• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Should people with STIs/STDs be tattooed?

Quoth The Raven

Half Arsed Muse
Aqualung said:
Not "easily", and certainly not as easily as one can with immoral behaviour.
Gee, I dunno. I had my tonsils out as a kid and had to have 4 units of whole blood because I bleed like a stuck pig. I had more chance of catching HIV from that than any of my subsequent immoral behaviour.
 

Flappycat

Well-Known Member
Maize said:
No, we're not a threat to your health, but some people think we are a threat to society and their traditions.
They're afraid of becoming obsolete, outmoded, left behind as the rest of the world progresses without them and their ideals slowly die along with their bodies. Also, they're afraid of being wrong, and their afraid of their parents, their clergy, and their mentors being wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. Their idols and role models are dying in ways that physical death could never do, and they're seeing a younger generation coldly dissecting and examining ideals and beliefs that have always been the world to them. I imagine it feels to them as if their hearts are being cut open without anesthetic and inspected according to a standard of worth they could never have known how to live up to.

May all my enemies have hearts of gold, and may I always have the courage to see their faces. Amen.
 

Mike182

Flaming Queer
Darkdale said:
You do realize that AIDS is deadly right? People that have AIDS and know they have AIDS, are criminal for passing it on. You agree? Or do you think, "screw em', who cares... most of these people are gay or drug addicts... who cares if they get AIDS and die"?
any evidence for this?
 

Mike182

Flaming Queer
faint, you still have,'t commented on my post number 19, i shall quote it for you


Mike182 said:
in our school, we had swimming classes

we had to use public changing rooms

anyone who appeared in any way different to everyone else was public humiliated, one boy in our school even tried to kill himself from being bullied so much about something as trivial as a mole on his bum - kids can be born with HIV, you want to brand them from the word go for a school life of bullying, humiliation, leading to depression, very low self esteem, and suicidal tendancies

i don't know about anything else, but in my honest oppinion, this is unjustified
 

jeffrey

†ßig Dog†
Well stated, Mike. There are some great posts of people showing love and compassion. Then others showing selfish, uncaring views. Arthur Ashe comes to mind. GREAT tennis player. GREAT person. Got aides from a blood transfusion. Instead of spending all this money on tattoos. why not use that money to help find a cure? Just a thought. And remember, until a cure is found. love is the best medicine.
 

Aqualung

Tasty
lady_lazarus said:
Gee, I dunno. I had my tonsils out as a kid and had to have 4 units of whole blood because I bleed like a stuck pig. I had more chance of catching HIV from that than any of my subsequent immoral behaviour.
You had a very, very, very slim chance. It wouldn't have been easy. :banghead3
 

SoyLeche

meh...
Aqualung said:
You had a very, very, very slim chance. It wouldn't have been easy. :banghead3
Today, you're right. There have been times when the people in charge of the blood supply were less careful.
 

Aqualung

Tasty
SoyLeche said:
Today, you're right. There have been times when the people in charge of the blood supply were less careful.
There have also been times when AIDS wasn't quite so widespread as it is today. The chance was still exceptionally slim.
 

mr.guy

crapsack
Tell that to the 140,000 Candians who got hepatitis from donated blood 20 years ago - not ancient history.
 

Aqualung

Tasty
mr.guy said:
Tell that to the 140,000 who got hepatitis from donated blood 20 years ago - not ancient hitory.
Compared to how many blood tranfusions were given, that's not very mny
 

mr.guy

crapsack
So by statistical probablity that they all were immoral (or knew someone who was) they likely deserved it anyway?
 

Aqualung

Tasty
mr.guy said:
So by statistical probablity that they all were immoral (or knew someone who was) they likely deserved it anyway?
Since when was giving a blood transfusion immoral? And if you could kindly direct me to the post where I said that AIDS was a punishment, I would be much obliged, since I can only recall saying exactly the opposite. :mad:
 

mr.guy

crapsack
Aqualung,
I'm still objecting to you're theory that moral behaviour is sufficient defense against AIDS (hepatitis is compribly transmitted). MY assumption is immoral behaviour is punished; you agreed in part saying:
"They'll get their real punishments later."
So AIDS isn't the punishment - it's just the start of it.

Basically, my equation would be if morals are breached, one should (in some form) expect retribution (at some time). If you say that your morality will protect you from AIDS, i assume that those who are immoral can certainly expect their protection to be resinded; That would include those who were not moraly protected while receiving blood.
 

Aqualung

Tasty
mr.guy said:
Aqualung,
I'm still objecting to you're theory that moral behaviour is sufficient defense against AIDS (hepatitis is compribly transmitted). MY assumption is immoral behaviour is punished; you agreed in part saying:
"They'll get their real punishments later."
So AIDS isn't the punishment - it's just the start of it.
No, no no!!! :banghead3 If AIDS were the start of it, I would say, "AIDS is just the start of their punishment, most of which they'll get later." I never said that!!! AIDS is just the consequence of different actions. It's not the punishment!

mr.guy said:
Basically, my equation would be if morals are breached, one should (in some form) expect retribution (at some time).
Good for you. So do I. I just don't think AIDS is the punishment.

mr.guy said:
If you say that your morality will protect you from AIDS, i assume that those who are immoral can certainly expect their protection to be resinded; That would include those who were not moraly protected while receiving blood.
Well, don't assume, because you're making an *** out of yourself.
 

mr.guy

crapsack
aqualung said:
AIDS is just the consequence of different actions
So immorality is not the principal action that bears AIDS? If so, moral behaviour is an insufficient safeguard.
 

Faint

Well-Known Member
Mike182 said:
people are not gay because it is trendy

ps, you are still to comment on post number 19
Gay is trendy (at least in California), but trend is not the cause, no.

#19? I don't see how this point of yours is worth arguing. Do you think we should build laws around what children will or will not make fun of? If I recall my grade school days, I remember that a) kids will make fun of other kids for something as trivial as a weird sounding last name, and b) none of my schools required showering naked with other boys anyway--maybe that practice should be discontinued itself, but that's another topic.
 

Faint

Well-Known Member
mr.guy said:
Yes, i am saying it. My point here is faints proposal stems from an assumption much like yours (be his harsher, no doubt); his conclusion is, of course, idiocy. Morality is not as useful in this instance as informed pragmatism; and neither are immune to possible transmission. If you're morals coincide with preventative measures to disease (deliberately or not), fine by me; but unless you admit AIDS to be retribution for immoral behaviour, i don't accept morality as a catch-all prevention method.
What you (and the LDS crowd) don't seem to understand is I'm not advocating using tattoos for "punishment", and I certainly am enlightened enough to know that sex in itself isn't immoral. The tattoos become a way to help protect others by allowing them to make better informed decisions about their sex partners and also to eradicate the disease (since conventional methods are not working). Ultimately, it is for the good of the human race, and I think it is "immoral" to oppose such an idea.
 

Faint

Well-Known Member
Jensa said:
I'm still waiting for this to be addressed.
Genital herpes (HSV 2), Jensa, should also be tattooed for. Cold sores (HSV 1) around the mouth are not such a big deal (unless you have an important first date or appointment for a photoshoot). Also, do some homework--you can't catch herpes from a drinking fountain, since the virus will not survive on the cold metal (anyway, were you one of those kids who put her mouth on that part of the fountain? You're not supposed to do that...)

I'm only talking about contagious, incurable, long term, chronic or likely fatal diseases. Chicken pox does not count. Nor does mono (there is no cure, but the symptoms vanish quickly), or type 1 herpes (same deal).
 
Top