HIV cured?

[Tale Crab]

so basically this new "development" doesn't really mean shit, considering its just one case, and it seems like the curing HIV part was purely accidental. more than likely the same procedure wouldn't render the same results on someone else.

How do you think research works in general? Taking highly calculated steps and only accepting and notifying the desired outcome? Fuck no.

You know, that little blue pill wasn't originally intended to make your weewee hard either, but so it did.

[Zurg]

Expand Quote

you're terrible. why do you feel its up to you to decide what's morally correct. stick to your own morals by all means, but trying to say you know whats right for everyone is ridiculous

[close]

hahaha how am I deciding for everyone? I'm obviously voicing MY opinion, that's all.

voicing your opinion would be "i choose not to develop or use a cure for STDs because of these reasons"

saying that others shouldn't spend time finding and distributing a cure for STDs is where you came off as being society's moral compass, to me at least.

[jackherer]

Expand Quote

I don't really care if you disagree with me, but at least explain where my logic is faulty? Other than the fact that its not "sensitive".

For instance, I'm fully down with finding a cure for cancer, and almost every other disease.

[close]

Someone gets raped. Their rapist has HIV. Too bad the rape victim wasn't more moral.

Someone's mother has a sexual disease that gets transferred to the child. Kid deserved it.

Furthermore, child never finds out. Child grows up, has sex with someone, neither of whom have had sex before, and it's fairly safe to think they aren't diseased. What a sickening display of immorality.

By the way, your morals are arbitrary and don't apply to everybody. Sexual repression stops HIV. It also fosters serial killers.

By the way, sensitivity is a moral, you fucking goof.

Dude, as I already said, I can see where it would be beneficial to individuals....I'm aware of all the instances that you are naming, but they are a minuscule minority when compared to the majority of HIV cases.

I'm simply saying, in the grand scheme of things, a cure COULD prove to do more damage than good.

It's obviously just a hypothesis, it's just another way to look at it.


I don't understand why you guys are responding as if i had the ability to decide whether a cure gets made or not.


Relax, stop getting your panties in a bunch, and take everything with a grain of salt...it was just a thought, calm the fuck down...

[Zurg]

I don't understand why you guys are responding as if i had the ability to decide whether a cure gets made or not.

individually, you dont. however, if enough people like minded to you speak up, they wont. do you think it's worth it to let tons of people live their whole life with illness or die just to test your hypothesis?

[jackherer]

Expand Quote

I don't understand why you guys are responding as if i had the ability to decide whether a cure gets made or not.

[close]

individually, you dont. however, if enough people like minded to you speak up, they wont. do you think it's worth it to let tons of people live their whole life with illness or die just to test your hypothesis?

dude you're fucked. once again, i obviously don't have the ability or desire to test my hypothesis. I was simply putting forward an alternate point of view on the issue, that's it. no need to over react and get all fucking angry over an opinion voiced on a forum. jesus.

[the whompler]

fact, condoms are ineffective in protecting against the hiv virus. i've heard doctors compare it to trying to stop a golfball with a basketball net. as far as condoms go, they aren't even a fool proof method in preventing pregnancy. and as was mentioned earlier children are born with the virus, rape and, blood transfusions are all ways "innocent" people can contract this disease. and for the record, how does being attracted to a dude mean you "guilty" and equate you deserve aids anyway. what exactly do people mean by social or moral issues? a god damn after school program or church meeting will never stop any of these ways of transmitting this disease. and anyone who thinks so is completely delusional and be shot on the grounds of strengthening the species. someone asked what the church will think, well jackherer answered it for you. without the fear of disease, it's harder to control the masses. aka the church is bummed about this news. hiv and aids are not good things and i hope this will somehow lead to an affordable vaccine for this terrible disease.

[Zurg]

you're right, it's not you displaying your opinion that really angers or worries me. It's that i'm scared that multiple other people who share your opinion will voice it in more important places and stop this research from continuing.

i'll stop arguing now

edit: aimed at jack

[jackherer]

did you guys even read my fucking post? the original one, look at how I phrased it: "is that perhaps the world is better off without a cure for HIV."


I never said they should stop the research, or that it would definitely be a bad idea, or anything even like that. I said PERHAPS...and then went on to explain a different point of view.

Now you got Zurg here calling me names and saying hopefully more important people dont think like me, when i never even said anything definitive...and tourist here concluding that Im a religious fanatic representing the church.


I still stand by the fact that there is some logic to my opinion, but thats as far as i ever went with it...stop fucking jumping to conclusions, shit, you guys are acting like 16 year olds.

[the whompler]

"perhaps the world is better off without a cure for HIV."

if you are unhappy with peoples replys, take notice please.
the above quote is what i read.
the above quote is why people are in fact shitting on you.
how is this tough to understand?

[Bobby Peru]

We're pissed because it's a sickening opinion. How do you know someone who reads this forum doesn't have HIV? Even if they got it through your world-ending immoral means of unprotected sex, you're wrong for singling them out and suggesting that they are the downfall of society and got what's coming to them. As Zurg said, enough people with your kind of opinion only makes for oppressive results, and should be called out.

And if I'm acting like a sixteen-year-old, you're acting like a KKK member who is mad that other people oppress him by not letting him express his oppressive tendencies.

[Zurg]

if that's not your opinion then i apologize, i misinterpreted your post. it seemed like you were heavily implying there shouldnt be a cure.

[jackherer]

Expand Quote

"perhaps the world is better off without a cure for HIV."

[close]

if you are unhappy with peoples replys, take notice please.
the above quote is what i read.
the above quote is why people are in fact shitting on you.
how is this tough to understand?

I just don't think intelligent human beings should over react so ridiculously to an opinion (or as you call it, "shitting on"). That's the only hard part to understand. There's a difference between disagreement, and childish name calling and over reacting. As I already explained, I never said anything definitive and it was just a hypothesis, it boggles me that people can't treat it as such.

I never even once said that I personally think HIV research should stop. I just offered a second point of view. And I am accepting everyone's comments, I sympathize with the reasons they are giving me and they are of course valid, in fact, so valid that they are obvious. Which is why I thought id make it interesting by offering a different outlook as opposed to a useless "oh yeah right on cure for HIV!" response. Might as well try to have a meaningful discussion.

[jackherer]

if that's not your opinion then i apologize, i misinterpreted your post. it seemed like you were heavily implying there shouldnt be a cure.

Thank you and I myself apologize if I offended you with my comments.

[H8R part 4]

if you get better go-to tricks, it cures AIDS.

[Trickskatin]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

"perhaps the world is better off without a cure for HIV."

[close]

if you are unhappy with peoples replys, take notice please.
the above quote is what i read.
the above quote is why people are in fact shitting on you.
how is this tough to understand?

[close]

Intelligent discussion? You're a fucking dirtbag for even hypothesizing that a cure to HIV would be a negative thing... or more likely some bible-beating 17-year-old who has no fucking clue what he's talking about.

[Trickskatin]

And before you say anything about close-mindedness or having a "different opinion." Your opinion is about as legitimate as saying "Perhaps the world would be better off if Hitler had succeeded."

[Sleazy]

more likely some bible-beating 17-year-old who has no fucking clue what he's talking about.

[Joust Ostrich]

...it was just a thought, calm the fuck down...
[/quote]

If you are going to tell me to calm the fuck down, I prefer that you use a cute animal to deliver that message.  Makes taking it a little easier.   Like this one.


Also, your 'thought' sucked.

[jackherer]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

"perhaps the world is better off without a cure for HIV."

[close]

if you are unhappy with peoples replys, take notice please.
the above quote is what i read.
the above quote is why people are in fact shitting on you.
how is this tough to understand?

[close]

[close]

Intelligent discussion? You're a fucking dirtbag for even hypothesizing that a cure to HIV would be a negative thing... or more likely some bible-beating 17-year-old who has no fucking clue what he's talking about.

haha well, right off the bat both of your assumptions are dead wrong. for one, i'm an atheist, not 17, and secondly, im actually a pretty left wing liberal.

for the 10th time, it was just a thought, and you guys are so fucking up your own asses that you can't even actually think out what i said for a second. im not asking you to agree, but you've got to be in outright denial if you don't think that the threat of stds does to an extent act as a deterrent from engaging in certain behaviour.

all im saying is that is that there might be a negative aspect to an hiv cure, because it would make people less accountable for their actions. there would no longer be as serious of a consequence for fucking random whores and etc.

granted that is only once aspect of it, and there are obviously many counter arguments, such as the many responses that have already been voiced regarding for instance, rape victims.

just sayin, a cure would also have a significant downside, along with the many obvious benefits that go with. just thought it might be useful to show some critical thinking and analyze a situation from different perspectives aside from the general consensus.

some of you are just too fucking quick to jump down peoples throats, its embarrasing.

[H8R part 4]

^you're ruining my slap experience, delete thy self! 

[daniel]

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

"perhaps the world is better off without a cure for HIV."

[close]

if you are unhappy with peoples replys, take notice please.
the above quote is what i read.
the above quote is why people are in fact shitting on you.
how is this tough to understand?

[close]

[close]

Intelligent discussion? You're a fucking dirtbag for even hypothesizing that a cure to HIV would be a negative thing... or more likely some bible-beating 17-year-old who has no fucking clue what he's talking about.

[close]

haha well, right off the bat both of your assumptions are dead wrong. for one, i'm an atheist, not 17, and secondly, im actually a pretty left wing liberal.

for the 10th time, it was just a thought, and you guys are so fucking up your own asses that you can't even actually think out what i said for a second. im not asking you to agree, but you've got to be in outright denial if you don't think that the threat of stds does to an extent act as a deterrent from engaging in certain behaviour.

all im saying is that is that there might be a negative aspect to an hiv cure, because it would make people less accountable for their actions. there would no longer be as serious of a consequence for fucking random whores and etc.

granted that is only once aspect of it, and there are obviously many counter arguments, such as the many responses that have already been voiced regarding for instance, rape victims.

just sayin, a cure would also have a significant downside, along with the many obvious benefits that go with. just thought it might be useful to show some critical thinking and analyze a situation from different perspectives aside from the general consensus.

some of you are just too fucking quick to jump down peoples throats, its embarrasing.

the embarrassment is all yours, you dummy.

[Paper Crane]

there would no longer be as serious of a consequence for fucking random whores women.

[Trickskatin]

Expand Quote

there would no longer be as serious of a consequence for fucking random whores women.

[close]

Seriously. How can you say that like its a bad thing?

[jackherer]

the embarrassment is all yours, you dummy.

lol why should I be embarrassed? for bringing up a different point of view? That I don't even necessarily endorse? At least I've been civil in my replies, which is more than a lot of you can say, and that's what's embarrassing.

Expand Quote

Expand Quote

there would no longer be as serious of a consequence for fucking random whores women.

[close]

[close]

Seriously. How can you say that like its a bad thing?

lol, yeah, probably not the best way to put it. i simply mean that its important to be accountable for your actions and that a cure to HIV might lead to a lot of irresponsible behavior.

Also, people seem to be obsessed with cures and quick fixes. Although yes an HIV cure would be nice and beneficial to a lot of people, it also to an extent diverts attention from the more important issue, which is to actually solve the HIV problem. A cure isn't the solution, it's just one aspect of it. Of greater importance is to tackle the root causes which created the HIV problem to begin with.

As I already mentioned, a cure would have virtually no effect in solving Africa's problem with aids, as they would not be able to afford it. Hell, a good chunk of americans cant even afford to break their arm. If you actually care about the grand majority of people who have aids, (that is- africans- and not the miniscule minority of Americans who contracted HIV through no fault of their own) then you would be more concerned with diverting those research funds to educational programs that will actually provide a LONG TERM solution.

I'm not trying to say i dont feel bad for people with aids, or that they deserve it or something. Just trying to look at the broader picture.


And once again, its just a thought which i myself dont even fully endorse, just food for thought.

[Jack Klompis]

fucking idealists

[weedpop]

People are definitely getting a little trigger happy comparing the dude to Hitler but that is some serious bullshit you are spewing, Jack Herer. I can't believe you're trying to backpedal and claim that people can't criticize your opinion because it's"just a hypothesis". You've stated it in a way that indicates it's not just a dispassionately held theory and you claim to have logical reasons for believing it; you should be held accountable for your opinion even if it's misguided.

Anyway, I think you're vastly overstating the important of "morals" in the perpetuation of social structures. They're certainly an significant precondition of social interaction but for the most part moral codes arise from the material, economic aspects of societal organization, (as well as religion to an increasingly low degree) not the other way around. Ideas about sexual morality have continued to become more liberal in the last 20 years anyway due to hyper-sexualized media and the declining influence of religion plus birth control and contraception. From 1960 to 1980 the pill became widely available and attitudes on sex were changed drastically but society still didn't implode in the way that you've vaguely prophesied.

Focusing on the morality of a cure (in a way that conveniently disregards the moral implications of allowing people to die for acting out their natural urges) also takes away from what I think of as the real problem with these kinds of research, and one which is already being faced in many parts of the world: overpopulation. Seeing as we're already well beyond the limit of earthlings that can be supported comfortably with our current productive capacity, any wonder cures should probably be distributed along with a massive program of economic aid and birth control, especially in the poorer countries. And we should definitely hold off on the "cures" for old age that people have been working on. That would be totally suicidal at this point.

[Chris P. Bacon]

Expand Quote

i see where youre going, but no. you could use condoms your whole life and contract HIV through a defect in them, or some one in a million blood transfusion fluke. would you sit back and say "dont worry about a cure, i deserved it"? What about people born with it?

[close]

Yeah I can obviously see where a cure would be very beneficial to individuals. But as a whole I feel that in the end it might have an overall negative effect on humanity by removing an obstacle that (whether you like it or not) is a deterrent to further contributing to the decay of our morals, which are after all, the backbone of a functioning society.

You can't deny that a big part of why everyone doesn't just fuck whoever they want whenever they want is due to the threat of STDs. I don't really care if you find that insensitive.

kinda like I Am Legend, only they cured cancer... yeah, yeah i get it... wait...no, no i dont.

[skate_bored]

You can't deny that a big part of why everyone doesn't just fuck whoever they want whenever they want is due to the threat of STDs. I don't really care if you find that insensitive.

well thats wrong. you should see some of the sluts i've fucked.

[jackherer]

People are definitely getting a little trigger happy comparing the dude to Hitler but that is some serious bullshit you are spewing, Jack Herer. I can't believe you're trying to backpedal and claim that people can't criticize your opinion because it's"just a hypothesis". You've stated it in a way that indicates it's not just a dispassionately held theory and you claim to have logical reasons for believing it; you should be held accountable for your opinion even if it's misguided.

Anyway, I think you're vastly overstating the important of "morals" in the perpetuation of social structures. They're certainly an significant precondition of social interaction but for the most part moral codes arise from the material, economic aspects of societal organization, (as well as religion to an increasingly low degree) not the other way around. Ideas about sexual morality have continued to become more liberal in the last 20 years anyway due to hyper-sexualized media and the declining influence of religion plus birth control and contraception. From 1960 to 1980 the pill became widely available and attitudes on sex were changed drastically but society still didn't implode in the way that you've vaguely prophesied.

Focusing on the morality of a cure (in a way that conveniently disregards the moral implications of allowing people to die for acting out their natural urges) also takes away from what I think of as the real problem with these kinds of research, and one which is already being faced in many parts of the world: overpopulation. Seeing as we're already well beyond the limit of earthlings that can be supported comfortably with our current productive capacity, any wonder cures should probably be distributed along with a massive program of economic aid and birth control, especially in the poorer countries. And we should definitely hold off on the "cures" for old age that people have been working on. That would be totally suicidal at this point.

dude what the fuck? i never said they couldn't criticize my opinion because its a hypothesis, my problem was with the fact that there were no actual reasons given with the "criticism", if you can even call name calling and dumb ass hitler comparisons that; If someone had at all responded with something along the lines of what you said, i would have welcomed that criticism.

you guys are reacting as though i were someone with special knowledge or power over these issues, which is simply ridiculous, as you said, it was just the opinion of a random on the internet; whether misguided or not, there was definitely no need for the ridiculous responses i received.

but in all seriousness, based on your reply, its obvious that you disagree with me, and yet, its actually exactly what i was looking for. all i was trying to do was bring up something new to make the topic a little more interesting to discuss. instead of making some regular comparison to hitler you actually countered my arguments with far better, more educated points than mine.

while I still believe there is some truth in my morality arguments (and a lot of truth in my root cause argument), i will admit the former was entirely baseless in the sense that i had no actual idea of the impact such a thing might have on social behavior, of which i am no expert on. clearly you are more knowledgeable on the topic, and unlike the rest of these idiots that are so close minded that they refuse to actually analyze the points, you had a much larger influence on my opinion than the rest of these hyper-sensitive over reacting morons.

I appreciate the response.

[jackherer]

Expand Quote

You can't deny that a big part of why everyone doesn't just fuck whoever they want whenever they want is due to the threat of STDs. I don't really care if you find that insensitive.

[close]

well thats wrong. you should see some of the sluts i've fucked.

dude, wait for the cure. what if its mad expensive...