Yes, but I practically had to spoon-feed you that answer.
Its an obvious answer I was already well aware of....what part of any of my previous posts indicated otherwise? (I'm assuming that was your perception, as you declined to say that you were simply playing devil's advocate when I gave you the opening)?
HIV vaccine is a good idea. The cure would be even better. If I knew someone with HIV I would like to give them some of my colloidal silver just to see if it would increase their T-cell count or at least stop replication and stabilize the progression. I'm a believer in colloidal silver, I don't know what it would do for HIV but I'd like to know. I think that it possibly could at least buy them more time because of the hundreds of pathogens that colloidal silver can kill.
I liked your answer before this, I just wanted something more substantial, viz., a Socratic answer that takes down an opponent on his own terms.
This would be a hell of a lot easier if I actually knew what this particular guy believed. It's much easier to discuss with someone on their own terms if one knows what those terms are--he doesn't say why he thinks it's a bad idea. If one were to discuss this subject with him, and if we wanted to try to persuade him that we should administer HIV vaccines, then we'd want to explore his beliefs, assumptions, and logic. Ideally, I'd discuss it with him so that I can understand his rationale.
There's only so much I can read into "I think it's a bad idea," so I can't take this too far. I'd assume that most who hold the opinion that the HIV vaccine is a bad idea because it'll lead to more sex and more gay sex and other bad stuff, but that they're not exactly Biblical literalists.
My first thoughts revolve around the idea of moral control. Control's a biggie for me, so I'm interested in writing about it..
The Old Testament pretty much loved espousing the virtues of both God and more 'righteous,' 'wise,' or 'moral' men controlling other 'savage' men. God's all like, "Don't build any idols! Don't shave!" In addition, He wrote Titus 1:9-11. ... and some people looove those verses.
New Testament--not so much. Romans 14:1-10, especially verses 3-4, is a good example of the whole "Let people make their own damn choices" mentality.
If someone believes in that first thing more than the second, then I'd have to move on to another argument (or study my Bible a bit better). If they believe in the second, if they agree that the second is all about relaxing moral control of others, and if we could assume (or be convinced) that not allowing the vaccine to be administered is a form of moral control, then the vaccine ought to be allowed on the principle that to do otherwise would be a form of moral control.
We'll also have to handwave away the whole "but you'd be controlling the morals of the administering physicians!" thing--I'd be under the assumption that the physicians (or policymakers, etc.) would not have to 'act' in order to get the vaccine out there but that they would have to 'act' in order to disallow it.