You think that if it was classified as mental health disease at the time, Reagan and politicians would cared? You think they would be better accepted at the time and cared about?
Good policy is often not ethical policy. Now if you think that millions dying for your ethics is a worth while trade that is a different discussion.
Are you sure? There's a line of thinking that I'll paraphrase here. I'm a heterosexual man. Do you know what keeps me from enjoying more casual sex with varied partners? Women. If women were more like men, I'd be meeting them in Turkish baths.
I want to raise the possibility that what curtailed Turkish baths was not the decriminalization of homosexuality but the advent of AIDS itself. That put the kibosh on the Studio 54, Days of Disco party. What we saw was the Sexual Revolution's "free love" ethic brought to life by men unrestrained by the reservations of women. AIDS put the damper on that.
I say the above without moral judgment. I'm just saying.
Can you explain this reasoning further? I'm not sure if I understand.
Do you also think we should make a policy banning sex because it will be "good policy"? Just use in vitro fertilization to procreate. It will certainly eliminate STDs.
Makes as much sense as closing down the economy over a virus with a >98.5% survival rate.