Quote:I'd've said you never do.
But which is better? To do something in good faith and be wrong or do nothing and be wrong? Pascal's wager examplifies this I think. Sure I could be wrong but at least i tried and I'm willing to accept the consequences of that. Sometimes you don't have the luxury of always knowing the right thing to do.
That being the case, I have a choice between:
1. Following a policy based on the recognition of my connection to my environment and the fact that damage to it, from any source, in turn impacts my own existence to greater or lesser degree.
Or
2. Trusting the word of a caste whose livelihoods depend on their ability to persuade others.
...gee, I fuckin' wonder.
Quote:Human beings have a duty to help them. Nationality is irrelevant except to the extent that the government is in the employ of its citizens.
As for africa, You assume the USA has a duty to
help them.
Quote:Source, please?
Better than most other countries that don't help much at all.
Quote:...What on earth are you talking about? Page 42 has nothing to do with the gathering of the control group - or any group at all! It talks about how each of the groups does at identifying STDs!
Also page 42 of the report seems to be confusing on how they got their control group together. If the control group is the one they compare the answers of the program group to then it is majorly flawed.
Quote:And at last we come to the paragraph that persuaded me to jump into this mess.
I don't buy biological function as an excuse for abstinance failure. That would excuse rape because the
rapist was follow his biological urges, which is ridiculous. We are thinking beings with the ability to choose. Not animals that have no choice but to follow our instincts. there are millions of adult virgins in the world. Just because
something is popular and feels good doesn't make it right.
First, an elementary-level distinction: Rape causes harm against the will of the victim. By definition.
Sex, in and of itself, does not hurt people. STDs and pregnancy are outside factors that attach to the act - and which can be seperated from it.
Second: The moral component of the choice between abstinence and sexual activity - presuming that one is agreed to exist, which, as you might've guessed, I actually don't - is not under question here. In fact, it is COMPLETELY FUCKING IRRELEVANT!!!
The question is, does the dissemination of limited or falsified information about the relative consequences of abstinence, condom use, and other methods of birth control materially impact the rate at which people actually abstain from sexual activity?
Unless I'm greatly misreading that paper's results, the honest answer is a clear, unqualified, and resounding "No."
In which case, the only interpretation I'm capable of putting on an effort to keep people from gaining access to the information they could use to protect themselves is criminal malice and irresponsibility.
Ja, -n
===============================================
"I'm terribly sorry, but I have to kill you quite horribly now."