Condom Use

[Snark]

deleted

[natee1]

When they'll get no more money, the targetted countries will finally boot the Yanks out. Good one.

Still plenty of dosh from more educated donors than the US...

[dr_Pat_Pong]

George W Bush, under the guidance of various christian coalitions, has qualified aid given by the US to third world countries:

* Countries whose public health departments advocate the use of condoms do not qualify for foreign aid.

* Countries that give public education which includes the use of condoms do not qualify for aid.

* Countries that make condoms easily accessible or even free to sex workers do not qualify.

What is your opinion of this legislation, abstinance before marriage as Washington DC calls it?

Same sort of self restraint that Billy Clinton used

[Thetyim]

Does this mean Bush Baby only disapproves of the use of condoms in third world countries

Why ?

[Snark]

deleted

[TizMe]

I wonder if GWB's brother used condoms when he was caught with the hookers in Bangkok.

[Richard Hall]

What a darn pity that Bush senior has never been taught how to use a condom! Ain't that already proof enough how useful condoms actually are?

How paradox: Religions, actually supposed (or better say created) to do good and support and benefit the human race, become more and more the reason for the world's greatest burden and cause of problems. Will that craziness by those extremists of any color in the name of God never stop??!! Use your brain and not prayers to see the light.

[dr_Pat_Pong]

What a darn pity that Bush senior has never been taught how to use a condom! Ain't that already proof enough how useful condoms actually are?

How paradox: Religions, actually supposed (or better say created) to do good and support and benefit the human race, become more and more the reason for the world's greatest burden and cause of problems. Will that craziness by those extremists of any color in the name of God never stop??!! Use your brain and not prayers to see the light.

In George Dubya's case, a spot of retrospective birth control is called for.

[Richard Hall]

Then lets hope Doc that science is making quick progress to get the world off the edge and rescue it from the good deeds of Georgie and his AIDS, whoops the capital lock was erroneously on, I certainly meant to write aids (however, astonishing the parallels aren't they). Ponder, ponder...aquired immune deficiency syndrome... guess this hits the nail right on the head.

[dr_Pat_Pong]

Then lets hope Doc that science is making quick progress to get the world off the edge and rescue it from the good deeds of Georgie and his AIDS, whoops the capital lock was erroneously on, I certainly meant to write aids (however, astonishing the parallels aren't they). Ponder, ponder...aquired immune deficiency syndrome... guess this hits the nail right on the head.

Your parsar angkrid is excellent Richard. Off topic, but it isn't worth starting a new topic for a simple accolade.

[Richard Hall]

Then lets hope Doc that science is making quick progress to get the world off the edge and rescue it from the good deeds of Georgie and his AIDS, whoops the capital lock was erroneously on, I certainly meant to write aids (however, astonishing the parallels aren't they). Ponder, ponder...aquired immune deficiency syndrome... guess this hits the nail right on the head. 

Your parsar angkrid is excellent Richard. Off topic, but it isn't worth starting a new topic for a simple accolade.

Well Doc, two years living and working in New Joycy (local dialect for Jersey) back in the late 80's were quite beneficial and... guess practising with PHD's on the forum did the rest (never know whether a little flattering may turn to my advantace one day, so why not give it a try and prove the old adage "flattery will get you nowhere" wrong").

Accolade, accolade... darn, had to look this one up - evidence that there is still much space for improvement

[dr_Pat_Pong]

Then lets hope Doc that science is making quick progress to get the world off the edge and rescue it from the good deeds of Georgie and his AIDS, whoops the capital lock was erroneously on, I certainly meant to write aids (however, astonishing the parallels aren't they). Ponder, ponder...aquired immune deficiency syndrome... guess this hits the nail right on the head. 

Your parsar angkrid is excellent Richard. Off topic, but it isn't worth starting a new topic for a simple accolade.

Well Doc, two years living and working in New Joycy (local dialect for Jersey) back in the late 80's were quite beneficial and... guess practising with PHD's on the forum did the rest (never know whether a little flattering may turn to my advantace one day, so why not give it a try and prove the old adage "flattery will get you nowhere" wrong").

Accolade, accolade... darn, had to look this one up - evidence that there is still much space for improvement

I thought that it was Joisy. A few words a day will see you through it

[chuckd]

I really do not like to jump in the water with all you GWB/America haters but, here I am.

Snark, I believe your information is incorrect. What GWB has done is invoke what is called the "Mexico City Rule", which "withholds USAID funds from organizations that perform, refer, counsels on or advocates abortions." It has absolutely nothing to do with condoms.

The fiscal year 2004 Omnibus Appropriations Bill passed by congress and signed into law by the president approves 2.4 billion for HIV/AIDS programs. The bill does provide "grantees must offer complete and medically accurate information on condoms if they offer any advice on condoms at all."

I got my information from the following web site and have quoted parts of it above:

http://www.populationaction.org/news/press...234_omnibus.htm

I await your source reference if I am wrong.

[Snark]

deleted

[Richard Hall]

I really do not like to jump in the water with all you GWB/America haters but, here I am.

Snark, I believe your information is incorrect. What GWB has done is invoke what is called the "Mexico City Rule", which "withholds USAID funds from organizations that perform, refer, counsels on or advocates abortions." It has absolutely nothing to do with condoms.

The fiscal year 2004 Omnibus Appropriations Bill passed by congress and signed into law by the president approves 2.4 billion for HIV/AIDS programs. The bill does provide "grantees must offer complete and medically accurate information on condoms if they offer any advice on condoms at all."

I got my information from the following web site and have quoted parts of it above:

http://www.populationaction.org/news/press...234_omnibus.htm

I await your source reference if I am wrong.

No, no hate for the American people or any other peoples in this world. Amazingly only individuals or small groups of individuals causing all the mess.

Mr. Bush openly claims to be a re-born (conservative) Christ and in this context appears to adopt extreme overdrawn moral attitudes. It's pretty much like a former smoker who quits, turns into the absolute opposite and starts crucifying smokers and their habit.

It is surely no secret that the traditional christian church considers birth control (including condoms) and abortion as generally immoral or even devilish like they have always done for hundreds of years. Basically, it is the same extreme religious (inhuman and unnatural attitude) madness justifing stoning people for adultery or killing people for not following the same beliefs.

[Snark]

deleted

[chuckd]

Snark:

At least, if nothing else, we have given Google a boost in their business today.

Thanks for the references and I did read them. I also noticed virtually all of your references and mine seem to have an agenda, one way or the other. I then decided to go here for information:

http://search.info.usaid.gov/query.html?qp.../www.usaid.gov/

This is the web site for the US Agency for International Development (USAID). While I certainly did not read every page of this site, I did find there are 122 references to the use of condoms and their promotion of the use of condoms.

I still don't think your information is correct but who really cares?

Richard Hall:

I am not one of the reborn types nor have I ever been accused of being one. I am a long time resident of Thailand and inveterate chaser of all things fun. Just thought you might like to know, but who really cares

Edit: By the way, I am a former smoker and, for the record, I really don't care whether you smoke or not.

[Snark]

deleted

[chuckd]

Snark:

I am happy to get the reference to HRW (a Google on it shows 3,890,000 references), which I will not read. Perhaps when I have a little more time?

In the interim, please provide an official US government policy that supports your position shown on page one of this thread.

I will be more than happy to admit the error of my ways and have done so numerous times in my long and boisterous career. Just let me have it.

Edit: Wow. You are editing your posts before I can even respond to the initial input. You are a rapid typist.

[chuckd]

Snark says......."The basic premise of aid given should be for the benefit and betterment of people without any religious, cultural, racial or political strings attached."......

In a perfect world, perhaps you have a point. In the real world, this is naive to the extreme. Attached strings are a basic requirement for anybody providing aid, much less governments.

For instance, if I provide you funds to continue your college education, it could be a requirement that these funds actually be spent on tuition or books and not on beer for the sorority/fraternity.

If a government provides funds for birth control, it could just as easily be a condition that none of these funds be diverted to purchase weapons of war.

Idealism is great....if it only worked.

PS: I gotta leave for about an hour. Please don't think I have forgotten you in the interim.

[natee1]

Does any of this have relevance to Thailand? Are new restrictions, conditions given to Thai government by the US?

[Snark]

deleted

[Snark]

deleted

[mango head]

I thought that it was Joisy.

actually, dr. pat, it's thoity thoid and a thoid street in joizey

[chuckd]

Snark:

You disappoint me. I challenge you on your original post and what do you do?

Rather than admit the possible error of your ways, you edit it and change it at a later point in time.

You have an agenda...I have an agenda. Obviously we are miles apart, but what you have done is the easy way out.

You have no credibility in my eyes.

[meadish_sweetball]

Regardless of whether Snark or HRW have an agenda or not, I still prefer it to the one of GWB.

Just denying aid to organisations trying to promote safe and responsible sex and birth control/abortions is utterly sick considering the state of the world today.

But I have seen mainstream American school books actually presenting "safe periods" in the female's menstrual cycle as a valid birth prevention method, so I am sadly not very surprised.

It is incorrect that condom use has not been promoted in Thailand. Khun Meechai is very famous for having done just that in the late 80s and early 90s, in fact so famous that one Thai slang word meaning condom is "meechai".

He also owns a restaurant on the way to Chiang Rai called Cabbages & Condoms, which has a few bungalows in connection to it. If I remember it correctly, condoms are provided free of charge to quests who stay there. Good intentions, bad restaurant.

[natee1]

Thank you, Snark.

[Snark]

deleted

[chuckd]

Snark:

What you should have done was leave the original post as it was instead of changing it entirely. I am talking about the post that started this thread.

This has nothing to do with the overall issue but has everything to do with integrity. You edited the first post long after our discussion began, softening your original stance. Now you are debating that revised stance and not the original position.

I notice you didn't edit the original post until we were well into page two of this thread. Perhaps you thought nobody would be aware of the change?

This subject is no longer worth debate.

[Snark]

deleted