Huckabee Thought AIDS Patients Should be Separated from the Population and Won't Recant his Statement?

Question

Huckabee stands by AIDS statement
WASHINGTON - GOP presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee said Sunday he won't run from his statement 15 years ago that AIDS patients should have been isolated.
"I still believe this today," he said in a broadcast interview, that "we were acting more out of political correctness" in responding to the AIDS crisis. "I don't run from it, I don't recant it," he said of his position in 1992. Yet he said he would state his view differently in retrospect.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071209/ap_po/huckabee_3

Thoughts?

Answer 1

Uh....gee.... Let's see now...... HIV is spread by blood. What else is spread by blood? Wow! check this out....Hepatitis B and Hepatitis C... better lock those people away too.

What can be transfered through saliva (besides good old Herpes)? Uh Oh...... Hepatitis B again and Glandular Fever

How about sweat? What can we get from someones sweat I wonder? Yuck, look at this folks......Chicken pox, Hand Foot and Mouth Disease, Ringworm, Head Lice, Warts

What if we happen to come in contact with someones faeces? Hepatitis A, Meningitis, Worms...this list is way to long.

What if you happen to breathe the wrong air? OH MY GOD!!!! Chickenpox, Diphtheria, Influenza, Meningitis, Mumps, Rubella, Tuberculosis.

A lot of this stuff can kill you too, not all but a lot of it.

Does anybody know of a case where someone contracted aids because they were helping someone who was bleeding?

Huckabee is a funny guy, not real smart but funny, and he looks like Gomer Pyle. He can come to my annual summer BBQ if he likes, but he needs to stay out of the White House.

Answer 2

Saying that back in the early '80s would be somewhat understandable because then it was fueled by fear and since then, progress has been made in the way of telling people how the disease is actually transmitted, not to mention how it's been treated. However in the early '90s, saying that is just plain ignorant, since people know how it's transmitted and that it doesn't discriminate(meaning that your sexual orientation has nothing to do with getting the disease), and it's still ignorant to this day. I disagree with what he said, but at the same time like the fact that he doesn't deny it or try to explain what he meant in an attempt to make himself look good. I'd doubt it'd hurt his campaign, depends on how petty the GOP candidates get.

Answer 3

I think he's an idot. Even in 1992 we knew that AIDS wasn't an airborn virus. And was he planning to separate them from the general population for the rest of their lives? He won't recant his statement either. All he says is we know more now than we did then. I'm scared to have a president that would make it mandatory that private medical illnesses be made public and then if the stigma of having a disease that you're inevitably going to die from wasn't bad enough, then he wants to put you on display labeled "Freak." I can't stand him.

Answer 4

So many great answers and a few really disappointing ones as well. The great ones made it hard to choose a "best" answer. I haven't forgotten those other great answers and I'll be looking for you all to answer questions of mine in the future so I can reward you with some points. Thanks!

Answer 5

If we isolated AIDS patients the AIDS problem would get worse. People are reluctant to get tested as it is without fear of being cast out of society.

As for Huckabee, he actually is getting more support from his true base of Evangelical Christians for these types of comments, however it will hurt him in the general election. The Republicans don't have a candidate that can speak to both sides of the party, but if push comes to shove they will take a Huckabee with guaranteed crazy people support over a Romney, McCain, or Guilliani with faltering support among rational conservatives.

Answer 6

a. He indicated that it is not his current position
b. He did not specify what the term "isolation" would refer to - it didn't necessarily mean that patients would be quarantined or imprisoned
c. In the late 80's and early 90's we were still learning about AIDS and the way it was transmitted (there was a case shortly before his statement where a dentist had infected a patient and it was a HUGE deal)
d. The premise for his argument was that AIDS was a huge public health risk - which it still is. His point of view was based on the fact that the way society approached AIDS should focus on what would help the community at large and protect public health instead of turning it into a civil rights issue

While I am not saying that I agree with his view, it is interesting to ponder what the infection rate would be today had we isolated individuals infected with the disease.

People get highly upset by this idea and think that it is in violation of their rights to be quarantined or isolated. The fact of the matter is that there is no cure for AIDS and that this does not boil down to just civil rights. There are ways to manage the disease, but NO cure. Anyone with typhoid or tuberculosis would be quarantined (as local health authorities DO have the authority to quarantine individuals against their will).

Answer 7

Isolation was considered when we didn't really understand AIDS and how it was spread and subsequently how to control it. It's been 15 years and there has been quite a bit of progress. It figures that a Conservative will discount science to stand by their views.

Answer 8

I don't relish the thought of voting for Huckabee should he win the nomination, but he is right on this particular subject. Our current policies have not slowed down the spread of AIDS in the homosexual or drug addict communities (high risk for AIDS categories). The great hetrosexual plague of AIDS they all told us was going to happen never came about. The only hetrosexuals who get it are drug addicts who inject, people who receive tainted blood products in their medical procedures, and hetrosexuals who have relations with the aforementioned high-risk categories.

All you have to do is go to the CDC website and look at the statistics to see this. Most of us don't do that. Instead we let the media tell us what to think.

The only countries who have managed to get a handle on the spread of AIDS are the ones who implement quarentines. A prime example is Cuba, who has dramatically reduced the new incidents of AIDS by quarantining those who have the disease.

We are applying politics to this disease instead of good sound medical science. Because of this many more people have caught AIDS that wouldn't have if there were a quarantine. Many more people will catch AIDS in the future because there is no quarantine.

One could make a good argument that it is racist to continue with the current AIDS policies. Blacks and hispanics have a lot higher incidence of AIDS per capita than other groups and thus the death toll is way out of proportion for those groups.

Answer 9

He has exposed a dirty little secret that republicans rarely say but certainly ascribe to which is that AIDS patients deserve it for their lifestyle rarely if ever acknowledging that all can be victims of aids. He is another one of the hypochristians that drive me nuts with their unmitigated gall......

Answer 10

We all have to live up to things we said in the past, even if they bite us in the proverbial butt! I hope this helps him to lose his bid for the white house, as I still do NOT believe a minister, preacher, elder, or any religious leaders of any church or synagogue, or mosque, should be in charge of this country. We need a person with strong spiritaulity, but not a Bible or Koran thumper.
'stepping down from soapbox'