Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Rev wright was right about the goverment spreding aids!!

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by rocket3forlife2, Mar 21, 2008.

Tags:

Page 1 of 2

rocket3forlife2 Member

Joined:

Nov 16, 2003

Messages:

2,035

Likes Received:

8

Basically the government gave diseases to a group of blacks 399 to be exact and used them like lab rats....What pisses me off is that a lot of other races in this country look at blacks as being unpatriotic when we don't trust the government .....Rev Wright is not as crazy as a lot of people thought.

The Tuskegee Experiment

The United States government did something that was wrong—deeply, profoundly, morally wrong. It was an outrage to our commitment to integrity and equality for all our citizens. . . . clearly racist.
—President Clinton's apology for the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment to the eight remaining survivors, May 16, 1997

For forty years between 1932 and 1972, the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) conducted an experiment on 399 black men in the late stages of syphilis. These men, for the most part illiterate sharecroppers from one of the poorest counties in Alabama, were never told what disease they were suffering from or of its seriousness. Informed that they were being treated for “bad blood,”1 their doctors had no intention of curing them of syphilis at all. The data for the experiment was to be collected from autopsies of the men, and they were thus deliberately left to degenerate under the ravages of tertiary syphilis—which can include tumors, heart disease, paralysis, blindness, insanity, and death. “As I see it,” one of the doctors involved explained, “we have no further interest in these patients until they die.”
Using Human Beings as Laboratory Animals

The true nature of the experiment had to be kept from the subjects to ensure their cooperation. The sharecroppers' grossly disadvantaged lot in life made them easy to manipulate. Pleased at the prospect of free medical care—almost none of them had ever seen a doctor before—these unsophisticated and trusting men became the pawns in what James Jones, author of the excellent history on the subject, Bad Blood, identified as “the longest nontherapeutic experiment on human beings in medical history.”

The study was meant to discover how syphilis affected blacks as opposed to whites—the theory being that whites experienced more neurological complications from syphilis whereas blacks were more susceptible to cardiovascular damage. How this knowledge would have changed clinical treatment of syphilis is uncertain. Although the PHS touted the study as one of great scientific merit, from the outset its actual benefits were hazy. It took almost forty years before someone involved in the study took a hard and honest look at the end results, reporting that “nothing learned will prevent, find, or cure a single case of infectious syphilis or bring us closer to our basic mission of controlling venereal disease in the United States.” When the experiment was brought to the attention of the media in 1972, news anchor Harry Reasoner described it as an experiment that “used human beings as laboratory animals in a long and inefficient study of how long it takes syphilis to kill someone.”

A Heavy Price in the Name of Bad Science

By the end of the experiment, 28 of the men had died directly of syphilis, 100 were dead of related complications, 40 of their wives had been infected, and 19 of their children had been born with congenital syphilis. How had these men been induced to endure a fatal disease in the name of science? To persuade the community to support the experiment, one of the original doctors admitted it “was necessary to carry on this study under the guise of a demonstration and provide treatment.” At first, the men were prescribed the syphilis remedies of the day—bismuth, neoarsphenamine, and mercury—but in such small amounts that only 3 percent showed any improvement. These token doses of medicine were good public relations and did not interfere with the true aims of the study. Eventually, all syphilis treatment was replaced with “pink medicine”—aspirin. To ensure that the men would show up for a painful and potentially dangerous spinal tap, the PHS doctors misled them with a letter full of promotional hype: “Last Chance for Special Free Treatment.” The fact that autopsies would eventually be required was also concealed. As a doctor explained, “If the colored population becomes aware that accepting free hospital care means a post-mortem, every darky will leave Macon County…” Even the Surgeon General of the United States participated in enticing the men to remain in the experiment, sending them certificates of appreciation after 25 years in the study.

Read the rest here

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0762136.html

#1 rocket3forlife2, Mar 21, 2008

rocket3forlife2 Member

Joined:

Nov 16, 2003

Messages:

2,035

Likes Received:

8

Where are all you rush limbough fans right wings at?

#2 rocket3forlife2, Mar 21, 2008
justtxyank Member

Joined:

Jul 7, 2005

Messages:

42,951

Likes Received:

39,984

LOL

Maybe I misread the article, but I didn't see a single mention of AIDS.

Anyway, as disgusting as this "experiment" was, it's starkly different to study infected patients who contracted the disease on their own as they die then it is to invent a virus and spread it with the intention of committing genocide.

No, neither is a good practice, but one was done for what the misguided and unethical scientists of the project thought was for the good of science. They were doing it with the intention of learning something. In no way am I defending that, but it is totally different.

#3 justtxyank, Mar 21, 2008
cson Member

Joined:

Jul 22, 2000

Messages:

3,797

Likes Received:

29

I agree that the Rev was not that far off or crazy, but a serious question: How old are you? Have you NEVER heard of The Tuskegee Experiment ? If not you are either A)Young or B) Not black. Which is okay, we learn what we learn when we learn it, but it's a shame that people don't actually know about the Tuskegee Experiment. I'm sure this (ignorance) is what leads to people ignoring people like Rev. Wright or trying to sweep the emotional repsonse and lack of trust of black folks under the rug.

#4 cson, Mar 21, 2008
MadMax Member

Joined:

Sep 19, 1999

Messages:

76,809

Likes Received:

26,164

justtxyank said:

LOL

Maybe I misread the article, but I didn't see a single mention of AIDS.

Anyway, as disgusting as this "experiment" was, it's starkly different to study infected patients who contracted the disease on their own as they die then it is to invent a virus and spread it with the intention of committing genocide.

No, neither is a good practice, but one was done for what the misguided and unethical scientists of the project thought was for the good of science. They were doing it with the intention of learning something. In no way am I defending that, but it is totally different.
Click to expand...

At the heart is devaluing human beings. And the United States of America is just as capable of that as any other human beings on the face of the earth.

I don't believe the US government invented AIDS. I don't believe they put it "into circulation" to kill off a segment of our population. I don't believe it all. But I can begin to understand the perception that it's possible if I put myself in the shoes of the group of people who've been experimented on in the past. Who've been treated as lab rats. That's not a big jump to me.

As an aside here...this is why I have such a hard time with the Church (big "C") latching on to the flag and patriotism with the same fervor it latches on to the cross. Or suggesting that God is necessarily on our side because we're America. I'm far more concerned with being on God's side than Him being on mine.

#5 MadMax, Mar 21, 2008
cson Member

Joined:

Jul 22, 2000

Messages:

3,797

Likes Received:

29

Double post regrets

Additionally, AIDS spread was due to the fact that the government (read Reagan) was able to do nothing about it as long as we all , black, white, green, yellow, tan and somewhat off-beige, agreed that it was about GAYS. It is always ok to be against Fags regardless of color. Some religions still demand it.

peace my brothers and sisters.

#6 cson, Mar 21, 2008
justtxyank Member

Joined:

Jul 7, 2005

Messages:

42,951

Likes Received:

39,984

MadMax said:

At the heart is devaluing human beings. And the United States of America is just as capable of that as any other human beings on the face of the earth.

I don't believe the US government invented AIDS. I don't believe they put it "into circulation" to kill off a segment of our population. I don't believe it all. But I can begin to understand the perception that it's possible if I put myself in the shoes of the group of people who've been experimented on in the past. Who've been treated as lab rats. That's not a big jump to me.

As an aside here...this is why I have such a hard time with the Church (big "C") latching on to the flag and patriotism with the same fervor it latches on to the cross. Or suggesting that God is necessarily on our side because we're America. I'm far more concerned with being on God's side than Him being on mine.
Click to expand...

At heart is devaluing human beings? I'm sorry but I disagree. The heart of each situation is different. The heart of the Tuskegee experiment was scientific advancement at the expense of human life. Sure, in that case it's devaluing human beings. But the heart of "creating aids to wipe out a race" is genocide. It's not to advance science or find a cure, it's to destroy a people. The heart of that isn't devaluing human life, it's want to wipe out human life.

With that said, I agree with your second paragraph. My point in the first post was the the OP wasn't being honest. He's say "Rev Wright was right about the government spreding aids." His article does nothing to support that thread title, just offer a defense for why a black man might suffer from some paranoia (justified) and mistrust of the government that would lead to his own conspiracy theory.

I also agree with your last paragraph.

#7 justtxyank, Mar 21, 2008

MadMax Member

Joined:

Sep 19, 1999

Messages:

76,809

Likes Received:

26,164

justtxyank said:

At heart is devaluing human beings? I'm sorry but I disagree. The heart of each situation is different. The heart of the Tuskegee experiment was scientific advancement at the expense of human life. Sure, in that case it's devaluing human beings. But the heart of "creating aids to wipe out a race" is genocide. It's not to advance science or find a cure, it's to destroy a people. The heart of that isn't devaluing human life, it's want to wipe out human life.

With that said, I agree with your second paragraph. My point in the first post was the the OP wasn't being honest. He's say "Rev Wright was right about the government spreding aids." His article does nothing to support that thread title, just offer a defense for why a black man might suffer from some paranoia (justified) and mistrust of the government that would lead to his own conspiracy theory.

I also agree with your last paragraph.
Click to expand...

How is wiping out human life not devaluing it? You're willing to get rid of it to achieve some greater aim. Same devaluation of human life that lead to the Holocaust, frankly. We have a purpose to achieve, and these people are in the way....we value our purpose more than their human lives.

Oh, well...we agree on 2 out of 3. We'd be in Cooperstown with that kind of ratio at the plate.

#8 MadMax, Mar 21, 2008
justtxyank Member

Joined:

Jul 7, 2005

Messages:

42,951

Likes Received:

39,984

MadMax said:

How is wiping out human life not devaluing it? You're willing to get rid of it to achieve some greater aim. Same devaluation of human life that lead to the Holocaust, frankly. We have a purpose to achieve, and these people are in the way....we value our purpose more than their human lives.

Oh, well...we agree on 2 out of 3. We'd be in Cooperstown with that kind of ratio at the plate.
Click to expand...

Yes it is devaluing it at a simple level, but I think it's far different to do something unethical in the name of science and do something unethical in the name of genocide. Neither is good in my opinion, but in a world that is full of shades of gray they are not the same thing.

#9 justtxyank, Mar 21, 2008
MadMax Member

Joined:

Sep 19, 1999

Messages:

76,809

Likes Received:

26,164

justtxyank said:

Yes it is devaluing it at a simple level, but I think it's far different to do something unethical in the name of science and do something unethical in the name of genocide. Neither is good in my opinion, but in a world that is full of shades of gray they are not the same thing.
Click to expand...

that might be true. but remember, for many genocide is about science. it was for many during the holocaust. science as they understood it. the gray lines often cross.

dr. mengele was all about science, right?

that's why i think...at its HEART...at its core....the question is, how much do you value human life? is it bigger than your value for science? is it bigger than your value of some notion of superiority?

#10 MadMax, Mar 21, 2008
HayesStreet Member

Joined:

Oct 1, 1999

Messages:

8,508

Likes Received:

182

The government walked soldiers, white - black - and other, through territory they'd just set off atomic bombs on to see what would happen. Yet I still don't think the government spread AIDS to kill the black man. That the government has done some bad things does not lend credence to these claims.

#11 HayesStreet, Mar 21, 2008
rocket3forlife2 Member

Joined:

Nov 16, 2003

Messages:

2,035

Likes Received:

8

So after all this stuff the government has done to its own people it is no way the government could have made aids to ethnic cleanse huh?

I mean after the Katrina incident I though we learned anything is possible.

#12 rocket3forlife2, Mar 21, 2008
rimrocker Member

Joined:

Dec 22, 1999

Messages:

23,373

Likes Received:

10,890

Still the best book on AIDS... everyone should read it...

And I should note it's an easy, fast-paced read. Well worth it.

#13 rimrocker, Mar 21, 2008

rocket3forlife2 Member

Joined:

Nov 16, 2003

Messages:

2,035

Likes Received:

8

Alot of people believe this

http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/46a.htm

#14 rocket3forlife2, Mar 21, 2008
Refman Member

Joined:

Mar 31, 2002

Messages:

13,674

Likes Received:

312

For forty years between 1932 and 1972, the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) conducted an experiment on 399 black men in the late stages of syphilis.
Click to expand...

Between 1932 and 1972, there were 3 Republican Presidents, and 4 Democrats. The last Republican President during that time (Nixon) saw the experiments end under his watch.

FDR, Truman, Kennedy, and LBJ were the Democratic Presidents who let this go on through their entire term. I guess that means that Democrats don't value African-American lives. No...it doesn't mean that at all. It means that our government has done some of the things that we think only other governments do. It has always been true, and will always be true.

On the other side of the coin, to accuse the government of creating HIV for the express purpose of genocide against people of color is insane. It also totally ignores the fact that for several years, HIV was almost exclusively an issue in the gay community. Recall that in 1982, AIDS was originally referred to as GRID (Gay-Related Immune Deficiency).

I suppose the Rev. Wright will amend his statement to accuse the government of creating HIV as an attack on the gay community.

#15 Refman, Mar 21, 2008
langal Member

Joined:

Nov 13, 2004

Messages:

3,824

Likes Received:

91

Refman said:

Between 1932 and 1972, there were 3 Republican Presidents, and 4 Democrats. The last Republican President during that time (Nixon) saw the experiments end under his watch.

FDR, Truman, Kennedy, and LBJ were the Democratic Presidents who let this go on through their entire term. I guess that means that Democrats don't value African-American lives. No...it doesn't mean that at all. It means that our government has done some of the things that we think only other governments do. It has always been true, and will always be true.

On the other side of the coin, to accuse the government of creating HIV for the express purpose of genocide against people of color is insane. It also totally ignores the fact that for several years, HIV was almost exclusively an issue in the gay community. Recall that in 1982, AIDS was originally referred to as GRID (Gay-Related Immune Deficiency).

I suppose the Rev. Wright will amend his statement to accuse the government of creating HIV as an attack on the gay community.
Click to expand...

Great points.

I doubt that any Democratic administration will ever be accused of genocide. When it comes down to it, this is as much about politics as anything.

The HIV rate amongst homosexuals and intravenous drug users is still much higher.

For some reason, I don't think the Reverend is very sympathetic towards homosexuals.

A lot of politics still in HIV research. It goes both ways. HIV is a behavioral disease. It is commonly spread through unprotected anal sex where the risk blood transmission rises. Risks of contraction also increase greatly for uncircumcised men. If you mention these facts though, you might get flamed.

#16 langal, Mar 21, 2008
bigtexxx Member

Joined:

Jun 12, 2002

Messages:

26,980

Likes Received:

2,365

too bad the government didn't spread better spelling abilities, rocket3forlife2

#17 bigtexxx, Mar 21, 2008
Rocket River Member

Joined:

Oct 5, 1999

Messages:

65,931

Likes Received:

33,564

justtxyank said:

Yes it is devaluing it at a simple level, but I think it's far different to do something unethical in the name of science and do something unethical in the name of genocide. Neither is good in my opinion, but in a world that is full of shades of gray they are not the same thing.
Click to expand...

http://www.remember.org/educate/medexp.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_human_experimentation

The Tuskeegee Experiment is no different than any of that
To says so . . . IMO . . . is to say that some lives are more valuable than others

and . . . it is ok to take them and torture them . . . if it is done by YOUR SIDE

Evil is Evil whether is wears a Swastika or Stars and Bars!

Rocket River

#18 Rocket River, Mar 21, 2008

cson Member

Joined:

Jul 22, 2000

Messages:

3,797

Likes Received:

29

bigtexxx said:

too bad the government didn't spread better spelling abilities, rocket3forlife2
Click to expand...

HA! YEAH! HA HA! YOU CANUT SPELL! HA!

#19 cson, Mar 21, 2008
moestavern19 Member

Joined:

Dec 8, 1999

Messages:

39,003

Likes Received:

3,642

Did this guy seriously just try to educate us on the Tuskegee experiments like nobody knew about it and then act like that was sufficient enough evidence to conclude that the US government wants to kill all black people with the AIDS virus?

Tuskegee was an performed as a scientific experiment, and yes it is as heinous as what the Nazis did on the Jews. I don't believe the US Government is in the business of keeping the general public informed of whatever agendas they have.

To assume all "whites" would side with the US Government and condone such actions is as ignorant and racist as the assumption that blacks should be neutralized with biological warfare.

#20 moestavern19, Mar 21, 2008

(You must log in or sign up to post here.)

Page 1 of 2

Share This Page