Dubya - with apologies to the non-americans - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-06-2001, 07:46 PM   #31
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 04:53 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Foxxern:
1)But during his tenure as governor of Texas, the man never once publicly uttered the word "AIDS". He never acknowledged an epidemic that is ravaging the homosexual population. Certainly AIDS is not contained within the homosexual community, but to practically deny the existence of such a disease invokes the memories of another president who all but ignored the problem--Ronald Reagan. As Bush ignored the problem in Texas, it only continued to get worse, especially amongst the homosexual population.
In terms of other homesexual-related topics, Bush has once again sided with the opposition. He vehemently opposes both same-sex marriage and gay and lesbian child adoption. He opposed a Texas bill that would have protected gays from discrimination based on sexual orientation. Maybe he doesn't outright hate gays, but he sure doesn't seem to support them in any way.
So, he hasn't uttered the word "AIDS" while he was governeor of my state Texas - do you know that? How do you know that? Governor of Texas is not some Surgeon General, who has time to appropriate money for every disease that comes down the pike. That's what disease foundations are for. AIDS is no worse a threat than Cancer, and yet, I don't hear people complaining because their governor doesn't spend all his time talking about Cancer. In many many cases, Cancer is TOTALLY unpreventable - meaning nothing the person does causes them to get cancer. This is usually not the case with AIDS. There is a very very small percentage of people who get AIDS through birth or through transfusion. So, there is a way to prevent AIDS. Don't share needles and don't have sex with anyone other than your spouse. And don't tell me it's impossible. I'm 34 years old and haven't had sex since I was 23 (and before that, I had NEVER had sex), and it's not even a difficult thing to accomplish. Also, George Bush is against Gay marriage and Gay adoption. Does that make him a homophobe? No no no. I would guess that most people probably are against gay marriage and gay adoption. I am. And I am no homophobe. I just believe certain things are wrong, and if they came to me with a bill to sign that would lead to state-sanctioning of something I feel is morally wrong, there's no way I would sign it. Do you begrudge a man for standing by his principles?
__________________

__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 08-07-2001, 01:58 AM   #32
Refugee
 
Foxxern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Illinois, USA
Posts: 1,284
Local Time: 03:53 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by 80sU2isBest:

So, he hasn't uttered the word "AIDS" while he was governeor of my state Texas - do you know that? How do you know that?


Salon Magazine, Nov 19, 1999. It isn't a revelation--there are other sources as well, if you would like me to pull them up. But this is a fact, uncovered by those who knew of his anti-homosexual stance, and who pored through his collection of speeches to find his plans to control the AIDS epidemic. Instead, they found literally nothing.

Governor of Texas is not some Surgeon General, who has time to appropriate money for every disease that comes down the pike. That's what disease foundations are for. AIDS is no worse a threat than Cancer, and yet, I don't hear people complaining because their governor doesn't spend all his time talking about Cancer. In many many cases, Cancer is TOTALLY unpreventable - meaning nothing the person does causes them to get cancer. This is usually not the case with AIDS. There is a very very small percentage of people who get AIDS through birth or through transfusion. So, there is a way to prevent AIDS. Don't share needles and don't have sex with anyone other than your spouse.


I never said Bush had to spend a great amount of time discussing the AIDS problem, but he could at least devote some time to a problem which is no longer contained to people who engage in high sexual activity. It isn't his job to control AIDS research, but he needs to help the people recognize that this is not a disease that is contained within the gay community. It's a problem for everyone, and only education can help people truly realize that.

Cancer is in a different situation, because again, the rate of cancer is not increasing, and in general it is not totally preventable. You seem to be contradicting yourself--why would people be concerned with taking action against cancer, a generally unpreventable disease? AIDS, on the other hand, is preventable, so it deserves some discussion regarding its prevention.


And don't tell me it's impossible. I'm 34 years old and haven't had sex since I was 23 (and before that, I had NEVER had sex), and it's not even a difficult thing to accomplish. Also, George Bush is against Gay marriage and Gay adoption. Does that make him a homophobe? No no no. I would guess that most people probably are against gay marriage and gay adoption. I am. And I am no homophobe. I just believe certain things are wrong, and if they came to me with a bill to sign that would lead to state-sanctioning of something I feel is morally wrong, there's no way I would sign it. Do you begrudge a man for standing by his principles?


I don't think it's impossible. I'm 19 and haven't ever gone there, though that has mostly been situational. I haven't really put myself into a place where I would have to make that type of decision, mainly because of the crowd I hang out with, and the culture I was raised in. We are both lucky in that sense. However, for some people, the temptation is just too great. Their culture has not made them feel as though casual sex is wrong, and they don't always consider the consequences. For them, there is much more possibility for the exposure to AIDS, and it will take years to change their culture to have them recognize the danger they are putting themselves into.

I myself am against gay adoption, as I am not sure if gay men and lesbian women are in the correct position to serve as a family example for a child. And I realize that most Americans (around 60%) oppose same-sex marriages receiving the same rights as traditional marriages. However, is it right do discriminate against homosexuals? Is it right to make them suffer further for something that have no control over? Bush has repeatedly shown that he does not support legislation that would protect homesexuals from discrimination.

I know of his belief that homosexuality is wrong, and I respect his decision as long as it is educated. If he believes in the teachings of the Bible, more power to him. However, he is isolating himself from those of us who are liberals and feel he needs to devote some time to discussing the problems amongst the gay community. The fact that he seems to ignore gay rights altogether raises more than a few eyebrows.

80sU2isBest, I don't think you are homophobic, as you seem comfortable with the subject, and you express your beliefs freely. I have no problem with that. I do have a problem with people who try to ignore homosexuals, thinking they will just "go away".



------------------
Change is the only constant
__________________

__________________
Foxxern is offline  
Old 08-07-2001, 12:16 PM   #33
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 04:53 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Foxxern:

Cancer is in a different situation, because again, the rate of cancer is not increasing, and in general it is not totally preventable. You seem to be contradicting yourself--why would people be concerned with taking action against cancer, a generally unpreventable disease? AIDS, on the other hand, is preventable, so it deserves some discussion regarding its prevention.
I wasn't speaking of prevention. I was speaking of finding a cure. And both diseases should be researched for a cure, but I don't knwo why the cure for AIDS takes on more importance than Cancer in so many circles.
Of course, I beleieve that we educate everyone, straights and gays, about prevention.
__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
Old 08-08-2001, 10:14 AM   #34
Refugee
 
Crzy4Bono's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: somewhere out there
Posts: 1,319
Local Time: 04:53 PM
80sU2isBest has a point...

Public Health Issue Estimated Number of Americans Affected FY 2000 Federal Spending on Research Spending Per Affected American

HIV/AIDS - 393,045 people, $1.8 billion spending, $4,665 per affected person

Cancer - 757,600 people, $3.3 billion spending, $4,398 per affected person

Alcohol Abuse - 3,100,000 people, $293 million spending, $95 per affected person

Drug Abuse - 13,000,000 people, $689 million spending, $53 per affected person

Heart Disease - 59,700,000 people, $2.0 billion spending, $34 per affected person

Child Abuse - 3,154,000 people, $68 million spending, $22 per affected person


AIDS is getting a disproportionate amount of spending for the number of people affected. However, I do agree that we are poised for a potential epidemic here (like in Africa) if our leaders do not talk about this issue. It is not a gay disease - it is just a disease. Perhaps additional funding is not the answer, but you can't just stand up in a nation and say it's wrong, the bible says so so we're just not going to talk about it. The bible doesn't say anything about AIDS. And George Bush is represented to elect a population that consists of a lot of other religions besides christianity.

Also on this list are several other things, including child abuse, that are preventable. I haven't heard him say much about these things either. Not trying to Bush bash or anything - I just haven't really heard much from him in the way of hard policy. Just let the churches do it (faith based) ... compassionate conservatism... but no real concrete action.

------------------
"I can't change the world, but I can change the world in me." - Bono
Visit my web page at www.u2page.com
__________________
Crzy4Bono is offline  
Old 08-08-2001, 12:01 PM   #35
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 399
Local Time: 09:53 PM
OY VEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I had missed these thread until today.

I had no idea, Claire. But I do remember you saying you knew someone who knew Dubya...

Wow... I'm as anti-Dubya as they come.

"Bigtime! Bigtime!" as Dick would say.

Tolerence... "Agree to disagree".

...breathe TC... Breeathe...

I just have to find the same compasion and forgiveness for Dubya that I found for Clinton...
__________________
Trash Can is offline  
Old 08-08-2001, 12:33 PM   #36
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 399
Local Time: 09:53 PM
Part 2:

The obvious: George W. Bush is certainly NOT the brightest Prez to sit in the Oval Officein quite a while.
He may be a nice guy. He may be a God-fearing Christian. He may be moral, as far as sexual immorality goes. But to be thought of AS the best candidate... the best American, the best Republican for the job.... NO. Lets be honest here.

(Before anyone starts: Clinton is/was a liar. He is/was immoral. He did terrible things in the White House, including adultery, selling bedrooms for money, and God knows what else. He lied to you and me, and perhaps to himself. He desperately needs help... Was he "intelligent? Very much so. Was he "wise" in the immoral acts he did? Certainly not. Was he caring about the "little man" --- NO pun intended -- Yes. Was he caring about the environment? Yes.)

Bush was elected, by the "Electoral Votes", He won.

He is my president.

Did the fact that his name was Bush help him?
Did the fact that Big Oil was behind him help him?

I truely believe that Dick Cheney, George Bush Sr., and Republican head-honchos run this country. If anything, they greatly influence Dubyas decisions ( and YES, Clinton had HIS Puppetmasters too!)

THANK GOD!!!
(Lord, please keep Dick Cheney safe and alive!)

Look, the American people seem to know that Dubya is a dimwit... and they dont seem to mind! What does THAT say about the American people??? I mean, in an era when "reality shows" are all the rage, Jerry Springer, Howard Stern and Rush Limbaugh are worshipped. And our last president's rating went up after we found out he had a real problem, but was in denial...

Do we deserve Dubya?
Perhaps.

As long as the man can read the teleprompter without too many bumbles, and does NOT say too much "off the cuff", I think we are safe... to a point.
AND as long as Congress keeps Cheney in check, we will be ok.

Hmmmm... Question is: WHO is best to run in 2004!!???


Too bad Powell has dark skin, eh??????

I hope * I * dont loose "friends" here by what I have said.

Peace.
__________________
Trash Can is offline  
Old 08-10-2001, 05:10 PM   #37
Refugee
 
Foxxern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Illinois, USA
Posts: 1,284
Local Time: 03:53 PM
Yeah, I think I agree with pretty much everything Trash Can said there. In the GOP, I was really rooting for McCain to get the bid. But I knew he was too liberal to ever get chosen. I just hope the Democrats can get a better cadidate in 2004. So far, the only name I hear is John Kerry. Meh.

So Dubya is God-fearing? Problem number one right there.

------------------
Change is the only constant
__________________
Foxxern is offline  
Old 08-10-2001, 05:12 PM   #38
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
U2Bama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Gulf Coast State of Mine
Posts: 3,405
Local Time: 03:53 PM
What's wrong with being God-fearing?
__________________
U2Bama is offline  
Old 08-13-2001, 06:20 PM   #39
Acrobat
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 399
Local Time: 09:53 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by U2Bama:
What's wrong with being God-fearing?
Certainly not a thing. Although "praising, worshipping, and loving" is much better worded.
What was the very first thing that Jesus (and many angels that appeared to men)continually said after His resurrection when He would appear to people???
__________________
Trash Can is offline  
Old 08-13-2001, 08:00 PM   #40
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
U2Bama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Gulf Coast State of Mine
Posts: 3,405
Local Time: 03:53 PM
I guess my meaning of being "God-fearing" is believing in God and knowing that He is supreme, but yes, Jesus the Messiah, after His resurrection, told people "peace be with you," and the angels said "be not afraid." I see Jesus as the redemptive member of the Trinity. And my "fear" of God is more or less my subordination of God the Father and his judgement (note: I do NOT "fear" Satan or evil).

~U2Alabama
__________________
U2Bama is offline  
Old 08-13-2001, 11:30 PM   #41
Refugee
 
Crzy4Bono's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: somewhere out there
Posts: 1,319
Local Time: 04:53 PM
TrashCan -

I believe you've been tripped up by a cultural difference here... "God-fearing" is a southernism - "U2Bama is a good, ole' God-fearing southern boy, went up to the university. And his folks are real nice too."

Most God-fearing southern boys also like football, but we forgive him for that.
(hey Bama, I worked football into this thread before you did! )

Peace!

------------------
She's gonna dream up a world she wants to live in / She's gonna dream out loud.
Visit my web page at www.u2page.com

[This message has been edited by Crzy4Bono (edited 08-13-2001).]
__________________
Crzy4Bono is offline  
Old 08-14-2001, 10:23 AM   #42
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
DrTeeth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Q continuum
Posts: 4,770
Local Time: 10:53 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Foxxern:
I just hope the Democrats can get a better cadidate in 2004. So far, the only name I hear is John Kerry. Meh.
Won't Gore be allowed to run again in 2004?
__________________
DrTeeth is offline  
Old 02-01-2003, 09:14 PM   #43
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
hiphop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: in the jungle
Posts: 7,410
Local Time: 11:53 PM
Just wanted to bring this thread back on top because there´s a nice discussion about jerk journalism, Bush non-diplomacy and AIDS inside.
__________________
hiphop is offline  
Old 02-02-2003, 12:24 AM   #44
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 04:53 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
My opinions, take 'em or leave 'em:

1) A 'diverse' cabinet means nothing. I almost see it as an overcompensation for the fact that the GOP comes across as a bunch of gun-toting, white-haired, old men. Yet, however, I do applaud at least the facade of diversity; but I still can't get over the fact that Dubya, along with the rest of his 'party,' are raving homophobes, and, until they can get beyond that, they will always be bigots to me.

Melon,

This is a little harsh. There are many republicans who are not homophobes. Many of us are young and do not own guns.

Peace

Matt
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 02-02-2003, 12:41 AM   #45
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 02:53 PM
Normal

Matt-
this thread is over a year old.

I think Melon isnt qwite as strident in his view of Rebublicans as of late..

Dave
__________________

__________________
diamond is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com