Who will become the next Senator from Delaware?

[Alcon]

It does prevent life which is true. And circumcision brings down the AIDs rate.

Condom use is virtually 100% effective and relatively cheap.  We should abandon that completely in favor of something with <50% efficacy, that costs much more, and would result in more unneeded children?  Especially when there's no reason they can't be used in conjunction?  That's absurd.

It would be great if we could reasonably expect Africans to be completely sexually abstinent, but condoms are by far the most effective policy, in terms of life saved per dollar.  If you have theological hang-ups about them, that's fine, but the trade-off is that more people in Africa die in their absence.  Empirics show that there is no indication that there are more cost-effective solutions.  Period.

[Alcon]

Well Opebo has one thing in common with O'Donnell.   Think Condemns are evil, or in O'Donnell's case "anti-human"

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0910/42288.html#ixzz0zl3e0X36

It does prevent life which is true. And circumcision brings down the AIDs rate.

So the government should be allowed to ban contraception devices like condoms as some states did until the early 60's?
 

Why are people here such shallow thinkers. Why would you assume I'd think that?

If your moral opposition to condoms is strong enough to stop using them in Africa, where it's pretty evident they're the most effective and cost-effective tactic, it's not entirely unbelievable that you'd support a ban in the U.S. too.