't justify stealing from me to give free stuff to others.


You keep getting hung up on this "free stuff" issue, when that isn't the even the primary reason such things are given out.


How about this. since it is "education" people are needing. Let's do some simple PSAs for them.
Here are some titles.
"Sharing needles can give you HIV".
"Using drugs can ruin your life"
"Having unprotected sex can get you HIV and/or pregnant"


Yes, because those PSA's worked SOOOO well when everyone was in high school and inundated with them.


No need for tax payer money to go to supplying people the means to do drugs or have sex. I mean, if it truly is about educating people and not enabling them, this should be the fix.


It's also about prevention of the spread of disease.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 02:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Subaeruginosa


So you don't hate anybody, you'd just like to see certain people die in the gutter infested with aids and hepatitis?

Oh, so no tax payer funded free stuff auto-magically means they will die in some hyper emotionally driven "what-if"?
I don't want people to die. I want them to take personal responsibility for their actions. I don't want money stolen from my wallet, which feeds MY family, to give people free clean needles.



originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
Yeah mate, I'm the politically motivated one refining words and terms, right?

Yes.


originally posted by: Subaeruginosa

Thailand (for example) has all these things. Would you define that as a first world country?

What is the percentage of the country still not on running water and such.


originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
A country also has to provide basic healthcare for all of its citizens to be defined as a '1st world' country. Even if the conservative fanatics refuse to allow the government put an official word to it.

NO, no it does not. That is some Progressive based La-la land ideal.
Also, the US was not designed for such BS.
I hear Canada has what you want. They are just North of the US. Have at it.



originally posted by: Subaeruginosa

lol, I wouldn't laugh just yet brother. The US still spends more money on social healthcare than any other country in the world (except for a few European countries) and that fact won't change anytime soon. Maybe if the hardcore conservatives one day wake up and realize that there's no getting around it and that its just a cost that come with the privilege of living in a '1st world' country, then it may allow the government to be a little more efficient, when it comes to social healthcare spending.


The Govt is not there to be "efficient" nor is it there to provide crap to people.

And with small gains in removing funds, maybe in a bit we can move back to people being responsible for their own actions. And the Govt can stop reaching into my pocket to fund people's lives.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 02:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: macman
The Govt is not there to be "efficient" nor is it there to provide crap to people.

And with small gains in removing funds, maybe in a bit we can move back to people being responsible for their own actions. And the Govt can stop reaching into my pocket to fund people's lives.

As is said....



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 03:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

But not all hospitals are private...

If is not private, meaning Govt owned, then the Govt can dictate.


originally posted by: Krazysh0t

I fail to see how helping people is a waste of money.

That is not helping people.
Enabling them yes...helping no.


originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Find me a politician who truly cares about the voter. I'm pretty sure one of those is as real as Santa Clause.


I agree that they are far removed from the voter.
The only Santa Clause instance here is how they are buying votes.
Free crap provided by a pretend person, like the Govt Sugar Daddy/Ferry.



originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Actually, it has quite a bit to do with it. Because heroin is illegal, needles become controlled items. Users trying to buy them could implicate themselves. And that's for the people brave enough to take the risks. Many will just not bother trying to obtain a clean needle because of the negative stigma surrounding usage. It's the same reason many don't seek out rehab or help with addiction because in order to do so, you have to admit you were breaking the law.

The purchasing of needles is not a criminal act. If they believe it implicates them, then maybe they should find a new lot in life.
As for a "stigma", good as it should be shameful to purchase such things for drug use.

All are not the problem of the tax payer.


originally posted by: Krazysh0t
It's an awful spiral of hopelessness. The system deems you a criminal, so many government sponsored outlets will either require you to become arrested first or don't do enough to help you. Plus the negative stigma attached to being classified as a user further prevents people from seeking out assistance.

Don't do drugs. Very simple. Problem solved.


originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Again. It's not like your tax money is paying for the drugs. Consider this, the person has already BOUGHT the drugs. He's spent all his money on the drugs and no money on a clean needle. Needles are cheap, it's easy to just give him one so that he doesn't end up contracting HIV.

Oh, so it doesn't pay for the baggie of H. Just the needle used to inject it into their arms....or under their fingernails, or anus or what have you.



originally posted by: Krazysh0t
So not only can you not empathize with these people, you refuse to even relate to their situation so that you can see things from their side?

Empathize? No, as I am not a habitual drug user, nor have I ever been.
Relate to someone that chose to use a drug that anyone with half a brain knows is deadly and addictive? Nope either.




originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Then how can you show such a naive attitude towards how it works? You should know intuitively that addiction is more than just the result of a few poor decisions in one's life. That addiction largely stops becoming a choice and becomes a way of life. That addiction especially addictions like heroin aren't overcome by just quitting.

Because I know that people made the choice to use drugs.
The first use does equate to poor choices.






originally posted by: Krazysh0t

It's a public safety issue! Without those things, STD's and HIV can more easily be spread. It doesn't take long for those things to cross from the realm of the users to the realm of the non-users either.

Don’t use drugs. very simple

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

You keep getting hung up on this "free stuff" issue, when that isn't the even the primary reason such things are given out.

SO, the drug user is paying for these things?


originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Yes, because those PSA's worked SOOOO well when everyone was in high school and inundated with them.

So, it really isn’t about education then.


originally posted by: Krazysh0t

It's also about prevention of the spread of disease.

Know what would stop spreading of it?
Not doing drugs, not sharing needles and not having sex.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

And the Modern Progressive is enthralled with the oldest of human actions....theft and deception.

SO you call me selfish because I don't want money stolen from me by the Govt. Okay, so what. I am selfish.
Doesn't change the fact that you and fellow Progressives just make excuse after excuse as to why the Govt needs more money from the tax payer in order to fund other people's lives.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 03:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

And the Modern Progressive is enthralled with the oldest of human actions....theft and deception.

SO you call me selfish because I don't want money stolen from me by the Govt. Okay, so what. I am selfish.
Doesn't change the fact that you and fellow Progressives just make excuse after excuse as to why the Govt needs more money from the tax payer in order to fund other people's lives.

Sorry...you live in a collective. If you don't like the rules, either vote out those lawmakers that offend you, or leave the collective. And that includes all that the collective society provides. You don't get to cherry pick.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 03:17 PM
link   
Naw...I don't need to say it twice to make my point. Unless you really wanna see it again.

edit on 6-4-2015 by JohnnyCanuck because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 03:23 PM
link   
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

No I do not live in a collective. You may, being in Canada, but we in the US do not.

That goes directly against what the country was founded on and how it was designed to operate.

And don't worry, as a US citizen I am voting and working on BS Progressive drivel to be ousted.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 03:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: macman
If is not private, meaning Govt owned, then the Govt can dictate.


Good. So let's move back to the original point I made when I brought this up. Hospitals can't turn anyone away that come to them. Caring for an HIV positive person is MUCH more expensive than giving them a free needle for the course of their addiction (whether it ends through death or quitting). So surely, you should recognize that is a better response to the issue.



That is not helping people.
Enabling them yes...helping no.


Helping them not get HIV. Plus the appearance at a clinic to obtain these items, we can also try to push addiction help to these people when they come in for more needles as well. Your definition of "help" is too narrow. You need to think outside the box a bit here.


I agree that they are far removed from the voter.
The only Santa Clause instance here is how they are buying votes.
Free crap provided by a pretend person, like the Govt Sugar Daddy/Ferry.


Who's buying votes? Surely not the heroin addicts. I'd bet they don't even vote.



The purchasing of needles is not a criminal act. If they believe it implicates them, then maybe they should find a new lot in life.
As for a "stigma", good as it should be shameful to purchase such things for drug use.


It's attitudes like this that prevent us from getting anywhere with addiction... Then it's people like you who wonder why addiction rates are at all time highs.


All are not the problem of the tax payer.


You should just get right with the fact that the tax payer is footing the bill regardless of which path you choose to take. That situation isn't going away no matter how much you whine about it.


Don't do drugs. Very simple. Problem solved.


...

Yeah if it was really as simple as that then we wouldn't have the problem to begin with... Are you even trying when it comes to rebuttals anymore?


Oh, so it doesn't pay for the baggie of H. Just the needle used to inject it into their arms....or under their fingernails, or anus or what have you.


Right, we are just creating a safer environment for the usage they are already prepared to go through with. This way we can minimize the spread of disease.


Empathize? No, as I am not a habitual drug user, nor have I ever been.
Relate to someone that chose to use a drug that anyone with half a brain knows is deadly and addictive? Nope either.


You do realize that it's possible to empathize with people even when you don't have a direct relation to their situation right? Otherwise, black people would never have gotten anywhere as far as equal rights are concerned. Why don't you give it a try for once. Knock yourself out of your comfort zone and actually try to think about what it would be like in their shoes. Maybe then you would be able to see these people as human again.


Because I know that people made the choice to use drugs.
The first use does equate to poor choices.


So you are of the mentality that one poor choice should be able to destroy the rest of your life and you should get zero assistance when it comes to fixing or coping with that bad choice? So I guess you support the P.I.C. then right? After all that is their entire M.O.


Don’t use drugs. very simple


It isn't that simple and only people stuck in the 1980's would believe such crap.


So, it really isn’t about education then.


No, it's about using several different tactics in tandem. The problem with the PSA's from the Just Say No campaign was that they were full of hyperbole and outlandish claims about drugs. These claims could easily be dispelled by simply using the drug for the first time. Then when you see that you don't immediately get your life destroyed from one use, you start disbelieving all the other things said about the drugs.

If you want to use education, it requires honesty and more importantly hands on help. It also requires safety. Teaching abstinence only sex ed causes a spike in teen pregnancy, while teaching safe sex minimizes it.


Know what would stop spreading of it?
Not doing drugs, not sharing needles and not having sex.



Ugh... Get your head out of the sand. Such utopias aren't EVER going to happen. Humans have been using drugs (opium being one of them) for thousands of years. It isn't going to stop because you want to be a miser with your tax money.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 03:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck
Doesn't change the fact that you and fellow Progressives just make excuse after excuse as to why the Govt needs more money from the tax payer in order to fund other people's lives.



It's already been explained to you that needle exchange programs REDUCE government costs not increase them.



posted on Apr, 6 2015 @ 04:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck
No I do not live in a collective. You may, being in Canada, but we in the US do not.
That goes directly against what the country was founded on and how it was designed to operate.

Collective, group...whatever. My tip-off was the UNITED States. You are not functioning all by your lonesome out there and as such, you are part of something bigger.You are dependent upon government and community. If you have to reduce this discussion to semantics to protect your point...well...that's kinda limp.



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 10:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t


Good. So let's move back to the original point I made when I brought this up. Hospitals can't turn anyone away that come to them. Caring for an HIV positive person is MUCH more expensive than giving them a free needle for the course of their addiction (whether it ends through death or quitting). So surely, you should recognize that is a better response to the issue.

Requiring someone to live with their life choice may take a while for people to understand their poor choices have ramifications.
May take a while..


originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Helping them not get HIV. Plus the appearance at a clinic to obtain these items, we can also try to push addiction help to these people when they come in for more needles as well. Your definition of "help" is too narrow. You need to think outside the box a bit here.

Yes, outside the box, which means tax payer funds.
If someone, knowing through education, that their action will more than likely produce poor results like death and continue to do these actions, then I guess they get what can only be expected. HIV and so on.


originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Who's buying votes? Surely not the heroin addicts. I'd bet they don't even vote.

Those within the PPh realm.



originally posted by: Krazysh0t

It's attitudes like this that prevent us from getting anywhere with addiction... Then it's people like you who wonder why addiction rates are at all time highs.

Are you kidding me.
Yeah, exactly why people are not stopping the use of drugs. If only society as a whole was more caring....All hugs and empathy is exactly why people don't stop.




originally posted by: Krazysh0t

You should just get right with the fact that the tax payer is footing the bill regardless of which path you choose to take. That situation isn't going away no matter how much you whine about it.

Yeah, I mean I should just accept the fact that my tax dollars will be pissed away with free needles and condoms to drug addicts.
I can't see ANY better use of my money then that.



originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Yeah if it was really as simple as that then we wouldn't have the problem to begin with... Are you even trying when it comes to rebuttals anymore?

It is very simple.
See, I don't use drugs. Along with many other people I know.




originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Right, we are just creating a safer environment for the usage they are already prepared to go through with. This way we can minimize the spread of disease.

Yepper, enable the user right to the end.




originally posted by: Krazysh0t

You do realize that it's possible to empathize with people even when you don't have a direct relation to their situation right? Otherwise, black people would never have gotten anywhere as far as equal rights are concerned. Why don't you give it a try for once. Knock yourself out of your comfort zone and actually try to think about what it would be like in their shoes. Maybe then you would be able to see these people as human again.

Oh good hell.
You want me to empathize with someone that has made poor life choices, free will based life choices to use drugs that everyone and their mother know are bad, and then continue to use said drugs only to give the excuse as to why they don't stop is because PPh has closed up shop, so know they will just double down on the poor life choices and decide to share needles and have unprotected sex.
Yeah, not going to happen.

Empathy is reserved for those that had no choice with their issues in life. Like, someone born without arms.....



originally posted by: Krazysh0t

So you are of the mentality that one poor choice should be able to destroy the rest of your life and you should get zero assistance when it comes to fixing or coping with that bad choice? So I guess you support the P.I.C. then right? After all that is their entire M.O.

Yes...amazing that I want people to see that certain choices in life will be devastating. That the choice to use heroine is so dangerous, that it can ruin your life forever.




originally posted by: Krazysh0t

It isn't that simple and only people stuck in the 1980's would believe such crap.

SO simple that millions that grew up during that time period went on to not use drugs and are a productive member of society.
Again, nothing like holding millions of people that followed the rules in life as hostages, in exchange for tax money and free needles.



originally posted by: Krazysh0t

No, it's about using several different tactics in tandem. The problem with the PSA's from the Just Say No campaign was that they were full of hyperbole and outlandish claims about drugs. These claims could easily be dispelled by simply using the drug for the first time. Then when you see that you don't immediately get your life destroyed from one use, you start disbelieving all the other things said about the drugs.

If you want to use education, it requires honesty and more importantly hands on help. It also requires safety. Teaching abstinence only sex ed causes a spike in teen pregnancy, while teaching safe sex minimizes it.

Yes honesty. Telling people "honestly you will screw up your life if you do this" is honesty. If they don't accept it, then I guess they will pay the price.





originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Ugh... Get your head out of the sand. Such utopias aren't EVER going to happen. Humans have been using drugs (opium being one of them) for thousands of years. It isn't going to stop because you want to be a miser with your tax money.

So, since it won't stop, then why throw money at it? Thanks for making that easy.



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 10:18 AM
link   
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

I am not dependent upon Govt. You really should get your statements correct.



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 10:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: macman
Yes, outside the box, which means tax payer funds.
If someone, knowing through education, that their action will more than likely produce poor results like death and continue to do these actions, then I guess they get what can only be expected. HIV and so on.


That would be fine if the HIV would just stay confined among the people who used drugs, but you and I both know that isn't the way it works.


Are you kidding me.
Yeah, exactly why people are not stopping the use of drugs. If only society as a whole was more caring....All hugs and empathy is exactly why people don't stop.


Well, clearly, your hard ass "eff em" attitude isn't working and by all accounts is just making the issue worse and worse. So I'd say it's time to try something new. What's the definition of insanity again?


Yeah, I mean I should just accept the fact that my tax dollars will be pissed away with free needles and condoms to drug addicts.
I can't see ANY better use of my money then that.


Would you prefer that MORE of your tax dollars went to paying for treating these people's HIV instead? This is no longer a choice between not spending tax money and spending tax money. It is a choice between spending a lot of tax money because you want to be a hard ass or spending not as much tax money because you want to help these people on the front end.


It is very simple.
See, I don't use drugs. Along with many other people I know.


Good for you. You, your willpower, and your opportunities throughout life aren't indicative of the population as a whole though. You don't even have an adequate sampling size, and even if you include the "people you know" the sampling size would be biased.


Yepper, enable the user right to the end.


You really need to stop looking at it like that.



Oh good hell.
You want me to empathize with someone that has made poor life choices, free will based life choices to use drugs that everyone and their mother know are bad, and then continue to use said drugs only to give the excuse as to why they don't stop is because PPh has closed up shop, so know they will just double down on the poor life choices and decide to share needles and have unprotected sex.
Yeah, not going to happen.

Empathy is reserved for those that had no choice with their issues in life. Like, someone born without arms.....


I've already pointed out to you several times as well as given sources that addiction stops becoming a choice. It alters their brain chemistry to make it irresistible. How have you not gotten that yet?


Yes...amazing that I want people to see that certain choices in life will be devastating. That the choice to use heroine is so dangerous, that it can ruin your life forever.


You might as well support the war on drugs then. Everything you've been saying seems to paint you as a hypocrite for being against it. You know since your attitude is, "Eff them and anyone they may come into contact with".


SO simple that millions that grew up during that time period went on to not use drugs and are a productive member of society.
Again, nothing like holding millions of people that followed the rules in life as hostages, in exchange for tax money and free needles.


Why "Just Say No" Doesn't Work
Why Just Say No Typically Doesn’t Work


So, since it won't stop, then why throw money at it? Thanks for making that easy.


I'm trying to minimize the money being thrown at it. YOU are pretending like no money is being thrown at it all and with the advent of needle exchange programs, suddenly we are. That isn't the case as has been pointed out to you already.



posted on Apr, 7 2015 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Not doing drugs is about the easiest choice a person can make. It actually requires no action taken.
You don't get money. You don't contact someone that deals drugs. You don't drive/walk/bus to them. You don't purchase said drugs. You don't go somewhere to do the drugs. You don't have to prep the drugs and finally you don't inject the drugs.

Not doing drugs is so easy, anyone can do it.

All you propose is a "safe" environment and conditions for people to use drugs after many many actions they had to perform.



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 7  8  9    11  12 >>

log in

join