on 1/31/03 12:26 AM, kakki at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > David, > > Thank you very much for going to the trouble to find this background > information for me. I agree that the problem was probably not attacked with > the full force of federal resources as it should have been and I remember a > number of researchers who were screaming out early on trying to get peoples' > attention. From a selfish point of view, I wish that all conservatives were > not painted with the broad brush of bigotry. I agree with a lot of > conservative points of view but have always thought these "moral" whatever > groups and Falwell and his ilk have nothing to do with true > libertarian/conservative thought and have been a true plague on the country. > They are preaching hate, they are. I believe that the large majority of > libertarian/conservatives utterly abhor these peoples' agenda - it goes > against everything they believe in and stand for.
I respond: Kakki, I certainly agree. I do not paint conservatives with a brush quite as broad as that which I used to use, and the libertarian aspect of conservatism (so far as it IS an aspect of conservatism) is attractive. What is frustrating to me is the strength of the venom coming from the Falwell types, and their seeming stranglehold on the Republican domestic agenda. > I disagree a bit with some of the information: > >> Health officials, failing to educate about transmission and risk behavior, > undermined any chance of an accurate >public understanding of AIDS. > > In my experience, there was lots and lots of information as to risk behavior > and transmission early on. But maybe this information was disseminated more > in some regions of the country over others. I do recall some heated debate > and stupid foot-dragging over whether to supply drug users with clean > needles. I respond: In the major cities, there were many programs outlining risk behaviour and transmission theories, starting around 1985. Had the federal research funding been released earlier, the HIV connection (and hence better information) could have been disseminated earlier. In almost all cases, the information was first distributed by local gay activist groups, and later by local governments pressured by local gay activist groups. The federal government remained silent as thousands died. >> At various points in the epidemic, conservatives called for the > quarantining and tattooing of PWAs. Jerry Falwell, the >leader of the Moral > Majority, was quoted as stating: "AIDS is the wrath of God upon >> homosexuals." > > The networks and media giving this guy any coverage just continues to > appalls me. I think they do it for the freak show factor. I reply: In New York, I personally saw hundreds die in the early 80s. Many, many local rabbis and priests were nothing less than gleeful and smug when aplauding the growing number of deaths. Sadly, Falwell was not an isolated case. > >> Reagan thought of AIDS as though "it was measles and it would go away." > > I can believe he could have been that obtuse. I reply: I met Reagan and briefly talked with him in 1987. He was very charming and friendly, but by my estimation his Alzheimers was already in evidence by then, so maybe you are right. >> I cannot find the quote, but Koop somewhere said that Reagan personally >> hated gays, and that hatred was at the core of his actions/inaction. > > I do find this a bit difficult to believe. Reagan was very involved as an > activist and populist Democrat for something like 40 years before he > switched parties. He lived most of his life in Hollywood (always a very > liberal town) and was a Bel Air Presbyterian, not a Bible belt > fundamentalist. A number of his wife's best friends for many years have > been prominent gay men. But, again, obtuse and out of step - I would agree. I reply: Again, I think it had much to do with Ronnie Jr.'s sexuality. It would be indiscreet of me to discuss Nancy's gay friends, but I do not believe they were active in the gay politics of the time. Ronald Reagan was a very gracious man, very gentle, and extremely personable. But he failed in his duties as President (based on his personal bias, IMO), and becuase of that failure, I watched the flesh rot from the once vibrant bodies of the men I loved, their vital souls extinguished. If Reagan was indeed as obtuse as you speculate, he should have stepped down, or been removed from office. >> If not for groups like Act Up and GMHC, no doubt many more straight women, > among others, would have >perished. > > Very sad and tragic. I hope that we have all learned by the actions of the > past so that something like this in the future is addressed in a radically > different manner. > > Thanks again, David. I reply: Kakki, it is always a pleasure! Best, David
