Facing Up to AIDS Problem

The Times issue published an article (Nov. 28) on acquired immune deficiency syndrome by Robert Scheer. It is a sympathetic article. But it fails really to face up to the problem. In the long run a blunt and hard-boiled article would do more good.

It is a part of human nature to avoid facing the facts. I have been guilty of that more often than I care to admit, and I see it in your article. We all look for cop-outs. The AIDS problem has a number of such. One is the claim that education will solve the problem. It will help but much more is needed. Rep. William Dannemeyer, (R-Fullerton) put it coarsely, but correctly, as quoted in your article, “How much education do you need to get them to stop buggering each other?”

Soon heterosexuals will have to face a similar issue, and a similar brutally frank question. The promiscuous life style, be it homosexual or heterosexual, was never a healthy one. The promiscuous homosexual life style has become suicidal; we can soon expect the same of a promiscuous heterosexual life style.

While data as to the disease is multiplying, the basic issues were clear at least three years ago. At that time it was clear that the disease was spread sexually and by intravenous drug use. We now feel much more sure that it cannot be spread by casual contact, but this fact merely emphasizes what was clear at least three years ago. Indeed, we might say that it has been clear for much longer. Venereal diseases have been known for centuries to be spread by sexual contact.

What we have known for years is all we needed to launch a program to teach all people, homosexual and heterosexual, the risks. We have done much. I recall my days in the Army in World War II included some films and lectures on diseases. Coming from a strict lower middle-class family I found some of what I learned hard to take. What we need to do is to apply to AIDS what we have done about other sexually transmitted diseases.

The problem is not teaching information but values . We must teach people that immediate gratification must often be denied. The “now generation” is well named. How do we tell someone that he or she must give up an immediate pleasure for long-lasting benefits? Notice that this is not a problem for the intellect. A person of low intelligence can grasp the principle very easily. The problem is one of values .

There is one other fact we must deal with. Scheer describes people with AIDS as “doomed.” Well, so they are, but, in a real sense so is everyone. A young man who practices the strictest health regimen is just as sure to die as the most promiscuous homosexual. The difference is that he will die at 75 when the other may die at 25. But ultimately he will die.

As a Christian, I have long since faced up to this fact. I know that the God who made me in the first place can raise me to life everlasting. But if we ignore this fact, what do we say to the person who argues that he is going to die anyway and he might as well live it up while he can?

To return to your article, I strongly urge that you do some much needed self-examination. The dithering about “safe sex” must be supplemented by some serious talk about “responsible sex.” In doing so you will step on some toes. It is time you did.

KENNETH HARVEY HOPP

Redlands