An honest question
I am a registered independent. That way I don't have to wade through piles of propaganda to get at the truth, I would rather study and make my own decision. As a nurse, it's bad enough, I have to belong to a union, and they are overwhelmingly liberal, I hate being mailed stuff telling me how I ought to vote, I know, I know, I can ignore it and I do, BUT it is annoying, that's all. So, as an independent, I wander a bit on the ballot issues, I feel that personal responsibility is our first responsibility as citizens and humans. On occasion I lean toward Libertarians, for that reason. Why should any government need to tell me how to conduct my daily affairs? Then I realize that reason they do is because sometimes we don't They take it too far sometimes but that has more to do with our schizophrenic, litigious (sp??) society than anything else. I do think that if something is successful the govt does not need to crush it, to allow less successful things to flourish, that's silly. And if something is failing miserably, why should the govt step in to make it work better? On the other hand, human nature being what it is, sometimes the govt does have to step in to make people do what is right, or stop doing what is wrong, it's just a fine line when and I am still working that out in my head (what that line is).
So the thing that I wonder is this (I really do have a point), why does the gay community complain that the govt isn't doing enough regarding AIDS research, when they themselves do not appear to be changing thier own behavior? If anyone can give me an honest, non-hysterical, well thought out and reasoned answer I would be grateful.
I am not judging, condemning or criticising, and I am not broaching the wider questions of Gay rights, etc, just this one question, because it bothers me and I have never gotten a good answer.
If I knew that a certain behavior was potentially deadly, would it not behoove me to avoid that certain behavior? Would I have anyone to blame but myself if I refused to avoid that behavior and so endangered my health? Would I be right in accusing the govt of not doing enough when, when I know something is harmful and I fail to stop doing it, and as a result hurt myself?
I may be alone in this, but I have a sneaking suspicion that what is underlying the accusation that enough is not being done, is a desire to find a treatment that allows them to continue to do what they want, and not suffer any consequences. I can relate, wouldn't it be great if the govt could invent a fat pill so that I could eat all I want and not be fat? Am I going to blame them if they don't and I develop health problems due to my weight? How could I? No one holds a gun to my head and says eat. I use this as an example, because, some might contend that having sex is a need, one can't just not have sex. I have to eat, the question, what choices am I going to make about how I do that?
Do men in the gay community even discuss this among themselves? Is it one of those things that they want to present a united front to the world, so they can't mention it publically but within their own circles they really discuss honestly? Is there such massive denial that they really believe it is the govt job to fix for them? I figure there is going to be some knee jerk "jerk" who is going to shout at me about being a right wing conervative pig-dog for even asking such a question, but maybe someone will step up and offer meaningful thoughts.
It does matter to me in a wider sense, because as we have seen, AIDS has not been confined to a small group, it spreads to a number of other demographic groups and it is a huge economic strain to manage, it affects the whole society, and how the largest group of sufferers deal with it affects more than just themselves. The money poured into research is not going to other, just as pressing, health issues, and so I would like to know that it is money being well spent. If millions of dollars are being poured down the drain so that people can ignore the facts and continue to engage in risky behavior, it doesn't matter who they are, I would rather see that money go to better uses.
So the thing that I wonder is this (I really do have a point), why does the gay community complain that the govt isn't doing enough regarding AIDS research, when they themselves do not appear to be changing thier own behavior? If anyone can give me an honest, non-hysterical, well thought out and reasoned answer I would be grateful.
I am not judging, condemning or criticising, and I am not broaching the wider questions of Gay rights, etc, just this one question, because it bothers me and I have never gotten a good answer.
If I knew that a certain behavior was potentially deadly, would it not behoove me to avoid that certain behavior? Would I have anyone to blame but myself if I refused to avoid that behavior and so endangered my health? Would I be right in accusing the govt of not doing enough when, when I know something is harmful and I fail to stop doing it, and as a result hurt myself?
I may be alone in this, but I have a sneaking suspicion that what is underlying the accusation that enough is not being done, is a desire to find a treatment that allows them to continue to do what they want, and not suffer any consequences. I can relate, wouldn't it be great if the govt could invent a fat pill so that I could eat all I want and not be fat? Am I going to blame them if they don't and I develop health problems due to my weight? How could I? No one holds a gun to my head and says eat. I use this as an example, because, some might contend that having sex is a need, one can't just not have sex. I have to eat, the question, what choices am I going to make about how I do that?
Do men in the gay community even discuss this among themselves? Is it one of those things that they want to present a united front to the world, so they can't mention it publically but within their own circles they really discuss honestly? Is there such massive denial that they really believe it is the govt job to fix for them? I figure there is going to be some knee jerk "jerk" who is going to shout at me about being a right wing conervative pig-dog for even asking such a question, but maybe someone will step up and offer meaningful thoughts.
It does matter to me in a wider sense, because as we have seen, AIDS has not been confined to a small group, it spreads to a number of other demographic groups and it is a huge economic strain to manage, it affects the whole society, and how the largest group of sufferers deal with it affects more than just themselves. The money poured into research is not going to other, just as pressing, health issues, and so I would like to know that it is money being well spent. If millions of dollars are being poured down the drain so that people can ignore the facts and continue to engage in risky behavior, it doesn't matter who they are, I would rather see that money go to better uses.
posted by madmom at 9:17 AM
2 Comments:
Very good post! I have never heard a good explaination either. I think it might come down to a kind of selfishness, or rebeliousness. Your analogy about overeating was perfect.
It probably does, Patty Jo, I can't think of any other reason that a single group of people would put themselves and others at risk on a regular basis simply to fulfill some sexual gratification. HOwever, that is a spiritual problem and someone in rebellion isn't going to listen or care, if it mattered to them, they wouldn't do it in the first place. I don't think they think they are in rebellion, I think they think they are just fine. The fact that gay men are dying at a significantly higher rate than average doesn't seem to matter. At the very least it would be nice if someone could offer even a superficial justification for their behavior. If there is no good reason even on the surface for ones' behavior, I doubt my pointing out the obvious flaws would be helpful. I just wonder what goes on in people's heads. When I was acting out, I knew deep down in side it was wrong, but I didn't care. It took realizing that God cared to change my direction. Proving, of course, that it was indeed a heart problem not a head problem.
Post a Comment
<< Home