This isn't intended to be a troll or the onset of a whisper campaign to build Regan into something he was clearly not: namely a good president. This is simply so solicit intelligent responses to an article I came across.
This is raised because I was proven wrong in an argument - something I am loathe to allow happen.
I generally believed that Regan was anti-gay and didn't provide assistance to AIDS and HIV but I can't say I'm so sure all of our facts are right.
Most of this information comes from here a source I wouldn't consider worthy of toilet paper. The facts, to the best of my knowledge, check out. Please comment on this so I may be better informed.
The crux of the situation is thus:
According to prevailing wisdom Ronny didn't even mention the word AIDS until 1987 yet it was a part of his 1986 state of the union speech*:
We will continue, as a high priority, the fight against Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS). An unprecedented research effort is underway to deal with this major epidemic public health threat. The number of AIDS cases is expected to increase. While there are hopes for drugs and vaccines against AIDS, none is immediately at hand. Consequently, efforts should focus on prevention, to inform and to lower risks of further transmission of the AIDS virus. To this end, I am asking the Surgeon General to prepare a report to the American people on AIDS.
He mentioned it in 1985 as well.
Regan also campaigned against a proposition that called for the dismissal of teachers who advocated homosexuality. California prop 6 failed.
Regan: "Whatever else it is," Reagan wrote, "homosexuality is not a contagious disease like the measles. Prevailing scientific opinion is that an individual's sexuality is determined at a very early age and that a child's teachers do not really influence this." He also argued: "Since the measure does not restrict itself to the classroom, every aspect of a teacher's personal life could presumably come under suspicion. What constitutes 'advocacy' of homosexuality? Would public opposition to Proposition 6 by a teacher -- should it pass -- be considered advocacy?"
I think in the end it can fairly be said there was more Regan could have done. Given the constraints of his party and his general unwillingness to be bold it isn't surprising he wasn't an advocate for more research which was, well into the 90's, considered a homosexual disease.
What is clear is that some of the 'facts' we have been employing and, much to my chagrin, proven incorrect in conversation should be checked.
All things considered, when the disease was discovered in 1982 it was supposed the vaccine should only be a decade away - this could have precipitated his political inaction.
Note: I'm not letting him off the hook for not doing more, but he did more than I was willing to give him credit for. Your comments are most welcome, of course.
UPDATE Apparently the comment regarding AIDS being a "homosexual disease" has been perceived as inflammatory. The general public perception, up until Ryan White gained notoriety was that HIV was a disease confined to homosexuality. This was obviously false, but it was never the less pervasive through the 80's and into the early 90's after his death.
I've given 4's to the few that spotted this because it does sound bad.
* ANOTHER UPDATE (this one relates to the article even)So... Murdock: President Reagan's February 1986 statement on AIDS, attributed below to his State of the Union address, was in fact from a written document — "Message to the Congress on America's Agenda for the Future" — submitted to Congress on February 6, 1986, two days after the State of the Union speech.
Murdock has a rebuttal and explanation