Could you do it?

[Callwaiting]

If you had the choice, would you kill every person with HIV/AIDS, therefore eliminating these terrible diseases forever?
If it was a matter of pressing a button anonymously.

Before you decide, consider the two sides.

On one hand, by eliminating AIDS you would be saving hundreds of millions of people from this lethal disease, which kills hundreds of people every day.

On the other hand, you would be extinguishing millions of lives, millions of futures marred by their eventual deaths but nontheless filled with hope and love like all of us.

So, if it really came down to it, would you?
If the button was in front of you, could you press it?

[Sapphire]

No, I don't think I could.

[Mzor203]

But, another point to think about is, what if you had AIDS? Very few would do it then.

The thing is, the spread of AIDS can be stopped if people are responsible. Most people didn't get it on purpose, so why do they deserve to die for that? They don't. They just have to take measures to make sure it doesn't spread to others.

So no I wouldn't do it and I wouldn't even think about it.

[Ultraviolet]

No. Our lives are ours. Who should have the right to take it but yourself or natural causes?

[CaptainObvious]

Absolutely not. Mainly because I think that killing everyone with AIDS is a worse "solution" than not. treatments are getting more and more advanced every day; eventually, there should be a cure (maybe wishful thinking, but at the very least a very, very effective treatment). Given that, killing everyone with AIDS (many of whom have contributed great things to our society) would not only be cruel and presumptive, it would be stupid.

[Whisper]

No
as sad and horrible as its sounds
were the top on the food chain
the only thing that somewhat slows our growth is disease and war
by 2042 at current growth rates we'll be at 9,000,000,000
As it stands China is the only country that has been forced to adopt a 1 child policy
but ya..
Theirs limited resources, limited space, limited food production capacity and as it stands now a tiny tiny TINY percentage is first world

The oceans being over fished
The rain forests are disappearing
ecosystems vital to maintain our way of life are on the verge of collapse
If the ice keeps melting like it is then the ocean level is going to rise meaning allot less land
like
ya

[BlackenedSilver]

Theres no way I could do it! But I wouldnt have any trouble doing it if I had it tbh, I wouldnt want myself to go through all that pain and suffering. I dont know! lol!

[redcar]

To do something like that would be stupid.

Look at our history. Smallpox was a horrible and deadly disease, it killed people. Killed people in the millions. But was eradicated.

Same will happen HIV/Aids. We will find a cure, and then mother nature or mankind will devolop a new disease that can't be cured for years and years and years until someone figures it out.

Look at our history, it has cycles. To kill everyone who has this disease would not only be pointless but cold blooded murder.

[iJack]

To do something like that would be stupid.

Look at our history. Smallpox was a horrible and deadly disease, it killed people. Killed people in the millions. But was eradicated.

Same will happen HIV/Aids. We will find a cure, and then mother nature or mankind will devolop a new disease that can't be cured for years and years and years until someone figures it out.

Look at our history, it has cycles. To kill everyone who has this disease would not only be pointless but cold blooded murder.
History ALWAYS repeats itself.

No, never, no possibility.

[Camazotz]

I think I might. Everyone is going to die eventually, we mind as well save the innocent so we can rid the world of the horrible disease.

[Mzor203]

To do something like that would be stupid.

Look at our history. Smallpox was a horrible and deadly disease, it killed people. Killed people in the millions. But was eradicated.

Same will happen HIV/Aids. We will find a cure, and then mother nature or mankind will devolop a new disease that can't be cured for years and years and years until someone figures it out.

Look at our history, it has cycles. To kill everyone who has this disease would not only be pointless but cold blooded murder.

One thing to think about here is that the Chinese were innoculating themselves against smallpox a very long time ago... simple as that. The Europeans didn't, and the Native American didn't, but it was as simple as that. AIDS isn't that simple. Though we will find a cure eventually, (We can't not), but it's not quite as simple as smallpox.

I'm not saying doom and gloom as coming. just pointing out the facts. :D

[The Resurrected One]

I wouldn't.

I'd rather just get a fucking cure.

This way is just harsh.

There'd be a lot of hate crimes going on.

[Oblivion]

I wouldn't be able to

[Nihilus]

The diseases are now in peoples genetics (DNA) so I would have to kill inoccent people which I couldn't do. I wouldn't be able to do it. I can't see how people can kill.

[Callwaiting]

I wouldn't.

I'd rather just get a fucking cure.

This way is just harsh.

There'd be a lot of hate crimes going on.


Yes, that's my point. You can't just "get" a cure, it'll take a very long time and a lot of money for one to be found.
So the people you save may outnumber the people you kill.

What do you mean by hate crimes?

[Zephyr]

My god. This is like the time my Sophomore year when we had to answer this question...

One girl responded, "I would ship them all off to Africa and nuke it."

But no. I would not.
A lot of them got it from their partners who lied about it or didn't tell them about it.

[Sapphire]

I think I might. Everyone is going to die eventually, we mind as well save the innocent so we can rid the world of the horrible disease.

The innocent? Does that mean that you deem those who have HIV to be "guilty"?

[redcar]

One thing to think about here is that the Chinese were innoculating themselves against smallpox a very long time ago... simple as that. The Europeans didn't, and the Native American didn't, but it was as simple as that. AIDS isn't that simple. Though we will find a cure eventually, (We can't not), but it's not quite as simple as smallpox.

I'm not saying doom and gloom as coming. just pointing out the facts. :D
You are right it is not as simple as smallpox. But the basics are. We have a disease that is destroying millions of peoples lives, just like smallpox did. Mankind was able to eradicate it. We will do that with HIV/Aids.

We will always have a disease we don't have a cure, a disease that can kill in the millions. We will never be free of disease.

[Requin]

But there's a problem. What if there isn't a cure? What if the problem reaches an even further scale than it already is?

Killing millions to save maybe thousands of millions. Is it worth it? Not now certainly. But to be honest i couldn't do it. But if someone said they would do it, well i'd be neutral.
It's horrible, don't get me wrong, but think how many lives it could save.

But then again, would it get rid of the disease completely? What if it doesn't work?
Then you would be in the shit. Not to mention the fact that you would of killed millions only for the disease to start again.
But i couldn't do it, it's to inhumane.

[Whisper]

The easiest way to attack and eradicate all known disease from the human body is nanites you program them to annihilate diseased cells
simple injection at birth injects millions if not tens of millions of them into your blood stream where they begin to perforate and spread throughout you're entire system
you'd never get sick


You basically just introduce a technological immune system

[Sapphire]

We will always have a disease we don't have a cure, a disease that can kill in the millions. We will never be free of disease.

QFT.

In the past we've had smallpox and the bubonic plague. At the moment, we have cancer and HIV. Organisms never stop mutating and so diseases change and demand different cures. We will forever play catch-up because we cannot predict how they will next mutate.

[Mannequin]

Agreed with Alex.

Maybe this idea is ludacris, but a person who knowingly has AIDS should be heavily fined for spreading their disease sexually. I reallyyy don't understand why those people do it.

[Callwaiting]

Agreed with Alex.

Maybe this idea is ludacris, but a person who knowingly has AIDS should be heavily fined for spreading their disease sexually. I reallyyy don't understand why those people do it.

Of course if they intentionally did it, but it's pretty complicated - what if a pregnant woman with AIDS gives birth and passes the disease to her child whom she loves? Should she be fined?

[rsc4life]

No I would not! I could never deal with killing those people. What if we found the cure the next day?

[Mannequin]

I think women with aids should get their tubes tied if they are any civil human being. what idiots would risk their own child like that

[redcar]

Maybe this idea is ludacris, but a person who knowingly has AIDS should be heavily fined for spreading their disease sexually. I reallyyy don't understand why those people do it.


It is a crime in a lot of places. Some places treat it like a murder charge. Knowlingly spreading it, you can get 10 - 30.

[The Batman]

I think women with aids should get their tubes tied if they are any civil human being. what idiots would risk their own child like that
Actually there is a way for a woman with HIV/AIDS to concieve a child without passing the disease. I can't remember how though but I know it takes a lot of medicine or maybe a surrogate.

[Neverender]

If you had the choice, would you kill every person with HIV/AIDS, therefore eliminating these terrible diseases forever?
If it was a matter of pressing a button anonymously.

Before you decide, consider the two sides.

On one hand, by eliminating AIDS you would be saving hundreds of millions of people from this lethal disease, which kills hundreds of people every day.

On the other hand, you would be extinguishing millions of lives, millions of futures marred by their eventual deaths but nontheless filled with hope and love like all of us.

So, if it really came down to it, would you?
If the button was in front of you, could you press it?

but i thought aids was originally a mutated virus from gays having sex(no offence my gay friends) in the sahara desert where the disease was first seen. if it is some genetic or viral mutation or a bacteria or virus, etc. that was caused by gay sex(which in nature, gay sex is not happening) then the virus may spring up again.


or im completely wrong and i would just kill all the aids infected people.

[Callwaiting]

It WAS NOT caused by gay sex, how could a virus just occur from doing something differently? That belief was abolished in the 1980s.

[Antares]

Maybe I think so only for thre sole reason that there is no cure and these people are most likely going to die sooner than later so why not save money and lives and just get rid of the whole thing so we never have to worry about it again.
Also its not necessarily genitic. You have it two ways. From being infected or from your mom. So once everyone that has it is killed then it doesn't exist...in theory

[Attax]

No
as sad and horrible as its sounds
were the top on the food chain
the only thing that somewhat slows our growth is disease and war
by 2042 at current growth rates we'll be at 9,000,000,000
As it stands China is the only country that has been forced to adopt a 1 child policy
but ya..
Theirs limited resources, limited space, limited food production capacity and as it stands now a tiny tiny TINY percentage is first world

The oceans being over fished
The rain forests are disappearing
ecosystems vital to maintain our way of life are on the verge of collapse
If the ice keeps melting like it is then the ocean level is going to rise meaning allot less land
like
ya

For those of you who have not taken a course in Environmental Science you may/may not know what I am talking about whenever I say sustainability. Our world has a carrying capacity and it only has certain amount of resources to sustain every organism on it. Did you know on average if everyone lived as the average American it would take ~ 2.48 worlds to have enough natural resources and energy to power us?

But allow me to get to my point:

That being that if we are increasing as a populous and this is a major problem (as we see it being considering in 2042 we will have approximately 2.7 billion more people than we have now and the world's carrying capacity for humans is estimated to be around 15 billion) then why would anyone even CONSIDER pressing that button? The HIV/AIDS is killing people, so if we actually want to do the greatest good in the long run we would allow for them to live. Because we can say that all we need to do is to be responsible and it will go away, but lets be honest with ourselves and admit that that won't happen. It will spread, and it may take hundreds of years to discover a cure (if we are still around that long), so by not having a cure a higher percentile of our population will not be immune to disease, and dying off from disease and sickness. So would this not help control population better?

I know that that sounds horrible, but it is just my logical analysis of the truth for those of you claiming we can control it and arguing about population control, etc. I mean no offense to anyone who has HIV/AIDS just proving how in essence it may be a blessing in disguise.

No. Our lives are ours. Who should have the right to take it but yourself or natural causes?

Unfortunately it is naive to think that in this world we will always have the right to take our own life or for only natural causes to take our own life. For this will never be attainable in our world, because we have evil in our hearts that drives some people to yearn to harm others. No offense but this naivety could also justify no government, no need for education, no need for driver's licenses, etc. So we cannot accept this logic because it is fallacious to assume this naivety will be possible in this cruel world that we inhabit.

[Curthose93]

The easiest way to attack and eradicate all known disease from the human body is nanites you program them to annihilate diseased cells


Easy? Nanites haven't been invented yet, Whisper. In a few decades, hopefully...

[Mzor203]

Easy? Nanites haven't been invented yet, Whisper. In a few decades, hopefully...

BUT, nanotechnology which is used to go inside the human body for different purposes (Mainly obtaining data) is already around, so all we need to do is program it to find and recognize cells which lead to disease. Yes, it's much harder than it sounds, but it could happen soon, if we're lucky.