Schwarzeneggar Proposes to End HIV/AIDS Services

[JWBear]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I have been debating posting this because I'm going to get slammed unmercifully, I'm sure.....but why is this the responsibility of government?

Why is it the responsibility of government to protect you from crime?

Why is it the responsibility of government to rescue you from your burning house and but the fire out?

Why is it the responsibility of government to make sure someone doesn't build a toxic waste dump in your backyard?

Why is it the responsibility of government to dig you out of the rubble of your home after an earthquake or rescue from your roof in a flood?

Why should the government ever protect the lives and health of its citizens? Who cares if people die; we don't know them, right?

We have made these things the responsibility of the government because the majority of Americans realize that these things are necessary in a civilized society; and that government is in the best position to provide these services equitably.

In regards to HIV/AIDS services, many of the programs being cut can not be found in the public sector. The AIDS Assistance Drug Program is one of the ones being cut. This program pays for the AIDS drugs that are the only things keeping many healthy and live. These drugs can cost thousands of dollars a month (thanks to the greedy drug companies); far out of the reach of most people. Without ADAP, many with AIDS will be forced to stop taking these life saving medications. And without medications to keep the virus at bay, they will die.

But that's not your problem, is it? Why should you care? Let them fend for themselves. And if they don't survive? Oh well. At least your taxes didn't go up! That would have been a tragedy!

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by JWBear

But that's not your problem, is it? Why should you care? Let them fend for themselves. And if they don't survive? Oh well. At least your taxes didn't go up! That would have been a tragedy!

Well, I did indeed get slammed.

I don't think feeding the poor is the responsibility of government, but think it's a great alternative to starvation.

I don't think funding this program is the responsibility of government, but think it's a great alternative to death from AIDS.

There are many, many things - as you pointed out - that the government does that we as a society have deemed are good things. At the state level I think that's great.

I honestly don't know....but are similar programs in CA offered for diabetics and cancer patients and other life threatening diseases?

[JWBear]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

...but are similar programs in CA offered for diabetics and cancer patients and other life threatening diseases?

Yes.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by JWBear

Yes.

In that case, don't discriminate. Cut them all across the board. It would be better to have cuts in each program and keep them each there, I suppose, than to eliminate one all together.

[JWBear]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

In that case, don't discriminate. Cut them all across the board. It would be better to have cuts in each program and keep them each there, I suppose, than to eliminate one all together.

Yep! Let these people die! Why should we give a damn, it's only our problem, right?

[second class citizen]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

In that case, don't discriminate. Cut them all across the board. It would be better to have cuts in each program and keep them each there, I suppose, than to eliminate one all together.

But that's not what Arnold has proposed. You asked a question and I suppose you can now see how passionate people are about the specific proposals (cutting live saving programs for people with AIDS who are on low income).

Let me suggest to you as someone who knows what could very possibly happen when these individuals become cut off from their life saving medications. There are numerous scenarios and I'm sure that given enough time I could think of many more.

Imagine 35,000 people who are dying from AIDS who are abruptly cut off from the drugs. Some will become prostitutes (female and male) (and for those heterosexuals who didn't get the memo, AIDS has been for some time now predominately transmitted through heterosexual means) and will sell themselves in order to make money so they can to cling to life or simply because they want to "live life to the fullest" before they die. Most likely they are going to make a point of NOT letting anyone know they are positive, because that would drive away most people. Their thinking: Why the f*ck should I care who I infect? No one cares about me, so why should I care about anybody else? Believe me when I tell you, this is INDEED how some people think. I've witnessed it firsthand. Now you have a potential of all those people deliberately or malisciously or apathetically passing on HIV to the wider unsuspecting popluation.

You will also have people who lives are SO intertwinned with those infected that they will not care about living without their dying loved ones. There will be some who will deliberately allow themselves to be infected (This is called "giving them the gift"), so they can "go down with their loved ones on a sinking ship" (think of Rose in Titantic or in real life, Mrs. Straus who refused to get on the lifeboat because her husband wouldn't go).

These are simply two scenarios I can think of and have either witnessed firsthand or read about in journals. There are thousands of others, most likely as many as there are people directly affected by this and my examples don't even begin to cover individuals who contract it by sharing tainted needles. God knows how many disastrous scenarios will ensue in that direction!

Cutting people off from life saving services is similar to cutting off firefighters from stopping or controlling a fire. The fire is most likely going to spread into other homes which were once deemed safe.

These cuts not only cease life-saving medications, they also cut AIDS education as well and most importantly to those who most likely need to be educated!

I have worked with HIV educators who get their funding from the government. I know people who have volunteered to be models for the "HIV Stops With Me" slogan, in spite of the fact that they would be discrimated against simply for having a disease. All these people are my heroes! They have made a huge difference in not only educating the general public about AIDS but also in stopping the spread of it.

[JWBear]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I don't think feeding the poor is the responsibility of government...

If not the government, then who? Especially in this economy.

Private food banks have seen a huge increase in applicants, while donations have shrunk. As a consequence, they are turning people away in droves. And even if those in need can find a food bank that can help, it often comes with restrictions. Many religious bases organizations will turn you away if you are of a different faith or if they disapprove of your life circumstances (try getting services from a baptist church if you are a single mother, or gay, or a Muslim).

The government can not discriminate against you for these things.

So Leo, if you suddenly find yourself without money to feed your children, and all the private food banks in your area are unable or unwilling to help you, you would allow your children to die of starvation because it's not the government's place to feed them, right?

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by JWBear

If not the government, then who? Especially in this economy.

I love being mischaracterized. Thanks for chopping of the part of the quote that says "but think it's a great alternative to starvation.".