rehctub,

“Its called, User pays.“

An interesting concept but why are you limiting this to one area of society? People who drive too fast, fall of a horse, drink alcohol to excess or eat too much meat can end up needing medical assistance more so than others who do not engage in that type of risky lifestyle.

Why are you only obsessed about a sexual behaviour, all of which can be risky by the way.

I really do want to know why.

David

Cedar J you just blew your argument, with your penultimate sentence.
This is not about morals this is about people who you treat as second class Australians.
You are just another self interested bigot.

Dear DD (Diver Dan),

I did say that you're entitled to your
opinion. However, what you're not entitled
to do is impose that blinkered point of view
onto other people.

Each society views its own patterns of marriage,
family, and kinship as self-evidently right and
proper, and usually as God-given as well.

Much of the current concern about the fate of
the institution of the modern family stems from
this kind of ethnocentrism.

When you assume that there is only one "right" marriage
form, then naturally any change will by you be interpreted
as heralding the doom of the whole institution.

It is important to recognise, therefore, that there is an
immense range in marriage, family, and kinship patterns.
That each of these patterns may be, at least in their own
context, perfectly viable; and above all, that marriage
like any other social institution, must inevitably change
through time, in our own society as in all others.

AFA, not at all.

I have always believed that anyone who inflicts self harm should not be entitled to free health,Including medication, beit drugs, alcohol, tabbacco or obesity.

A prime example is when a repeat druggie has up to ten staff working on them in ER, while at the same time someone is seriously I'll, yet can't get help as all staff are tied up with this repeat offender.

Or the grossly over weight person, a victim of their own bad habbits,who on their way home from the doctor, treats themselves to maccers.

Life/accident/trauma insurance has limitations for these and many other forms of self harm, why not the publicly funded health system, because like all other public purses, it' too is over stretched.

rehctub,

You did not answer the questions on the examples I posed (sigh) but let me get this straight. Those who end up with an STD because of hetero or homosexual conduct, a risk with having sex, should be financially penalised for this. Is that what you think?

Have you ever thought this through? I guess not.

David

An excellent opinion piece, Amanda and Danielle, thanks. The facts are clear, if the people in charge, be they politicians, religious leaders, teachers, bosses... discriminate against a minority, then the members of that minority become depressed, fearful and suicidal, while the rest of the population feel justified in also discriminating, and the problem worsens. Then the Diver Dans and rehctubs rejoice because at last there's someone lower in the pecking order than them; so they vent their spleens. They have no interest in the mental health of anyone, being sick themselves, all they want is to kick and stomp on someone to prove they're not the bottom of the heap, except that their words prove they are.