Amazing << Hear this. Feel this, and tell me that this isn't music.
Oh, dear...
Posted on 08/04/2009 6:50:05 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
I don't know ... the drugs are somewhat effective, and if they can keep infected people working, that's a good thing.
My guess is that an attitude shift came to Africa.
We certainly cannot discount that -- it would be a HUGE factor in preventing new infections. But again, infection rates are incredibly high there, and treatment of infected people is still necessary.
Oh, if only our own nation would repent "Thou shalt not commit adultery" is not just an option.
I'll agree to that....
Unfortunately, that is offset by Dubya’s utter refusal to act decisively to stop the invasion of illegals who behave like criminal terrorists. That has had a profoundly negative effect on my life.
Amazing << Hear this. Feel this, and tell me that this isn't music.
Oh, dear...
I believe that conservatism, based on the words of our Founding Fathers, must also include morality, and part of that morality is goodness, not only in our own behavior, but in how we treat others. I concur with de Toqueville when he said, "America is great because America is good. If America ever ceases to be good, she shall cease to be great."
And because of that - because God has blessed this nation with great wealth (our poor are richer than western Europe's middle class)- I believe that part of America's morality is helping others in catastrophic need. I also believe that this is conservative to the core.
We are all obliged to give as individuals, and we do - we are the most generous people on earth. But there are situations that are beyond our individual reach. As an example, the Tsunami. We, as Americans gave in abundance, but it was our naval vessels - our taxpayer funded military - that took our gifts to those in need. We could not, as individuals done what needed to be done to get aid to the tsunami victims.
This is obviously very subjective, but America has historically helped the victims of earthquakes and catastrophic events, and I believe that the aid to Africa, given with the conditions President Bush placed upon it, based on the Ugandan model of ABC - abstinence, faithfulness, and then condoms - has been in keeping with our moral principles and our goodness as a nation.
Which, if you would bother to find out what the Bush policy was, and the controls on the aid were, you would understand was exactly what was happening.
We were most certainly NOT "subsudizing behaviors that are dysfunctional." We were, under the Bush policy, requiring moral behavior to get the aid.
The State Department leftists went crazy when Condi Rice introduced the ABC pattern of behavior as a requirement for help because it was so MORAL. But then it started to work, and some of them came around.
As for your comments about Obama - they are irrelevant to the discussion, and I understand full well what is going on. It has nothing to do with stopping the mass death in Africa.
I agree with them.
It's not America's job to prop up the rest of the world. After the deficit is paid off and all government bills are paid and our own citizens are properly cared for ... THEN let's talk about foreign aid.
Amen, brother rdb3!
Do you sincerely believe that the drugs stop HIV infections from passing?
To paraphrase Davy Crockett, it wasn’t his to give.
“We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to appropriate a dollar of the public money.” Col. David Crockett, US Representative from Tennessee
How can you possibly blame President Bush for Obama's election? It makes absolutely no factual, historical or logical sense. It seems to be the product of people who are so desperate to hate President Bush that they blame him for things that aren't his doing, just so they can stay mad at him.
That's not you, is it? You're not setting aside all the facts, are you?
The men in Africa needed moral training, and they got it, and that's why the AIDs epidemic abated.
It is my understanding that the Obama admin. is planning on removing the moral restrictions, and if they do that, you will have an argument.
They painted Bush the bad guy so well Laura probably hated him.
They tried to do this to Rush...
They tried Palin...
They are now making anyone who dares to question 0bama out to be NUTS with childish name calling..
right wing nuts
birthers
fringe group (tea party protesters)
it is very sad too watch, it is all surreal to watch the media protect and promote a man and their radical left politics and ideals.
I'm doing the job others don't want to do.
President Bush was an honorable man who was not prepared for the viper’s nest of Washington DC.
Sheesh!
No, of course not -- and I agreed with you on that.
But the drugs do help to keep the folks already infected with HIV alive; and given that the alternative is generally for them to die and leave behind orphans with no means of support, the drugs must be counted not only as a positive moral good, but also a practical good.
I can’t tell if you are being sarcastic, but no I am not kidding.
No matter how much you hate Bush for his lack of spending restraint, or immigration reform, or whatever faults you ascribe to him, THAT was a really ignorant statement.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.