I would think them clinics would stop providing abortions in order to get the funds. When you are a beggar you have to accept the conditions imposed on the gifts you receive.

I agree. However I feel it is a bit specious to suggest that since some money is being wasted, the effort itself is a waste; which is the tone that some people are carrying in this discussion.

http://www.aidsmap.com/publications/factsheets/fs28.htm

Quote: "HIV can be transmitted from an HIV-positive woman to her child either during pregnancy, or during labour and delivery, or by breast-feeding. In Europe and the USA, about 15 to 20 per cent of babies born to HIV-positive women who are not taking anti-HIV drugs are infected. In most cases, HIV is thought to be transmitted during the last weeks of pregnancy or during delivery."

Let's see, some lucky women in Africa used to have the option to bring another HIV-ridden child into the world, or to spare them both - the baby, the pain of living a hopeless existence, dying from almost the time of birth - and obviously the mother, as things are difficult enough taking care of children in Africa without having to worry about the provider and the provided having life-threatening diseases. The global gag rule now leaves them no choice but to bring more HIV-infected beings into existence. Not exactly productive to the overall goal of helping Africa's AIDs problem, is it?

My point was not entirely about abortion, but the health centers that used to provide them or at the very least, discuss abortion as an alternative reproductive choice and being cut from vital funds because of it. These clinics also provided condoms and sexual health information, so if Bush was truly interested in helping Africa's crisis, he would not have made the dim-witted, very counter-productive decision he did.

So it has no effect on any adults. AND the baby has a 80-85% chance of NOT being infected.

I don't see how Bush's policies with regards to abortion effect this crisis one way or another, to be honest.

When the greatest problem on the continent is hunger, I would definitely say overpopulation is a problem. Frankly the European colonial powers of the 19th and 20th century ruined Africa. These people never wanted a democratic, western style existence. Now they are being dragged into the 21th century, where they barely made it through the 20th. I mean they have to get the basics down, like building roads, praticing commerce, living peacably with each other. Frankly I don't know where these African nations can start. South Africa is the only viable country in sub-saharan Africa, and they aren't exactly the poster child for effective, moral government

Children die in Africa from drinking dirty water...children die in Africa of measles and many many other preventable diseases. They do not have national health systems like we do. The effects of that is seen in education of prevention and basic knowledge, to immunizations to health care available. One thing most people never discuss on this subject is the fact of the costs of information. Why do you know what you know about AIDS and how it is spread, prevented and the risks of contacting it? Because your gov told you. It costs money to publish pamphlets stating the science and knowledge behind the disease. Much of this is copyrighted and protected for republishing..most of the poorest nations in the world don't have the additional money for the copyrights let alone what is needed to distribute information and start a campaign to inform their public.


There are so many misconceptions on Africa out there. Many people feel it is nothing but a vast continent with nothing but dirt and flies and has little value and little resources..but that is simply NOT true. Africa is a very rich continent..of life, geography and history.



Africa has mountains....Africa has even ranges of mountains..in fact Africa even has glaciers. They even have a ski resort in South Africa..which I suppose is odd being that they are so technologically behind and mentally retarded. In fact there are even African nations who list one of their natural resources as being hydropower.
It is not predominately the lack of water but the mismanagement of it.





Africa has a rich history of trade and commerce. Have you forgotten Egypt was part of Africa? They have always been acutely aware of eachother and one another's resources and goods and openly exchanged them with vast trade routes and depended on one another for materials. Not to mention the nomadic lifestyle is and has been a predominant way of life for Africans of all nations/regions. I am sorry but it is near impossible to have vast trade like that for as long as they have and not have an exchange of ideas, knowledge and awareness of one another.

What is considered to be the largest known human migration took place in Africa...they were not isolated and confined by flies and dirt.

Large kingdoms did exist. Kingdoms who at one time were the richest of all the world..even the Greeks were envious.

How do you explain that Christianity has been in Ethiopia for centuries? If they were so isolated by dirt and flies how did Islam and Christianity spread? Or the fact that Africa is part of the Silk Road..or the how about the massive amount of trade that DID occur trans-Sahara? Trade routes who in fact did feed and help flourish some of the greatest known Kingdoms of African history. I am sorry but your theory does not take into account actual African history.



Europeans have been in Africa and trading with her long before they set out west. See the Africans at one time were not subservient to the Europeans and traded as equals. The Europeans had no reason to invade and establish trade routes because the Africans already had done this. Besides Rome..did invade northern Africa and Northern Africa was in fact a piece of the Roman empire at one time. We just don't call that a colony since it was pre-colonial times. Africans also invaded Spain and ruled it for over 700 yrs turning it into one of the greatest centers of education, art, and industry in all of Europe. How is that so from a bunch of isolated half-wits frightened by flies?


So what happened to them? Why this traumatic downfall in their history? Hmm?



Yet trade is not just about agriculture...The US is very much involved with Africa when it comes to trade. Because Africa is a RICH continent..and has much to offer. Go look up a few African nations and see who their predominate trade partner is. For us to be the beacon of free trade and to then practice the opposite especially so with countries as powerless as many of these African nations are is a terrible hypocrisy on our part.

Would the people who are claiming we are exploiting Africa in trade please go to a website showing our trade balances with sub-Saharan African nations and point out where the exploitation is? The site is here

The claim we should help Africa fight AIDS due to the fact we exploit them in trade is a bit odd to start with and unsupportable.

Well I can only speak for myself...as I am not a piece of a collective we in my argument..and I have not been consulting with others prior to posting.
My argument is not about trade balances as your link shows us..who cares? What is that exactly proof of? Does that show trade sanctions or tariffs? Does that show how open or restrictive our trade with African nations is?

I do not support aid or assistance to African nations in need by throwing dollars down south and hoping those who are most in need catch bits of it. We need to be more fair and open with our trade..and we includes all of us..US, EU, Canada..etc.
AGOA is a start. Yet we still make many demands on the poorest nations ..many who are in Africa..to open their markets and liberalize their trade systems while keeping ours closed. Yes this is unfair and this is exploitation.
We tie many of the requirements with desperately needed debt aid which I personally would not have a problem with if the game was being played on level ground but it isn't. This is not odd or unsupportable even the World Bank has been asking the Western nations to stop this unfair practice and to stop mucking up their attempts to debt and economic relief.

Also..the patents. We should approach Africas medical emergency like we would approach it if it was happening in our own countries. Cipro's patent meant nothing to many in the US gov when faced with the idea of an Anthrax epidemic..and how many had died? So why are we so insistent on Africa upholding patents laws in the face of their AIDS crisis? Why do we back our demands with economic warfare? We fought so long and so hard against an obvious public health crisis. Why?

We have smart sanctions..why can't we have smart aid?

The trade situation is a moot point anyhow. It may be in our national interest to exploit Africa and still not in out interest to aid Africa. We do run trade deficits with Africa though.

We dont have this money. We are the world's biggest debtor nation. It does not advance our interest to attempt to educate people, who by western standards average being borderline retards, and allieve their suffering.