Huck and AIDS

Mike Huckabee's 1992 comments about homosexuality -- "sinful," he says --- aren't going to be terribly controversial with his supporters in Iowa, although the press may harp on them (to his benefit, probably).

His belief, back then, that AIDS patients should be quarantined -- completely (willfully?) ignoring the mechanism of transmission -- is much weirder and harder to defend.

CBS' Joy Lin is on the trail with Huckabee in South Carolina this morning and reports that the governor did not take questions about the AP questionnaire per se, but did do a little pre-speech inoculation.

“Many of you know that I’m a human being that’s going to make a whole lot of mistakes, in fact you’re going to hear that I am a human being that’s made a lot of mistakes. In fact, if you don’t know that yet, just keep reading all the press releases from my opponents,” said Huckabee to a chuckling audience. “And when they can’t find enough, they’ll make some up.”

In any event, Huckabee is nowhere near his 1992 position today. He supports dramatic increases in HIV/AIDS prevention funding.

Comments

Why would a quarantine for AIDS patients be considered weird? I still don't believe medical science knows exactly how the virus is transmitted, but suppose they're right and it is only communicated through blood, etc. Suppose an AIDS patient leaves a spot of blood on a subway pole and I put my hand on that pole and the virus goes through a cut in my hand? I'm not even aware this happened, but I may contract AIDS because that patient wasn't quarantined. In today's society AIDS patients have rights. We don't. How does that make sense? Having a basic concern about the spread of a disease makes someone intolerant? Go figure. Huckabee is the only candidate I've seen who takes a realistic view of the issue - without worrying about political correctness. Refreshing.

Posted by Lynne | December 8, 2007 7:48 PM

I think Huck's response was correct and balanced.
He supports funding for those suffering from AIDS, so I don't see the reason for the liberal media to attack him besides anti-Christian bias.
$30 billion for AIDS isn't nothing.
I understand that its hard for people that are unfamiliar with Christian beliefs to understand all this, so I'll attempt to explain.
He had said that he thinks homosexuality is sinful, so did Jesus. Yes, Christians believe Jesus is God, and those statements against homosexuality in the Old Testament are spoken by God. Additionally, statements against homosexuality in the New Testament are "inspired by the Holy Spirit." Since Christians believe in the Trinity, they believe that the Holy Spirit is God. And the apostles of Christ were appointed by Christ and it is obvious they spoke against homosexuality. Of course, Jesus spoke on many different sins, including pride, greed, and specifically sex outside of marriage and adultery. It is immoral for people to look at pornography too, yet many in the media are very supportive of everything pornographic.

Posted by midwesternguy | December 8, 2007 8:19 PM

Once the HIV virus is outside the human body, at less than body temperature and exposed to air, it can not be transmitted. The transmission path is very well understood as it is a fluid borne disease that can not live outside a fluid environment. The science was settled over 20 years ago.

One other point, the supporters of quarantine were unwilling to pony up the money to do so. There never was funding for this proposal coming from them, or anybody else.

Posted by dalea | December 8, 2007 9:00 PM

It is well established how AIDS can and cannot be transmitted, and this was established beginning in the late 1980s, early 1990s. To describe homosexuality as sinful is sinful.

Posted by michael | December 8, 2007 11:27 PM