25 Years of HIV , what do u think of the response of John Roberts and Reagan about this issue back then ?

year 2006 HIV is 25 years old in the USA . recently i find out about the reaction which Reagan had back then about the issue . i learned that he pretty much ignored the problem until he recieved a letter from a boy who was expulsed from ohio just like many others before him from many other places all this because of the ignorance of many back then. Reagan decided to adress the nation and said that it was OK to expulse all who were positive because they were not sure if it could be adquired through casual contact , he gave this responce because he recieved a letter from a young layer call John Robert ( today chief justice ) who told him he should not tell the nation to not be afraid and to not expulse those who were found to be POSITIVE . so my question ..... what u think of their responce and do u belive that someone who did this should be chief of justice ?

1. by reagan's second term it was already an issue where not only gays were the infected , remember the kid i mentioned he was expulsed whit all his family from ohio
2. i cannot give the benefic of the doubt to any of the fallowing attitudes :
a) when ppl used to get leprah they used to be expulsed and blamed for getting it and stoned if came near a "sane" person
b) today there is some kind of tuberculosis which some have had the shame to blame the immigrants for bringing to america and just like HIV was blamed on the haitians back then .
c) when HIVstarted ppl blamed the haitian , expulsed the sicks and once more blamed them for getting it .
so i ask how can we condone this kind of attitudes or give the benefic of the doubt to them ?
3. a famous religios leadder stated that HIV was a blessing because it was targeting all the right people . can this be also condoned ? do we want to be remebered as people who condoned this kind of attitudes ?

Reagan was one of the most racist people there was. He coined the phrase "welfare queens" and made being an open racist ok for a lot of people. He didnt give a damn about HIV because as far as he was concerned it didnt affect him and it did affect groups of people he didnt like anyway, gays and blacks. Well if we learned one thing from ignoring the drug problems in this country when it was mostly a problem in the black ghettos we should have learned that eventually that which affects one of us will affect us all. AIDS has spread to every group of Americans.

Well like the bird flu now they are telling us they got it in control and not to worry, but when we start dying in USA with it, guess they will worry about it then...

Reagan was an idiot and he traded weapons to the enemy so he got his in the end.

They didn't care, it was primarily a gay and third world disease.

I'd like to give them the benefit of the doubt and say they had no idea what they were doing. It was a scary new cancer that was spreading by means that was not yet thought of. It took quite some time to figure out, but imagine how much more serious a disease it might have been had Reagan acted like it were not a big deal. It's all based on the times and situation.

Get a grip

AIDS is, for the most part, prevantable. It is also the 16th largest killer in the US.

Heart disease, cancer, stroke, diabetes all kill more people. I'd love to see the money this country spends on AIDs research spent on these other disease.

For the record here are the top 15 for 2003 the last year complied by the CDC:

Diseases of heart (heart disease)

Malignant neoplasms (cancer)

Cerebrovascular diseases (stroke)

Chronic lower respiratory diseases

Accidents (unintentional injuries)

Diabetes mellitus (diabetes)

Influenza and pneumonia

Alzheimer鈥檚 disease

Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome and nephrosis (kidney disease)

Septicemia

Intentional self-harm (suicide)

Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis

Essential (primary) hypertension and hypertensive renal disease (hypertension)

Parkinson鈥檚 disease

Assault (homicide)

Well am not gonna sit here and pass judgement on Roberts' past, i think watever he did was for your protection. AIDS wasnt understood then at all, let alone know if it was transmitted via watever contact method. Now i can say that they could have worded wat they said in a diff manner; which i do believe they did. Am a democrat, and I think this is a bull strategy, if not then i think he was just protecting the rest of the population. Now if we can see the original transcript of the letter sent to Reagan then we'll know if it was courteous.
I think roberts must have known better how to handle such a sensitive issue. personally i dont like him but i respect that no matter how he did it. Think about it if AIDS was xmitted via any kinda contact

Any problem that has to do with sex will make conserves
blush, run away & pretend the problem doesn't exist.
Yet, it's ok to take life by killing.

Yes, the whole administration should be replaced with people
who have world knowledge, people who have worked for a
living & with scientists.