It will probably trip at least a few of them up. Because if they approve of people being required to show they are considered medically safe to do things needed to live, like grocery shopping, then surely they should agree that doing something that's instead a voluntary act entirely unnecessary for personal survival, yet holds the same type of potential danger (infection of a third party), should also be subject to the same sort of restrictions. I know the dangers of HIV/AIDS has been downplayed in the past few years, but I think the average person will still recognize that AIDS is worse than the wuflu.
Comments (17)
sorted by:
I've tried it. Your last sentence is wrong. The NPC responds that AIDS isn't a big deal and most pozzed people live completely normal life, including a vibrant sex life, but the coof will literally kill everyone.
I will be brutally honest. I can't blame a person for fucking executing those "muh vibrant AIDS sex life" people for endangering them. Like if someone did that to me... I would probably snap.
Seriously. If someone knowingly gave me AIDs, they're getting fucking domed and idgaf about prison at that point.
"Law Abiding Citizen" comes to mind. Domed? Nope. Not that easily. After they've been taken apart piece by fucking piece? Waste of ammo.
Via Appia...
Some people might think your comment is hyperbole but it's not. You're 100% correct, and that kind of sentiment is being amplified by GLAAD.
No joke, GLAAD is encouraging "positive" media portrayals of HIV/AIDs victims as role models. Here are the articles about it: https://www.glaad.org/reference/hiv
https://www.glaad.org/releases/glaads-where-we-are-tv-2020-2021-report-despite-tumultuous-year-television-lgbtq
Relevant sections:
Now why would a pharma company want more people to get HIV?
Good research, thanks for this.
Ask them if they know how much the anti-viral drugs required to live "vibrant lives" cost, then show them a list of the one's used in the U.S. and their price tags.
$30 a pill for the cheapest if I recall, and the drugs are getting less and less effective as resistant strains of HIV pop up.
They want you to pay for that though. They want the tax payer to pay for drugs so they keep fucking each other in the ass without a condom.
"So you are okay with people making dangerous decisions that affect their health receiving life-saving treatment? Great, glad we agree. The difference between me and the gay man is, I'm not asking you to pay for my healthcare. I just want to be able to pay to go to the same hospital he gets admitted to at no charge."
The problem with this is that liberals are comfortable with their hypocrisy.
They aren't thinking, reasoning creatures like you or I. They're evil, and they like it that way.
i hear ads on tv trying to normalize or even make acceptable the idea of having hiv.
We're past the stage where you can argue your point.
I support the ban on gay people donating blood, but oppose the Social Credit system. When 2% of the population is responsible for 2/3rds of new AIDS cases, a restriction that doesn't inconvenience them in anyway but might hurt their feelings if they're a selfish, over-emotional idiot is an easy decision to make.