Record High Number Of STD Infections In U.S., As Prevention Funding Declines

[Devout Pessimist]

Also, love all the dolts mocking the OP while ignoring the clear correlation it is built on: we cut funding for prevention programs bilgly and STD rates went up. Wow! Magic!

There has been a lot of social changes in 15 years. Pornography has become far more mainstream, the internet has made it much easier to find hook-ups and have affairs, fringe sex acts are becoming the themes of popular movies, books and songs, it is a hate-crime to even mention the tendency towards a hedonistic and degenerate lifestyle within the LGBTBBQ community, slut-walks are in and slut-shaming is out. We live in a culture that champions depravity and filth. It is hardly shocking that STDs are on the rise.

 

[Staph infection]

There is no stance more anti-pragmatic and immature than the conservative stance on STD's and teen pregnancy.

Moral. Preaching. Is. Not. A. Policy. Solution.

Example:
Side A: Let's take an educational & economic approach that's proven to be effective and can be outlined and implemented in specific terms
Side B: Just tell them to stop having sex!!
Side A: Okay....but how would we go abou...
Side B: OMG TELL THEM STAHP!!!

[ time passes, the issue goes unaddressed, gets worse ]​

It's a deflection of addressing the issue - that is all. It's not different than opposing welfare entitlements on the basis of "instead we need to encourage family values!" There is no actual policy proposal underpinning the opposition.

Ok! Let’s start in the home when people are younger. Parents should be educating their children on sex and all the issues that can be associated with it from pregnancy to STD’s. Instead of always looking to be government for help and to take care of them after the fact put this on the people and let them take responsibility for once.

 

[Trotsky]

Ok! Let’s start in the home when people are younger. Parents should be educating their children on sex and all the issues that can be associated with it from pregnancy to STD’s. Instead of always looking to be government for help and to take care of them after the fact put this on the people and let them take responsibility for once.

Again: how do you enforce that through public policy?

Saying "parents should do X and Y" or "that guy should take personal responsibility" doesn't do anything other than express your opinion. Meanwhile, the situation goes unaddressed and gets worse. At the most, it's just an implicit hope that things will get so bad that eventually, by the grace of God, human nature will correct itself organically and all of the sudden millions of people will adopt your ethos out of sheer desperation. It's not realistic and it's not productive.

 

[Staph infection]

 

[Devout Pessimist]

There is no stance more anti-pragmatic and immature than the conservative stance on STD's and teen pregnancy.

Moral. Preaching. Is. Not. A. Policy. Solution.

Example:
Side A: Let's take an educational & economic approach that's proven to be effective and can be outlined and implemented in specific terms
Side B: Just tell them to stop having sex!!
Side A: Okay....but how would we go abou...
Side B: OMG TELL THEM STAHP!!!

[ time passes, the issue goes unaddressed, gets worse ]​

It's a deflection of addressing the issue - that is all. It's not different than opposing welfare entitlements on the basis of "instead we need to encourage family values!" There is no actual policy proposal underpinning the opposition.

There is not a need to spend ridiculous amounts of money to tell people about the risks of promiscuity. It is well know that there are risks to sleeping around, but people (in growing numbers) do it anyway. More money is not going to change people minds and immature attitudes when it comes to sex, but natural consequences will. If you don't want to be responsible and restrain yourself, then you can suffer the consequences.

 

[Trotsky]

What a lot of people are saying is that there is not a need to spend ridiculous amounts of money to tell people about the risks of promiscuity. It is well know that there are risks to sleeping around, but people do it anyway. More money is not going to change people minds and attitudes when it comes to sex, but natural consequences will.

Except we know from experience that it does make a demonstrable difference. We can tell that from historical trends in teen pregnancy and STD's in abstinence-first jurisdictions.

You merely saying that the correlation doesn't exist doesn't make it so.

 

[superpunch]

Ok.. it's 2018, you get an STD, your fault. Unsafe sex, drug addict, or, yeah, that thing that's un-PC to say that also causes HIV.

I dunno why this is linked to funding. None of this is caused by funding. Healthcare outcomes, education outcomes, crime, none of this is funding. We spend the second most government money on healthcare, the second most government money on education, have the strictest justice system in the world -- this isn't a failure of funding on anything. It's a broken culture.

 

[Devout Pessimist]

Except we know from experience that it does make a demonstrable difference. We can tell that from historical trends in teen pregnancy and STD's in abstinence-first jurisdictions.

You merely saying that the correlation doesn't exist doesn't make it so.

The funding and information was useful when the majority of the population thought a woman could not get pregnant the first time she had sex. These days most six year olds know that is not true and there are countless young people getting decent sex education from YouTube. We are at a point where emphasis on responsibility and restraint will be much more effective than throwing money at the problem.

 

[Ripskater]

When the Obama administratiion promotes homosexuality and trannies, what do you think is gonna happen? Kids, adults will be encouraged to "come out" and engage in destructive sexual behavior.

 

[Staph infection]

Again: how do you enforce that through public policy?

Saying "parents should do X and Y" or "that guy should take personal responsibility" doesn't do anything other than express your opinion. Meanwhile, the situation goes unaddressed and gets worse. At the most, it's just an implicit hope that things will get so bad that eventually, by the grace of God, human nature will correct itself organically and all of the sudden millions of people will adopt your ethos out of sheer desperation. It's not realistic and it's not productive.

You asked for a response that more that just “stop being sluts”. A lot of issues with society today do start at home. Parents need to take responsibility for their homes and work to raise decent children. Adult men and woman should be responsible for their actions. There is no accountability anymore, everyone gets a pass on what they do and society and morality is suffering because of it.

 

[Trotsky]

The funding and information was useful when the majority of the population thought a woman could not get pregnant the first time she had sex. These days most six year olds know that is not true.

So why does the empirical relationship still exist? If the catalyst were, as you say, people not knowing you could get pregnant the first time, the correlation would have ceased back in the 1950s.

Again, this is a matter of pragmatic, evidence and outcome-based policy versus moral pontification that, as far as policy goes, amounts to voodoo. It's the trickle down economics of social policy.

You asked for a response that more that just “stop being sluts”. A lot of issues with society today do start at home. Parents need to take responsibility for their homes and work to raise decent children. Adult men and woman should be responsible for their actions. There is no accountability anymore, everyone gets a pass on what they do and society and morality is suffering because of it.

So, for a third time, how do you effectuate your perspective through policy?

Your opponents' position amounts to demonstrably effective addressing of the issue. Your position amounts to doing nothing other than pontificating about moral decline. Do you proffer that we make church attendance mandatory? That we force the termination of irresponsible pregnancies? That we closely monitor parenting and punish bad parenting?

How do we effectuate your position in a way that actually addresses the issue and doesn't just let it go unresolved?

 

[Mark Hunts FIST]

1.Today's generation didn't have that AIDS scare .

2. Dating apps

3. The gays.

 

[Devout Pessimist]

So why does the empirical relationship still exist? If the catalyst were, as you say, people not knowing you could get pregnant the first time, the correlation would have ceased back in the 1950s.

Again, this is a matter of pragmatic, evidence and outcome-based policy versus moral pontification that, as far as policy goes, amounts to voodoo. It's the trickle down economics of social policy.



So, for a third time, how do you effectuate your perspective through policy?

Your opponents' position amounts to demonstrably effective addressing of the issue. Your position amounts to doing nothing other than pontificating about moral decline. Do you proffer that we make church attendance mandatory? That we force the termination of irresponsible pregnancies? That we closely monitor parenting and punish bad parenting?

How do we effectuate your position in a way that actually addresses the issue and doesn't just let it go unresolved?

The policy is to let nature take its course. If people don't want to be responsible for their sexual behaviour, then they get to live with an STD. Money, education and policy has its limits and is ineffective when you have a population that is highly knowledgeable of the risks, but chooses to be promiscuous anyway.

 

[cincymma79]

Again: how do you enforce that through public policy?

Saying "parents should do X and Y" or "that guy should take personal responsibility" doesn't do anything other than express your opinion. Meanwhile, the situation goes unaddressed and gets worse. At the most, it's just an implicit hope that things will get so bad that eventually, by the grace of God, human nature will correct itself organically and all of the sudden millions of people will adopt your ethos out of sheer desperation. It's not realistic and it's not productive.

So you’re saying black people cant figure out condoms or they can’t afford 19 bucks a month for a 36 pack of them which is enough for more than once a day

 

[ShadowRun]

I need the gov to save me with $$$ funding otherwise I’ll be catching STD’s. Thx Obama

 

[superpunch]

Your opponents' position amounts to demonstrably effective addressing of the issue. Your position amounts to doing nothing other than pontificating about moral decline. Do you proffer that we make church attendance mandatory? That we force the termination of irresponsible pregnancies? That we closely monitor parenting and punish bad parenting?

How do we effectuate your position in a way that actually addresses the issue and doesn't just let it go unresolved?

I want to answer for that guy because I like these questions. My answer is that: No, you don't do any of those things. And that yes, this is a moral decline. There's nothing you can do about this or education or healthcare or crime. All of them are simply symptoms of a civilization about to be taken over by civilizations that have all those things in check by: their culture.

Asians don't just do amazing in Asia: on healthcare, on education, on crime, on STDs.. where they spend pennies on the dollar that we do in America on all those things. Even in America, under our "broken systems", they have: 87 year life expectancy, incredible grades to the point where they have to be systematically racially discriminated against, low murder rates to the point it's considered white supremacy to talk about it....

Clearly, none of these things have have anything to do with "the system". Asians do great regardless of "the system". The system is just a scapegoat. The problem is the culture. And there's nothing you can do about that.

 

[luckyshot]

The policy is to let nature take its course. If people don't want to be responsible for their sexual behaviour, then they get to live with an STD. Money, education and policy has its limits and is ineffective when you have a population that is highly knowledgeable of the risks, but chooses to be promiscuous anyway.

So, do advertising firms spend billions and BILLIONS of dollars on campaigns because people “need to be informed of the facts”?

Think about the truth campaign to get kids not to smoke. It was, by all measures, very successful... it’s not like kids didn’t already KNOW that cigarettes were bad for them, but seeing information in a compelling and consistent way makes a huge difference. Branding works. Advertising works.

I just can’t get over the number of people coming to this conclusion:
1. We cut the public health budget.
2. STDs went up.
3. Therefore, obviously, spending on public health was an ineffective way to deal with the STD problem.

MIND BOGGLING.

 

[nostradumbass]

Again: how do you enforce that through public policy?

Saying "parents should do X and Y" or "that guy should take personal responsibility" doesn't do anything other than express your opinion. Meanwhile, the situation goes unaddressed and gets worse. At the most, it's just an implicit hope that things will get so bad that eventually, by the grace of God, human nature will correct itself organically and all of the sudden millions of people will adopt your ethos out of sheer desperation. It's not realistic and it's not productive.

How about "not my problem"? These are personal choices with personal consequences. STDs are pretty easy to avoid and everyone knows how, but poor people don't seem to give a fuck. I'm not sure why you think the government needs to step in and spend a ton of money for every little thing. These are not my problems and I should not be on the hook for people who choose to sleep around and spread diseases to each other. This isn't just some thing that's happened to them beyond their control. This is their own problem, and a problem of cultural and societal value rot, and people who don't partake in destructive behavior don't have to worry about things like this.

 

[superpunch]

So, do advertising firms spend billions and BILLIONS of dollars on campaigns because people “need to be informed of the facts”?

Think about the truth campaign to get kids not to smoke. It was, by all measures, very successful... it’s not like kids didn’t already KNOW that cigarettes were bad for them, but seeing information in a compelling and consistent way makes a huge difference. Branding works. Advertising works.

I just can’t get over the number of people coming to this conclusion:
1. We cut the public health budget.
2. STDs went up.
3. Therefore, obviously, spending on public health was an ineffective way to deal with the STD problem.

MIND BOGGLING.

Dude it's 2018. If you have to spend a billion dollars to convince a group of people to wear condoms or not to fuck a vagina with warts on it, that's a group of people not worth spending a billion dollars on. That's fucking bullshit.

 

[TheGreatA]

Not really a surprise, considering the cultural shifts in recent times.

The modern society's function is to manufacture cultural problems which are then "fixed" by the society through creating further layers of bureaucracy, escalating its power over the individual, making the "man" more and more dependent on the "machine" (and by doing so, greatly contributing to his existential suffering). The presented "fix" is intended merely to alleviate and temper the end results of society's ills, to reduce the threat to a "maintainable level", rather than addressing the source of the problem, that being the sick society itself.

In this scenario, we are only ever going to see a greater effort made by the "scientist" to produce "remedies" that will help people continue to perpetuate the frustrated degeneracy that has made them ill in the first place. At no point will the "scientist" step up and chastise the degenerates for acting wrongly, because he understands that doing such a thing may render his efforts, as well as his future vision of techno-cratic society, obsolete. His worth as a human being depends solely on fixing problems that exist, and he gains absolutely nothing by contemplating why they may exist.

All of this happens quite unconsciously to us and is largely the result of innate human biology, lending much greater energy to external efforts rather than internal critique. We are much better at creating problems and creating solutions to our created problems, than we are at taking a long, hard look into whatever the fuck we think we are doing. Thus the same hopeless cycle will continue to perpetuated until the dawn of time.