Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Logically, I would like to point out that the assessment of danger is not solely based on past lives claimed, but also the potential risks in the future. In that sense, terrorism is an ongoing problem, with the potential to claim many more lives. HIV/AIDS is a treatable medical condition that has a strong probability of being cured at some point in the future. Claiming it is more dangerous than terrorism simply isn't a logical assertion, because we live in a world where cultural and economic conflicts will continue to produce terrorists, and we have not yet found a way to stop such conflicts and disparities, and may never find a way to stop terrorism.
Seriously...I'm not taking a position on it...I'm only asking a question. The OP seemed bent on attacking the person rather than the statement.
I wasn't attacking the politician. I was attacking the entire Republican Party.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
