father time says:

Have these people ever had sex, with and without a rubber? Sheez, women must be running the show.

NIH watch says:

Condoms are constantly claimed to “save lives” so they use that argument to justify the research.

It’s like the argument about the need to have surveillance everywhere, and creating a 100 mile constitutional free zone around the borders, drivers checkpoints that end at 2am when football players are drunk out of their gord at 5 am, illegal wiretapping to prevent terrorism when the only problem we really had was the lack of steel cockpit doors, and every other unnecessary intrusion into our lives, and it’s all based on “saving lives”, a nobel cause albeit misappropriated.

That 1/2 mil for condom research could have permanently housed families thrown out on the streets, who snap and end it all. No, instead, these kinds of funds continue to make these corrupt scientists filthily richer providing them 10 more homes, trips, etc.

These self serving bureaucrats completely ignore the proven facts that the holes in condom membranes are bigger than viruses, thus using condoms for protection is “like leaving the screen door open and expecting the flies to remain outside” as was put into words by one government researcher at the start of the whole condom obsession mess in the 1980’s.

It’s too bad the public either doesn’t understand this or ignores it when you try to tell them. They have latched on to condoms as their savior.

Here are some nauseating facts about the NIH and it’s special interest in condom research.

The National Institutes of Health spends $206,906 per AIDS death (compared to $13,365 per Diabetes death, $12,000 per prostate disease, $9,000 for Parkinson’s disease and $9,000 for Alzheimer’s disease), even though AIDS has never been a leading cause of death in the United States or Africa.

Ref: ex liberal / ex cop’s website that includes correspondence with the NIH.

Bob says:

#4, while cutting off the heads of polliticians is a little much, it would like to see some kind of merit based system on the laws.

For instance, you tell the american people that your plan is only going to cost 1 million and it ends up costing 2 million, then the senetor who sold us that bill at that cost should have to pay for it some how. Either making up the cost difference, or for the really big ones, spend some time in jail, or some other major punishment. It wouldn’t end stupid spending, but at least they would start telling us how much it would really cost.

chuck says:

When she says “yes” – I wear whatever she tells me to wear:
– a condom
– a paper bag
– leather chaps
– her fishnet stockings (ok, I was already wearing those

Special Ed says:

Alfredone doesn’t like them because they become lodged in his butt.

Iso says:

I would like to confirm the last statement of this post. The withdrawal method, or “when in doubt, pull out” plan, works just fine. It prevented me and the wife from having little ones right up until we were ready.

And now you know.

Li says:

So, condoms suck. We all know that. But what is the alternative as long as we continue to be such prudes? Let me explain.

What happens to people with STD’s, especially the untreatable ones? One might say nothing, that they are free to do as they choose. I would say this is true to some extent, but the one thing they are not free to do (if only in their minds) is to admit that they are diseased. That means exclusion, lack of access to sex, and being labeled as a dirty pervert, even if it was the simple matter of bad bad luck rather than being very very easy. Our problem is that we are an irrational society. In a rational society, we would all accept one another as we are without discrimination, and allow for full disclosure of such things. We would facilitate diseased individuals finding other people with the same disease to get down with (aka serosorting), and institute universal testing to that end. Within a few generations, without rubbers, discrimination or exclusion, we could eliminated all STD’s from our society.

But we can’t do that, because we can’t even be comfortable with the idea that we are all naked under our clothes, let alone the fact that some of us have sexually transmitted diseases. We can’t accept and forgive and act rationally. So, we continue using condoms, and un-diseased couples are denied their intimacy, diseased couples are denied their dignity, and mixed couples ride on the razors edge of safety, a few micrometers of rubber between them and doom.