7 ms·

Yes, and a ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. No one is stopping you from being celibate or monogamous if you so choose. But that changes noting abo

Yes, and a ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. No one is stopping you from being celibate or monogamous if you so choose. But that changes noting about the logic of the situation. It is impossible to avoid cause and effect: Celibacy = 100% success against STIs Non-monogamy = 79.85% Chance of catching an STI (Using numbers from the NYC STD CENTER) Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

s1artibartfast 2y ago
Who is making this your problem?
- normalaccess 2y ago
  It's not my problem I am merely volunteering an alternative view point in a public form (unless my tax dollars are paying for it then it is my problem). As mentioned above we already have a 100% effective solution. Problem == solved, however the solution is unacceptable to our modern society. The fact that people balk at the idea shows that they care more about base desires than their own health then turn around and demand that someone else fixes their mistake. I mean for goodness sake, we are decriminalizing knowingly infecting other people. That's the opposite of helping. How can someone give informed consent if their partner is allowed to lie about their condition? https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/new-california-law-reduces-penalty-knowingly-exposing-someone-hiv-n809416 https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/new-california-law-r... Don't want lung cancer then don't smoke. Don't want STIs then don't have promiscuous sex. It literally cannot be easier to understand.
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    Seems like you are objecting to a sentiment that doesn't exist, or is extremely Fringe. People understand that sex carries a risk of STI, and that smoking carries a risk of lung cancer. Who is demanding someone else fix their mistake? And why do you find this offensive? Drug researchers and pharma companies are not being pressed ganged into servitude to develop cures. They are happily developing products to sell. Does it bother you that people want to have promiscuous sex and be free of STIs? If so, why?

s1artibartfast 2y ago

Who is making this your problem?

normalaccess 2y ago
It's not my problem I am merely volunteering an alternative view point in a public form (unless my tax dollars are paying for it then it is my problem). As mentioned above we already have a 100% effective solution. Problem == solved, however the solution is unacceptable to our modern society. The fact that people balk at the idea shows that they care more about base desires than their own health then turn around and demand that someone else fixes their mistake. I mean for goodness sake, we are decriminalizing knowingly infecting other people. That's the opposite of helping. How can someone give informed consent if their partner is allowed to lie about their condition? https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/new-california-law-reduces-penalty-knowingly-exposing-someone-hiv-n809416 https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/new-california-law-r... Don't want lung cancer then don't smoke. Don't want STIs then don't have promiscuous sex. It literally cannot be easier to understand.
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  Seems like you are objecting to a sentiment that doesn't exist, or is extremely Fringe. People understand that sex carries a risk of STI, and that smoking carries a risk of lung cancer. Who is demanding someone else fix their mistake? And why do you find this offensive? Drug researchers and pharma companies are not being pressed ganged into servitude to develop cures. They are happily developing products to sell. Does it bother you that people want to have promiscuous sex and be free of STIs? If so, why?