From: sehari@iastate.edu (Babak Sehari)
Subject: Re: Re; AIDS in Iran [sci-poster]
Originator: sehari@class1.iastate.edu
Organization: Iowa State University of Science and Technology, Ames, Iowa.
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 06:50:03 GMT

In <lj1pqaINNgav@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> etxmajz@solsta.ericsson.se (Majid Zolfaghari  TX/DKG) writes:

>Sehari> Finally, maybe a High tax (some where around %90 of
>income) on all the Sehari> un-married people over 21 could
>force our people to Sehari> lower their expectations and get
>married.

>Some questions about your proposal:

>- Should girls pay this kind of tax too?

Yes.

>- What about unemployed young people, should their parents
>pay the tax?

In my opinion yes, but the rate should be much less.  Say %10
surcharge per child, who has not married once. Specially for
girls, since some people in Iran are very picky for their girl's
husband than for their boy's wife.  Considering the biological
clock of women, this is much more harmful for them than for guys.

>- How should people who does not want to get married because
>of medical reasons be treated? Should they shout "babaa xare
>maa az korregi dom nadasht!?"

He should get a medical diferal, like military service deferals.

>- How should the economical problems of people who do not
>get married because of that reason be solved? I can guess
>that this is really the main reason.

The economic problems are there married or not married. It should be
solved for everyone.  What I am saying is lets start solving other
problems, at the same time.  Hey I never said there is no economical
problems, nor did I said the economy does not have anything to do with
it.  What I am suggesting is that it might be too late for many people
to wait until the better economic conditions.  You know, humans do not
live for ever, we have 60 good years to live, if we live to live it all!
Further more, married people have a better chance of making it.  

>- Was there such a law in the time of Mohammad? Why did not
>he come with such a law. Is there some punishment in some
>region for single people? Or people always have get married
>when they wanted and when they could manage the economical
>consequences of marriage. Do you feel that you are
>completing other religions or you are coming with a new one?

No.  Nor there was law for drivers license, or there was a law for city
zones.  These laws has nothing to do with religion.

>- Why has this problem grown in such a big dimension in the
>recent years? Why has people becoming s} "bad" that they do
>not want to get married? Do you really think that it is
>because of influence of the western civilization? In that
>case, is their such problems in western countries?

Well, I tend to think it was started during 70s in the Shah's time.
People started to demand higher and higher standard from their mates.
Sometimes, these standards were unreasonably high that could not be
met by regular people anymore.  This has resulted in problems, since then.
The Single rate has steadily increased since then, due to several reasons
such as war, economy, political unrest, so on.  It is very hard for people
to down grade their expectation as fast.  However, when we come out of this
recession; people should be much fitter.  As if the nature plays its game
over and over again to find the finest.  This true for almost all countries.
However, the swings might be smaller in some places and larger at other
places.

>- Somewhere you have mentioned that you wish to have your
>own lab to experiment. Do you think that the society is your
>lab as well? What will happen if your experiments does not
>succeed and result to additional catastrophic results?  Who
>is responsible in that case? You? the people?
>  

No.  But I have asked this question from many people, who seem to
want to experiment with other nations. 

>- How can one say that the individual is responsible to what
>he does, if all of her life (or at least the most important
>decisions) are forced by punishments and by authorities?

This is a good philosophical question, but it is not related here.

>- Your proposal about how sick people should be treated is
>an another history. You have such a fixation on sex that you
>see all of people who have Aids, as sexual criminals, and
>because of that reason you propose some kind of prison for
>these people! There is much more ways to get AIDS! I guess
>that one of the most usual ways to this disease in Iran is
>medical institutes, hospitals and so on. Blood transfusion
>and injections are some examples.

Well all the other ways should be controlled as well.  Moreover,
People with Aids are not the only people who should be quarantine
for the good of society.  Other infectious diseases are being
quarantine world wide.

>Mr. Babak, I do not really think that what you have said is
>so serious. But why I answer it? Yes, because it really
>shows the worth side of our society (we have much good sides
>as well).  Unfortunately some people think that the society
>is their livestock and they have the right to treat it how
>they think is best. And more unfortunately, there is not
>such a few unserious laws and treatments we are subjected to
>in reality.

Very good, society is not livestock, and we should not take
chances with it.  It's better be safe than sorry.  Aids is very
dengerous disease and we should not put our people at risk, or try
to reduce the risk as much as we can.


                      With highest regards,
                           Babak   Sehari.
-- 
Newsgroups: soc.culture.iranian