BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?

Subject: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Paul Burke
Date: 30 Nov 09 - 05:26 PM

Uganda is debating a law which would criminalise homosexuality, including the death penalty in some circumstances. The law is being promoted, apparently, by American Evangelical missionaries. Would any of our resident Christians and/ or homophobes care to indicate whether they find this to their taste?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Bill D
Date: 30 Nov 09 - 05:33 PM

I'd rather see Uganda make it legal to demonstrate TO American Evangelical missionaries exactly what is at issue.....

(I seriously doubt you'll find anyone here willing to bite on your dare, Paul. Very few are willing to put their names to the most extreme positions)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Lox
Date: 30 Nov 09 - 06:28 PM

I'm not up for this kind of baiting whoever does it.

Neither big nor clever.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 30 Nov 09 - 06:57 PM

Apparently? Well, that sounds apparently like possible conjecture. Have you any support for your hypothetical question?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: JohnInKansas
Date: 30 Nov 09 - 07:11 PM

TimesOnline

Apparently a legitimate report on a real proposal.

John

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 30 Nov 09 - 07:22 PM

Obviously there are Christians who would be horrified at this kind of thing.

Then there are some home-grown Christians that would secretly support this.

Much of homophobia is engendered by an interpretation of the text in the bible.

Also, Islamic fundamentalists execute homosexuals, too.

Something the two religions have in common.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 30 Nov 09 - 07:25 PM

When I was growing up in the 50's cartoons often showed missionaries in Africa being boiled in a big stew-pot. Not very politically correct these days, I suppose.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: olddude
Date: 30 Nov 09 - 07:33 PM

Evil people will do Evil under any name they wish to use, Taliban does not represent Muslims, Nor does drinking the cool aid with poison or railing against others represent people of faith (Any Faith). Hate groups put on all kinds of masks to justify their actions of hate.

I think my faith is pretty solid and I am a Christian, and ya know what I scream loud and hard when gay people are discriminated against in any way shape or form in this life - as loud as I do when I hear of the injustice against minorities, women , or any other group. I have neighbors, friends and even family that is gay ...(And noone cares!)

you see for me and those I know with faith, As with flowers, God made a lot of wonderful variations in people. And those who try to use his name for hate purposes or political gains or reasons, know nothing of Faith.

Hate is not an option in Faith, it is just the opposite and those who do hate, have no faith so those people can label it Christian, Muslim anything they want but it is political and nothing more than an agenda to divide or try and justify their crimes.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: artbrooks
Date: 30 Nov 09 - 08:09 PM

Well, it would seem that MPs in Uganda have the right to introduce legislation, regardless of its prospects of passage, and individuals have the right to support it or not, regardless of their religious affiliation or the basic repugnance of the bill.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 30 Nov 09 - 08:19 PM

There may be a handful of American Evangelical missionaries who support such a proposal, but there may well be a hundred times as many who are appalled by it.

Painting with too broad a brush is not just unfair, it's unwise. People who do it usually end up with a lot of paint on themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ed T
Date: 30 Nov 09 - 08:22 PM

Scroll down a bit for the story:
http://www.abibitumikasa.com/forums/afrikan-social-systems/41481-uganda-museveni-warns-against-homosexuality.html

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ed T
Date: 30 Nov 09 - 08:27 PM

Some more info:
http://www.afrol.com/articles/16744

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: katlaughing
Date: 30 Nov 09 - 10:24 PM

olddude, that was beautifully written. Thank you from this non-Christian who also has gays in the family as well as many friends who are homosexual.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Alice
Date: 30 Nov 09 - 11:06 PM

There is a connection to the Uganda law with the evangelical group of politicians in Washington, DC, on C street called The Family. We've discussed the Family in this thread.


From examiner.com
C Street politics: The Family sponsors death for homosexuals in Uganda
"Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni, and David Bahati, a key Ugandan lawmaker, are both active members of the Family, and the major force behind the legislation. Indeed, they represent the Family in Uganda. Bahati organizes the Family's Ugandan National Prayer Breakfast and oversees an African student leadership program designed to create future leaders for Africa, into which the Family has poured millions of dollars."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 03:18 AM

One of the most worrying aspects of this is the way that small yet powerful Evagelical groupings are starting to act like nineteenth-century imperialists - seeking to intervene in the affairs of non-Western nations as they see fit.   Intense moralism + imperialist arrogance = a very scary cocktail.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: theleveller
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 03:27 AM

"There may be a handful of American Evangelical missionaries who support such a proposal, but there may well be a hundred times as many who are appalled by it."

I'm sure that's true, but I'm not hearing their cries of protest. Perhaps, like Olddude, they should be screaming loud and hard.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 04:31 AM

I am totally against the death penalty, whether for homosexual criminals or heterosexual criminals......with the possible exception of men who habitually rape or abuse babies and very small children.
They in my opinion are beyond human help.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Lox
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 04:36 AM

"I'm sure that's true, but I'm not hearing their cries of protest. Perhaps, like Olddude, they should be screaming loud and hard."

So who's crties of protest are you hearing?


... what's that sound? .... wait ... I heard a pin drop ...

That was the sound of the christians not protesting.

Everyone else was just being sileent as a mark of respect.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 04:37 AM

Tolerance and acceptance of the gay community has yet to reach most non western countries.
The Anglican Church is having real problems persuading its African communicants to join our acceptance of gay priests and bishops.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Bryn Pugh
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 04:38 AM

Death penalty : when have two wrongs (and I do NOT mean homosexuality) ever made a right ?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 05:35 AM

Yes, Bryn: but that applies, not only to capital punishment, but to the entire concept of punishment in general and thruout — ALL punishment consists of replying to one wrong with another: doing wrong to the offender by imposing on him an experience he would prefer to evade; otherwise it wouldn't BE a punishment. It is a self-evidently terrible idea. Unfortunately nobody has yet come up with a better one.

In my teaching days I would say to a new class I was meeting for the first time, "I intend there to be no punishments in my lessons" — at which they would smirk self-satisfiedly. After a pause I would add, "So - you begin."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 05:40 AM

"Tolerance and acceptance of the gay community has yet to reach most non western countries."
Doesn't 'tolerance' imply that homosexuality is a crime or a weakness?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 06:07 AM

I think it would be helpful to 'Christianity' (and to Christians) as a world-wide religion if moderate denominations (ie: most of them) were to make some form of formal collective denunciation/condemnation of extremist Christian groups who advocate murdering certain doctors/praying for other people to die/murdering gay people, and so-on.
A kind of 'not in the name of Christ' sorta deal.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: theleveller
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 06:08 AM

"So who's crties of protest are you hearing?"

Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, the media who are covering this event....will that do for a start?

Now, your point was what, exactly?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 06:48 AM

Pardon me for asking, but would somebody please point me toward the mention of missionaries, American, Evangelical, or other.

I've followed the links, and I don't think I've missed anything, but I saw no indication of foreign input in support.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Lizzie Cornish
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 07:30 AM

To tarnish all Christians with the same brush is wrong. There are things in most Holy Books, I'd imagine, which have been written by those with 'agendas'. The vast majority of people have the common sense and a sense of love and peace that comes so much of their Holy Books.

Those who seek to use any form of religion, purely for their own evil means, as Dan has mentioned above, should be rooted out. And yes, I'm with Crow Sister here, I think a 'Not in the name of Christ' campaign, would be wonderful...as would 'Not in the name of Allah' too.

Most religions are based on peace and love, and most who choose to follow those religions choose to follow that path.

Please do not therefore brand ALL Christians, Muslims, Jews..etc.. as feeling this way.

The British National Party is er...British, but they do not stand for what I believe, even though I am British.

Common sense is needed here, methinks.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: treewind
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 07:41 AM

"Islamic fundamentalists execute homosexuals, too.
Something the two religions have in common."

No, just something fundamentalists have in common.

(to my mind, neither group deserves the description "religious")

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: KEVINOAF
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 08:24 AM

The most homophobic faith is probably the judaic although chistianity and islam too are not devoid of this trait,.In any event no religion has the right to intrude into the bed chamber in matters involving consenting adults. if they choose to practice their filthy habits in the privacy of their own apartments then its no-ne else's business!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 08:37 AM

Can someone please point me to the part of the New Testament which demands the death penalty for any 'crime' or 'offence', whether by homo- or hetero-sexuals, Christians or Non-Christians, white men, black men or, for that matter, blue men?

If it's there, I've never seen it, and it's wrong to tar all Christians with the same brush as a few who hold extreme (and fundamentally un-Christian) views. Just the same as it's wrong to brand all Muslims as violent, murderous infidel-haters. Both are patently untrue.

Christians all over the world, all the time, announce their opposition to all sorts of wrongs and injustices, including killing, by the acts of living, practising and publically acknowledging, their Faith. There are millions who do just that, just as there are millions from other Faiths, and of no Faith, who live their lives as shining examples of goodness and humanity.

The good guys outnumber the bastards by hundreds of thousands, if not millions, to one. Unfortunately, it's always the bastards that we get to hear about, and the shit they fling about always seems to land on the good guys.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 08:41 AM

The death penalty (as a maximal penalty, depending on the case) for homosexuality exists in the following countries:

Iran, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, United Arab Emirates, Sudan, Nigeria, Mauritania

I do not see a pronounced Christian influence in these countries.

If some extreme Christians want to follow that example that reminds me of the position towards evolution: The most extreme rejection is shared by Christian and Muslim fundamentalists (literalists).

"When you criticize only one group for things that are done by all groups, you are practicing hypocrisy as well as bigotry" (CarolC)

Wolfgang)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: goatfell
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 09:08 AM

I'm a Christian, and I don't like this idea that they might do in Uganda.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Wolfgang
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 09:19 AM

Mark, Chapter 7: 8-11: "You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men. And he said to them: 'You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions! For Moses said, 'Honor your father and your mother,' and, 'Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death."

It seem to me that Jesus quotes Moses approvingly here.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Alice
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 10:45 AM

Don, just google "C Street The Family Uganda homosexuality" and you will find many articles about the support of this law and the people behind it in Uganda by the Republican politicians in the US who are member of the "Family", an evangelical cult in DC on C Street.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 10:51 AM

Ummmmm, wasn't Moses in the Old Testament, Wolfgang? I.e Before Christ? The teachings of the Old Testament differ greatly from the New Testament. Or are German Bibles different to English ones?

And it seems to me that Jesus (if Mark was indeed quoting Jesus - I'll check that when I get home) was demonstrating to the Jews that they had put aside (many of) God's commands, and using the extreme example of putting to death anyone who cursed his parents to press home his point. I don't see any approval, tacit or otherwise, in there.

But then I'm not seeking to see that approval. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 11:31 AM

So who's crties of protest are you hearing?


... what's that sound? .... wait ... I heard a pin drop ...

That was the sound of the christians not protesting.

Everyone else was just being sileent as a mark of respect.

Not too many Mudcatters, it seems to me, are in a position to know what the 'common' Christian thinks about this. I know that my sister's church is discussing it and asking how they can help get across the message of love and acceptance.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Alice
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 12:42 PM

This all comes back to the political agenda of the cult on C Street called The Family. Google and read about it. I was raised a Christian (Catholic) although I'm not a member of any religion now, and I don't think most Christians would find what is happening in Uganda or within "The Family" to 'their taste'.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: olddude
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 01:08 PM

Well I cannot speak for everyone, but I sure can speak for me, I have rattled cages where it helps most over and over. I know the Clintons, my daughter worked for Hillary in DC when she was a senator, My message went out quite clearly on a direct path. And I am absolutely sure the real faith community will be heard , that is all faiths.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 01:44 PM

Thanks for the links Alice.

Christ, that rats' nest needs fumigating, doesn't it?

They make Fred Phelps look like a boy scout.

Seems like a good argument for the real Christian Churches to make a very loud show of excommunicating the whole vicious evil lot.

What happened to the popular myth that the USA separates religion fom government?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 02:00 PM

I think that the Ugandan Government has the right to pass the laws as they see fit. But they should not stop at gays. What about the fornicators? The adulterers? The shrimp eaters? I am sick and tired of "Christians" who treat Leviticus as and a la carte menu while completely ignoring the message of Jesus. Executing people for their sins is not loving thy neighbor as thyself.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Tinker
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 02:01 PM

Here is one church speaking out...House of Deputies president condemns proposed Uganda anti-homosexuality legislation

Churches that are not making fundamentalist statements often get little press coverage for their stands.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Paul Burke
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 02:24 PM

Wolfgang is probably right in quoting Jesus as approving of the death penalty in that case, though I know of no Christian administration which imposes it for cursing one's parents. I think he also said something about millstones. That's not the point. The thinking Christians have gone a long way beyond the letter of the Bible, old or new, and have accepted- proclaimed- that what was offered was not a prescription or a set of inviolable rules, but a framework to guide thinking. Christians of this sort have been at the forefront of many of the great campaigns- against slavery, against capital punishment, for social justice, for civic freedoms, against poverty, for equality. But there still seems to be something of the attitude that diehard Communists used to have in the seventies- to deny the evidence of Stalinism in their case. It was all propoganda, you can't believe the enemy. So some people seem to see any criticism of the fundies as criticism of themselves.

It seems to me that "Christian" is not even a useful label- You can't tell anything about a person's beliefs from it, as it encompasses the range from one extreme to another. This is one of the extremes; I'm very happy that most Christians here are much closer to the opposite pole. And it's nice to see people with the courage to speak out on the subject, even if it exposes the raw truth that you can't have unity with polar opposites.

I think the Ugandan obscenity is best seen in terms of a movement which is competing for members, rather than trying to lead them. In societies in which men feel they have to prove their masculinity- often because they are economically marginalised in post- colonial societies- they may well suffer from gender insecurity and fear of being identified as un- masculine. Failing to support hardliners coukld be one way of avoiding the charge of softness.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 02:40 PM

Recent events in Ireland are, in my opinion, the strongest case yet for the church (any church) having no say whatever in the sexual behaviour of the people - ever again.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Bill D
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 02:48 PM

Remember...Jesus, whoever and whatever he was..or wasn't.. didn't write books. People wrote what they HEARD about him, from 70 to 250 years after his death. In fact, most of the Christian bible was compiled in very strange ways, and a lot of it says what certain clerics and those who directed those clerics wanted said.

You can find almost anything in it you wish.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 03:09 PM

I do not recognize that translation Wolfgang. Shouldn't it be "Shall die" or "let them die" rather than "Must be put to death?"

But even so, the context of Mark 7 clearly shows that Jesus is pointing out the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, he is not telling them to go out a kill those who openly disagree with their mothers. He is telling them to lay off his people for such a minor thing while they let more clear and blatant sins go unpunished. To me this is a major implication of Christ's message, one that is often ignored by those most loudly professing to follow him.

Do you recall "let he who is without sin cast the first stone"? Do you believe that he meant that mercy only apply to harlots? It applies to all sinners. Christians forgive. They do not mete out punishment. Punishment is the purview of government.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Donuel
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 05:11 PM

I wrote about this last week. If that is what the people of Uganda want, they should have it.

If on the other hand this is what the C Street family wants for the people of Uganda but the people do not, it would be biblical justice to execute one C Street family member for every gay Ugandan executed.

starting with Inhoff

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Lox
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 05:39 PM

Jim,

"Doesn't 'tolerance' imply that homosexuality is a crime or a weakness?"

Not always.

It could mean that someone feels uncomfortable or finds it hard to believe or empathise with homosexuals, yet they accept and respect that homosexuals have equal rights and are therefore accepting of them.

My closest friends are 90% compatible with me. I tolerate the other 10% with no difficulty.

Do you see how I am using the word?

It doesn't always have to be a negative.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Donuel
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 06:05 PM

There is no room in old time religion for either tolerence or positive spin. Zero Tolerence - No Spin!

This year we must re double our efforts to ban the pornographic secular Christmas carols that are a Abomination to our Lord!!

Strike from thy lips "Don we now our gay apparel"
The word gay appears in no fewer than 4 carols and must be purged and destroyed...and that goes for that fruity reindeer Prancer too.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 08:09 PM

Leveller, regarding your post of 01 Dec 09 - 03:27 a.m.—and to others—there are plenty of Christians who are speaking out strongly on this matter. But apparently, they are far less interesting to the news media than are those relatively few loudmouths who want gays lynched.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 01 Dec 09 - 10:16 PM

Whta would one expect from the country that gave the world Idi Amin?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Goose Gander
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 12:26 AM

Names, please. Who are the American evangelicals who support his proposed law?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 12:41 AM

Some here.

Takes a few seconds to load.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Goose Gander
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 12:57 AM

Well, I've found some stuff about 'The Family',an alleged 'Christian' organization that supposedly has funded the Ugandan politician that introduced the legislation. And the cowardly Rick Warren has refused to condemn the proposal. Absolutely noxious, this should be fought tooth and nail.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 03:17 AM

Well spoken, Jack The Sailor and Lox.
Truly, they are words of wisdom.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 03:37 AM

"It could mean that someone feels uncomfortable...."
Thanks Lox - something to think about.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Lox
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 04:48 AM

""It could mean that someone feels uncomfortable...."
Thanks Lox - something to think about."

No - it couldn't mean that someone feels uncomfortable.

That isn't what tolerance means.

But in many diffferent contexts, such as where people disagree, or where people have different ways of doing things - like washing up ... tolerance can mean "being accepting and respectful of how others are different to you."

A classic example might be a married couple who get on 90% of the time but are 10% incompatible. It could be that a common source of tension is the manner in which the dishes are washed. I do it one way and you do it another.

If both are intolerant of the differences then they might end up bickering and falling out. If they learn to tolerate each others differences then they will probably succeed as a couple.

A gay couple might learn to tolerate each others differences.

A woman might tolerate the flirtatious habit of a close male friend - or vice versa.

We are all different and there are some people who instinctively feel uncomfortable about homosexuals and homosexuality.

I consider myself lucky for not being afflicted by any such handicap.

But I don't judge anyone who is.

I do react strongly when people decide that they have the right to Judge homosexuals, when misinformation is peddled about homosexuals and I stand up to people who would like to limit the civil rights of homosexuals and victimize homosexuals.

By "tolerate" we do not only have to mean "put up with" which is how you are understanding it.

A tolerant society is one where those who disagree or are instinctively incompatible with homosexuals learn to be respectful of their civil rights and accepting of their place in society and learn to coexist peacefully in the workplace and elsewhere with gay colleagues etc.

It is unrealistic to expect everyone to be friends with everyone all of the time.

That's where the notion of cultural and political tolerance come in.

You asked "Is it a crime?"

Society doesn't tolerate crimes. It does tolerate my point of view and yours and it tolerates both our sexual orientations too regardless of what they might be.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Penny S.
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 05:34 AM

Bear in mind that the law also includes a three year prison sentence for anyone who becomes aware of a male homosexual or a lesbian and does not inform the authorities within 24 hours. So if you are not prepared to turn someone in for death, you have to face a punishment yourself. Heaven help any Ugandan Underground Railroad.

The death penalty does have limits on it, apparently. It is for people who have had a relationship with an underage person of the same sex, have relationships when they know they are HIV positive, and one other case which escapes me, but probably includes force or non-consensual sex.

Part of the arguments about it concern the idea that homosexuals groom a child from a school and promise them rewards for "converting" another child, and "once two children have gone, the whole school is lost". There is a strong idea that homosexuality is a learned or chosen behaviour, and not inborn.

But even so, it is appalling, and that it should be derived in the first place from British colonial law, and now American interference, is more so.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 06:09 AM

Religious fundamentalists don't do themselves any favours. In fact, they don't do religion in general any favours. You read something like this and end up thanking god you are not religious......

I must say, I am always waiting hopefully for influential religious leaders such as the Pope or Archbishop of Canterbury to say "not in my name."   They are too busy sorting out who owns the bigots to worry about how their clubs affect real people....

This Ugandan thing? Disgusting that these so called christians are aiding and abetting what would be illegal in their own country. Here in The UK, you can be prosecuted for crimes abroad. If the Ugandan government execute anybody, the happy clappers should by any moral code I can think of be guilty of aiding and abetting murder.

If anybody can find anything in the Bible that says homosexuality is wrong, the answer is simple. The bible is wrong, irrelevant and can we please move on.....

There is no god in any sense that man has described, and these fundamentalists from Dumbfuckistan are criminals with a disturbing mental health issue.

(A church should be a place of sanctuary, not sanctimony.)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 06:15 AM

Well said again, Lox.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Dodger
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 06:51 AM

Death penalty for American Evangelical missionaries. might be a better idea. who has proof of god? the devil a care.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Dodger
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 07:46 AM

All males are born as females, has that something to do with it? the devil a care. eat the rich.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Dodger
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 08:38 AM

I mean females in the Womb

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Donuel
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 10:26 AM

This is the book and the author who has uncovered the C Street evangelical links to Uganda and other foreign policy fiascos.

http://www.amazon.com/Family-Secret-Fundamentalism-Heart-American/dp/0060559799

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: ToeRag
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 11:09 AM

Would the world not be a better place without religion

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 11:26 AM

It might possibly be a better place without religion. It would not be a better place without Faith. One is not necessarily the same as the other.
IMHO. YMMV. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 12:18 PM

"It would not be a better place without Faith."
Totally agreen, as long as 'faith' doesn't have to be religious faith.
Am happy to have faith in my fellow humans - politicians, businessmen and bankers and clergymen excepted!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Donuel
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 12:53 PM

faith to me is trust
There is nothing we can totally trust, not the sky, not the earth beneath our feet and not always our fellow man. But ya still gotta trust somthing or someone somtimes.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 01:08 PM

Donuel
I trust you had a pleasant day?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 01:21 PM

Am happy to have faith in my fellow humans - politicians, businessmen and bankers and clergymen excepted!>>>

Come come, Jim — that's - er - well, - er - not racist or sexist or ageist: bit it sure·as·hell IS somethingist!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: ToeRag
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 01:47 PM

Can we trust that there is a God

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Bill D
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 01:51 PM

Except for odd little attempts by a minority to do something like pass this law, Uganda is one of the better run and more progressive countries in the area. (
I know a woman who spent a number of months there working with the govt. as they try to modernize.)

As more information comes out, it begins to look like this proposed law would never have been put forth without the 'guidance' of some of the American evangelicals...such as "The Family". The seeds of hate were planted and nourished in complex ways...but we KNOW the justification for this law come from a twisted understanding of Christian theology.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 02:37 PM

"Would the world not be a better place without religion"?

No

No more than the world would be a better place without homosexuals.

Or that the world would be better without, say, folk music!

Religion in itself is not bad. It's just a different way of living

Homosexuality is not bad. It's a different way of loving.

Neither are practiced by everybody and neither would suit everybody, obviously, but that is no excuse for not accepting those those that do.

The major difference, as I see it, is that one can choose to be religious and which religion one follows. Homosexuality is not a choice. It is 'merely' one form of innate sexual behaviour, not just in humans, but in many other animals. One that, in humans, can be intenseley loving as anything experienced by heterosexuals. Surely to love someone, each other, and ourselves, is all a part of the human condition and is far better than hating. I am not talking about just sexual love here but the love of a person in all it's forms.

Love is also at the centre of what Christianity surely is about? God so LOVED the world that he sent his only begotten Son, Jesus Christ....". And Jesus said "A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another". Jesus said "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends". Love, love, love... no mention of hatred and killing each other over sexuality that is not a choice.

Jesus message was one of love and forgiveness, not hate and condemnation, and I never read anything issuing from his mouth that suggested we should judge anyone.

Life, with all its complexities and diversities, is so rich and wonderfully challenging that there is room for everyone as long as they are not hurting others. Religious or not, when we challenge love we challenge the very thing that might just seperate us from the other animals.... love, spirituality, and the ability to put things right that have been wrong for a long time.

Sorry to have 'gone on' but, in my humble opinion, there are far worse things to fear than homsexuality going on in our world. Live and let love.

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 03:00 PM

"it sure·as·hell IS somethingist!"
How about establishmentist - where do I sign?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 03:10 PM

Correct on all points, mauvepink.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 05:36 PM

"There is nothing we can totally trust, not the sky, not the earth beneath our feet and not always our fellow man. But ya still gotta trust somthing or someone somtimes. "

Did the sun rise this morning? You think it might come up again tomorrow?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Penny S.
Date: 02 Dec 09 - 05:50 PM

Mauvepink, great.

I'm just watching an episode of Lewis in which the plot hinges on the strife between religious rules and the love of homosexuals, with the message "Love is never wrong".

It seems to me that the people who take the view of the fundies on homosexual love don't know love when they see it. It is quite worrying to think that they cannot think of any sort of sex without stripping it of love - and the attitudes of those who espouse celibacy and abstinence and impose restrictions on others' expression of love whether hetero or homo tend to back this up.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 04:35 AM

I reckon Mauvepink does have a point. (In the abstract, but let's not get picky.)

However, and please, anybody, help me understand this;

If I felt so strongly about a religious creed and genuinely believed the unambiguous message of love, forgiveness, turning the other cheek and reaching out to those we don't understand...

I reckon I would be at the forefront of demanding that "leaders" of my faith denounce fundamentalist hijackers of the message, and would have huge problems being associated with the institutional bigotry; not only this extreme example but the softer ones such as vicars wanting to take communion with Catholics because their brand of homophobia and lack of women doing the job suits some so called representatives of the "good news."

You see, whilst ever religions can ignore equal rights legislation (that should affect their status as charities and as employers) I have HUGE issues with them trying to give society a steer. I really do.

Mind you, I can't be a hypocrite. Even if they did join the 21st Century, I don't need an abstract concept to give me a moral steer. I watched David Attenborough's Life series and was fascinated by the altruism and community based behaviour of other animals, such as insects, reptiles, fish, furry mammals and even microscopic organisms. Some of which have never heard a sermon or read the bible......

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 05:23 AM

I'm a lifelong Catholic, and I've worked in the Catholic Church all my life - so I know the situation in the American Catholic Church quite well. Despite the official stand against homosexual sex, most priests and nuns I know are very sympathetic to the concerns of homosexuals. And it seems to me that most Catholic lay people and bishops have attitudes that are far more rigidly opposed to homosexuals. Many Catholic priests and nuns aren't particularly pleased about the idea of anti-homosexual Anglicans joining the Catholics.
It's a dilemma that's not as easily resolved as one might think.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: ToeRag
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 07:01 AM

If God did not exist... would we be having this conversation about Uganda, debating a law which would criminalise homosexuality, including the death penalty in some circumstances.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 07:05 AM

Sorry Toerag - cannot begin to understand the point you are making. Could you perhaps expound it a little further & with more clarity? Why should the fact that we are having this conversation in any way presuppose or indicate the existence of the Deity in whom it appears you believe but I don't?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: ToeRag
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 07:19 AM

No god no American Evangelical missionaries. so God seems to be the problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 07:39 AM

I think you are metaphysically confused TR — the problem is not God as such, but the question as to the actual existence of such an entity. But I leave this topic now as my head begins to spin.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 08:08 AM

ToeRag does make one interesting point.

God does exist.

As a concept.

Descartes said "I think, therefore I am." So in that sense god does exist.

God exists as ever, as an instrument for helping the few domineer the many. T'was ever thus. I reckon that if you got rid of religion, you would have to invent it anyway. Look at the countries where religion was banned. It was banned so it didn't compete with the state system to gain the same end. ie., fodder for the masses.

ToeRag isn't quite so accurate with the idea of no god, no missionaries. We would have missionaries, but their role would be pushing state propaganda.

About time these idiots from the bible belt (aka Dumbfuckistan) realised that the vast majority of people may not be able to say whether there is a god or not, but at least most people know the so called moral code extracted from scripture is flawed, irrelevant and in places downright disgusting. (ie the cause of debate in this thread.)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: ToeRag
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 08:46 AM

My point is, God does not exist, so no need for the bible belt.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: olddude
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 10:12 AM

What amazes me is people think this has something truly to do with Religion, It doesn't

It has to do with hate and the masks evil people use to divided and spread their hate.   

Your hatred for people of faith makes you a victim falling into their hands. Painting with a broad brush to generalize people without the least bit of understanding what faith is.

Hitler was very successful in convincing the whole of Germany that all evils that befell the German people were cause by the Jews. Use whatever popular mask to spread the hate. That is what hate does.

Church groups that do amazing wonderful things, never get the press never, only the hate groups that use the false label of Christian get the press so everyone like many here can blame and generalize the "Christians" are the cause of it all. And many of the TV guys get their evil press by preaching hate knowning nothing of God.

True Christian people are easy targets ... and it amazes me how so many people buy into the message without the least bit of understanding. Go ahead and label, but from my perspective.

If you wish to make a true change in the world, if you want to make life better for everyone. Do what I try to do every day. "FIND THE HATE THAT LIVES IN OURSELVES" WHATEVER THAT HATE MAYBE AND GET RID OF IT. then and only then can we try to remove the hate from others.

Hate is in all forms, people who say the immigrants are taking our jobs, the minorities are crossing over to take our land. Yada yada, all hate all of it wrong, now it is the Christians are trying to kill people ....   fact is evil is evil pure and simple, any means especially popular ones will be used to justify evil

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Penny S.
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 12:47 PM

There is a piece in New Scientist today about some research carried out in America on how people perceive the ideas held by God as compared with those they have themselves, those held by other Americans and a few other groups. These ideas were selected from a variety of topics, but I expect you can guess which ones.

What happened was that it turned out that those researched felt that God had the same opinions they did, while these might diverge from those held by the other groups.

The researchers then asked the subjects to develop an argument in favour of the opposite view from that they held themselves, for instance on the death penalty. They found that the subjects tendeed to change their own view on the subject, but also believed that God's opinion was different, while that they attributed to others had not changed.

Which means that, unless it is possible to get the proponents of the death penalty to argue against it, there isn't a hope in the hot place of getting them to accept that God does not want death for his children, or that they are not the real Christians.

They will see those who oppose them as the not Christians.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: ToeRag
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 01:44 PM

Gays Won't Go to Heaven: Cardinal, IslamOnline.net & Newspapers .

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1258880717525&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 01:52 PM

Dear God, please confirm what I believe

THAT is not only interestering but also frightening. It is also the third most popularly read article on "New Scientist" " today

Interesting in that I have found whenever I try to reason an omnipotent, loving God should be able to "do this, see that, help this, avoid that" I get told not to try and figure the mind of God. I am reminded I am human and can have no understanding of God's great plan. Frightening because if people create God's laws "in their own image", so to speak, then is boils down to using God as a scapegoat for evil doings, thereby never having to take responsibility for wrongful, terrible actions. Forgiveness, therefore, is all about who you can blame the bad act upon and, if it's God, then how can we possibly understand?

My simple brain now hurts so I am going out to listen to some great live folk music courtesy of a local Folk Club!

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: ToeRag
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 02:12 PM

Whether a Christian, Jew or a Hindu, Muslim, being more devout to one's religion makes him/her more opposed to homosexual practices,
So no God means homosexuals are safe.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,astro
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 03:39 PM

This religious discussion is very tired and old...and not important, what is important is the idea of countries imposing death penalties upon life style issues and should not only be opposed by individuals but also opposed (more importantly) by governments. Aid, trade, allowed travel from these countries should be stopped until these laws are dropped.

The whole purpose of this thread was not to show a concern for the gay Ugandans, but rather to impose a red herring to draw out those who hate religion (Christianity for certain) and those who may support such hideous laws. To me, a man of faith and a scientist, this is a tawdry method of discussion and is pretty sad. In all arenas, science or religion or business or politics or sports or..., you will find people of low opinion or ethics. To paint all in any arena by the lowest common denominator is just plain wrong and points to an agenda.

I know that in science, there are no good reasons to point to any population for special punishments while in religion I do know that when asked, Christ noted the greatest commandment was to love God with all you heart and soul and then closely the second greatest commandment was to love you neighbor as yourself. Those who cry Christ, Christ are not necessarily ones who follow Christ. You can tell by their actions. Calling for hate is a sure sign that they are not.

So, get the focus right, there are those out there who are suffering and those who want to make them suffer. Help those who are suffering and oppose those who want to make them suffer. It is simple as that, any other discussion is just smoke and blows away....and points that in truth they really don't care about those who are suffering...only to win the point. Which, in fact, was the whole agenda in the first place.

astro in LA

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: olddude
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 03:40 PM

The new testament is a book of unrestricted, compassion, hope and love, anyone calling themselves Christian or people of faith that don't see it are following a church leader, a false path, and not the teachings.   One passage that sums it all up

words of Jesus " when you do to the least of my
breathrens you do it to me"

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: olddude
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 03:51 PM

Astro
makes an excellent point, I would suggest that everyone that is in the USA write Hillary and let your voice be heard via the gov website. Hillary is a good person and good soul. Others contact your state departments. If you want a direct path PM me but you will need to include your full contact info and phone.   I can get it to her direct.

It is only when good people say enough that this stuff can be over come.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 04:03 PM

"should not only be opposed by individuals but also opposed (more importantly) by governments. Aid, trade, allowed travel from these countries should be stopped until these laws are dropped.">>> writes Astro above.

An attractive argument; but it has always been a principle in diplomacy among nations that 'internal affairs' must be left to develop as the governments concerned see fit. We continue to maintain diplomatic relations & to trade with, e.g., SaudiArabia, who stoned a Princess [no less] to death for adultery not long since; regularly publicly amputate the hands of thieves; publicly flog blasphemers & fornicators of both sexes; behead those who abandon the faith··· Governments, by longstanding convention, do not interfere or sanction in such instances. How shall Uganda's proposed new laws be treated any differently without invidiousness?

This is not to imply that I don't think their proposals appalling. I do. But it seems to me that the situation is not as simple as many might wish, & these points need to be made.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 04:06 PM

"Descartes said "I think, therefore I am." So in that sense god does exist."

er ... nearly ...

What he actually said was that after he had stripped away all the things which he couldn't assert to be true with 100% surety, (i.e anything perceived by his senses) all that was left was his mind.

"I am; I think" Was the only thing he could not find grounds to doubt.

He does not argue that talking about the notion of himself makes him exist, he points out that at the end of his discourse, he is left with "I " I walk, I think, I disagree, I think, I don't think, I perceive wrongly, I trust nothing ... etc ...

In all cases, as long as I , then I exist.

This has no bearing on any external thing such as God.

He did try to go on to argue that God exists, but not on those grounds.

His thoughts and observations require the existence of "I" to occur.

"I think God exists" is not subjective to God but is still subjective to "I". Likewise with "I talk about God and therefore cause the idea of him to exist"

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Paul Burke
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 04:19 PM

The whole purpose of this thread was not to show a concern for the gay Ugandans, but rather to impose a red herring to draw out those who hate religion (Christianity for certain) and those who may support such hideous laws.

No it wasn't (I should know). It was to show concern for gay Ugandans, and hopefully to draw enlightened Christians to oppose the vile machinations of their supposed co- religionists. What it did, sadly, was to expose the raw nerve and drive some people into denial.

As I pointed out earlier, thinking Christians have more in common with atheists than with certain varieties of fundamentalists.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: ToeRag
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 04:25 PM

Is this God talking those who feel homosexual impulses "perhaps aren't guilty, but by acting against the dignity of the body they will certainly not enter the Kingdom of Heaven."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 04:50 PM

Paul,

your OP insinuates that Homophobes and Christians are synonymous terms.

If that was not your intention it could be a good idea to clarify that point and to apologize to those christians who are not homophobes who may have been offended or hurt by their reasonable inferrence of your motives.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 04:51 PM

Astro .....I've been reading all the bullshit and cosy rhetoric about different ways of living and loving, how homosexuality is genetic not behavioural and how its not really sexual at all, but just pure luuuuve, like we used to see in the movies.

I wasn't even going to bother to respond to the "feelgood sisterhood" but when I read your post I saw sincerity and clear sightedness.

I agree with your thoughts on this thread and the agendas of many who have posted here. I also agree that we should be putting our efforts into helping those who suffer, not punishing them.
To start helping to solve a problem, it is important to understand that there is a problem to begin with. People like mauvepink and others here, see any discussion of homosexuality and its place in our society as bigotry, but blinding ourselves to the problems associated with homosexuality is much worse, it condemns homosexuals to the lifestyle they have at present.....horrendous health and life expectancy statistics, promiscuity figures which point multiple sexual partners and a statistical link to child abuse, in the surveys on child abuse in the Catholic church.

These are real problems which need to be addressed in the way homosexuals in Los Angeles are dealing with the dreadful link to hiv/aids, facing up to the figures,accepting that there is a problem and attempting to find out why the problems exist.

No sane person wants to see fellow humans suffer, no matter what their sexual practices are and closing our eyes to what is actually happening around us helps no one.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 05:01 PM

""Whether a Christian, Jew or a Hindu, Muslim, being more devout to one's religion makes him/her more opposed to homosexual practices,
So no God means homosexuals are safe.""

Sorry ToeRag, but that's the biggest blooper you've managed yet.

Are you seriously saying that all gay bashers are religious zealots, and there are no atheists who oppose homosexuality?

What planet are you from?

There is no logical connection between the Ugandan situation an religion per se.

This is entirely about fundamentalism (with the accent on the "mental"), bigotry, and hatred. None of these are related to genuine religious feeling, but spring from an intense loathing of the "different, the "other".

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 05:11 PM

I take a deep breath and think "OK, lets give this a chance.

Then I read:

"promiscuity figures which point multiple sexual partners"

Promiscuity being limited to Gay People of course ...

... and in "straight" clubs all over the country the boys and girls are all dropping down on one knee and proposing Marriage to their one and only sexual partber for life (only after marriage of course) and are all forming long nurturing relatonships with a view to procreating and getting a family going to which they are remaining loyal and faithful ...


"a statistical link to child abuse"

Because all Homosexuals are closet paedophiles.

Besides which, the statistics referred to only show that if you intend to interpret them to show that from the outset.

In fact they show something else, as was clearly pointed out in a previous thread, with no contest from the statistician who posted them.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 05:21 PM

Are you for real?
Have you actually read the CDC homosexual promiscuity figures?
Child abuse....81% to 19%?

Do you think I take any pleasure in quoting the figures for new Aids cases, promiscuity,etc?
If you do, you are indeed a lost cause!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 05:45 PM

"Have you actually read the CDC homosexual promiscuity figures?"

Have you been to any nightclub in the lsat 50 years?


"Child abuse....81% to 19%?"

81% to 19% of what?

And where does this information come from?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 06:01 PM

OK,

I've just been to the CDC site and found that they tended to investigate trends according to the following classifications: Age, Gander, Race ... no metion of sexual preference ...

... I did however find that the highest rates of STD suffering were in Teenage Girls and the next highest were young adult women ...

(Must be all those closet paedophile Gays who'll shag anything ... they did it)

There was also plenty of information about differences in sexual health for different races.

Minorities were found to be hit the hardest.

I wonder if racial minorities are closet paedophiles too .... I think we should be told ...


Hmmmmmmm ..............

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 06:19 PM

Gosh -this CDC site really is interesting ... look what I found ...

In This link, I discovered the following:

"The data also show that nongay-identified MSM are less likely than gay men to practice safer sex (CDC, 1993)."

Gosh.

Still nothing on promiscuity though ...

... best keep looking ...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 06:31 PM

Ah now here we go ... an expose about the health Risks associated with being Gay ...

... at www.catholiceducation.org ...

I wonder if these are the same Catholics who are seemingly populated by sexually repressed closet Gay Paedophiles?


I'd Love to know ....

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 07:04 PM

I'll just post a few figures, as you seem to be unable to locate them


CDC

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 07:08 PM

As MSM, (homosexuals and bisexuals)account for only 2-3% of the population, these figures are indeed "horrendous"

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Bill D
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 07:54 PM

some ought to go find a copy of this old book

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 08:04 PM

Why would the CDC or Eurosurveillance wish to lie?

Here

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 08:20 PM

akenaton... "People like mauvepink and others here, see any discussion of homosexuality and its place in our society as bigotry"...

With respect: that what not what I said and it is certainly not what I think. I cannot say what others actually think as I am not blessed with mind reading abilities. There are many discussions about homosexuality, on all sorts of boards and forums, and the most are not bigoted (though bigoted comments can be found quite easily often). I think open discussion, in many things and on many subjects, is a way forward to people understanding others (if they really want to understand at all).

As for STI's and all the promiscuity. Well, figures actually also show that this is not just the domain of homosexuals. STI's affect all sexualities, genders and age groups (though some of the horrendous figures actually show up in young, straight females). STI's respect no boundaries if any sex is involved!

All I was saying, and I did say it was my opinion and not for everyone, is that homosexuality is just as much a part of human life as is blonde hair, freckles, being straight, and folk music ;-)

You do not have to agree with me: that is your right and your choice. But I do believe that being homosexual should have the same rights as those who are straight and that it is not down to choice. I think there is genetic evidence that shows it is not a lifestyle choice for most. If we concentrated more on actual human facts, and stopped blaming people for the genes they get from their parents, we could all be better off.

I also somehow think this explanation will hardly satisfy :-(

Fact is: I do not see discussion on homosexuality as always being bigoted... perhaps bigots do? I have no idea.

What really confuses me is why anyone should be upset by anyone else's sexuality unless it directly affects them?

best wishes

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 08:29 PM

"What really confuses me is why anyone should be upset by anyone else's sexuality unless it directly affects them?"

Then you must be very easily confused Mp.

I am not upset by anyones sexuality, but I do get upset when a patently unhealthy lifestyle (both physically and psychologically) is promoted in our schools and society, as safe and healthy

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 08:44 PM

Thank you for your quick reply akenaton :-)

Nopes: not easily confused unless my blonde genes kick in. Oops! Just another stereotype rattling around in my head ;-)

"I am not upset by anyones sexuality, but I do get upset when a patently unhealthy lifestyle (both physically and psychologically) is promoted in our schools and society, as safe and healthy "

You see, I don't actually come across anything patently unhealthy being promoted in our schools. I don't think sexuality is something you can promote. It's a natural trait.

But then many patently unhealthy lifestyles are out there in society, being shown as safe and healthy, and one only needs to see some of the advertising that promotes it. Being uber thin, drinking strong beers, driving cars at breakneck speeds on open roads and in towns, playing loud folk music through earphones on the latest super bass player! Put simply, I am trying to say there are many things out there that are unsafe and unhealthy and that are for many everyday lifestyle CHOICES. Perhaps we could all be better emplyed trying to change some of those things for the better instead of putting down a group of individuals in society who have no choice for who they are.

I fear we may just need to agree to disagree our own feelings on this as I can see you are as likely stuck in your own mould as I am in mine. My position/opinion is as stated and I cannot apologise for that even though it is my choice to hold it.

best wishes once again

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 09:14 PM

"I don't actually come across anything patently unhealthy being promoted in our schools. I don't think sexuality is something you can promote. It's a natural trait."

For some time now, Indonesia has been feeling the negative effects of overpopulation. A friend of mine, who has spent considerable time in Indonesia, says that the Indonesian government has actually been subtly trying to promote homosexual relationships in order to try to diminish the birth rate. My friend tells me that, so far, the effort has failed miserably.

As mauvepink says, gender orientation is a "natural trait." And there is considerable evidence of late that it is genetically determined and not simply a matter of choice.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: olddude
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 09:32 PM

If you learn to hate another group of people and you are a hate monger yourself, then of course it would upset you if our school system is teaching tolerance to others that you don't like ...

Our schools cannot teach enough good things about accepting others as far as I am concerned.   I am not gay, I am a far from it as one can get ... however, I hear this stuff all the time ... like people are somehow afraid of others with different lifestyles ... last I looked one does not "Catch gay" if that is what you are worried about ...

And somehow, gay people are the cause of moral decay in this nation.
another lie that is so stupid that it would take 1000 years to respond. People all people, are either good people, or bad people and their sex drive has nothing to do with it.   Good or bad lays in the heart of a person.   

Gay people are not Christians, another absolute stupid statement. I wish I had the faith of some of the gay people I know.   How they were made by God has nothing to do with their love for God ...

I can't talk anymore ... I am feeding trolls ...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Simon G
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 11:02 PM

Let try another tack here.

I'm just wondering why a legislative proposal in Uganda which doesn't even come from the government is news and yet Saudia Arabia already has much more draconian legislation in place and not a peep about it. On the same vain there is an assumption running through this thread that a bunch of non-descript white guys (Ok so we don't know the Americans are white, but I bet they are in most peoples heads) can influence the government of Uganda. Do a smell the stench of rascism here?

Like most sub-saharan countries Uganda is barely hanging on by its finger nails under the pressure of our trade policy, our lack of help with AIDS, our raping the country of their natural resources, our introduction of corrupt practices. We in the West need to start playing fair with Uganda, actually we need to start being generous with them. Perhaps then they won't be tempted to pick on minorites, for picking on minorities is a symptom. Its a symptom of a society under severe pressure. Stacking up the pressure on this issue, global warming and the like simply make the problem worse.

Just remember we stacked up the pressure on German in the 1920s and we all know what the result was.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Alice
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 11:12 PM

Well, all I can say is the facts are there that the C Street politicians in The Family have influenced some Uganda politicians to join The Family. The facts are there, no assumptions, and that is behind this proposal of a law in Uganda.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Alice
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 11:26 PM

A good report on the details leading up to this Uganda proposal are on the Rachel Maddow program tonight on MSNBC. The video of that program will not be available until tomorrow. It involves the move under George Bush to change the ABC, (abstinence, be faithful, condoms) program that was working in Uganda to control aids to an Abstinence program, excluding condoms. She covers the history of funds coming from the USA, leading up to this current situation, quite well in her program tonight.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 03 Dec 09 - 11:58 PM

Good gracious. All along in this thread I had been wishing for some hard evidence of the Family's hand in this and I didn't find it. I followed the link(s)- the Examiner article that was referenced is pure d baloney without more credibility than Beck at his finest.

True, it appears that several Ugandan politician belong to the Family and that they are active in espousing the stupid law but that does in no way mean that the Family itself is involved or even agrees.

I am embarrassed that Mudcatters are this gullible.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Alice
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 01:15 AM

There was an NPR interview in November regarding the connection. The Family also has other names, including "The Fellowship".

link to NPR transcript

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 01:50 AM

Well, now, that was harsh. I really meant to say that I was surprised that we took the story at face value. If I was embarrassed as well that had more to do with me than with anyone else.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 02:35 AM

""I am not upset by anyones sexuality, but I do get upset when a patently unhealthy lifestyle (both physically and psychologically) is promoted in our schools and society, as safe and healthy""

Another blatant piece of agenda driven misinformation from the king of the misinformed.

Our schools do not "promote" homosexuality as normal, or in fact as abnormal. They inform and educate as to its existence, in exactly the way that they inform and educate as to the existence of the outside world, its cultures, religions, and moral perceptives, without ""promoting" acceptance or adherence to any of them.

No matter how many times you drag this particular red herring across the trail, you will not make your central premise valid.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 03:24 AM

"Do a smell the stench of rascism here?...."
Not necessarily Simon.... the west can be very forgiving (or silent) towards the human rights issues of a country which is the major oil supplier to the Western World - oilism maybe!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 03:50 AM

If there is a God, why did he play that dirty trick on his Chosen People, telling them to turn left when they reached the other side after he had parted the Red Sea for them? If only he had told them to turn right instead, they would have all that oil now, wouldn't they?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 04:26 AM

Thanks Ake.

I took issue with 2 comments.

1. "Have you actually read the CDC homosexual promiscuity figures?"

Neither of your links contains either the word "promiscuity" or the word "promiscuous"

2. "Child abuse....81% to 19%?"

Neither of your liinks says anything about homosexuality in relation to child abuse.

Both claims remain unsubstantiated slander.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 04:36 AM

Ebbie:"I am embarrassed that Mudcatters are this gullible."

Embarrassed??

Well Ebs, I have to agree with you on this one....I'm amazed, myself.
A lot of them act like a lynch mob, just looking for anyone ..especially anyone who displays 'reason'!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 04:40 AM

Oh yes and Ake,

You never answered my question -

"Child abuse....81% to 19%?"

81% 0f what and 19% of what?

What is this ratio?

Where does it come from?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 05:21 AM

Proof of evolution...

This thread....

It has gone from questioning the antics of some fundamentalist bigots in influencing a government all the way to questioning the statistics on homosexuality itself.

Perhaps a thread to allow people to use statistics to back up their prejudice or otherwise about Gay lifestyles would be a better place to have that discussion.

I am far more interested in how a religious faith based on love and understanding (as claimed) can be interpreted to hate a chosen lifestyle? To the point of trying to get in Africa what they can't get in The USA! (Mind you, many states do execute prisoners, so I do accept the term "civilised" may mean something different either side of the pond....)

There are also those who set out to say that if you disagree with their faith, you are the usual suspects, setting out to put religion down.

Yup, guilty as charged! If you can't win an argument with facts, don't try to win by questioning people's right to say the Emperor has no clothes, (or big white beard....)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: ToeRag
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 05:53 AM

Of the 53 Commonwealth member states, over 40 still criminalise same-sex relations, mostly under anti-gay laws that were originally imposed by the British government in the nineteenth century, during the period of colonial rule.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 07:17 AM

"It has gone from questioning the antics of some fundamentalist bigots in influencing a government all the way to questioning the statistics on homosexuality itself."

This is a phenomenon which I have also observed on other threads that you may need to get used to.

"Perhaps a thread to allow people to use statistics to back up their prejudice or otherwise about Gay lifestyles would be a better place to have that discussion."

I have learned that such an expectation is unrealistic.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 08:39 AM

Glad somebody thinks it is unrealistic. Judging by some of the posts, it would appear otherwise.

ToeRag starts to make a good point about Commonwealth countries having anti Gay laws that started with Colonial penal codes. However, I wouldn't go as far as to blame Great Britain for their retention.

We taught the rest of the world how to divide and conquer, the benefits of winning arguments by tying people to the mouths of cannons and how to increase productivity with bullwhips. It was a popular form of government, not just us...

Mind you, if we were a less interfering nation and more benevolent, the Irish song tradition would have a gaping hole in it's heritage.....

Pip Pip

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 09:05 AM

"oilism" = great term!

That could be a subject in itself, as to how many countries turn a blind eye to certain 'allies' who have oil and a terrible human rights record, while deposing other nations who, while certainly not innocent of human rights crime, are very much less involved in the oil politics 'game'.

In reality it matters not a jot WHO is killing and putting down people for being different than the majority population: they are killing under some banner or other that appears to add legitimacy to the act. It's still wrong.

I would like to think that teaching tolerance - and, even better than that, ACCEPTANCE - is the proper way forward in finally ridding the us of all the various hate messages. Hate can become a lifestyle simply because people choose to follow it's message and principle. It is often based on ignorance and fear (and some of that fear comes from within the person themselves of knowing what they are and not being able to change it). But there are many out there who are good at using that ignorance and fear toward their own agendas. It is comforting to see that most of the posters on this thread, and others like it, do not fall for it :-)

Tolerance, acceptance, love. Three ginormous words that are not easy to live by - and I have had my slippage moments along with most - but at least something we can try and aspire to.

On that note I'll shush!

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Simon G
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 10:28 AM

I like oilism, but how about oilophilia, its our lust for oil the allows us to blinkered to the nature of the people supplying it. Having said that I don't believe that marching across the globe punishing people for not falling into line with us, isn't the way to go.

It is difficult enough to practice acceptance (as per mauvepink) on an individual level. Jesus was right in that the only way to make it work is to love others as yourself; acceptance on its own doesn't survive long. It may come as a shock to some who tout Jesus's name but he was quoting Leviticus, just a few verses from the verse singled out to support punishment of homosexuals.

We seem to find it next to impossible to act with anything other than self interest when we form into groups, particularly when the group is called a country and has a government. We need to change our expectations of governments, perhaps then governments would act differently. What we have know is the alternative were power is everything and the power of the West is a mighty fist which stamps its self-interest on the rest of the globe. This discussion maybe in a good cause, but from a Ugandan perspective I would suggest it is part of the mighty fist, maybe a very small part.

Better to ask ourselves what we can do for Uganda and its people to allow them to move to a place were this proposed legislation is unacceptable to them. If we loved them as ourselves then they would be in a very different place than they are now.

Simon

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: ToeRag
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 10:33 AM

And now we have to consider, how we are to set about seeing this.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 10:53 AM

All good points Simon. And, ToeRag, maybe it has already begun. Maybe we are already seeing it start.

Edmung Burke said "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing" and so any start toward changing things and highlihgting hate has to be a start. Education has to be a good start as if you can get rid of some of the ignorances surrounding some of the hate and fear then things can change quite rapidly. Sadly that kind of change can also be resited by those with other agendas.

I would like to think we are seeing the start of seeing this better world unfold, slow though the process is...

Maybe I have to believe that or it all becomes so hopeless a picture

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Paul Burke
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 02:27 PM

Lox, I linked Christians with homophobes because, if you read the report, it is a Christian movement which is calling for the ultimate legal penalty to be applied to homosexuals. That's homophobic enough for me. What disappoints is that for some of you, the self- assumed tag "Christian" puts them beyond criticism.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Alice
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 02:41 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulojORxW5XI

Excerpt video of the program last night with the description of how the Aids legislation with funding under Bush was changed (away from condoms) and how The Family is connected to Uganda activism of US religious conservatives and the issue of Aids (public bonfires of condoms and anti-gay preaching).

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 03:24 PM

MP....I notice you left smoking out of your list of unhealthy things to do on a wet sunday afternoon! :0)

Now smoking has a marked effect on life expectancy......it shortens life considerably, but not nearly as much as homosexual practice.

We are taking steps to change peoples behaviour regarding smoking, in the interests of smokers health and the health of society at large.
We have even gone so far as to criminalise certain aspects of being a smoker, yet we remain silent about a sexual behaviour which shortens life by around 20 years, increases the incidence of STDs like sphyllis and HIV/AIDS dramatically; and seems linked in studies to the sexual abuse of teenage boys.

Go figure! and best wishes to you...sincerely....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 03:51 PM

Hello Lox.....I heard there had been a severe outbreak of civility in your area...looks like you've caught it mate :0)
Never mind I'm sure you'll be back to normal before long.

The percentage reference was from the Irish child abuse thread.
There was a similar case in America in 2004 where Catholic priests had been abusing children.
The victims of abuse were 81% boys to 19% girls. Most of these boys were between 11 and 16 years of age.

Would you like me to draw any pictures?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,maivepink
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 03:57 PM

Alas, the fact remains that homosexuality is not a choice. That said, there are lots of health education programmes out there for all sexualties about how to decrease risky practices and practice safe sex. Straight people are not immune to STI's and shorter lives. Just like there are programmes to help people stop smoking.

TBH I totally never thought to include smoking as, here in the UK, advertising is banned and it is not promoted as a lifestyle. Smokers still have a choice however.

I dare say we could debate this whole topic and you will stay where you are with it and I will stay where I am. As I said: I think we need to agree to disagree but I do think I have a certain amount of facts on my side to show it is not down to choice. Risk assesments apply to all sorts of things in life, sexuality being one of them, and believe it or not, more women die in childbirth than do of AIDS/HIV I suspect. And, of course, many children will die before they even get to express a sexuality by not reaching puberty because of all sorts of horrid things. Those are the real iniquities I think we all need to concentrate on. There are enough real iniquities without making some up for groups we may not agree with.

The sad truth too is that most of those children too will have no choice in how they live or die :-(

Trying to make homosexuals into some disease ridden population who all have short life expectancy for their sexuality is as perverse to me as blaming those children for feeling so hungry. However, most would understand hunger pangs (not the same as the starving children of course) and not condemn themselves for feeling it.

Have a good weekend

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 04:16 PM

"Trying to make homosexuals into some disease ridden population who all have short life expectancy for their sexuality is as perverse to me as blaming those children for feeling so hungry. However, most would understand hunger pangs (not the same as the starving children of course) and not condemn themselves for feeling it."

I'm afraid I can make no sense of that statement MP, would you rather deny the evidence?

The American homosexuals who wish to "own Aids", have accepted the statistics and are trying to bring about a proper medical study of homosexual practise Aids do not bury their heads in the sand....or clouds. They are brave and clear sighted, although their actions are condemned by "liberals" who's political agenda would be in danger by such action.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 05:29 PM

Thanks Ake,

I went to the other thread to find this statistic to which you referred.

The only mention of the figures you put forward was a post written by ... er ... you ...

Interesting aproach.

Make a "factual" claim in two threads, and then if someone askes you for a citation for the claims in one, point them towards the other.

That way you are your own source.

But lets entertain your imaginary stats for a minute anyway just for fun.

It seems that you are saying that amongst Priests and alter boys, and amongst priests teaching in all boys schools, it was apparently found that the majority of the priests were men and the majority of slter boys and pupils at boys schools were boys.

Now I see it!

So homosexuals really are all closet paedophiles ... well I never ...

In the meantime, there remains no evidence that Homosexuals are any more promiscuous than anyone else.

In other words, your whole argument that Homosexuals are more promiscuous and harbour secret lusts for children, rests on the high proportion of Aids casualties amongst homosexuals.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 05:31 PM

Oh and by the way, Yes I'd love it if you'd drew a picture - if only out of curiosity to see what kind of picture you might draw.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 05:40 PM

There's a really fierce echo in here!

Akenaton has tried to peddle all this same misinformation before, on other threads. I'd say he's obsessed with the subject.

Interesting. . . .

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 07:23 PM

My My desperation has certainly set in!
Lox the child abuse figures are not mine, but come from the "John Jay Report", a study into "Abuse of minors by priests of the catholic church in the US" by the John Jay College of criminal justice.
Figures are widely available showing much higher numbers of sexual partners among homosexuals than among heterosexuals

Don, you are an idiot....when are you going to stop making that stupid analogy, I have no tendencies towards homosexuality, I dont want to criminalise homosexuals, I dont hate, fear or distrust homosexuals. They have my sympathy, they need help coping with their health problems, they need psychiatric help with their sexual problems...help they will never get from the Mudcat lynch mob.

My motivation for contributing to these threads, is to try to show that the promotion of homosexuality as "just another kind of loving" is dangerously misguided.
The figures are there for all to see....or to ignore...and at the moment they are being ignored by most people, most importantly the "liberal" media.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 07:36 PM

Yeah, yeah, yeah. . . .

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 04 Dec 09 - 11:53 PM

Hey, Ake! Did you know that authorities used to tell adolescents that masturbation makes you go blind?

Add that to your list of crawling horrors.

Don Firth

P. S. "Idiot," eh? Better be careful using words like that in reference to those with whom you disagree or you are laible to have Little Hawk "tut tut tutting" all over you!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 03:33 AM

Don..We are not "disagreeing" over whether or not I have homosexual tendencies; you are simply making a statement which you have no way of substanciating and which is quite untrue.

A personal smear,in other words.

I apologise for the use of the word "idiot", an idiot would not be devious enough to use such tactics.   :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 04:02 AM

"they need psychiatric help with their sexual problems..."
Now there's a trip down Memory Lane - if you want to visit The Stone Age.
The last individual I heard utter this anachronism was an Irish priest - I'm not sure whether he has been named in the current child abuse scandal.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 05:06 AM

Interesting that there is a lot of support for the kind of ideas that Ake advances ... in the catholic church ...

... ok ... I'll go and find this john jay report to see what it is talking about.

I wonder if it will show that Gays are all closet paedophiles.

I wonder if I should run a book ...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: ToeRag
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 05:19 AM

Well, it is rather a wild idea, certainly; but, as you say, one has the option of believing it or not, as one likes!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 05:53 AM

Ah yes here we go ...

.. you mean the 2004 report that was commissioned by the US conference of Catholic Bishops as part of a "Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People".

It is quite a comprehensive report indeed.

The catholic church seem to have done a good job.

Oh yes - I nearly forgot.

It at no point asserts in any way that the priests had a preference for boys.

It does state that 81% of the victims were boys.

Abuse tended to happen mainly in the Priests private residence where the vistims parents trusted they would be safe.

Ake, do you know what children Priests have contact with?

they have contact with Altar Servers, school pupils and youth club attendees.

Do you know how many Altar servers are Girls?

I'll tell you - until 1994 Girls were not allowed to serve at the altar.

And as Smokey pointed out in another thread, girls tend to be mentored and taught by nuns and their activities tend to be run by nuns.

So who is most likely to end up in the circumstances described in the john jay report - Girls or boys?

Who do paedophile priests have access to?


Shall I draw you a picture?


Its like doing the pepsi challenge when there's only pepsi available.

You actually end up not knowing anything about peoples preference.


And your assertions and slander that all homosexuals are more promiscuous than anyone else and that they are all closet paedophiles remain unsubstantiated.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 07:49 AM

A far-ranging study of homosexual men published in 1978 revealed that 75 percent of self-identified, white, gay men admitted to having sex with more than 100 different males in their lifetime: 15 percent claimed 100-249 sex partners; 17 percent claimed 250- 499; 15 percent claimed 500-999; and 28 percent claimed more than 1,000 lifetime male sex partners. By 1984, after the AIDS epidemic had taken hold, homosexual men were reportedly curtailing promiscuity, but not by much. Instead of more than 6 partners per month in 1982, the average non-monogamous respondent in San Francisco reported having about 4 partners per month in 1984.
Promiscuity among lesbians is less extreme, but it is still higher than among heterosexual women. Overall, women tend to have fewer sex partners than men. But there is a surprising finding about lesbian promiscuity in the literature. Australian investigators reported that lesbian women were 4.5 times more likely to have had more than 50 lifetime male partners than heterosexual women (9 percent of lesbians versus 2 percent of heterosexual women); and 93 percent of women who identified themselves as lesbian reported a history of sex with men. Other studies similarly show that 75-90 percent of women who have sex with women have also had sex with men. "

The Health Risks of Gay Sex
JOHN R. DIGGS, JR., M.D.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 08:28 AM

""Lox, I linked Christians with homophobes because, if you read the report, it is a Christian movement which is calling for the ultimate legal penalty to be applied to homosexuals. That's homophobic enough for me. What disappoints is that for some of you, the self- assumed tag "Christian" puts them beyond criticism.""

I think you miss the point Paul. Nobody here is actually defending these nutjobs. What you have is the usual knee jerk reactions of a few on both sides.

1. You have the few who seize every opportunity to discredit a belief system which posits the existence of God

2. You have the few who see every comment about any religious sect, as an attack on religion per se.

Two opposing schools of thought which, based on their individual false premises, go to war on practically every thread where any mention is made of religion.

IMHO, the important fact about the "Family" is that, no matter what they choose to call themselves, they are about as far removed from "Christian" as it is possible to be.

Therefor, anyone attacking their aims and objectives is emphatically NOT attacking either Christianity, or religious faith (believers please note).

On the other side of the coin, those who do not believe in a deity, should take a step back, and re-examine their stance on religion.

There is as much proof of the non-existence, as there is of the existence, of GOD!..........Precisely none!

Neither side can ever prove their case, so instead of constantly reiterating "THERE IS NO GOD", it might be more respectful of others' feelings to say "I don't believe in God".

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: ToeRag
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 08:37 AM

I have heard you say so before, but cannot believe it; at any rate, it will not be so in my case.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 08:56 AM

For some reason I have a skepticism over the figure for lesbian women having relationships with men. I am certainly not saying it never happens, no less than gay men having relationships with women, but I would tend to put them in a bisexuality area than full lesbian. Some women only 'find out' (finally admit) later in life they are 'true' lesbian after many failed and even abusive relatinships with men (from personal experience not anything I have stats for).

And, again, some sexuality is fluid and changes as we go through life. We are what we are at the time but will we be the same at any time in the future? For sure there is research in the whole area about sexuality, it's spectrum and where we as individulas sit on the continuum at any one time. On average women appear to be more fluid than men (but it could be that is women are more open and not as stressed about theior sexuality as many men). Kinsey found a great deal of fluidity within genders, ages and sexualities.

That some lesbians have and do have relationships with men makes them no less lesbian. Ultimately it is about loving women, not hating men.

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: ToeRag
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 09:02 AM

Eteetera, eteetera, eteetera; what an extraordinary omnium-gatherum ! this is the box in question,I suppose.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 10:05 AM

===There is as much proof of the non-existence, as there is of the existence, of GOD!..........Precisely none!===

Brilliant, Wyzywig!

So I think I shall take to the worship of the 37 Brown·Sugar·Rattlesnake·Gila·Monsters who live in Soudley Ponds in the Forest of Dean — there is, according to your philosophically unchallengeable postulation above, no proof of Their non-existence either. Anyone care to join me? — I bet we could get Lottery Money to build a Temple dedicated to Their worship.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 11:51 AM

(sorry for the blank post. I have no idea how that happened. Could it be removed please)

I think what Don(Wyziwyg) is describing is not "his own philosophically unchallengeable postulation" but the general idea of Agnosticism a term forst coined by Thomas Henry Huxley. Many people who are not athetists or theists are agnostics. It is basically saying there is no proof tangible proof there is a God than it is that there is tangible proof for a God. It does not necessarily mean you have no belief but that you have an open mind to the idea until proof shows itself.

I myself am intellectually skepitical about the existence of God BUT also emotionally spiritual so agnosticism helps me allow for the possibility of a God without me being atheistic. Do you get my meaning?

It could well be that there is/is not physical proof of the 37 Brown·Sugar·Rattlesnake·Gila·Monsters who live in Soudley Ponds in the Forest of Dean, and so that can be tested, but if that is not the case agnosticism can be invoked for many things. I thought Don(Wyziwyg)'s explanation was acceptable as a skeptic.

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 12:03 PM

===37 Brown·Sugar·Rattlesnake·Gila·Monsters who live in Soudley Ponds in the Forest of Dean, and so that can be tested, ===

oh, no, mp, be assured — they are even more shy & harder to catch than Nessy... or God.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: ToeRag
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 01:52 PM

Something is greater if it exists than if it doesn't.If God is the greatest thing imaginable, he must exist. I may paint an imaginary masterpiece, but that only means i imagine that i paint a masterpiece, in fact, since it does not exist, it is no better than my actually existing 'inferior'paintings. A real masterpiece must always be better than an imaginary one!

Note from Joe Offer: this appears to be a quote from St. Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109) - see here (click)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 02:05 PM

Are ideas real? Yes. They are very real. They are not physical, but they are real. If you don't think so, take note of what power an idea can have, and how it can change the world.

You cannot find "tangible" proof for either God...or an idea...or a movement of imagination that occurs in the mind...but just because something is not tangible does not mean it isn't real.

Non-tangible things such as ideas and thoughts formed in someone's imagination can have real effect...effect that is soon seen in the world of the tangible, because thoughts affect actions and they also affect one's physical health and well-being over a period of time.

Consciousness rules our reality. It is the crucial factor in experiencing reality. Without consciousness we would not even be aware of anything physical, and the world we experience...for us...would vanish, to all intents and purposes.

And that is exactly what happens for you when you become unconscious. The world as you knew it vanishes. If you remain permanently unconscious, then the world...for you...has ceased to exist, as has life itself.

Consciousness isn't tangible either. But it is real. God, if there is a God, is not to be found in what is tangible, but in the realm of consciousness.

Without consciousness, you could not presently be reading this post...and finding something in it to disagree with! ;-) Consciousness is what you are.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: frogprince
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 02:15 PM

"If God is the greatest thing imaginable, he must exist."
ToeRag, I really don't know for sure where you're going. Are you setting that out as as actual evidence for the existence of God?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 02:19 PM

Little Hawk...

that is so eloquent and beautifully put. It also explains wonderment and hope and, if not, it sure feels like it does

Thank you

:-)

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 02:30 PM

Ake:

Don..We are not "disagreeing" over whether or not I have homosexual tendencies; you are simply making a statement which you have no way of substanciating and which is quite untrue.

A personal smear,in other words.

I apologise for the use of the word "idiot", an idiot would not be devious enough to use such tactics.   :0)

Ake, I didn't say anything about you being a homosexual.

The disagreement I referred to is about your erroneous contention that homosexual men are the source of the HIV/AIDS virus, and if they were somehow restrained, HIV/AIDS would simply go away – and that homosexuality equals pedophilia.

All I said was that judging from your vociferous presence on the California Proposition 8 (anti-gay marriage) thread, and then again here, with the same ferocity (not to mention cobbled statistics), you seem to be obsessed with the subject.

You put the rest together yourself!   (Sort of a self smear).

Getting more interesting all the time.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 02:30 PM

You're welcome. ;-)

This is why religions (at their deeper level) are essentially concerned mainly with consciousness, and how to manage one's consciousness in the most positive, harmonious, and effective fashion. That is the crux of all the Asian religions and philosophies such as Buddhism, Taoism, Hinduism, and the Yogic disciplines. It is also the crux of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam...at their deeper levels of understanding.

(On the more surface levels one sees rituals, traditional forms, rules and regulations, hierarchies, etc...but those are the more superficial aspects of religion.)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 02:48 PM

frogprince - Toe Rag's statement is an interesting one. It could mean a number of things.

What does "the greatest thing imaginable" mean? It could mean different things to different people. One person might see it as the largest single physical object we can imagine...in which case, it could be a huge star...or it could be the whole Universe (a collection of objects).

Another might see it as bigger than the observable Universe.

Another might see it as "all that is" (which would include, theoretically, not just the observable Universe, but all other dimensions and universes, all thoughts, all energies, etc).

Some religions and philosophies do see God as "all that is". If that's the way you see it, then no one can deny the existence of all that is, can they? It's self-evident.

So it depends on how you define "God".

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 02:56 PM

Well you're not often right Don, but I'm afraid you are wrong again.

You have repeatedly on this and other threads alluded that my interest in this subject is related to my sexual orientation.....something you know absolutely nothing about.
On the various threads concerning, homosexual "marriage", homosexual fostering, and homosexual child abuse you have been very active, but unfortunately contributed nothing of any value.

Both yourself and Lox insist that these priests raped and abused young boys and young adult males because there were no girls available.....nothing to do with homosexuality you say....yea right!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 03:57 PM

Ake, whether I have contributed anything value to these threads or not is something that, with your locked-and-bolted mind, you are not comepetent to determine. I'll let others judge that.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 04:03 PM

The absence (or scarcity) of available women can definitely contribute to a prevalence of homosexual behaviour among a group of men. There's plenty of historical evidence of that in prisons and on ships during the age of sail. Sex-starved men who are short of the possibility of female company will sometimes fix their attentions on other men (typically younger males who may superficially appear a bit more "effeminate", in that they have less body hair, more delicate features, etc). If so, does it really indicate that the men engaging in such activities are intrinsically homosexual? Or does it rather indicate that they are damned horny, and looking for some kind of outlet wherever they might find it?

Once indulged in, of course, it could become a regular habit. That tends to happen with various types of sexual acts.

There's an emotional basis to sex, and there's a purely physical basis. Both would play a significant part.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 04:10 PM

"Both yourself and Lox insist that these priests raped and abused young boys and young adult males because there were no girls available"

No, they did it because they are paedophiles.

And I 've never said anything about adult males.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 04:17 PM

Keith,

As I am guessing you don't own books about homosexual promiscuity, would you mind providing a link to the stats you have provided.

They look decidedly dodgy to me.

The first link I found, (on a christian website) had this to say.

"According to the researchers, 42.9 percent of homosexual men in Chicago's Shoreland area have had more than 60 sexual partners, while an additional 18.4 percent have had between 31 and 60 partners. All total, 61.3 percent of the area's homosexual men have had more than 30 partners, and 87.8 percent have had more than 15, the research found."

This doesn't sound that different to the numbers you would find in any british nightclub.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 04:24 PM

Oh .. hnag on ... it's ok keith ... I've found it.

You forgot to include that John R Diggs MD said all this in an article that he wrote for the following website.

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html

no bias there then.

Furthermore, he does not say what study he is referring to or where his claims can be verified.

In other words, he has merely given an unsubstantiated opinion.

Unsubstantiated opinions do not serve as evidence.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 05:28 PM

I really take issue with the information in the excerpt posted by Keith A of Hertford at 05 Dec 09 - 07:49 a.m. The first statistics quoted are from 1978, and then again in 1984, after the AIDS epidemic had taken hold, at which time the rate of promiscuity had dropped significantly. That was twenty-five years ago, and a lot of changes can happen in that much time—especially when the individuals involved realize that their very lives may be at stake.

As Samuel Johnson wrote, "Nothing concentrates one's mind so much as the realization that one is going to be hanged in the morning!"

It is not just the certainty of imminent death, it is also the distinct possibility of dying of a lingering and debilitating illness that has no cure that can cause one to change one's behavior quite drastically. I am acquainted with a number of homosexual male couples—committed couples—who, a few of the men admit, had led pretty promiscuous lives until AIDS became rampant, and who then sought a stable, safe relationship with one person, which they also found far more emotionally satisfying.

This is one of the factors involved in the current push for legal recognition of such same-sex relationships.

Both Ake and GfS are vociferously opposed to legal recognition of such relationships and cite the spread of HIV/AIDS as the reason for their opposition (along with the specter of "perversion"), apparently unable or unwilling to acknowledge the obvious:   Such recognition would encourage stable, "monogamous" relationships by granting the legal "perks" that heterosexual married couples have and cut down on promiscuity and the possible spread of HIV/AIDS.

You'd think that if one were genuinely concerned with reducing the spread of disease, one would favor any measure which offers the possibility of doing so.

As to the canard that gender orientation is a matter of choice, that has long since wound up in the waste basket. No competent psychiatrist holds with that anymore.

Although the actual gene may not have been found yet, it is patently obvious that there is a genetic factor involved in gender orientation. It may be that the gene is being looked for in the wrong place. It is quite possible that the crucial gene (or combination of genes) is carried by the mother of a male who grows up to be homosexual. All fetuses start out as female, and those destined to be male (with the Y chromosome) need to receive an infusion of the necessary hormones at the appropriate time in the fetus's development. If the mother does not produce the necessary hormones at the appropriate time, or if the production of the hormones is insufficient, the child is born with a male body (the Y chromosome), but with some of the characteristics—including gender orientation—of a female.

Now—let's hear that chorus of howls and squawks from Ake and GfS.

Don Firth

P. S. And lest Ake or someone pounces on my mention that I know a number of homosexual male couples and tries to make some kind of hay out of it, I know them because my wife of thirty-two years and I belong to a small, inner city church that is a signatory of the "Affirmation of Welcome" (scroll down), and as a result of the welcoming, accepting, and non-prejudicial spirit of the church, a number of gay people have gravitated to it. The congregation numbers around 250, about ten or twelve percent of whom (men and women) are gay. And the pastor has performed at least four marriage ceremonies for same-sex couples (whether the law recognizes them or not). One of the members of a committed same-sex couple is a fine writer and attends the writers' group that meets at Barbara's and my apartment once a month for mutual comment and critique of each other's writing. We know he and his partner quite well.

P. P. S. By the way, Washington State Initiative 71, upholding the law recently passed by the Washington State Legislature, recognizing same-sex domestic partnerships, unlike California's Proposition 8, was passed by the voters.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 05:36 PM

Central's Affirmation of Welcome
We affirm with the apostle Paul that in Christ "there is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female" (Galatians 3:28). Christ has made us one.

As a community of God striving to be inclusive and open to diversity, we, the members of Central Lutheran Church, welcome all people to join us as we struggle to better understand the mysteries of God's teaching and purposes for us. Although our world can seem to be a place of alienation and brokenness, Christ calls us to reconciliation and wholeness. We are challenged tb Christ to care for, to love, to understand and to listen to each other, regardless of our race, age, gender, marital status, physical and mental abilities, sexual/affectional orientation, national origin, or economic status. We celebrate the special gifts that each has to bring!

That is well worth posting as a whole piece in my opinion. Even as an agnostic it warms me immensely and I just love totally the idea of "sexual/affectional orientation" as covering ideas of sexuality. That is twice today I have been thrilled to read someone else's post on this thread.

There is great hope for the future. Yes, indeed, it has already started :-)

Thank you for pointing the affirmation out

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 05:39 PM

"Sex-starved men who are short of the possibility of female company will sometimes fix their attentions on other men (typically younger males who may superficially appear a bit more "effeminate", in that they have less body hair, more delicate features, etc). If so, does it really indicate that the men engaging in such activities are intrinsically homosexual?"

Not according to Lox n' Don, LH. Now if these priests were to start writing about the dangers and problems associated with homosexuality on Mudcat, that would be a sure sign that they were "on side"!! :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 05:46 PM

By the way Don, the figures state that most homosexuals are not interested in "marriage", the take up rate being very low; and that the average length of time in a homosexual union is from 18 to 24 months....this compares very unfavourably with heterosexual union or marriage.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 05:55 PM

Oh, yeah? WHOSE figures?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 06:32 PM

Go look for them, even Lox is becoming computer literate so it shouldn't take you too long to get the hang of it.

Seriously Don, they are all over the net.
first one which came up

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 06:56 PM

"Male-to-male sexual contact accounted for 53% (28,700) of estimated new HIV infections in 2006. CDC's historical trend analysis indicates that HIV incidence has been increasing steadily among gay and bisexual men since the early 1990s, confirming a trend suggested by other data showing increases in risk behavior, sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), and HIV diagnoses in this population."

These figures are from CDC would one of you dreamers like to explain why this nice safe healthy lifestyle produces these figures?

This question is the major reason that these threads exist, not really much to do with biblical teaching
BTW the figure of 53% is rather conservative, I have seen others up to 71%

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 07:03 PM

"HIV risk factor: sexual orientation
In the United States, the group with the highest rate of HIV infection is men who have sex with men (CDC, 2005). This group has the highest rates of unprotected anal sex, which is a behavioral risk factor for HIV transmission. In most regions of the world, however, the group with the highest rates of HIV is people who have heterosexual intercourse."

from


http://www.apositivelife.com/forasos/demographic-risk-factors-for-hiv.html

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 07:11 PM

When the percentage of homosexuals in the population 2-3% is taken into account, the figures become horrific.

New infections are falling worldwide, except within the homosexual population.
Why does anal sex between men and women not produce these results?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 07:23 PM

"Male-to-male sexual contact accounted for 53% (28,700) of estimated new HIV infections in 2006...."

Hmmmm... maybe if same sex civil union was legal and TOLERATED, such relationships would last longer and reduce the spread of aids?

After all, if it's just the gays spreading aids, something is fucking wrong. Go figure.

What about a sexual ID card? Ya wanna fuck someone, ya gotta show em yer card. Straight, gay or bi. Bi-curious could be a sub-classification, but when you make up yer mind, ya gotta get a new card. And if you change yer mind and ya wanna get a new card, ya gotta take an aids test.

Hey! I got an idea. Ya gotta get a new card every so often and you gotta pass the test! A whole new government department! And, since just about everybody wants to fuck, the revenue would be astronomic even with low fees.

I am an idea man!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 07:26 PM

The figures are horrific regardless of whether the contact is homosexual or heterosexual.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 07:38 PM

Ake, I seem to be more computer—and internet—literate than you are.

The "first one that came up" is the Family Research Council, a conservative, Christian right group and lobbying organization. It was formed in the United States by James Dobson in 1981 and incorporated in 1983. The group was designed to be a lobbying force for conservative legislation on Capitol Hill. In the late 1980s, the group officially became a division of Dobson's main organization, Focus on the Family, but after an administrative separation, FRC officially became an independent entity in 1992. Its function is to promote what it considers to be traditional family values.

The FRC promotes socially conservative views on many issues, including divorce, homosexuality, and abortion.

Your second link is to a site that hides its identification, but is funded by two American pharmaceutical companies, GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer.

You seem to be trying to push your notion that the AIDS virus is spontaneously generated by anal intercourse between two males. Which is to say the AIDS virus suddenly exists as a result of the act where it did not exist before!

The possibility of such a thing as "spontaneous generation" is a Medieval belief that was finally laid to rest by Louis Pasteur in 1859.

Sure, Ake, this stuff is all over the internet. You can also find passionate and powerful sounding arguments for the prophecies of Nostradamus, the End of the World on December 21, 2012 (12/21/12), that the moon landings never happened, they were all cobbled together at the Disney Studios, and that the earth is a) flat, and b) round, but hollow.

And you posted a lot of your "statistics," carefully selected and edited by you on the other thread (Prop 8). You're just recycle your trash.

Don't waste peoples' time with this crap!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 07:50 PM

Indeed, I did not express myself very well in my last post.

What I meant was, that when population percentages are taken into account, the incidence of hiv/aids and other STDs is massivly larger among homosexuals than heterosexuals.

If this is the case, why are we still promoting homosexuality as "safe and healthy", why are we fostering our children into such a lifestyle? Why are we attempting to normalise this lifestyle by redefining marriage to accomodate it?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 07:58 PM

Don, we cross posted. Would you like to explain the CDC figures?

The website I linked to was as you say, but the figures and articles on that website, were from emminent and independent doctors and health experts, including some from CDC,

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 08:01 PM

Achey... "safe and healthy".... it is safe as long as neither has aids. Same for the hets. You gotta think without the box.

Oh, yeah... you can't see out of the box you are in.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 08:07 PM

If this is the case, why are we still promoting homosexuality as "safe and healthy", why are we fostering our children into such a lifestyle? Why are we attempting to normalise this lifestyle by redefining marriage to accomodate it?

No one is promoting homosexuality as "safe and healthy" as an alternative to heterosexual sex, which is what you seem to by implying (that wouldn't sell, anyway). And with proper precautions, it is just as "safe and healthy" as heterosexual sex (even if it disgusts you, which is what this is all about). And who is fostering our children into such a lifestyle? No one I've ever heard of. And no one is trying to "redefine" marriage. "Include" does not mean "redefine."

Plots and conspiracies. It's gotta be those Liberals!!!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 08:08 PM

"You seem to be trying to push your notion that the AIDS virus is spontaneously generated by anal intercourse between two males. Which is to say the AIDS virus suddenly exists as a result of the act where it did not exist before!"

I know no more about "spontanious generation" than I do about why these homosexual/hiv figures should be as they are, please dont put words in my mouth.
I would appreciate an explanation of these statistics from a supporter of homosexual practice.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 08:20 PM

"I would appreciate an explanation of these statistics from a supporter of homosexual practice. "

Most people here neither support nor detract from sexual practices as far as I can see. (Practice makes perfect.)

If the issue is AIDS/HIV, then of course 'lifestyle' will come into it. If the issue is homosexuality, than that's another thing. Hence, I will hereby declare that I am not in favour of AIDS/HIV or any other infectious disease whether it is transmitted sexually or otherwise.

I'm not homosexual, so basically that's got nothing to do with me. These arguments have been addressed ad nauseum, repeatedly, over and over again. Not one thing has changed. People aren't wearing condoms, HIV/AIDS rates are still too high and the heterosexual population is as at fault as the homosexual population.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 11:22 PM

Mauvepink:"...Alas, the fact remains that homosexuality is not a choice. That said,......."

No, it's something that people get into because a part of them did not develop and mature naturally, while they were 'emotionally focused' on something in their formative youth, that they could not let go of. USUALLY, resentment, often unforgiveness for a perceived wrong, by that parent, of the same gender as themselves, or an idealistic calling...and instead of overcoming it, coupled with feelings of inadequacies, they turn to others of the same sex, to deal with their sex drives.


Like it or not, that is the truth. When politicized, it becomes a 'civil rights' issue, instead of a mental health issue.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: frogprince
Date: 05 Dec 09 - 11:46 PM

People become homosexual because they were focused on an idealistic calling during their formative youth, and they haven't overcome the effects of that??????????

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 12:32 AM

Often not. If one is focused, to form an 'attitude', that one obsesses on, a lot goes by, that they miss, in maturing, while emotionally focused.
True Story!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 12:38 AM

In answer to GfS's latest spasm about same-sex orientation be a matter of choice, I reiterate a paragraph from one of my posts above:

"Although the actual gene may not have been found yet, it is patently obvious that there is a genetic factor involved in gender orientation. It may be that the gene is being looked for in the wrong place. It is quite possible that the crucial gene (or combination of genes) is carried by the mother of a male who grows up to be homosexual. All fetuses start out as female, and those destined to be male (with the Y chromosome) need to receive an infusion of the necessary hormones at the appropriate time in the fetus's development. If the mother does not produce the necessary hormones at the appropriate time, or if the production of the hormones is insufficient, the child is born with a male body (the Y chromosome), but with some of the characteristics—including gender orientation—of a female."

Boys who turn out to be gay often tend to display atypical behavior for boys long before puberty occurs and before they have any knowledge of or interest in sex.

####

Whether you know what it was historically called or not, Ake, "spontaneous generation" is the belief that certain organisms can be generated by non-living matter or by decaying matter. After a pile of garbage sat somewhere for even a brief time, rats and mice, flies and all sorts of other bugs would appear. Somehow it didn't seem to occur to many—including, amazingly enough, Aristotle—that the vermin were attracted to the garbage, not generated by it. They believed that such vermin were spontaneously generated by the garbage.

As cockamamie as this idea was, it was genererally believed until well after the Renaissance (note that Hamlet, feigning madness, cautions Polonius to not let his daughter walk in the sun, for ". . . if the sun breed maggots in a dead dog. . . ."), and even though many "natural historians" (early scientists) called it into question, it was finally shown, once and for all, to be bogus in 1859 by Louis Pasteur.

If two men who do not carry the AIDS virus have homosexual relations, neither of them will contract AIDS as a result. That simply does not happen.

Ake, whether you know what the concept is called or not, your constant harping on statistics that purport to indicate that homosexual activity by itself can bring about the sudden appearance of the AIDS virus is obviously what you mean to convey.

And it is BOGUS, Ake, and your know it. Even if you don't know what to call it.

Join the 21st century.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 12:49 AM

Don First:'"Although the actual gene may not have been found yet, ....."

Enough said!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 01:42 AM

Don Froth is taking an unusually long time responding. He must be wearing out his computer looking for that gene. He'll come up with a 'study', probably funded by ACORN....maybe even Al Gore.

But the FACT(remember those??), That which determines gender is found in the genetic code. Simply, 'not believing' the FACTS based on a political outlook, gives you NO SUBSTANTIATION to base your 'premise' on. Then you insist you are 'right', insult those who disagree with you, and call them 'bigots' and 'homophobic'.

You, by nature of these tactics, insult the intelligence of any sound thinking person...including yourself!!(But you being a 'sound thinking person' is unsubstantiated too).

I don't feel like 'debating' this with you any longer! See professional help!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 04:15 AM

I don't understand your point Don.
My stance has always been that the homosexual lifestyle causes massive rates of hiv/aids in those who adhere to it.
It is therefore unsafe and unhealthy

About why hiv aids starts in two healthy people I do not know, but apparently new outbreaks usually start among the homosexual community.
The important bit is that homosexual practice unsafe and unhealthy

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 04:53 AM

There is something deeply offensive in witnessing two homophobes (one recently 'out-of-the- closet, the other not yet having the bottle to own up to being one) pontificating and moralising about the sexual orientation (whether chosen or genetic) of others. Mind your own ******* business.
No doubt these two boyos would describe themselves as 'Christians' In Ireland we've had a bellyful of homophobic 'Christians' who have raped and abused their way through generations of our children, while at the same time pontificating on the 'sin' of homosexuality.
They even managed to make hetrosexual sex something dirty and unpleasant in the eyes of their congregations - a'necessary evil'!
In the end there is little to choose between racism and homophobia; both are judgemental, oppressive and dangerous, and both ruin lives.
I suggest it is this pair who need to 'get help', or maybe a humanity transplant.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 04:59 AM

Akenaton, If Don wants to believe that AIDS/HIV is not prevalent in the homosexual community, because his political bent says he can't admit that, he won't admit it... no matter what stats you quote from any non partisan, impartial medical source.

If he wants to 'support' the homosexual community, for whatever reason, well, knock yourself out! Nobody on here would call you names, or think ill of you, for doing so. But, really, don't try to convince us that you can mix politics with science and come out with an impartial, accurate anything! That being said, Don is free to believe anything he wants to believe..and he does.

Some on here are blaming Catholics, some blaming the Irish government, some might even get around to blaming the Irish, in general..so what??
I already got called names for saying that in the Catholic clergy, there were SOME 'bad apples'..and to one idiot on here, was reason to call me a bigot!! I think he wanted me to condemn the whole of the Catholic Church, probably because they are not pro homosexual!..Who knows?? Who cares??
You know better, I know better, and others know better. Some people just want to suck their thumbs, and not accept FACTS...and think you are picking on them, because you post them(facts).
As far as the issue of the death penalty for homosexuals, that seems pretty far fetched...unless you are building up a new country, where
the leaders see homosexuality as a destroying factor, such as may be the situation here. Those who are already in a decaying society, will of course, vehemently object. That being said, I personally DON'T SUPPORT the death penalty for homosexuals. But those who do, probably see them as a threat.
What I really see, is that every time the subject is brought up, it gets heated, and the name calling begins, and of course, facts get ignored, and those presenting the facts, are labeled as bigots, haters of 'progress', 'old fashion', religious nuts, etc, etc..
However, in most of my posts, with understanding, I think I've shown more compassion,(one poster even remarked about it on the 'Prop 8' thread), than those who are trying to defend homosexuality...and most all the time, they don't even see it!
...but then, they are the ones who are still trying to justify their existence(homosexuals).
Oh well, it was good to see you on here, trying to reason, with the hostile and unreasonable.....
Regards, GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 05:01 AM

200!!
Hey, I just read Jim Carrol's post, as we cross posted. A perfect example of what I just posted in my thread!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 05:17 AM

Guest from Sanity... you wrote "No, it's something that people get into because a part of them did not develop and mature naturally, while they were 'emotionally focused' on something in their formative youth, that they could not let go of. USUALLY, resentment, often unforgiveness for a perceived wrong, by that parent, of the same gender as themselves, or an idealistic calling...and instead of overcoming it, coupled with feelings of inadequacies, they turn to others of the same sex, to deal with their sex drives".

My question to that would be: So all other animals who practice homosexuality also have the mental capacity and psychological abilities to go through this process too? I actually doubt that and I think, of all the studies there have been on behavioural imprinting and the triggers for sexuality, none have come up with empirical evidence to support it.

The 'gay gene' search may not actually turn up a single gene, and it may not even be a consequence of being on a sex chromosome, as it could be the combined effects of several gene groups. Work is ongoing in that area. Most gay people I know, men and women, knew they were gay before they ever had an idea about sexual actions.

One thing I would postulate though is that homosexuality is certainly NOT a mental illness. I, personally, still am of the opinion that the genetic model fits far better not just for human but in other animals too.

Best wishes

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 06:04 AM

"Hey, I just read Jim Carrol's post, as we cross posted"
Hey, I just cross-posted with one of the homophobic bigots I was writing about - coincidence or what?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 09:10 AM

""So I think I shall take to the worship of the 37 Brown·Sugar·Rattlesnake·Gila·Monsters who live in Soudley Ponds in the Forest of Dean — there is, according to your philosophically unchallengeable postulation above, no proof of Their non-existence either. Anyone care to join me? — I bet we could get Lottery Money to build a Temple dedicated to Their worship.""

Smart arse comment missing the points at issue which were:-

1. Those bastards are NOT Christians, nor anything recognisably relating to faith in a deity.

2. Non believers need to stop crapping all over people of faith, because their point of view is JUST ANOTHER BELIEF.

Now go join whatever you like, but don't shit on the human race and call it Christian.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: ToeRag
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 09:48 AM

I think the world makes sense without God, it's when we bring him/her into it, that the confusion starts. Who is God ,what is God, where is God, should we not perhaps bury God?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 11:29 AM

It should be obvious that HIV/AIDS are correlated to promiscuity, not homosexuality. Since heterosexuals have the option of legal marriage, they tend to develop toward it. If homosexuals were equally entitled under law to marry, the incidence of HIV/AIDS would probably decline!

ANd I think you will find, if you examine it honestluy, that what most people her "promote" is not homosexuality but tolerance and compassion. Remember those?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 11:34 AM

MP, there's no real science or logic in GfS's theories. She/He just makes it up as he/she goes along, using pseudo scientific language in an attempt to disguise the nonsense spouted.

You only have to look at the constant repetitive allusions to "evidence" which turns out to be unsubstantiated opinion from anti gay so called scientists, who coincidentally turn out to be intimately involved in fundamentalist right wing "Christian" sects, and are feeding into their prejudices.

Our two resident misfits are the only ones in the army who are marching in step, so they would have us believe, and one of them even has the nerve to cite himself as an evidential authority, giving a link to his own posts on another forum, as a source for the same posts on this one.

That's carrying the circular argument one step too far, and if these two told me it was raining, I'd not believe them without looking out the window.

Don T

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: ToeRag
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 11:54 AM

is Homosexuality a natural phoneme in nature, I think so Homosexuality is widespread in the Animal world.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 01:17 PM

Scientists knew that pluto existed before they saw it through a telescope.

The likelihood in the face of evidence was so strong that finding it was inevitable.

The Gay Gene hasn't been seen through a microscope ... yet.

It won't be too long before it is found.



Ake has established one fact. That Gay men suffer from aids more than any other demographic.

This fact has no bearing on any of his slanderous claims about gay peoples habits or inclinations, and he has yet to provide any other evidence except that provided by Church organizations and right wing political lobby groups. No actual studies or statistics exist to support his view.

The official mudcat hairdryer, useful for making a lot of noise and producing hot air and not much else besides.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 02:39 PM

GfS, when someone starts farting around with my name, then I know I've scored big, because getting personally insulting and abusive is all you've got. You're displaying what looks a lot like a temper tantrum.

And if I'm taking a long time responding, it's because I was off-line. Eight hours of sleep, among other things. After all, my life, unlike yours apparently, is not composed entirely of sitting at my computer. I DO have a life in the real world. Besides, I know that trying to set you straight is impossible because your head is made up and all the scientific evidence in the world to the contrary will not change it. You will persist in believing what you WANT to believe.

The operative word in my post above is "MAY" (not have been found). Unlike you, I am trying to be fair and objective. There are geneticists who maintain that they HAVE found the gene, and there are brain researchers who have found that there is a consistent difference in a lobe of the hypothalamus between heterosexual and homosexual men that they maintain must be the result of genetic influence. But not all scientists agree.

So—If I was operating with the kind of "scientific integrity" that you operate with, I would be making the flat, unequivocal statement that the gene HAS been found.

Read the rest of my post, the part about the possible mother's role in fetal development. As I said, they may be looking for the gene in the wrong place.

And Ake—I don't dispute the fact that there is much more HIV/AIDS among homosexual men than among heterosexual men. What I do give the lie to is your insistence that the virus springs up spontaneously with homosexual activity where it did not exist before. You know better. Or if you don't, then you're scientific education has been grossly neglected.

By the way, there IS one group of homosexual men in which the HIV/AIDS virus does not exist:    those who are in committed, monogamous relationships, which they tend to regard as marriages, whether the law recognizes it or not. No. No AIDS there. There's a lesson in that.

Don Firth

P. S. Why do I—why do any of us waste our time arguing with these two (yes, I WILL use the word, since, by its dictionary definition, it is the word that applies) BIGOTS?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 03:37 PM

Amos.....Nice to hear from you, nearly always the voice of reason.
I agree with your sentiments regarding tolerance and compassion....nicely put sir.

In saying that, we must never blind ourselves to suffering and death in puting these two emotions into practice.....must we tolerate the obscenity of watching thousands of young men suffering a degrading and painful death because our tolerance and compassion for the people involved will not permit us to question the lifestyle which brings such pain and degradation.

Is our compassion and tolerance helping homosexuals to lead longer or more healthy lives? I think not, we simply carry on with the status quo, close our eyes and our minds to the figures and allow young men to die for our political "principles"

Several of the "walking brain dead" have suggested that it is not homosexuality but promiscuity or anal sex which makes the HIV figures so bad.

Do they not realise that in homosexual practice, promiscuity and anal sex go with the territory!...Risk taking also goes with the territory; and tho' I know only a little of psychiatry, I have read that risk taking and promiscuity are also symptoms of manic depression.

The homosexual gene will never be found, because it does not exist and if the "liberals" cant find it, they will invent it.
Why can they not see that a major medical study into homosexuality and HIV/AIDS would be in the interests of homosexuals and society at large.....is it because the results of such a study may not suit their political agenda....even if it were to save millions of lives...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 03:50 PM

Maybe I should clarify my final paragraph.

"liberals" care more for the political rights of minorities like homosexuals, than in caring for their personal medical wellbeing.

They are perfectly happy to see them...."equal but dead"

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 04:04 PM

Ake, I don't see how your first paragraph in the above post correlates with what Amos says in his most recent post. In case you need one of us walking brain-dead liberals to read it for you, what he is saying is just the opposite of what you keep saying. And, yes, I agree that Amos, as usual, is very much the voice of reason.

Just thought I'd point that disparity out. The rest of your post is just more of your usual inability to reserve judgment in the face of incomplete but ongoing research, along with your thesis that homosexuals need to be marginalized and oppressed for their own good.

Where have we heard that sort of thing before!??

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 04:07 PM

You miss th e point altogether, Ake. Evidently you would like to have some Cloud Chief decree how people may live and what should happen.

Some of us cleave to a different model. Equal rights under the law, and personal responsibility for the consequences.

Your argument, extended, would make the Founding Fathers responsible for revery hurtful thing ever said, because they made alegal principle of free speech. These are two different things, man.

The right to legal blessing does not relieve married people of personal responsibility for how they live their lives. But it DOES, as Don pointed out, tend to reduce the incidence of promiscuous transmission of STDs. Why is that hard to understand? Why do you think homosexuality, by its nature, is any more prone toward promiscuity than heterosexuality? I have seen huge amounts of promiscuity among heteros. I fail to see why you think homosexuals would be any more promiscuous. In fact, given that hetero sexuality is so much more heavily promoted in ads and magazines and such, it would probably be mor einclined to promiscuous behavior.

So I don't think your arguments hold much merit here.

Obviously, given the mechanics involved, homsexual sex will probably include a higher frequency of anal penetration than hetero sex. Not exclusively, of course, but greater. If said homosexuals are in a monogamous relationship, with legal structural support, the chances of this being a transmission vector are greatly reduced. Not increased.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 04:09 PM

Still no evidence Ake?

Yawn.


I would like to clarify a point raised concerning a perceived dispute between whether AIDS is a "homosexual thing" or a "promiscuity thing".


In fact, if AIDS in homosexuals were the result of greater promiscuity we would see the same disparity in the numbers of cases of Ghonnorhea Syphilis and Chlamydia.

However, the CDC report I posted above in this thread shows that in fact, young women and older teenagers are the group most affected by these diseases.

So it isn't promiscuity that makse the difference.

Also, it is fairly obvious to anyone with any vague understanding of science that Sperm + Blood does not equal HIV. HIV is an organism that infects those to whom it has been transmitted.


So what is the reason for the high proportion of cases of AIDS amongst homosexual men?

I am as interested to know as anyone else.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 04:15 PM

Dear me Amos,

The very idea of Ake disapproving of Free Speech!

Are you not aware of how his freedom of speech has been ruthlessly surpressed on the Mudcat by the henchmen of the Liberal Fascist contingent?

Boy - it's a harrowing tale - but he's been strong.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 04:17 PM

"However, the CDC report I posted above in this thread shows that in fact, young women and older teenagers are the group most affected by these diseases."

That should have read "young women and older teenage girls".

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 04:19 PM

"Do they not realise that in homosexual practice, promiscuity and anal sex go with the territory!..."

Do you not realise that not all homosexual men have anal sex? (Did I just feel a jaw drop somewhere?). Anal sex is not the soul preserve of homosexuals either. But whether they do or not is irrelevant because lots of gay men are dying at the hands of violence just because they are who they are. Why not campaign against the violence that ends so many lives early?

HIV/AIDS not only affects gay populations. No more than other STI's do. It is a HUMAN Immunodeficiency Virus Deficiency virus. It's not a "letsonlypickongatpromiscuousmen immunodeficiency virus"... it affects, ot has the potential to affect, all HUMAN BEINGS.

I sometimes wonder if a virus had come about that excluded the gay populations, sexually transmitted, what would all the straight people have done about it? The fact is there is a disease out there affecting straight populations and they seem to be blase about it, in many cases, and do not use safe sex. Gay males are not the only promiscuous humans out there. And, in some countries, it is not homosexuality that is responsible for the high death toll. It's straight sexual practices and the lack of contraception that is abetting the spread and increasing death tolls among men, women and children.

This is not liberalism. I have no political agenda. But I will stand up for the rights of homosexuals, wrongly accused, as much as I will for Christians, wrongly accused, because the damage being done is not by them but by closed thinking (in the least) and hateful propaganda levied at them. As I have said earlier in the thread, there are lots of dangerous, risky and deadly lifestyles that are actually chosen. Why do people not campaign against them and leave people who are doing no harm to anyone alone? I still maintain they have no choice over being homosexual, but if they choose to take risks with their own lives with unsafe sex, like so many straight people do, then that is thier choice and no-one elses.

Why do some so want to blame others all the time instead of putting their own house in order? It truly saddens me.

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 04:24 PM

Aids is not a fucking joke Don!
It is deadly serious, especially for people who habitually take sexual risks, indulge in anal sex and lead promiscuous lifestyles.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Paul Burke
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 04:32 PM

There's no hope for the world, if you lot are representative.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 04:48 PM

"Aids is not a fucking joke Don!"

No one said it was, Ake. But you are the one who wants to keep homosexuals promiscuous by denying gays the right to form stable, monogamous relationships.

AIDS is not a fucking joke, Ake!!!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 05:03 PM

Foe fuck sake Amos, you cant have it both ways!

On the one hand your team says "It is not homosexuality, but promiscuity", which causes the horrific homosexual AIDS figures.....then you come along and contend that homosexuals in general, are no more promiscuous than heteros.

You have one big problem Amos....keeping your team on message...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 05:09 PM

Don..... can you not get it into your skull,that the vast majority of homosexuals do not want a stable monogamous relationship?

And in addition to that, the figures I posted earlier say that the average homosexual union lasts only between 1 and 2 years!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 05:21 PM

"On the one hand your team says "It is not homosexuality, but promiscuity", which causes the horrific homosexual AIDS figures.....then you come along and contend that homosexuals in general, are no more promiscuous than heteros."

I wish you would pay attention.

You marvel at my apparent newfound computer literacy, yet you seem unable to read or comprehend written English.

But to remind you (as it was oh so long ago) - and I hope no-one minds the cut and paste job.
__________________________________________

"I would like to clarify a point raised concerning a perceived dispute between whether AIDS is a "homosexual thing" or a "promiscuity thing".


In fact, if AIDS in homosexuals were the result of greater promiscuity we would see the same disparity in the numbers of cases of Ghonnorhea Syphilis and Chlamydia.

However, the CDC report I posted above in this thread shows that in fact, young women and older teenagers are the group most affected by these diseases.

So it isn't promiscuity that makse the difference.

Also, it is fairly obvious to anyone with any vague understanding of science that Sperm + Blood does not equal HIV. HIV is an organism that infects those to whom it has been transmitted.


So what is the reason for the high proportion of cases of AIDS amongst homosexual men?

I am as interested to know as anyone else."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 05:33 PM

"Foe fuck sake Amos, you cant have it both ways!"

I think that's a matter for Amos to decide in the privacy of his own home ... ;-D

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 06:03 PM

Don..... can you not get it into your skull,that the vast majority of homosexuals do not want a stable monogamous relationship?

According to you, perhaps, but I think all of your "knowledge" (the part you don't make up yourself) comes from reading web sites that support your already formed opinion.

I hear otherwise from real, live people. I'm not afraid to talk frankly with men who are homosexual, and because I don't look at them with prejudice and contempt, they are quite willing to talk frankly with me. Most of them would like very much to have a stable, monogamous relationship with another man. But it's the reactions of other people and their lack of willingness to accept that kind of relationship that makes it extremely difficult to sustain them. Get that? Other peoples' interference!

If there were some sort of legal recognition, or for that matter, recognition by a church willing to do so (such as the one Barbara and I belong to), it would make all the difference in the world; some sorth of social support that would make it easier to withstand the disapproval of the busybodies whose business it is not.

And in addition to that, the figures I posted earlier say that the average homosexual union lasts only between 1 and 2 years!

Recognized same sex unions (whether regarded as legal or not, but recognized, say, by the church my wife and I belong to, or are acknowledged without prejudice by their friends as a couple) tend to be more stable and long-term than many heterosexual marriages.

Barbara had a friend, a boy, from grade school who turned out to be gay. In his mid-twenties, he met another gay man. They bought a house in Southern California, where they are still living. One of them is a college professor (now retired) and the other (Barbara's old school chum) is an expert on English history and American Civil War history. He tutors high school and college students (like kids of movie stars and such) who are not doing well in school. They make a regular trip to England every year, where the college professor is invited to participate in seminars having to do with theater arts. Barbara and I have visited them in California a number of times, and they have also come here to Seattle.

Many heterosexual married couples don't have as stable and loving a relationship as these two do.

Ake, you need to get away from the computer and meet some real people. And instead of being so dogmatic, shut your mouth and open your eyes and ears. And your MIND.

You might be amazed at what you can learn about the real world.

That is, if you are really interested.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 06:15 PM

Dogmatic?.....moi??

I want to LEARN why homosexuals are 50 times more likely to get Aids than heterosexuals. Is that being dogmatic?

Your insistance that all is well with the homosexual lifestyle in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary is dogmatism!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 06:21 PM

Speaking of meeting real people...I've known at least three openly homosexual men back when I was living in Toronto. One was a musician...an interesting guy who had a long career in the folk-rock field, played in a band backing Dylan once, and we shared a common interest in model aircraft. I don't think he was looking around much for a monogamous relationship. He played the field.

Another guy was living in a rooming house where I rented for awhile. Again, very interesting guy, terrific conversationalist, but I think he was playing the field too as far as I know.

The third guy was an artist, a good friend for many years, and a very bright and amusing character. Again, he seemed to pretty much play the field as far as I could see. He died young of some illness. I don't know if it was AIDS or what it was, but I heard from mutual friends that he had passed away.

I draw no particular conclusions from the above, I'm just recounting my own direct personal acquaintances with friends who were openly homosexual. They didn't try to hide it from anyone, and it didn't create any problems between them and me and the general circle of people I knew at the time.

I've also known a handful of women who were lesbians. Again, it simply wasn't a problem. Not for me, anyway. Maybe for their parents? I can't say.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 06:36 PM

Since the cross-over of SIV to humans, one thing is certain. Stopping homosexuality will not stop the spread of HIV in humans. It's clear that although the 'first' reports of AIDS in North America were amongst gay men, the organism existed long before that in the human population, and not only amongst the homosexual population.

"Four of the earliest known instances of HIV infection are as follows:

A plasma sample taken in 1959 from an adult male living in what is now the Democratic Republic of the Congo.9
A lymph node sample taken in 1960 from an adult female, also from the Democratic Republic of the Congo. (10)
HIV found in tissue samples from an American teenager who died in St. Louis in 1969. (11)
HIV found in tissue samples from a Norwegian sailor who died around 1976. (12)
A 1998 analysis of the plasma sample from 1959 suggested that HIV-1 was introduced into humans around the 1940s or the early 1950s. (13)

In January 2000, the results of a new study (14) suggested that the first case of HIV-1 infection occurred around 1931 in West Africa. This estimate (which had a 15 year margin of error) was based on a complex computer model of HIV's evolution.

However, a study in 2008 (15) dated the origin of HIV to between 1884 and 1924, much earlier than previous estimates. The researchers compared the viral sequence from 1959 (the oldest known HIV-1 specimen) to the newly discovered sequence from 1960. They found a significant genetic difference between them, demonstrating diversification of HIV-1 occurred long before the AIDS pandemic was recognised."

So, unless the name of the game here is to slam homosexuals, then please deal with the facts.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 06:43 PM

In the US homosexuals are 50 times more likely to develop Aids than heterosexuals...fact....please explain.....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 06:48 PM

I respectfully request the medical source of that fact, Ake.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 07:00 PM

CDC...read the thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 07:01 PM

I would prefer facts from an organization like CDC or WHO, not places like

www.afec.org/issues/homosexuality/facts.htm

Thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 07:02 PM

Nope. Please provide the link or address. Thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 07:08 PM

http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:najCMCXqob0J:www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/aug/09082609.html+homosexuals+more+likely+to+get

Is that the site you quote?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 07:11 PM

Hell, Ake. The bias in that article just GLOWS.

By Patrick B. Craine

ATLANTA, Georgia, August 24, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - An official with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announced the CDC's estimate Monday that in the United States AIDS is fifty times more prevalent among men who have sex with men ('MSM') than the rest of the population. Dr. Amy Lansky revealed this statistic during a plenary session at the 2009 HIV Prevention Conference in Atlanta.

The CDC had already revealed last year that approximately 53% of the estimated 56,300 new HIV cases in 2006 were in homosexual men, with the African American population being particularly affected.

The new statistics, however, estimate the prevalence of HIV/AIDS relative to the homosexual population, which allows comparisons to other groups in the wider population. Because of the difficulty of determining the homosexual population, the CDC had to estimate. Based on a variety of national surveys, they based their statistics on the median estimate that homosexual men constitute 4 percent of the overall male population, reports RH Reality Check.

According to Dr. Lansky, then, based on the 4 percent figure, the CDC estimates that in 2007 there were 692.2 new HIV cases per 100,000 homosexual men - or fifty times more cases than the rest of the population.

While merely an approximation, the CDC's announcement confirms previous statistics and studies that indicate vastly disproportionate occurrence of sex-related diseases in homosexuals. According toa February 2007 study, for example, homosexual men with HIV are 90 times more likely to develop anal cancer than the rest of the population.

Earlier this year, as another example, the Centers for Disease Control released a statistical report indicating that homosexual men made up 65 percent of the reported primary and secondary syphilis cases in 2007. A report from the Public Health Agency of Canada in 2006 revealed that 51 percent of people infected with HIV in the country were homosexual men.

In fact, the statistics on HIV/AIDS led one group, the Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center, to state in 2006 that HIV/AIDS is a "gay disease," in a billboard ad campaign geared to reducing rates of HIV infection.

While homosexualists have actively suppressed such statistics in the past and focused on portraying HIV/AIDS as a disease affecting the whole population in an equal fashion, the statistics' increasing undeniability has forced their hand. Rather than admit any inherent problem with homosexual practice itself, however, the apparent prevalence of disease among practicing homosexuals has led them to switch tactics and use these statistics to urge governments and other organizations to increase support to the homosexual communities.

Asking why it has taken so long for the CDC to make its estimate about the high prevalence of AIDS among homosexual men, homosexual activist Dr. Senterfitt chalked it up to 'homophobia'. "Seems clear to me," he says, "that this was at least an indirect effect of the pervasive homophobia still affecting much of government, public policy, media and societal norms in this country."

"We must fight for funding and adequate social investment to end HIV/AIDS wherever it continues to persist and thrive," he argues, "which is almost always where concentrated social injustice also thrives."

Pro-family advocates, on the other hand, maintain that the prevalence of sex-related diseases among homosexuals is clear evidence of the disorder of homosexual practice. For example, in a commentary for LifeSiteNews.com published last year, J. Matt Barber stated, "By recently admitting that 'HIV is a gay disease,' Matt Foreman, outgoing Executive Director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, acknowledged what the medical community has known for decades: the homosexual lifestyle is extremely high-risk and often leads to disease and even death."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 07:25 PM

Ake,

Dr Amy Lansky's figures are about ten years old. I'm not. She points out that there were then 692.2/100,000 NEW cases of HIV in the homosexual population. The further extrapolations in that article come from someone else who, it seems has some sort of axe to grind with the homosexual population. Not a good source, imo.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 07:37 PM

Reality Check.

The Life Site News web site from which that article came is a Christian fundamentalist site devoted to "Life, Family, and Culture." Nuff said.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 08:07 PM

Little Hawk, also over the years I have known a number of gay men (musicians, actors, one dancer—generally in the Arts one way or the other ["Oh, goodie!" some might crow. "Stereotypes!"]), who seemed to be generally playing the field, but not any more promiscuously than any other single male (!), and there, as you say, none of them ever came on to me.

But these guys were not dummies, and when and if they had a sexual relationship with another man, they were certain aware of what the risks were, and I know they were smart enough to a) know the other person well enough to be aware of their state of health, and b) even so, take the necessary precautions.

Some years ago I was acquainted with a few gay men who had contracted AIDS, but that was before the outbreak was well under way. None lately that I am aware of.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,hg
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 08:33 PM

HIV/AIDS deaths and people living with HIV/AIDS are still most prevalent in Africa. 50% of the people worldwide living with the disease are female. It is and has been a disease most devastating to heterosexual individuals in terms of numbers. To conclude that homosexuals are largely responsible for the spread of the disease is simply ignorant. The numbers say otherwise.   



AIDS statistics around the world

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 08:41 PM

I'm sure the overall situation has changed a great deal, Don, since everyone (heterosexuals included) is well aware that the risks of unprotected promiscuity have gone way up. Of those guys I mentioned, I knew one of them in the 70s and the other two in the early 80s.

One of them did proposition me one time...but he didn't "come on" to me in any aggressive way, he just asked if I was interesting in "going out with him", so to speak. That was the artist guy in the 70s. I was quite surprised, because I hadn't realized he was gay. He said, "Well, I thought maybe you were, because you haven't had a girlfriend that I know of in the last couple of years that I've known you..."

I laughed. "Yeah, that's true," I said, "but it's not because I'm gay, it's because I'm simply hopeless at finding myself a girlfriend. I'm usually in love with some female who isn't with me, and she's always interested in someone else. I could hardly BE more desirous of women than I already am..."

So that was that. We continued having our coffee and talking about some other stuff instead. That was Phil. He was a pretty cool guy, and a totally wacky artist, but he had talent.

I don't think I know anyone at present who has contracted AIDS. If so, I haven't heard a word about it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 08:48 PM

I want to clarify something I said earlier, that all those guys were openly gay. Phil had "come out" not too long before he had that conversation with me, but I hadn't heard anything about it, so I was surprised when he propositioned me. He had been living with a Trinidadian woman not too long before that, so I simply assumed he was heterosexual. He was, in fact, bisexual...but his later preference seemed to be for homosexuality after the relationship with the Trinidadian girl had ended.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 09:23 PM

Ake,

"I want to LEARN why homosexuals are 50 times more likely to get Aids than heterosexuals. Is that being dogmatic?"


No, you've implied and then later confirmed on more than one thread that you think Gay men are closet paedophiles and that they are more promiscuous than everyone else.

This dogma remains unsupported.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 10:33 PM

Little Hawk, back in the late 1950s, Cecil, a friend of mine told me an absolutely harrowing story.

It was one of those extremely rare weather phenomena in Seattle (probably not that rare in Ontario) when it snowed several inches, then froze. This kind of thing can shut Seattle down. A bunch of people were partying it up and suddenly found that they were frozen in. The last person with a car had already left, the buses had stopped running, and the cab companies weren't answering their phones (nothing but busy signals). In short, about eight people were stranded. There were enough beds there if people slept double.

After a lot of shuffling and dealing, Cecil, to his horror, wound up assigned to sleep with Tony. Tony, even back in the Fifties, was out. Very out! Positively swishy!

Cec and Tony went to bed. Cec was tense. He was apprehensive. He was on his guard. In fact, he didn't sleep all night! He lay there with his muscles in a knot. It was a horrible night. For him, a waking nightmare. A wide-awaking nightmare! The longest night of his life!

He got up the next morning with multiple bags under his eyes and feeling like someone had dropped a grand piano on him.

Tony had rolled over and gone to sleep immediately, slept soundly all night, and woke up refreshed, bright-eyed, and bushy-tailed.

He wasn't the least bit interested in Cec.

Poor Cecil. Much ado about nothing.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 10:54 PM

LOL! That's not harrowing, Don, it's funny.

Yeah, we have those storms here now and then. I think you call that an ice storm, and it's a nasty business, specially if there's a power outage from the ice bringing down branches or trees, and there often is.

Some people, Don, cannot sleep all night if anyone is in the same bed with them, regardless of sexual orientation. Maybe even if anyone is in the same room with them. I have the sad fate of being one of those people. It's simply that my mind is too active, and the awareness of the other person being there...just the simple awareness itself...keeps me awake. It's not that I'm worried about them being there. I just cannot stop my mind from thinking about it. I have, in desperation, tried meditative techniques, etc, to stop that from happening, but nothing works except experiencing it repeatedly for some time until the complete lack of sleep finally exhausts me so much that my body falls asleep out of total enervation.

Trust me...it's worse than what Cecil experienced. It lasts longer.

The first time I acquired a steady live-in girlfriend, I barely slept for about 3 solid months! And it wasn't because of the sex. Nope. It was because I simply needed to be alone in the bed to fall asleep.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 11:30 PM

With Cecil, it wasn't quite that way. We were going to the University of Washington together and often met for coffee at the student union building cafeteria. With dozens if not hundreds of people around and several people at the same table, I've seen him fall asleep with his chin in his coffee cup.

I was surprised that he was that apprehensive about Tony. Tony was definitely gay, but he played it for all it was worth. He worked every stereotype. I'm pretty sure it was an attention-getting device. Of course, it could get him punched out, and on more than one occasion, a couple of guys would jump him and beat him up just for the hell of it.

I thought he was a real snort! Over the top! Sometimes he and I would do off-the-cuff jokes, mainly to shock and horrify people in the vicinity. Once we were sitting in a booth in a coffee shop near the university. There were five of us at the table. I was in an inner corner and Tony had pulled up a chair and was sitting at the end of the table.

At one point, Tony said, "Don, would you pass me a napkin?"

I reached for the napkin dispenser, and—the devil made me do it. I asked him, "Super, regular, or junior?"

Everybody's chin hit the table. Tony looked at me with a smirk and said, "Oh, Donnie, you are such a bitch sometimes."

All in good fun, but the rest of the people didn't know it.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Bill D
Date: 06 Dec 09 - 11:36 PM

The problem with Ake is not the specific facts he quotes, many of which 'may' be accurate, but with what assumptions he and many others make about what conclusions can be drawn from data.

That is: one can state that there is 'higher incidence of HIV in certain populations' or that 'no one has found the "gay gene" yet' or even that 'specific sexual practices may make it easier to contract AIDS'.........but those (if they are true) are simply data!

None of these assumptions says anything relevant about the **moral** relevance of homosexuality! There are many human practices which are 'dangerous'...like rock climbing...or military service! But few would suggest that we ban or discriminate against those who indulge!

Ake...and others who are indignantly flinging data about are also implicitly suggesting that homosexuality IS a choice, that it is somehow immoral (was it immoral BEFORE HIV?), and that defending the rights of homosexuals is the same as promoting it.

There is this shifting back & forth from one asertion to another when they are challenged, creating a circular argument as they answer one rebuttal with a re-statement of a previously discredited claim....

You see what is happening? Ake...and others ...have a predetermined notion of what the truth NEEDS to be, so they use rhetoric and cherry-picking of facts to try to prop up their argument.
If we typed 47 paragraphs explaining WHY HIV affects a larger % of homosexual men than 'straight' men, and why it proves nothing relevant to any moral question, he would just switch the focus and eventually either just deny our conclusions or toss out some other set of 'facts' from some study done by some group which also has a predetermined 'answer' to promote!

YOU CANNOT WIN when debating those whose mind is made up at the beginning....all you can do it put some reasonable points out so that others might see them.... and several have done a pretty good job of that.

(sheesh... I wish I had typed all that when I wasn't so tired. I don't think I said it very well...but maybe I got across what a flawed argument form Ake is using.)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 12:31 AM

"YOU CANNOT WIN when debating those whose mind is made up at the beginning....all you can do it put some reasonable points out so that others might see them.... and several have done a pretty good job of that."

Exactly so, Bill. I'm not so foolish that I think I can change the minds of people like Ake and GfS. They have their agenda and they will not waver from it. My concern (and I don't really think I have to continue being that concerned) is the confusion of the innocents – trying to set the record straight for any who might by impressed by Ake's "statistics" and GfS's claim that s/he knows because s/he's a "counselor." Neither has demonstrated that they are competent at their claimed professions. Quite the contrary.

Hell's bells, I've got a life to lead. I really don't need to dedicate my life to repeatedly refuting the perpetually recycled ravings of a couple of – here's the dreaded word again – bigots.

(Sorry, Little Hawk, but I calls 'em like I sees 'em.)

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 02:18 AM

If gay men are inclined towards multiple partners rather than stable coupledom, and as a gay man myself I know that this is not wildly inaccurate, it is nothing to do with sexuality. It is to do with masculnity (most STRAIGHT men would also rut around rather than 'settle down'), and with capitalism (which has carved out a very lucrative little market in constructing the clubs and bars of the ''''gay scene'''').

Gay ''''''''promiscuity''''''' is also a direct consequence of homophobia: if you have finally decided it's OK to do something you have been told for years that you should not do, wouldn't you gorge yourself by doing it as often as you could ???

The question of why so many gay men choose to put health concerns as a lower priority is the most difficult one to resolve. But it won't be resolved by those in this thread who want to peddle the myths that homosexuality is intrinsically wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 03:05 AM

Ok, this thread seems to now be flushing out a few people who reckon homosexuality is wrong.

Why is it wrong?

Why have a group of people claiming to follow the teachings of a possibly mythical person, who reckoned to preach love, tolerance and understanding... want to kill people for their lifestyle? Especially as their lifestyle does not affect or interfere with their own lives?

To keep a folk aspect to it, I know many people who wouldn't and couldn't understand Morris dancing, sticking your finger in your ear and singing about reed cutting despite being born, bred and living in a city.

But many people do.

And enjoy it.

The difference being that nobody has an ingrained hatred of such people. Hobbies and interpretations of entertainment may not be the same as the bloke next door, but he doesn't open a page of a 2,000 year old book and claim the book says to kill them? Or if he did, we have a medical diagnosis for such behaviour.

To anybody who says homosexuality is wrong.. So, what is right then? Can we have a list so we can bow to your smug sanctimonious pathetic illness?

Just because I could never be gay, (it might make my eyes water,) doesn't mean that I despise people who are. I don't understand the fascination with bell ringing either yet my wife's family seem to revolve around it. Still married her. I didn't point and laugh....

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 03:36 AM

999...Sorry. I've been in bed for a few hours.
I referred to the CDC figures that 53% of all new cases in the US are among homosexuals. As homosexual make up 2-3% of the US population, the likelyhood of homosexual or heterosexual contraction can be easily extrapolated by most people.

Smedley...Thank you for your honesty.
Do you not think that the lower priority of health matters has something to do with the "Risk taking" referred to earlier....and do you put any credence on my view that manic depression may affect the behaviour of many homosexuals?

Manic depression is more widespread in all sections of the population than most people realise and can lead to all kinds of risky and destructive behaviour like addictions, promiscuity etc....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: KEVINOAF
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 04:38 AM

only woulld a dialogue between the nation that spawned idi amin on the one hand and theology that spawned the westboro' baptist church on the other would make such propositions have any credence!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 05:24 AM

Don Froth, You can say almost anything you want, to discredit me, doubt me, deceive others, or discourage others from getting to the truth...but you still haven't produced one shred of evidence to back up your faulty premise! Mine still stand. Nice try!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 05:47 AM

Ake, I'm not convinced by your 'manic depression' theory, I'm afraid.   It's almost as if you think that sex with many partners is a symptom of illness rather than a choice (albeit a choice made, as all choices are, within constraints).

There are gay men with mental health issues, though my supposition has always been that prejudice against & victimisation of homosexuality play a very large role in that scenario. I don't think that even the most 'sympathetic' hetero can fully grasp what it is like living in a situation where simply being honest about a key part of who you are can lead to such damaging responses. Happily I don't face many of those hostilities in my current daily life, but I only have to read some of the comments in threads like these to know that prejudice is alive & thriving.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 08:14 AM

ToeRag, you are having a ball denouncing people with 20x your intelligence as 'stupid' today. Enjoy yourself, it'a a harmless occupation — for a self-styled ToeRag, ToeRag.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 09:47 AM

"The question of why so many gay men choose to put health concerns as a lower priority is the most difficult one to resolve"

or indeed heterosexual Girls and young women (see above)

and with that in mind we can say ... the rest of us too ...

... the answer? because we want to feel good and while a condom is so easy to put on, it is also so easy to forget to put on "because I was Drunk" or because "one thing led to another".

The only exception to this is Ake who went looking for a wife from day one (apparently) and never had more than one partner, and then only for procreative purposes.

GfS,


"Don Froth, You can say almost anything you want, to discredit me, doubt me, deceive others, or discourage others from getting to the truth...but you still haven't produced one shred of evidence to back up your faulty premise! Mine still stand. Nice try!"

Actually Gfs, for those of us with the ability to read and understand words and stuff, it is very clear that you have been making Slanderous assertions about Gay people and Don has been pointing out your lack of evidence to back them up.

"can be easily extrapolated by most people."

You mean as you insist on extrapolating, regardless of how scrutiny exposes that such conclusions are unsafe.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 11:00 AM

Smedley...The only prejudice I have is against death and suffering, and letting things go on as they are( the homosexual Aids figures rising steadily), will only increase that death and suffering.

Right from the start, my fight has not been against homosexuals, but the politically motivated people who wish to silence anyone who points out the Aids figures and demands a proper study

These people pretend to protect minorities, but in reality their politics and their party mean more to them than the lives of homosexuals....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Paco O'Barmy
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 11:06 AM

Homosexuality was ILEGAL in England, and it should have remained so. For some reason, every chat show on TV now has to be hosted by a fey homosexual,what happened to the world??

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 11:14 AM

"Right from the start, my fight has not been against homosexuals, but the politically motivated people who wish to silence anyone who points out the Aids figures and demands a proper study"

Don't forget your assertions that Gay people are closet paedophiles who have no desire, much less ability to form meaningful relationships.

When questioned you have confirmed these views.

You have never denied them or rejected them.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Paco O'Barmy
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 11:17 AM

Homosexual men indulge in practises that revolt most ordinary people. Why will you never acknowledge the facts?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 11:27 AM

"Homosexual men indulge in practises that revolt most ordinary people. Why will you never acknowledge the facts?"

I am an ordinary person.

And a homosexual.

99% of the practices (such aromantic word) I indulge in can be, and are, indulged in by heterosexual couples.

Any more insightful contributions, Paco ??

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: theleveller
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 11:31 AM

"!Homosexual men indulge in practises that revolt most ordinary people. Why will you never acknowledge the facts? "

I'm absolutely amazed that some people are still living in the dark ages. You are obviously sexually repressed, Paco.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 11:42 AM

Paco:

Projecting your own revulsions to make it appear "most" "ordinary" people are sharing them is a common error, but it is still an error. I think it is a form of denial-by-distribution. Put it everywhere, and it won't be noticed. But, ultimately, you have to answer for your own revulsions and prejudices. Why, for example, would you invest so much energy being revolted by something you are not doing, not required to observe, and which is none of your own business? Just asking...


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Bill D
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 11:43 AM

Ake & GfS.....

People of all sorts often pursue behavior that is dangerous or generally unhealthy! People overeat until they are morbidly obese: they smoke cigarettes, they drink way too much alcohol, they drive too fast (sometime after drinking too much), they climb cliff faces with no ropes...etc...
   But you seem to be putting sexual practices/inclinations into a separate category....and if I am reading between the lines correctly, you 'seem' to imply that homosexuality would be 'wrong' somehow, even if there were NO dangers involved!

*IF*, Ake, you really mean "The only prejudice I have is against death and suffering, and letting things go on as they are..", then all you should be concerned with is education about dangers, research into cures for HIV and counseling about **safe** sex...etc.; just like education about obesity, smoking, venereal diseases in general and alcoholism.

Sexuality is as powerful a force as there is: research done on monkeys showed that when electrodes were implanted which allowed the monkeys to stimulate the area of the brain controlling sexual pleasure, they would often forgo food in order to push the pleasure button!
We see heterosexuals also take chances, or just 'forget' to use reasonable care when desires drive them, and it is not really clear yet exactly why some people have better control than others. We DO know that in males, testosterone levels can be involved, and other hormone levels control a lot of sexual orientation.... we KNOW this, but you seem to wish to either deny this or ignore it as you cite 'statistics' in some attempt to paint homosexuality as 'chosen' and 'offensive'..(whether you use those words or not!)

People are different!! They don't all like the same kind of cake, they don't all like the same music, and they don't all have the same sexual orientation as YOU. There is more & more evidence that much of ALL orientations in life are influenced by brain chemistry and heredity. Why shrug about cake & music and fret about sex?

IF health is really all you care about, go volunteer to help with educational programs and donate to scientific reasearch!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 11:52 AM

Most sexual activities, viewed dispassionately, have their absurd and messy aspects — stains on sheets, grunts & groans & gasps & squeaks & squeals, odd jerky bodily movements... But aren't they nice?

Don't really know what of the sort homosexuals actually do because have had no such experiences [tho am working on perhaps acquiring some before I go, just to find out before I pass out — I'm in v late 70s but still sexually curious, & active up to a point tho a widower so having to do the best I can]. But what can it be, whatever it is, that makes people like Paco react with such negativity to just one aspect, when so much of such activity, hetero or homo or solo, manual or oral, 'specialist' or kinky or whatever, is, as I say, pretty bloody absurd & mucky anyhow!?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 11:56 AM

Don and Little Hawk....

Some people, it would seem, do not sleep easy in their bed if someone is miles away from then sleeping who just happens to be gay! ;-)

Smedley wrote: "The question of why so many gay men choose to put health concerns as a lower priority is the most difficult one to resolve". It is indeed BUT it's not just gay men is it? Straight men have a tendency to neglect their health too. Trying to get a man to go to the Doctor can be a labour of love when he is ill! Men are dying. literally, because they will not have 'normal' health checks, and anything to do with their genitals... forget it! So I actually think that is a male thing and not a gay male thing alone. Men do neglect themselves in my experience.

Each to their own lives taking what chances they take or not. It matters not a jot what sexuality someone is to me. I am always far more interested at what is between a persons ears, and in their hearts, than what is between their legs. Affording everyone the same initial respect - whereby only they themselves can change the meter up or down - generally works. What people do in their own time has nothing to do with me as long as they are not hurting me in its doing. Obviously, some things affect us all in a way that would mean us having to take notice if someone were hurting someone else but, generally, live and let live seems a reasonably good starting point with any encounter.

I still think education is a major leveller for things to do with hate, ignorances, homophobia, etc. Not everyone will stop the hate but many, once aware of true facts, do become more tolerant initially and then actually accepting. Even within the gay communities, and many other minority groups, there is misunderstanding, distrust and confusion.

We can live in hope for greater understanding and knowledge to bring about changed environments where everyone can have respect for each other.

I am a dreamer....

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 12:27 PM

"Homosexual men indulge in practises that revolt most ordinary people. Why will you never acknowledge the facts? "

I have no idea what they get up to. I am not, nor do I want to be, 'ordinary' (whatever ordinary is). I am just me, with all sorts of interests in life, some of which could potentially shorten my life. I could use a capo in a C&W club and get lynched, for instance, or try and play my guitar without a safety net ;-)

I just drove home from work on a very busy, wet, dark and windy Motorway. Now that concentrates my thinking and warrants concern because it affects me.

TBH I could not give two hoots as to what gay men indulge in (if by practice you mean sex) as I am far more interested in all the other things thay are capable of that could actually increase my pleasures or interests, as with the other sexualities in our midst. I am not interested in what straight couples do in their own privavcy. Nor any combinations inbetween. People's sexual practices (being consensual and adult in nature) has nothing to do with me. I am too busy getting on with my own life and answering posts on Mudcat lol ;-)

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Bill D
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 12:53 PM

"Homosexual men indulge in practises that revolt most ordinary people. Why will you never acknowledge the facts? "

We surely do acknowledge that many *ordinary* people are SO ordinary that they can't cope with differences! The real problem is with shallow, ignorant and insensitive 'ordinary' people! These are the people who condemn religions other than their own, political parties other than their own, cultures other than their own...etc.

If other people indulge in practices that do not affect ME, it is none of my business what they do. *IF* they try to coerce ME into joining their church, political party or sexual practices, then I will object loudly!

"Go thou, and do likewise."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 01:08 PM

If you bozos had any idea what male Orangutans do when they are alone together, you wouldn't be so het up anymore about what gay men are doin', lemme tell ya!

DISGUSTING!!!!

I always put my gloves on before shakin' an Orangutan's hand. And I get the glove sterilized afterward. If I get in a fight with an Orangutan, I shower for three hours when I get home and I dose up on Vitamin C and hard liquor. You can't be too safe.

- Chongo

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 02:44 PM

""Aids is not a fucking joke Don!
It is deadly serious, especially for people who habitually take sexual risks, indulge in anal sex and lead promiscuous lifestyles.""

Nobody is laughing about aids Ake. Not even you are that stupid.

It is good, however, to see that you are at last acknowledging (however accidentally) that it is a disease which attacks people who take sexual risks, indulge in anal sex, and lead promiscuous lives, and not just gay men who do those things.

That, for you, is a major step toward recognition of the realities of life.

Now all we have to do is to get you to acknowledge that your post should read unprotected sex, and you will just about be on the right page.

This is really encouraging.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 02:57 PM

"Homosexual men indulge in practises that revolt most ordinary people"
I find people who kill animals for pleasure pretty revolting.
A couple of friends not far from here almost throw up at the thought of eating meat.
And don't get me started about eating oysters!!!!
Please explain 'ordinary people'
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: theleveller
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 03:00 PM

I just don't understand this fixation with other people's sexual proclivities. It seems to me to be unhealthily prurient, intrusive aand voyeuristic. Don't you gay-bashers have sex lives of your own? Presumably not if you're so interested in what other people get up to.

Sad!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 03:18 PM

""I want to LEARN why homosexuals are 50 times more likely to get Aids than heterosexuals. Is that being dogmatic?""

Glory be to the Great Pixie!....Akenaton wants to learn.

OK, well, if you take your statistical sample from the comparatively small enclosed communities in the Western United States, you won't get the same answers as if you ask the same questions on the African continent where it originated, and where they are under the impression that HIV/AIDS is very much a heterosexual thing.

That may have some bearing on the HUGE percentage of children who are victims in Africa.

I'm assuming that you will acknowledge that homosexuals are not responsible for children born with HIV/AIDS.

Also, without wishing to shatter your closed and shuttered illusions, a visit to a local nightclub on a Friday night might give you some surprising (to you) new information about the degree of heterosexual promiscuity which exists out here in the real world.

Scotsmen aren't usually that obtuse, in my experience.

Don T

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 03:37 PM

"I'm assuming that you will acknowledge that homosexuals are not responsible for children born with HIV/AIDS."

I'm not assuming anything ...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Peter Laban
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 03:56 PM

I want to LEARN why homosexuals are 50 times more likely to get Aids than heterosexuals.

This is obviously not the case everywhere, in Ireland for example the fastest growing group of HIV infected are heterosexual, especially women. Intravenous drug user are strong risers too in the newly infected statistics while new infections among the homosexual community have remained stable.

In most of the Western countries the homosexual population was the first into which the virus was introduced. Hence the high infection rate. In Africa the infection started in the hetero sexual part of the population, and there it is still most prominent. Fairly basic stuff really, if you think about it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 04:44 PM

Paco has a point, if any real heterosexuals among you were given the choice of being raped by a woman or a man....which would you chose, and which would fill you with horror!

Bill ..A nice post, wish I had time to discuss it at length with you.
I will tell you that I am involved with a group which provides information and services to heroin addicts....many are dying from hepc and many die from heroin and methadone overdose most of these lives could be saved if the govt had the will and provided proper funding, but as you probably know, helping addicts is not an electoral plus.

The important thing in dealing with homosexual practice is to stop the deaths and to do that a far ranging study into the negative medical aspects of homosexuality requires to be undertaken.

It may well be that some here will not like the recommendations of such a study...but who gives a fuck what the sort of numbskulls who have posted since my last message think, as long as thousands of lives can be saved.

PS I don't catagorise your good self,Smedley,Mr Obarma or Chongo, as numbskulls...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 04:58 PM

"any real heterosexuals among you were given the choice of being raped by a woman or a man"

Oh fuck off! You have absolutely no clue about anything you pontificate on. Women are just as nasty and sadistic as men, they don't have cocks but they certainly have imaginations, as may be witnessed by all kinds of tabloid reported events.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 05:02 PM

Do you mind! I want my full title... a LIBERAL numbskull ;-)


The studies have been done and the recommendations made, of all non safe sex practices for all sexualities. The results have been known for some time. I think you will find they found there are negative medical aspects to all kinds of things sexual, for straight, gay or bi. The factual studies are not hard to find for anyone wanting to find them. Still...

I'll just sit and facepalm now as anything else I would want to say has been blugeoned out of me lol

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 05:05 PM

As a woman, I'd "choose" to be raped by whomever got out of my spacve as past as possible.

I wonder what our resident anti-gay posters would prefer to be raped by? All man, or man with dick and titties? Double the "trauma" hey.. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 05:07 PM

In answer to the earlier puzzlement about the fixation on others' sexual proclivities and activities, I can only conclude it stems from a sorry uncertainty about one's own...


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 05:08 PM

Rape by penis is potentially more harmful and invasive than rape by lips or fingers, seems to me...but it's clear that either experience would be quite unpleasant for the recipient in both a physical and a psychological sense. Nevertheless, the possibility or likelihood of such an assault by a man (gay or otherwise) is tremendously higher than it is by a woman...and everybody knows that. It's completely obvious. It's like saying "You are more likely to drown in water than in sand." (and you definitely can drown in either)

The very nature of male sexuality, by virtue of the physical structure of males, is more aggressive, while the nature of female sexuality, again by virtue of the physical structure itself, is more receptive (or passive). That doesn't prevent some individual females from being aggressive, of course, nor does it prevent some individual males from being passive, but it definitely does color the general nature of their sexual actions to a considerable extent.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 05:16 PM

"... if any real heterosexuals among you were given the choice of being raped by a woman or a man....which would you chose, and which would fill you with horror!"

I suspect the question is somewhat irrelevant. What gender would the hetrosexual be? And rape is rape. Something else that is not a choice to the person being raped no matter their gender or sexual orientation.

I find the very idea perverse and repulsive anyone being raped by anyone, to answer part of your question.

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 05:26 PM

So comforting having the (quite obvious) ignorance of inexperience isn't it little h? There are those amongst us who know different. Nothing is obvious if unknown. Women can use all kinds of things to rape. Imagination, like I said.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 05:26 PM

I would to some considerable extent prefer being raped by a woman than by a man if I was forced to make a choice between one or the other. But I still would not like it. And that is the plain truth, quite apart from poltically correct posturing to make sure that no one listening in here thinks (gasp!) that I might be homophobic!

To be branded as homophobic these days is pretty much like being accused of consorting with the devil back in 1550. It is to be avoided at all cost. This accounts for a great deal of the frenzied rhetoric one hears about it all the time.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 05:33 PM

Jim...We seem to have more in common than I thought.
The killing of animals for fun also revolts me.
Were you ever a member of the CP by any chance?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 05:44 PM

"...if any real heterosexuals among you were given the choice of being raped by a woman or a man....which would you chose, and which would fill you with horror!"

Good god. What kind of question is that? (Why do I keep getting the feeling that there is a prurient aspect to a certain person's stance?)

Rape = force. Rape by broom handle or glass bottle or whatever/em> besides a penis would be far more horrendous, because it denotes a further twist to the attack; the chances of escaping alive would be seriously reduced.

Ake, I think you need to back off.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 05:50 PM

Sister and Hawk, I was of course referring more to the psychlogical trauma.
Your thoughts on "homophobia" are right on the button Hawk, to the extent that so called liberals are prepared to watch a minority decimated by disease, rather than criticise the lifestyle which causes the damage.

Sister...you seem rather a good example of the female type which you describe.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 05:55 PM

Lifestyle doesn't cause the damage. HIV does.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 05:59 PM

When it comes to my least favorite way to be raped, Ebbie...yes, I would prefer rape by penis to rape by broom handle, jackhammer, schmeisser submachine gun... or monitor lizard.

I think...

Hmmm. I gotta sit down and really give this some thought.

;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 06:00 PM

"...so called liberals are prepared to watch a minority decimated by disease, rather than criticise the lifestyle which causes the damage."


In what way does criticizing the lifestyle help the minority?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 06:04 PM

I mention above about my college acquaintance, Tony, who was rather obviously gay, from time to time getting dragged into a back alley by a couple of "he-men" and beaten up.

GfS insists that homosexuality is a matter of free choice, and further, that it is a psychological aberration that can be cured by proper counseling. Ake has heartfelt concern for the detrimental effects on those who practice anal intercourse—along with the pedophilia which he tells us is rampant among homosexual men. Both seem to be insisting that homosexual activity is "unnatural" (despite the incidence of homosexual activity within the animal kingdom) and "a perversion" (which can be anything one finds distasteful), although, to be fair, neither go quite as far as those of a religious fundamentalist bent who insist the homosexuality is a mortal sin.

One wonders sometimes where all this earnest concern for the health and well-being of gay men leaves off—and veiled hate speech begins. One also wonders where this sort of thing can lead. Well. . . .

Without further comment:

On October 7, 1998, at the Fireside Lounge in Laramie, Wyoming, Russel Arther Henderson and Aaron James McKinney, both 21 years old, picked up Matthew Shepard, a college student and also 21, and drove him to a remote rural area where they robbed him, pistol-whipped and tortured him, then tied him to a fence and left him to die.

Some 18 hours later Aaron Kreifels discovered Shepard, after initially mistaking him for a scarecrow. Shepard was still alive, but in a coma.

Shepard suffered fractures to the back of his head and in front of his right ear. He had severe brain stem damage, which affected his body's ability to regulate heart rate, body temperature, and other vital functions. There were also a dozen lacerations around his head, face, and neck. His injuries were deemed too severe for doctors to operate. Shepard never regained consciousness and remained on full life support. As he lay in intensive care, candlelight vigils were held by the people of Laramie.

He was pronounced dead at 12:53 A.M. on October 12, 1998, at Poudre Valley Hospital in Fort Collins, Colorado.

Police arrested McKinney and Henderson shortly thereafter, finding the bloody gun as well as the victim's shoes and wallet in their truck.

Henderson and McKinney had attempted to persuade their girlfriends to provide alibis, but subsequently the two of them were convicted of kidnapping and felony murder. Each "copped a plea" to avoid a death sentence, and each of them was given two consecutive life sentences without possibility of parole.

Why had the two of them committed this vicious act?

Matthew Shepard was gay.

Don Firth

P. S. I couldn't find a video, but here are the words to a song recorded by Peter Paul and Mary. CLICKY

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 06:04 PM

Little Hawk, it sounds like you are making light of it. Broom handles and glass bottles have often been used.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 06:12 PM

Pardon me, but I will add one comment to my post above. A question, actually.

In the incident I describe above, who of the three men was (were) the "pervert(s)?"

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 06:14 PM

I think Ebbie, that if forced to chose, most men would rather be raped with a broom handle than a penis!

Btw, if you had taken the time to read the thread, you would KNOW why the question was posed....and prurience had absolutely nothing to do with it. I will "back off" or as Sister says "fuck off" when I am good and ready and need no advice on how to conduct my self or my argument from either of you

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 06:20 PM

Let me re- phrase the question, would you rather be raped by a homosexual or subjected to attempted murder by a woman holding a broken bottle and about to insert it into your anus?

Fucking idiots!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: TheSnail
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 06:35 PM

Isn't it the defining aspect of rape that you don't have a choice?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 06:37 PM

No.....they might be "liberals"

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 06:38 PM

The issue is NOT rape in any case. That's just a red herring.

The issue, originally, was the brutalization of individuals in a minority by individuals in a majority as defined by sexual orientation.

Hetero men and women:

Have sex
May get AIDs
Increase the risk of STDs if uneducated or careless about them
Increase risk of STDs if they engage in anal intercourse
Only engage in anal intercourse in some cases, not in all.
Engage in oral sex.
Engage in manual sex.
Are allowed to define one another as spouses with concomitant legal priveleges such as survivorship, co-ownership, insurance, etc.

Homo men and women:

Have sex
May get AIDs
Increase the risk of STDs if uneducated or careless about them
Increase risk of STDs if they engage in anal intercourse
Only engage in anal intercourse in some cases, not in all.
Engage in oral sex.
Engage in manual sex.
Are not allowed to define one another as spouses with concomitant legal priveleges such as survivorship, co-ownership, insurance, etc.

Why is this logical?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 06:41 PM

Yet another topic gets lost completely under the weight of Akenaton's desire to rule over the rest of the world's private lives.

Why don't you go and take over Uganda, Ake, they must be about ripe for another lunatic dictator.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 06:53 PM

Why would a homosexual rape a woman?

I suspect having a broken bottle put inside your anus or vagina (or used to cut your penis off) would be potentially immediately more life threatening than any organ being placed inside you, at least initially.

TBH, to rather have one thing or the other happen you would have to be a fu***** idiot... or very sick.

The argument you are making, using the example you have, is still irrelevant, sorry.

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 06:54 PM

Don, as you know I dont normally respond to your shite, but when in the last few months have you posted any topic of any interest whatsoever?

If lunacy is a job requirement, then Don's yer man, you Ugandans!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 07:04 PM

"Why would a homosexual rape a woman?

I suspect having a broken bottle put inside your anus or vagina (or used to cut your penis off) would be potentially immediately more life threatening than any organ being placed inside you, at least initially.

TBH, to rather have one thing or the other happen you would have to be a fu***** idiot... or very sick.

The argument you are making, using the example you have, is still irrelevant, sorry"

Now this is a bit complicated MP.......See that thing ye dae wi yer hauns ower yer een.....is it "facepalm" ye ca'it?......Well ah think mibee yer meant tae tak yer hauns away an read the threid afore ye start typin' doll.   :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 07:17 PM

Ake, your obsession with anal sex has now escalated to an obsession with anal rape—with a whole variety of implements. Let me make a suggestion:

Step out into a motorway, lift your kilt, moon (altogether, now!) "a bonny army lorry," and try to entice it to drive up your exit ramp.

That oughta be quite a thrill for you!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 07:18 PM

Gentlemen, breathe deeply.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 07:25 PM

Amos....I like your wee lists, very neat n'tidy.
But you've missed one wee tiny detail to the homosexual one

"are 50 times more likely to develop aids than heteros"


Jist tryin' tae be helpful, 'ken.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 07:28 PM

You said... "Let me re- phrase the question, would you rather be raped by a homosexual or subjected to attempted murder by a woman holding a broken bottle and about to insert it into your anus?"

With an emphasis on "would YOU rather", and me being female, I am saying why would a homosexual [male]* want to rape a woman? Any woman? As you know, I have been on the thread throughout so have been reading. * my brackets

I am having great trouble understanding your premise and where it is coming from or going to. The example you are using, at least to me, is irrelevant, as it has nothing to do with original thread and it's continuing support from most of acceptance for gay people. Demonising them will not actually make the argument any more or less valid.

In short I do not understandit because I am not worrying about what gay people want to do. I accept they are gay through no choice of their own and they have a right to live as you and I, free and without prejudice. If they choose to risk their lives, along with the straight and bi sections of the community, by unsafe practices, then that is their own decision. Being gay is not a decision. This is not liberalsim, politically motivated, or agenda driven other than to accept the diversity that is human nature. Your argument appears to stand against just gay men. IF the argument was to be to try and educate and stop the sexual carnage that is going on with promiscuity for all sexualities, I would agree with you far more. Indeed, I advocate safe sex for everyone in any case. Where you and I seem to differ, and others on this thread, is that we do not see it as a gay issue.

We really must agree to disagree akenaton as we do seem to be on very opposite sides. I am not willing to name call to make any other points. People can have their opinions. I would like to think mine are based on experience and research as I know it. I simply cannot go along with your argument... though I did read the last sentence of your post to me (in whatever dialect it was written in it was understandable with a little practice). It's not complicated. It's just that we disagree and I fear that will remain the case on this topic.

And now I must go to bed as I have work in the morning and I am up later than I should be.

Good luck with your postings

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 07:31 PM

"are 50 times more likely to develop aids than heteros"

That's just not true, Ake. That info comes from a fundamentalist "christian" website. Notice I didn't capitalize christian. The fifty times more likely crap is just that. Fact is, people who have unprotected sex are a 1,000,000 times more likely to 'develop' AIDS than those who abstain or use condoms, be they gay or straight.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 07:34 PM

Speaking of foreign objects lodged in one's nether regions-- , it's going to be difficult to dial 911 (999 for the UKers), imo.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 07:37 PM

999--that depends on your degree of sphinctral prehensility, no?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 07:40 PM

If you're thinking along the lines of elephants' trunks, and if you can do that, you're the eighth wonder of the world, and you'll have shagged yourself in the process.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 07:48 PM

Sorry 999....the figure comes from CDC who quote 53% of all new aids cases are within the homosexual community.
Homosexuals make up 2-3% of the population, so the "fifty times" figure can be extrapolated from the two percentages

But I'll say no more about it if you don't mention fag jokes!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 07:49 PM

I know, lets idly speculate, in vivid technicolour, all the possible ways a man or woman might rape somebody.

How about with a broken bottle?

Or a broom handle?

No actual examples, just creative self indulgence.


Ake, you have a serious and really sickening problem. I find you repugnant and revolting in the extreme.



LH, I have enjoyed some of your posts over the years, but your intellectual ego and the self satisfied pseudo-philosophical nothings that you yawn all over us in these kind of discussions are starting to grate on my nerves.


How horrific to indulge Ake's "horror" fantasy in such a blithe and carefree way.

I've been wondering how long it would take before Ake stopped repeating unsubstantiated assertions and started rinsing his morbidly descriptive and vivid imagination again of all its darkest imagery.

We've had it in previous threads, where he has taken us in glorious detail through his fascination (and of course disgust .... he just loves to feel that disgust) with the image of two men having sex with each other.

He asks us when we'll admit that this is all about Anal sex and promiscuity.

I'm starting to see that that is true.

And now you are regaling us with descriptions of rape fantasies.


Did these events occur?

NO!

Then where did they come from?

your imagination - that's where.

They are fantasy.

Your fantasy.


Your whole argument is based on fantasy and when given the chance you just love to describe that fantasy in all its horrific glory.

Would I rather be raped by a man or a woman?!?!?!?!?!

WTF?!?!?!?!?!

Tell me Ake, does it disgust you how all these gay men (closet paedophiles) abuse their victims too?

"Would you like me to draw any pictures?"

No thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 07:53 PM

This discussion really has hit sewer level, especially since Ake appears to have found himself another soulmate after the last one rode off into the sunset (one more time - "ordinary people Paco?).
I also suggested that Ake and 'guest from Sanity' were peddling the same fundamentalist 'Christian' line on homosexuality that enabled clergymen to rape generations of children, and received no reply - did I hear the cock crow three times Ake?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 07:56 PM

Why isn't that true in Africa, then, Ake?

Doesn't that disparate curve make you ownder whether you are distorting the problem with an exclusive sample?

According to your math, then, for 1000 humans, 250 will be gay and they will get as many cases of aids as the other 750. If there are one hundred cases that means they will get fifty (a one in five (.2) chance for any individual) and the other 750 people will get 50? For a chance of .06 compared to .2. Meaning the multiplier is not 50 but a little over three.

I suspect your combining per centages is fallacious, mathematically.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 07:58 PM

Oh my.... I shant be back. Beyond trolling... into sickening.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 08:04 PM

"who gives a fuck what the sort of numbskulls who have posted since my last message think, as long as thousands of lives can be saved."

So now you're really just helping the poor Gays.

Don't you think they're closet paedophiles anymore?

You'd be better off writing a book of sexual fantasies.

I think it is pretty clear where your niche would lie.

Though I suspect you'll come up with a lot more creative ideas for your niche than I ever could.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 08:07 PM

"I know, lets idly speculate, in vivid technicolour, all the possible ways a man or woman might rape somebody.

How about with a broken bottle?

Or a broom handle?

No actual examples, just creative self indulgence.


Ake, you have a serious and really sickening problem. I find you repugnant and revolting in the extreme."

Right you fucker! Do you seriously think that I care what you think of me?.....If you had taken the time to read what was printed,you would have discovered your vivid technicolour horror film was actually thought up by sweet Ebbie a founder member of your team.

You find me repugnant and revolting in the extreme....well whoopee doo      What do I think of you....Seemple... fuck all, zilch,nothing, I dont waste my time!.....but I will expect an apology in due course.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 08:19 PM

Amos as you know, we have already discussed the very different means of transmission in Africa on another thread and its a bit late to go into all that.

For the purposes of this discussion lets stick to the north American figures

Amos my friend, your language is superb, but your "sums" leave a lot to be desired....:0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 08:21 PM

The fantasy begins here with Paco:

"Homosexual men indulge in practises that revolt most ordinary people."

You turned it into a rape fantasy here:

"Paco has a point, if any real heterosexuals among you were given the choice of being raped by a woman or a man....which would you chose, and which would fill you with horror!"


What fills me with horror is the self indulgenet ignorance of these two posts.

Little Hawk began his tasteless analysis of whiich would be worse, searching his feeling as he indulged the whole rape fantasy and from that point on this thread became the most vile thing I have ever witnessed on Mucat.

Shame.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 08:24 PM

It seems the character of the opposition has been revealed in vivid technicolour!.............:0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 08:25 PM

"For the purposes of this discussion lets stick to the north American figures"

You mean lets be selective so that your argument doesn't look quite so ridiculous?

"your honour, I would like to move that the defence leave out the rest of the evidence and allow the prosecutions case to stand on the evidence that we have presented alone. Sadly the defences evidence contradicts my argument and is therefore inconvenient."


You are having a laugh!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 08:27 PM

You dont even have the guts to apologise! you're pathetic!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 08:30 PM

I haven't got caught up, all the way, but I saw this one, and just HAD to answer it!
Smedley:"Homosexual men indulge in practises that revolt most ordinary people. Why will you never acknowledge the facts?"
I am an ordinary person.
And a homosexual.
99% of the practices (such aromantic word) I indulge in can be, and are, indulged in by heterosexual couples.
Any more insightful contributions, Paco ??"


99%????..You mean you leave out, finding a partner of the opposite sex, loving that person, crossing the differences of the genders, making love to that person, producing a child, with, and by that person, and spending your days, raising and loving that child, into adulthood???

Its all about sex isn't it???

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 08:39 PM

No Ake,

I'll tell you what is pathetic.

-your arguments and the premiss upon which they are built
-your desperate clinging on to a meagre scrap of tenuously related evidence
-your accusation that Gay men of having a natural propensity for paedophilia
- your blaming of the weakness of the economy on immigration
- and your vivid descriptions of morbid visions of men having sex with each other
- and you invitation to us to indulge in rape fantasies


And so is your last post.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 08:44 PM

"99%????..You mean you leave out, finding a partner of the opposite sex, loving that person, crossing the differences of the genders, making love to that person, producing a child, with, and by that person, and spending your days, raising and loving that child, into adulthood???

Its all about sex isn't it??? "


No GfS,

You are leaving out having dinner, going on holiday, conversation, emotional support, consolation, humour, etc etc ...

i.e all the other things that make us human.

I think the point is that it isn't just about sex, and that fascination with how gays have sex says more about the fantasist than the object of their fantasy.


As Gil Scott heron said, I am 360 degrees, and sex is just one small part of that.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 09:49 PM

Lox, Re-read the post I responded to....I think you missed something.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 09:52 PM

I disbelieve the 53% figure attributed to the CDC. I live outside the US and therefore cannot call them toll-free. Is there and American who would please ask the CDC about that 53% figure and pass the info onto Mudcat? Their toll free number in the US is

800-CDC-INFO (800-232-4636)

I disbelieve the 53% figure, Ake. I do NOT think you are BSing. I do think you got hold of some bad info.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 10:15 PM

A rcent set of Figures is here (CDC Statistics).

2007 data: Whites 12,556
                   Blacks 21,549
                   Hispanic 7,484

Male adult or adolescent:

Male-to-male sexual contact                 22,472
High-risk heterosexual contact                 4,551
of a total of 31,518.


Female adult or adolescent:

Injection drug use                1,806
High-risk heterosexual contactc                9,076
Otherd                96

of a total of 10,977.

This shows a ratio between MtoM sexual contact and hetero male sex of 22:4.4, about 5:1 (not 50).   Note that 22/31 of male cases are from MtoM sexual contact.(70%)

In females, the ratio of high-risk hetero sexual contact is 9 out of 10.9, nearly 95%.

These numbers do not support any of the cut-and-dried arguments in this thread as far as I can see. 70% of males cases come from male homosexual contacts while 90+% of cases in females come from unsafe hetero contact.

Perhaps the moral of the story is "Don't have sex with males no matter what your gender!"


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 11:20 PM

If there were a death penalty for humorlessness, gross intolerance of differing viewpoints, knee-jerk emotional reactions of a very predictable nature, vicious personal attacks on other posters, and outrageous self-righteousness carried to the point of unintentional humor, this place would be littered with dead bodies like the Alamo after the battle was done.

That's why I ignore this thread most of the time. It's like visiting a toxic waste dump. Interesting to look at....but you don't want to hang around too long, because you might get poisoned by all the ill will.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 11:28 PM

I have stayed the Hell out until this excrable piece of nonsense.

Now I cannot sit still.

The full quote is:

"99%????..You mean you leave out, finding a partner of the opposite sex, loving that person, crossing the differences of the genders, making love to that person, producing a child, with, and by that person, and spending your days, raising and loving that child, into adulthood???"

Let me parse and add commentary:

"99%????..You mean you leave out, finding a partner of the opposite sex,"

Why does a loving partner need to be of the opposite sex?

"loving that person,"

Ditto!

"crossing the differences of the genders,"

WTF? Why does this matter? Can't we also say appreciating the PERSON?

"making love to that person,"

Yup, got that covered. But this is the point where Ake has such vivid imagingings.

"producing a child, with, and by that person,"
So procreation is all that matters? What about the heteros who marry late in life? Or those who decide to not have kids? You are no fooking counselor...trust me.

"and spending your days, raising and loving that child, into adulthood???"

I have three (count 'em three!) immediate relatives who have all done this while married to a same-sex partner. And the kids are happy, well-adjusted successes with kids of their own. Again, you are no fooking counselor. You are a poser. A fraud. Now go make up a character to agree with you. And use no capitals to disguise your "voice". And, be sure to not use the phrase "being as", or you will be transparent on the spot. Go.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 11:50 PM

TIA, Do you mean to tell me that these homosexual couples had children from having sex with each other????...That was what I was asking Smedley....Being as he said that..."I am an ordinary person.
And a homosexual.
99% of the practices (such aromantic word) I indulge in can be, and are, indulged in by heterosexual couples."

So, if you can't sit still...sit on it!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 07 Dec 09 - 11:54 PM

Gross intolerance is exactly the point.
And personal attacks should not be defended with pseudo-philosophical self-righteousness.

Evil flourishes when good people do nothing.

-Edmund Burke (maybe)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 12:13 AM

Yup, homosexual couples have children. Drives you crazy, but they do.
I also have two kids of my own that did not involve my organs. Are they any less my kids counselor?
God help your "clients" if you answer the way your posting thought process dictates.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 12:15 AM

And now I will "sit on it" (are you picturing that Ake?).
Being as you will never convince me, and I will never convince you.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 04:38 AM

TIA:'I also have two kids of my own that did not involve my organs. Are they any less my kids counselor?'

Well, that's what I was talking about! Children from the original parents, in answer to Smedley's post.

By the way, sure looks like I hit a nerve!..Which in my earlier post(Prop 8 thread), I broached that subject, both sensitively, and compassionately, if you remember, as to a certain inner sadness that homosexuals had in common.

The same is often true, with two families trying to join together, as in hetero, broken homes.

So, what is it? You finally came roaring out of the closet, to 'set me straight', and tripped over your own truth????

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 05:41 AM

Guest from Sanity: I used the word "practices" because I took it directly from Paco's idiotic 'contribution' to the debate.

He (or, I guess but I hope not, possible she) sure as hell meant sexual practices as that post shuddered homophobically at the thought of the organ/orifice conjunctions we homos are known to enjoy. I merely pointed out that putting Thing A in Hole B (etc etc) was not sexuality-specific.

The other issues you introduced in your hyper-ventilating attempt to point-score against me are nothing to do with Paco's original point.

I don't throw the term 'homophobe' around lightly, but you deserve to have it tattooed on your forehead.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 02:43 PM

As to the matter of procreation, some same-sex couples do want children.

There are a couple of ways of accomplishing this. Perhaps the easiest method is adoption. Twice now, one of the same-sex couples I mention above have made trips to China, adopted infants from a Chinese orphanage, and are raising them. These kids are going to have a much better life with Steve ("Daddy") and Dave ("Papa") as their parents than they would have had otherwise. Granted, it's not a conventional family life, but it's far better for them than no family life at all. Steve and Dave are both attorneys and have the resources to see that these kids get good educations and have everything they need. There are a lot of kids in the world who are not so lucky.

Another couple (also both attorneys) have suddenly found themselves with four children. Surrogate mother, in vitro fertilization. Eric has a two year old son. And by the same surrogate mother, Jim wound up with triplets! Other than being a bit dazed, everyone is doing fine, thank you very much! And the kids are all at least half-related, through the mother.

By the way, both of these couples have female friends and relatives who spend a lot of time with the kids (baby sitting and such), so it's not as if the young 'uns are bereft of having women around.

And they have the support of their church whenever they might need it.

And GfS, ". . . as to a certain inner sadness that homosexuals had in common."

Which fortune cookie did you get that totally unsubstantiated bit of hokum from? Your half-vast experience as a "counselor," not doubt!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 02:49 PM

""Don, as you know I dont normally respond to your shite, but when in the last few months have you posted any topic of any interest whatsoever?""

Your posting history is available to any who wish to test the veracity of your blatantly lying first sentence. Your responses to my comments are a matter of record, and those who choose to check will also be able to ascertain that you rarely make a logical, sensible or pertinent response.

My posts too are a matter of record, and I will happily accept the verdict of members other than yourself and GfS, as to which of us actually has enough grasp of reality to post sound common sense, and which of us is on a one man campaign to set human progress back a hundred years.

If you want a battle of wits, you'll need to achieve better than your current half equipped status.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 02:58 PM

By the way:

". . . homosexuals are 50 times more likely to develop aids than heteros."

This "statistic"is purely speculative, and as such, nothing more than someone's wild guess.

For example, people who engage in the dangerous practice of sky-diving are 99% more likely to bury their faces three feet deep into the hardpan than people who engage in the practice of Morris dancing.

Those who are born male have a 100% greater chance of getting prostate cancer than those who are born female.

So, what of any significance can we learn from "statistics" like this, eh?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 05:51 PM

Smedley:"....don't throw the term 'homophobe' around lightly, but you deserve to have it tattooed on your forehead. "

I have to consider the source, and coming from a homosexual, you may confuse a 'homophobe' with any person who is supportive of the family structure, consisting of one man, one woman, children of those two.
Because that is out of your(and a lot of others in here) reach, don't project a phobia onto happy family people who couldn't give a rat's ass on your particular dysfunction.......(Bingo)!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 06:20 PM

So, no one called the CDC?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 06:23 PM

GfS, I don't know what Smedley has in mind, but what indicates to me that you are a flag-waving, card-carrying homophobe is that you spend so much of your time and effort trying to peddle your anti-gay propaganda on this and other threads (and God knows where else). That, plus the fact that you are dedicated to denying a minority equal rights and protection under the law (civil rights) is what brands you indelibly as a bigot.

Sorry, GfS, but you are condemned out of your own mouth (i.e., keyboard).

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 07:48 PM

Funny how Don, TIA, and a lot of their fellow clowns throw the word 'homophobe' around so freely. You claim to want 'tolerance' for homosexuals, but have NONE for those who prefer the traditional nuclear family, but want to 'imitate' them, in you supposed 'same gender' family 'structure'. This has nothing to do with the well-being of children; this is more like using them as 'props', for two dysfunctional 'adults' pretending to play house!!! In light of that, being slandered with 'homophobe' or 'bigot', should maybe be reserved for those who call homosexuals 'fagots', or 'fudge-packers'...and nobody has called them that on here and certainly not me!..nor Akenaton, for all I can remember. So, who is the two faced hypocrite???? You can't have it both ways, but I don't think you can see it both ways. You can't even be honest enough with yourself to be objective, and look for truth, that doesn't fit into your preconceived notion of the hypocritical political crap you subscribe to!

When I answered Smedley, it was meant to point out that there is MORE to relationships, than scratching each others sex drive itches. But thanks to the narrow mindedness of the defenders of hypocrisy, you turned it into something else, so you could champion your folly, instead of addressing what was said or meant. WHAT A SORRY LOT!!!
Don is already renowned for that very tactic, and has been called on it repeatedly....but he doesn't learn, from past mistakes, which, by the way, is a classic symptom of a psychotic! Look it up for yourself!

And yes, I am a counselor, and one thing I've known through the years of doing it, is the denser of the two, is the one who can't see him or herself as part of the problem, and uses that tactic to refuse to take responsibility. Instead, its rationalize, and justify, rationalize and more justification.....EXACTLY WHAT'S GOING ON HERE WITH THE USUAL VILLAGE IDIOTS! GET A CLUE, AND LOOK FOR TRUTH, objectively, AND IF IT SHEDS LIGHT, ON ONE OF YOUR PRECONCEIVED BIASES, THEN POSSIBLE CONSIDER CHANGING YOUR MIND IN LIGHT OF NEW INFORMATION!!!!!

In other words, to quote John Belushi, "WISE UP!" yourselves, instead of 'dumbing' down all around you, so you can 'feel' accepted' and comfortable!!!

....But then, after all, you are the products of political propaganda!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 07:58 PM

" ...denser of the two, is the one who can't see him or herself as part of the problem, and uses that tactic to refuse to take responsibility. Instead, its rationalize, and justify, rationalize and more justification.....EXACTLY WHAT'S GOING ON HERE WITH THE USUAL VILLAGE IDIOTS! GET A CLUE, AND LOOK FOR TRUTH, objectively, AND IF IT SHEDS LIGHT, ON ONE OF YOUR PRECONCEIVED BIASES, THEN POSSIBLE CONSIDER CHANGING YOUR MIND IN LIGHT OF NEW INFORMATION!!!!! "

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 08:17 PM

God help your patients, GfS, because it's obvious that you certainly can't.

And it's not politics, it's ethics.

You've heard of it, haven't you?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 08:20 PM

QUESTION: WILL anyone from here call the CDC? Toll-free number below.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jeri
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 10:08 PM

From http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/basic.htm

HIV Incidence Estimate

Incidence is the number of new HIV infections that occur during a given year.
In 2008, CDC estimated that approximately 56,300 people were newly infected with HIV in 20061 (the most recent year that data are available). Over half (53%) of these new infections occurred in gay and bisexual men. Black/African American men and women were also strongly affected and were estimated to have an incidence rate than was 7 times as high as the incidence rate among whites. Visit the HIV incidence page for more details.

1Hall HI, Ruiguang S, Rhodes P, et al. Estimation of HIV incidence in the United States. JAMA. 2008;300:520-529.

So the figures are from 2008, and the '53%' is new HIV infections, not 'AIDS'.

I won't continue any argument here. It's the same discussion that happens whenever someone says 'homosexual' around here. It starts out being about marriage or people being put to death, but the same old 'homosexuality is evil' bigots kick get back on that high horse and shove the discussion back to their scripts.

If hatred compels a person to have the same frustrating knee jerk reactions over and over, to shove conversations back into the familiar rut, that person has a problem. I only have a problem if I try to argue or reason with them. For most of us, this is just discussion. I think maybe for other people, it's something a lot deeper and they can't NOT go ballistic.

The virus is passed blood to blood, and anal sex makes that more convenient.
Promiscuity and lack of condom use are risky behaviors.
Having a penis makes a person more likely to spread the virus. Being penetrated by a penis makes a person more likely to get infected. People having sex with those in a population where there's already a high rate of infection makes a person more likely to contract the virus.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: frogprince
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 10:08 PM

"Don, TIA, and a lot of their fellow clowns ...claim to want 'tolerance' for homosexuals, but have NONE for those who prefer the traditional nuclear family."
An absolutely groundless, pointless, supposed extrapolation of anything anyone here has said. To "prefer" a traditional family is by no means synonymous with ranting that no other combination can be considered a family.

"...but want to 'imitate' them, in you supposed 'same gender' family 'structure'." Is this supposed to mean that each of the individuals you refer to is now in a same-sex relationship, but wants to imitate the traditional family? Or is it supposed to mean that those individuals want to imitate same sex couples? There's no way to be sure from this mess of non-sentence structure, but either meaning would be absurd.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 10:10 PM

"QUESTION: WILL anyone from here call the CDC? Toll-free number below. "


I don't know how to rephrase the fucking question.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 10:11 PM

800-CDC-INFO (800-232-4636)

TOLL-FREE number.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jeri
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 10:14 PM

What question should I ask the CDC? If the figures they published on their website are correct? I'll feel just a little bit stupid doing that, so maybe there's another way to phrase the question. (I'm not calling tonight anyway. Not terribly awake.)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 10:21 PM

The question I would ask is this: "What percentage of HIV infections in the USA are incurred due to male-to-male sexual contact?"

Ther are gangs of CDC websites--many local authorities as it were. I would expect that because the number of gay individuals in SanFrancisc seems to be higher there than say Jacksonville, Florida, that local stats on new HIV infections may indeed be 53%. The question refers to the USA.

I simply do NOT believe the 53% figure. If I'm wrong, then I'm wrong. I'd simply like something resembling a more definitive answer.

Thank you, Jeri.

I'm also grateful to you for offering. It seems thsi thread is one 'side' giving the gears to the 'other side'. Lots of opinions and few freakin' facts. When asked to seek the facts, neither side does. Go figure.

Anyway, thank you again.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 10:27 PM

DonFirst:"And it's not politics, it's ethics. You've heard of it..haven't you?"

Well, I'm GLAD you brought that up! Mr.radio station manager!

When you decided what to broadcast, was it for ratings, so you pandered to your local demographic(like on here), or was there an actual ETHIC, in bringing the best you could bring?????

Being as you're up in the Washington state area, known for being pathetically 'liberal' above being logical, I guess you could peddle whatever mindless bullshit you could, saying it in any quasi-'hip' way, and get applauded for being 'on top of the story'....even if you sacrificed the FULL story, to appease your listening audience! Same with music...didn't you play a lot of commercial crap, so you could charge higher advertising fees???

I think you'd say ANYTHING to assure your 'popularity'(just like the business end of radio), without giving a damn, about its accuracy, taste, or lasting effects, on who is listening, ..just so long as the ratings are high, and the bucks keep coming in!!!

That's EXACTLY what you do on here...but that's all you've known to do...for years now!

Now I'm sure you'll come out with shit like how you're so 'right' like you did in that other thread, making a complete ass of yourself, in the process(which you got called on, and by others)...and how your 'station(read:computer blogging), is 'the best in the west', and how 'hip' and 'dialed in' you are. But the truth is, though you use broadcasting logic, and make things 'SOUND' like you know what you're talking about, therefore the 'host with the most', a great deal what you spout off about, on here, is complete bullshit!

You've heard myself AMONG others, point to the media, and blast it for being dishonest, corrupt, biased, and misleading..for profit..well good ol' pal...YOU ARE THE MEDIA!!! and your posts are the same mindless and almost persuasive blather, that we've all come to know about the media!!!!

Maybe you should take a commercial break, only to find out that the policies you're selling out to, the public can't afford the crap you're peddling...what are you going to do now???

Now I'm expecting to hear a broadcasted 'disclaimer', and proceed to demonize me, as you've tried so many times before, but I'm calling you on your practice, ethics, and media propaganda, that you're spewing forth, with complete abandon to any responsibility 'to its content'...( a phrase the media recites when they broadcast shit, that might be controversial, and get their listener audience's knickers in a twist, so they can say, that they're 'trying to bring all sides', in case, that audience thinks the station is actually as lame as the show they put on)...God no! don't think bad of us, we're only the radio station.(We can be lame, and get away with it).

Sorry Charlie....Don't talk to me about ethics, you 'sell out' con man for the highest bidder of advertising time!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 11:00 PM

There's no pathos to liberal thought; it espouses reciprocal dignity and tolerance. Your bitterness reveals its own sour roots.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 11:04 PM

Amos, you have no clue about me, or what you're talking about, in regards to me. Stifle it!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 11:12 PM

WOW! That was quite a little outburst, there!

GfS, you're an idiot!

I never said anywhere that I was a radio station manager. You made that up, just like most of what you post.

I was an announcer at a classical music radio station. I put records on turntables, told the listeners what music I was about to play, then flipped the switch. Some of this (Monteverdi, Mozart, Beethoven, Stravinsky, etc.) was selected by me, but most by the program director, Bob MacDonald. I read commercials (time sold by the sales department) and public service announcements at the times the station manager specified in the log. At the top of the hour, I read the news (torn from the teletype).

I had nothing to do with the advertising fees. That was a whole different department. Not my job.

You made up a whole fictional "Don First," which is not me. You can't even get my name right!

That's a real tour de force there, GfS! You have managed to combine the fallacies of argumentum ad hominem with "The Straw Man." Bravo!!

Not only are you barking up the wrong tree, you're lost in the wrong bloody forest!

"Counselor?" You, sir or madam as the case may be, are the one who is badly in need of psychological help. Your last couple of posts in particular more than amply demonstrate that you are losing your grip.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 11:14 PM

ConFirth must be typing away every excuse and reason he can..while you're at it, don't forget, to include how you were so SELF absorbed into YOU, that your first old lady kept you from being around the kid, that you never wanted..so you could pursue a career, in bullshitting people for profit!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 11:46 PM

You know, they do say that people go into the field of work where they themselves are deficient. So maybe Guest/Far, Far from Sanity is a counselor. *g*

(Although I devoutly hope not.)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 11:49 PM

Pure fiction, GfS. You take a few things I said about mayself (a marginal note's worth) and wrote a whole War and Peace-sized novel from that, making it all up as you go along. All pure fiction and bearing no resemblance whatsoever to anything in my real life.

You know, this would be funny if it weren't so sick! I must have really got up your nose for you to explode with this kind of frenzied hatred for me. I'm getting a bit worried about you.

Okay, I'll leave you alone for a few hours so you can calm down a bit. Barbara just got home from her job at the library, so we're going to have a bit to eat and watch a movie on DVD. I'll be off-line until tomorrow.

Try to relax and calm down.

Don Firth*

*Firth = Scottish place name, i.e. Solway Firth, Firth of Forth, Pentland Firth, etc. My great-grandfather came from Scotland with the Hudson's Bay Company in 1851 and eventually settled in the San Juan Islands (north of Seattle).

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 11:51 PM

Mebbe you don't think you are bitter. Your language says otherwise. I stifle NUFFINK!!! :D

Seriously, though, it is just possible you have substituted local conclusions for global judgement. An easy error to make.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 12:24 AM

From: Don Firth
Date: 28 May 09 - 07:31 PM

Considering the vagueness of some of the verbiage used by Ake, especially GfS, and also Little Hawk, it's sometimes not real easy to follow what the hell they are trying to say, if anything. Perhaps that's the point.

And before someone attempts to cast aspersions on my ability to comprehend, let me remind them that I majored in English as well as Music and I have worked ("day jobs") as a technical writer (often trying to translate "governmentese" into plain English) and as a radio station news director.
Don Firth

Oh, you mean propaganda minister??? Professional SPINNER????...ONE WHO TAKES FACTS AND TURNS IT WHAT IS 'FIT FOR THE PUBLIC'S CONSUMPTION'?...to say whatever you want it to mean?..like on here???

When you said you just played 'classical music',are you lying now, or back then?..as the news(?) director.
You want to talk about ethics, man, let's go!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 01:04 AM

Here, let's put this in context:

NOW:

From: Don Firth
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 11:12 PM

I was an announcer at a classical music radio station. I put records on turntables, told the listeners what music I was about to play, then flipped the switch. Some of this (Monteverdi, Mozart, Beethoven, Stravinsky, etc.) was selected by me, but most by the program director, Bob MacDonald. I read commercials (time sold by the sales department) and public service announcements at the times the station manager specified in the log. At the top of the hour, I read the news (torn from the teletype)."

THEN:

From: Don Firth
Date: 28 May 09 - 07:31 PM

"Considering the vagueness of some of the verbiage used by Ake, especially GfS, and also Little Hawk, it's sometimes not real easy to follow what the hell they are trying to say, if anything. Perhaps that's the point.

And before someone attempts to cast aspersions on my ability to comprehend, let me remind them that I majored in English as well as Music and I have worked ("day jobs") as a technical writer (often trying to translate "governmentese" into plain English) and as a radio station news director.
Don Firth"

Oh, you mean propaganda minister??? Professional SPINNER????...ONE WHO TAKES FACTS AND TURNS IT WHAT IS 'FIT FOR THE PUBLIC'S CONSUMPTION'?...to say whatever you want it to mean?..like on here???

When you said you 'just played classical music', are you lying now, or back then?..as the news(?) director.

So knock off the accusations, about 'homophobes' and 'bigotry'.
Your consistency of the truth, and representing things as they really are, are highly at question!!!
You want to talk about ethics, man, let's go!

(sigh)..trying to cop a lower plea,,,jeez!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 01:57 AM

So sorry to repeat myself, but the Sanity person (oh the irony) is still trying to wriggle out of what I said, or twist it perversely.

I focused on sexual acts because that was the turf on which the poster I was challenging had chosen to focus.

If you want to discuss relationships, let's go for it. I could tell you about the stable, loving, happy, lifetime relationship I have been in for fifteen years. But you wouldn't want to hear about that, as it contradicts your preferred images of how gay men are.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 04:34 AM

Smedley,

I think you are making the same mistake that the rest of us keep making time and time again ... Doh!

And that is the assumption that GfS's comments have any bearing whatsoever on anyone elses point.

She lives in a whirlwind of desperate confusion and needs to justify her fears to feel safe.

A miserable existence.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 04:45 AM

Jeri

From: Jeri - PM
Date: 08 Dec 09 - 10:08 PM

I think you have just about summed it up.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 04:46 AM

"Homosexual men indulge in practises that revolt most ordinary people. Why will you never acknowledge the facts? "

One practice that is not revolting is that in my experience, our gay friends make wonderful soufflés.

As to how this thread has gone...

There are some people on here that revolt me to be honest. But I bet none of them are gay. In fact, I would put money on the fact that the vast majority of them have religious beliefs.

Scroll up far enough and you will find a quote from some philosopher or other that I posted, and it seems so many screen scrolls ago, I might just repeat it. Cos a) I can and b) I like it.

Religion is like a municipal swimming baths. All the noise comes from the shallow end.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 05:05 AM

"GfS, you're an idiot!"
No he's not - he's an out-of-the-closet homophobe and an apologist for wholesale child abuse.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 05:20 AM

Some of them make wonderful soufflés as StmngWillie remarked: others can be distinguished broadcaster & writer of books on the popular arts, in stable longterm CivicPartnership relationship with member of the Inner Magic Circle, which is case with a couple among my [still think really in terms of "our" to include my dear dead wife] dearest friends in the world. What's with these people [Ake, GfS, Paco et al] who imagine they must be up to something nefarious & unspeakable, instead of just getting on with their lives and careers like the rest of us?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jeri
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 12:05 PM

I called CDC and managed to ask a couple questions they couldn't answer, so I got elevated. They're going to e-mail me, and I can follow up with them by e-mail.

"Over half (53%) of these new infections occurred in gay and bisexual men" is correct, but my questions were:

How did they know the infections were new? (Were there previous negative tests?)

Were members of other risk groups included in the 53%, i.e. IV drug users?

They aren't going to do anything more than speculate as to why the difference between the US and other places in the world are so different. It could be because there's a lot of gay/bisexual men who are HIV positive already in the community. In Africa, there may be a lot of heterosexuals who are HIV positive already in the community.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 01:55 PM

Incredible, Gfs!

I didn't realize that I was as powerful and sinister as Ernst Stavro Blofeld, the arch villain from the James Bond novels/movies. But then media moguls like Rupert Murdock, Ted Turner, and me wield a lot of power and influence on world affairs. Nor did I realize that I had managed all by myself to turn Washington State into "The Soviet of Washington," that notorious "liberal fascist" state. Wow! I am so-o-o-o-o cool!

"When you decided what to broadcast. . . ."

To set the record straight, GfS, I was not the one who decided what to broadcast. I was an announcer. Announcers are the on-the-air voices who read commercials, read news (not write, read), and play music records. What kind of records depends on the orientation of the station, and that's determined by the owner of the station, and that was not me.

Prior to working at a classical music station in Seattle, I worked for a year at a small station in eastern Washington. There, I was an announcer and news director. As news director, my duties consisted of calling the local police station, sheriff's department, and hospital first thing in the morning to see if anything newsworthy had happened overnight. Other than that, on my board shift, I would read the latest national news headlines (off the teletype—Associated Press broadcast news service) at the top of each hour. Whatever I put on the air was vetted and approved by the station manager, who, as I said, was not me.

I also wrote and produced commercials. I wrote the copy from a fact sheet that the commercial time salesman handed me (what the sponsor, i.e. sporting goods store, restaurant, car repair shop, or whatever wanted said in the commercial), then read the copy, recording it onto a tape cartridge, often over appropriate background music. There, too, the station manager had to approve what I had done before it went on the air.

I had no control over station policy, what commercials were aired, nor, at this station, the music I played. It was all pre-programmed and on fifteen inch reels of tape. I just pressed the button that started and stopped the tape.

As I said above, at the Seattle classical music station, the only thing I had to do with news was to tear it off the teletype (once again, AP) and read about five minutes worth of national and local news at the top of the hour, every two hours, along with a weather report. My main duty was to select, announce, and play music records (once again, classical, not pop, rock, or elevator music. Classical.) that met the guidelines of the station format—that is, I selected and played classical records other than the featured works already selected by the program director, who, once again, was not me.

And I also played the listed recorded commercials or read commercial copy when the station log indicated that I should. In addition, I wrote down the meter readings from the transmitter at prescribed intervals, required by the Federal Communications Commission, and signed the transmitter log.

So that was me, diabolically propagandizing and ruling the world from behind a microphone.

I worked in radio for about seven years. It was fun, but I had an opportunity to make use of my writing skills (after all, I was an English major in college before I changed my major to Music) by working as a technical writer for the Bonneville Power Administration's energy conservation program (residential weatherization), so I took it. Also, it paid better than broadcasting and I no longer had to get up a 5:30 in the morning.

And your comments about my "first old lady" and my son are vicious and mean, totally inaccurate, and fail to consider the amount of emotional pain that was involved when she and I decided, due to circumstances beyond our control, that it was better—for her and the boy—that we not see each other again. I am just very happy that when he was grown up and learned the truth, he wanted to meet me. And we've been the best of friends—closer than most fathers and sons—ever since.

As a "counselor," you lack all human understanding and have a real mean streak in you. God help your clients! If any!

By the way, how's your life going these days? Your relationship with your father?

Crawl back under your rock. You're still a bigot.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 02:49 PM

Some UK stats.
(Our situation is different because we have immigrants from Africa where it infects more heterosexuals than in western countries.)

Although only about 1% of the total population of Britain are adult gay men, almost half of the people living with HIV are gay men.

This means gay men are about 90 times more likely to be living with HIV than other people.

Similarly, although African people account for about 1% of the population in Britain, 33% of the people living with HIV are African.

This means African people in Britain are about 50 times more likely to be living with HIV than other ethnic groups.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3856963.stm

(Without the African dimension, gay men would account for rather more than the 53% quoted for USA)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 03:36 PM

I wonder if Ake knows ...

... he might decide to prevent the unhealthy promotion in our schools of the idea that being African is healthy and normal.

He might suggest that children should be discouraged from being African as for us to do otherwise would be irresponsible.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ed T
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 07:29 PM

This is interesting....
http://firozeshakir.blogspot.com/2009/07/world-without-hijras-would-suck.html

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 08:27 PM

Being African is not behavioural and catagorising them in this way would is racist......you should be ashamed of yourself and will almost certainly be drummed out of the "liberals"

That's just a little more of the irony that you proved yourself incapable of understanding when responding to posts from Sanity, Little Hawk and myself futher up the thread.
I've just been discussing Alan Bennett on another thread and you remind me of a Bennett English characterisation......complete with the ability to suspend reality, ignore that which is obvious and show self obsession on a massive scale.
You just brush off Keith's figures as if they didn't exist, although they support everything I have been saying about the need to have greater control over the disease.
Worse.....You attempt to turn these figures into a stupid, witless joke

Still waiting for that apology by the way!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 09:17 PM

Jeri, thank you very much.

Ake, you got it right--and if anywhere I implied you were fulla 'beans' I hereby apologize.

The statistic (53%) is shocking. I'd expect it means that gay men are not using condoms and that is causing the very high (compared to hetero) infection rate. Are there any efforts people are aware of to 'get the news' to the gay population? Seems that it's kinda stupid on people's part (in a country where condoms are fairly cheap) not to take the precaution, and I expect that gays are aware of the infection rate. What can be done?

Smedley, I am addressing this to you because I would guess you are more aware of 'gay' issues than I am. What happens where you are? Are there programs that include the gay community specifically and if so are those programs effective? Serious question for you there, buddy.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 09:27 PM

Guest.....no need for an apology from you.

We can all make mistakes and you were never abusive. You were right to question the figures....at first I thought them unbelievable, but they are correct and rising steadily

While these shocking figures are being ignored and people who point them out abused, there is little hope for the unfortunates affected.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 09:31 PM

Thanks, Ake.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 11:08 PM

Bruce Springsteen Backs Gay Marriage in N.J.

"The Boss" is backing gay marriage in the Garden State.

Bruce Springsteen posted a statement on his Web site urging support of the gay marriage bill that's up for a vote in New Jersey's Senate on Thursday.

Springsteen wrote that he's long believed in and has "always spoken out for the rights of same-sex couples."

The native son says he agrees with Gov. Jon Corzine that marriage equality is a civil rights issue.

Gov.-elect Chris Christie is a big Springsteen fan. The Republican has said he would veto the bill.

A state Senate committee approved the bill by one vote on Monday.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 11:32 PM

If it does get enacted into law in New Jersey, contrary to (what word should I use? Well, just fill in your own), the state will not break off from the rest of the continent and sink into the Atlantic.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 09 Dec 09 - 11:37 PM

Guest999:"Ake, you got it right--and if anywhere I implied you were fulla 'beans' I hereby apologize."

An honorable person is worth listening to. You've shown more class on here, than most of the know-it-alls!(know-all-o-gists).

There are still those on here who just ignore the FACTS, or spin the FACTS, and think they are changing reality!....only their own.

Hats of to you 999!
Warmest Regards!
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 12:15 AM

For someone who put in so much time and effort thinking up and writing all those vicious libels about me, the words "facts" and "honorable" ring a bit hollow coming from you, GfS.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 01:48 AM

Don,
Well, finally!.....The thread name is, "RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?"

Actually, it could have been named, "RE: BS: Death penalty for straight families?".....Why?

Because you've done nothing but character assassinate us, all in the course of 'politically correct' liberal bias....Why?

Because you walked away from yours, and your responsibility toward yours...Why?

Because you were selfishly seeking your own capitalistic and self image, and acceptance success....Why?

Because you thought you wouldn't be so bitter....Why?

Because your bitterness blindsided you, by your selfish, self serving, mixed with good ol' greed, and, ever since, you've been bitter about those who seek it, perhaps for the right reasons(like providing for their loved ones, their families), and its hard to look back, and without excuses, and acknowledge that you screwed up.....Why?

Because you still can't admit you were wrong....Why?

Because...well, jeez, you still can't....Why?

Because you'd rather be perceived as 'right', and maybe find a new rationalization for a new excuse...Why?

Because, no matter how many people you think who are convinced you are so wise and 'right', in your heart of hearts, I think, that you think, that you know better...and if you admit to anything you were wrong in, you might have to look deeper, and admit more.

I told you I was routing for you!
Sending you positive thoughts,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 03:57 AM

In answer to 999's question a few posts ago: I live in a British city with a very large gay population. There are all sorts of programmes, campaigns, information sources and facilities which target high-risk groups (this category includes gay men but also others).

I have friends who work in HIV-related healthcare and they tell me that many gay men who are HIV-positive now live much longer because of the increased availability of medication (which doesn't of course cure the condition but helps to manage the symptoms). Indeed one HIV-positive friend of mine was diagnosed as long ago as 1990 but happily is still alive & pretty well thanks to the pills he takes.

The only downside of the availability of medication is that a foolish minority young gay men (late teens or thereabouts) think they don't need to worry about adopting safer sex practices because the medication is there and will 'sort them out'.

The cost of the medication is also outlandish - drug companies make *huge* profits out of HIV.

One of the most-at-risk groups these days is men who have sex with men but do not identify as gay (and are often in marriages with women). These people are less likely to access the programmes/campaigns/etc as they don't want to risk being labelled as gay (which I guess they're not, really).

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 04:33 AM

Obama said recently that he might start allowing immigrants with HIV.
Who would pay for their medication?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 08:54 AM

This debate still going on then?

Why hasn't this god guy struck lightning on the level headed ones amongst us yet then?

The fact that we are still here shows that your god doesn't agree with your homophobia after all.

What are you going to do now? Claim that being gay goes against something other than religion?

I would say such idiots are a pain in the arse but irony never suited me....

Luckily, if we were to tot up the score, more catters seem to be caring humans than god bothering fascists. If there was a god, I would ask him to bless the majority in this debate....

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 09:36 AM

Being a 'God-Botherer' doesn't make one a fascist, Willie.
That 'God-o-phobic' comment of yours belongs in the same place as the homophobic stuff you're complaining about, it's exactly the same kind of groundless shite.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 09:41 AM

Backwoodsman
Suggest you have a peep at what the 'god-botherers have been up to with Irish children over the last half century.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 10:01 AM

Sorry backwoodsman, but it does.

I said god botherer. I didn't say person with religious belief. Many of my own family and friends have faith and belief and I do not consider them god botherers.

The term is reserved for those who try to say that their god exists for me too, when of course he does not. Then when you complain that they have influence on everybody's lives, regardless of whether you are superstitious, they claim you are persecuting them.

Groundless shite is what I am complaining about. The groundless shite that says if you have a lifestyle that doesn't concord with a couple of sentences in an over translated 2,000 year old fairy story book, you need putting to death. (The thread of this debate.)

The Irish children situation, as Jim Carroll rightly brings it into this discussion, is not only truly awful but the systemic cover ups over the years by church leaders of the disgusting, tragic and downright criminal antics of some of their employees completely stops their right to moralise to the rest of us. (Moralising aka god bothering)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 10:49 AM

I've said this before, but I suppose I better repeat it for those who see this thread as a chance to kick the shit out of religion in general and the Catholic branch of Christianity in particular.
I'm an atheist...always have been, but I know many good people who love and need their religion, most are simply not emotionally strong enough to deal with the horrors we meet on our journey, or the losses we endure.

The Church took the cowards way out over this issue, in failing to confront what was going on.....in many ways organised religion is run like a business.....Keep a clean wholesome profile tho' your ingredients may be toxic, admit nothing and cover up the evidence.

How the Church really conducts itself has no bearing on the spiritual needs or wishes of those who believe in Christ and his God given ability to redeem the evil doers in society
These people are the "religious" not the ones who administer the business, so don't kick them, they are blameless

And remember, when this abuse was actually happening, the Catholic Church, the Pope, even the congregation were all absent.
I most cases, the only people there, were a young teenage boy and a man with a hard on........Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 12:02 PM

"And remember, when this abuse was actually happening, the Catholic Church, the Pope, even the congregation were all absent."
When will you admit that the church hierarch KNEW about the abuse - facilitated it by passing the abusers on to other parishes (and eventually to countries where, apparently, it didn't matter) while continued to cover it up (right up to the preasent day)?
The abuse goes right through the church like a rotten core - and has yet to be acknowleged, let alone apologised for by the church leaders.
It's true that all this has nothing to do with Christianity - but neither has the church. Tomorrow there will be a 'damage limitation' meeting in the Vatican, which sums up perfectly how 'chastened' the church is regarding its behaviour toward the children of Ireland.
All this - while they church aspired to the nation's moral guardian.....
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 12:09 PM

"I most cases, the only people there, were a young teenage boy and a man with a hard on"
You conveniently left out the fact that girls were abuse victims; we have yet to learn to what extent.
Oh - and surely god would have been there as well- wouldn't he/she!!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 12:40 PM

Gts, I really have to protest your blathering rhetoric ad hominem instead of ad res. You are really exerting yourself (it seems) trying to assign a whole slough of personal dysfunctions to someone who is a perfectly coherent correspondent. In doing so you are sounding a little less than coherent yourself. You are not sticking to issues, facts or topic.

Furthermore, you are asserting a string of conclusions here which are conclusions absent supporting data.

This makes you sound like an opinionated fathead instead of the thoughtful human and humane person you most likely are.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 01:29 PM

Well glad to hear your opinion, Amos, but in light of the hate rhetoric that's been going on in here, you know what you can do with your opinion!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 02:08 PM

"the only people there, were a young teenage boy and a man with a hard on."


In which case Ake?


Oh ... no specific case ...

just the one in your imagination that you wish to illustrate for our benefit.

You asked

"Do you want me to draw you a picture?"

I thought I said

"no thank you"


But you seem to think you are the only one who knows what the term "abuse" means.


So you conjure up the image in your mind and work yourself into a froth, and so fuelled take that energy and use it to call Gay people closet paedophiles.

Where is your evidence of this?

999, do you think Gays are closet paedophiles?

Ake does.

If you need to see evidence of this I'm sure either Don Firth or Don T could direct you to the last thread that Ake hijacked with his slanderous bile.

Apologize?

LOL

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 02:13 PM

GfS,

would you mind providing an example of Hate rhetoric? (one from this thread that is)

And while you're at it, perhaps an example of anyone discriminating against families.


You refuse?



I thought you might.


Time for you to waffle on about your refusal being somehow to do with peoples attitudes and nothing to do with the fact that no examples exist.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 02:28 PM

A bloke in my local pub who, it has to be said, gets his opinions normally from the Gor Blimey! end of the tabloid newspapers, came up with an interesting one last night.

He is not gay, I doubt that he knows anybody who is gay to his knowledge and in general believes the bullshit The Sun prints.....

He was rattling on about the priest situation in Ireland, (he is Irish and was brought up a catholic, but calls himself a failed one.)

He said that his old church has always preached that homosexuality is wrong and the sinners will burn in Hell etc.

"Here we go" I thought...

Anyway, he said that he can't see what's wrong with liking blokes any more than liking blondes as opposed to brunettes, except a bloke would be easier to buy things for.

He then went on to say that although he could never fancy a bloke, he thinks that those who are so hostile towards gay people are so because they are having problems coming to terms with their own sexuality, and that most of them are closet homosexuals who haven't the courage or intelligence to accept it, even to themselves.

Wow, I thought. I have been following this thread on Mudcat and wondering how to address the bigoted minority and here it is! What an extraordinary insight, and from an old soak in the pub at that!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 02:31 PM

ooops, hit the wrong button

Refuse? I didn't refuse. You were imagining that I would. If you read, and or comprehended my post, I said 'Straight families' You only said 'families'....as in non homosexual families, traditional ones..probably like the one you grew up in, that you resent.

Probably if you weren't dwelling on your last post, before addressing me,...

...."the only people there, were a young teenage boy and a man with a hard on."
Oh ... no specific case ...
just the one in your imagination that you wish to illustrate for our benefit.......


So you conjure up the image in your mind and work yourself into a froth, and so fuelled take that energy and use it to call Gay people closet paedophiles."

I guess you were too excited to understand what I wrote, and meant!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: frogprince
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 02:54 PM

"claim to want 'tolerance' for homosexuals, but have NONE for those who prefer the traditional nuclear family."

"!.....The thread name is, "RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?"

Actually, it could have been named, "RE: BS: Death penalty for straight families?".....Why?

Because you've done nothing but character assassinate us,"

Gfs: NO ONE HERE HAS EXPRESSED SO MUCH AS DISTASTE FOR TRADITIONAL STRAIGHT FAMILIES, OR THOSE WHO PREFER THEM,
LET ALONE LACK OF TOLERANCE FOR STRAIGHT FAMILIES OR "CHARACTER ASSASSINATION" OF STRAIGHT FAMILIES OR THOSE WHO PREFER THEM.

If, in fact, you really believe that that's what you're reading here, that strongly suggests that you need psychiatric help.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 03:07 PM

You're the one who's attempting the character assassination, GfS.

Not only are you a bigot, GfS, you are a vicious—but highly imaginative—liar. You're making up complete fictions about me when, in actuality, you know absolutely nothing about the reasons and motivations involved in what you keep harping on. You know nothing!

I know why you are doing this. You let your motivation for your compulsive gay-bashing slip in the Prop 8 thread ~ and I called you on it. This, of course, tossed a match into your emotional haystack, and that's why you are so frantically trying to discredit me.

Your father married and sired a number of children (including you), and then, according to you, "decided" he wanted to be gay (actually, finally admitted to himself that he was gay) and left the family to go off with a male lover. And this (quite understandably) left you feeling abandoned and very resentful of your father.

This you said yourself.

And judging from the emotionality and general vitriol of your posts, its easy to extrapolate from there.

You have expanded and extended that anger and resentment to homosexuals in general. Then—when it became known that that gender orientation is quite probably genetic, suddenly you became afraid of the genes that you are carrying and embraced the idea that gender orientation is a choice with the desperation of a drowning man clutching anything, no matter how flimsy, that might keep him afloat.

You're terrified that you might be gay. Have you have urges that you might find a bit disturbing? And how long have you been feeling these urges? Since adolescence, perhaps?

This reason for your anti-gay obsession is just a theory, of course, but you--as a counselor--will have to admit that the theory is based on sound psychological principles.

You have cited the work of Richard Cohen to support your idea that homosexuality is a matter of choice and can be cured. Cohen, a "cured homosexual" who, with no qualifications, has declared himself a therapist, attempts to "cure" his homosexual clients by, among other things, cuddling and caressing them (!!!).

You might find this clip interesting. Both video clip and the text of the interview:   HERE. The video clip cuts off early. The latter part of the interview contains some very telling stuff, so I recommend reading that in addition to watching the clip.

Physician – heal thyself! Or accept thyself!!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 03:16 PM

Just checking back to get an idea of what is going on.

Jaysus... trolls are immortal. Don... get out from under the bridge man!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 03:16 PM

Don...wow...I mean that is first-order hardball, but, to say the least, more ad hominem than ad res.


Understandable, and forgiveable, under the circumstances. But a duck is still a duck.

The bottom line is this. Regardless of personal preferences, or hypotheses about provenance, there is no reason offered here why intolerance should extend to legal or civil rights, including the right to go on breathing, AND the right to choose and marry anyone you please.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 03:25 PM

Ok GfS - I'll let you off finding me evidence of someone discriminating against families.

Instead, I'll ask you to find evidence of someone discriminating against straight families.



I can't help observing that you have made a distinction between straight families and families, thus implying that straight families are different.


I had made the mistake of seeing all families as just families, but thanks to your correction I now see I should have discriminated between "families" and "straight families"


... Hey ... wait ... hang on a minute ... I've found it ... the first post that discriminates between "families" and "straight families" ...

And the winner is ...

From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity - PM
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 02:31 PM


If you read, and or comprehended my post, I said 'Straight families' You only said 'families'.


Well done!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 03:48 PM

You are right, Amos. My intention here, obviously, was to answer GfS's slanders (actually libel, since it is in written form), but I figure that this thread, like the other one, has pretty well passed its "sell-by" date, having developed a really bad smell. The issue raised in the opening post is hardly being discussed anymore. It's just GfS and Ake, as usual (plus a few stragglers), using this thread, basically, for gay-bashing.

And gnu is right also. Trolls will be trolls, and this thread has basically degenerated into a flame war.

I will no longer lower myself to argue with the likes of GfS. I declare—blanketly—that since all GfS really knows about me comes from his/her fetid imagination, anything derogatory that s/he says about me from here on is a lie and should simply be ignored

Goodbye, folks. Have fun. I have serious work to do and a lot of music to make.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 04:01 PM

You know very well Amos, that humans do not have the "right" to choose and marry anyone they please.

But other than that I tend to agree with you that this thread has descended into a sort of mad hate fest.
The original question was "should Homosexuals face the death penalty", i have seen no one advocate such a course of action here regardless of how we feel about the homosexual lifestyle.

The history of homosexuality,homosexual risk taking and promiscuity, incidents that I have witnessed in my life concerning homosexual child abuse and various statistics(like the ones citing priest abuse and others) have led me to the view that male homosexuals have a much stronger propensity to the abuse of pubescent teenagers than heteros.

Another poster made the very good point, that all men may have a propensity to the abuse of children, but the family structure and the siring and protection of their own children keeps that propensity in check.

I am speaking here in very general terms....of course there are exceptions in both directions, but in discussions on these subjects, generalisations must always suffice if we are to get anywhere near the truth.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 09:21 PM

Hey! Pay attention to paragraph #7!!!!!!
Web address at bottom!


Vermont court disputes Virginia ruling on lesbian custody fight
Updated 8/4/2006 1:07 PM ET         E-mail | Save | Print | Subscribe to stories like this

MONTPELIER, Vt. (AP) — The state Supreme Court ruled Friday that Vermont courts, and not those in Virginia, have exclusive jurisdiction over a case involving two women battling for custody of a child they had while they were in a lesbian relationship.

The unanimous ruling conflicts with a series of decisions in Virginia, where courts ruled the state's anti-gay marriage laws controlled the case.

Justice John Dooley wrote that Vermont civil union laws govern the women's 2003 separation and subsequent child custody disagreement because they were legally joined in a civil union there in 2000.

"This is a straightforward interstate jurisdictional dispute over custody, and the governing law fully supports the Vermont court's decision to exercise jurisdiction and refuse to follow the conflicting Virginia visitation order," Dooley wrote.

Vermont became the first state in the nation to recognize same-sex couples' relationships in 2000, enacting a civil union law. Connecticut is the only other state with such a law and whether such relationships would be recognized in other states has been a matter of litigation.

Lisa and Janet Miller-Jenkins were Virginia residents in 2000 when they traveled to Vermont to join in a civil union. Lisa Miller-Jenkins conceived a child through artificial insemination while the couple was together, and they eventually moved to Vermont.

About a year later, Lisa Miller-Jenkins, RENOUNCED HER HOMOSEXUALITY, returned to Virginia and denied Janet Miller-Jenkins' demands for visitation rights. They were granted a dissolution of their civil union and Lisa Miller-Jenkins filed for full custody.

A Vermont Family Court judge gave Janet Miller-Jenkins temporary visitation, prompting Lisa Miller-Jenkins to file for full custody in Virginia courts.

The Vermont Supreme Court ruled in favor of Janet Miller-Jenkins on the visitation dispute. The court also upheld a decision by Vermont Family Court refusing to abide by a Virginia decision giving Lisa Miller-Jenkins full custody, and a contempt order against her for failing to abide by the Vermont visitation order.

A lawyer representing opponents of same-sex marriage said the dispute undoubtedly will have to be resolved by the U.S. Supreme Court.

"It's a classic conflict between two states over same-sex unions," said Mathew Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, which is representing Lisa Miller-Jenkins, one of the women in the dispute. "The real question there is whether or not a state can have its own policy that does not accept same-sex unions or whether they have to accept the union of another state."

Don't believe me now??????
Hey Don, hope you're reading!
Were their civil rights denied?
How come you can denounce your genes?
Time to re-think some errors in your thinking?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-08-04-lesbian-custody_x.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 09:28 PM

Smedley, thank you for answering my question(s). I really do appreciate it. You have at once given an answer to part of the problem and also pointed toward a solution. Please keep well.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 10:48 PM

Gee Ake, you offer an interesting conclusion. Seems it would be best, then, to extend the familial structure created by marriage to include same-sex couples to afford the same socializing influence to them, eh?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 10 Dec 09 - 11:55 PM

With the help of our resident counselor, I have just come out of the closet.

Now I will be able to honestly be sexually atttracted to women.

With the help of counsel, I now realize that I am a lesbian trapped in a man's body.

Thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 12:11 AM

lol So sad.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Donuel
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 12:18 AM

Rick Stevens and Inhoff have today said they do not support the pending legislation to execute homosexuals.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Peace
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 12:30 AM

"999, do you think Gays are closet paedophiles?

Ake does."

I'm quite sure some gays ARE closet paedophiles. Just as are some 'straights'. That said, I don't speak for Ake. Ake speaks for Ake. Period.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 01:58 AM

TIA:"With the help of our resident counselor, I have just come out of the closet.
Now I will be able to honestly be sexually attracted to women."

You already are attracted to women...so much, maybe you wanted to BE everything they weren't to you.

Wink,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 04:09 AM

Akenaton points out that nobody in this thread has come out in favour of the subject ie., death penalty for homosexuals.

Good point.

But plenty have come out saying that it is wrong to physically love somebody of the same gender.

So in a way, plenty have come out in favour of the rationale. Just they haven't the guts, courage of conviction or honesty to support the Ugandan solution.

Perhaps there is something they should be telling themselves at the very least?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 04:16 AM

Back to the old point; paedophelia is not by any means a predominantly gay crime - nobody exept the homophobes have ever suggested it was.
On the other hand rape is almost exclusively a hetrosexual crime - does that tell us anything about either sexual orientation?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 05:56 AM

I can remember plenty of cases of homosexual rape being reported over the years, Jim — not as many as hetero ones, but a fair number just the same.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 07:58 AM

This'll be fun.
What weren't they?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 08:29 AM

Well, sheet fire...

Looks as I've missed out on all the fun here but, hey, let's get real here fir just one danged minute...

Hey, if God Hisseff wanted us to be queers then he woulda but that in ther Bible somewhere... You know, like "Thou shalt be be queers"... Right???

(spit)

But he didn't so let's take up this proposed law about killin' queers... Where is that law anyway??? Alabam is my first guess but might as well be in some Afercan country, I donno... If the folks in Alabama wanta kill the queers, hey, I'd say that the queers oughtta not wait fir that law to take effect.... Heck, no... They oughtta go where folks loves queers, like Washington, D.C.... Seems every time ya' turn around there's some Congressman who been caught in one of them wide stance situations and so let the Alabama queers go up there... Right???

(spit)

What else??? Oh, yeah... Families... I heard there is this joint in D.C. where "The Family" hangs out and they trade girlfirends and boyfriends like they was baseball cards... See ehat I mean??? The wierd thing about The Family is that they is all behind killin' queers... But then word on the street is that these folks will take a poke at anything with a pulse... What is that??? Sopunds lot like queers to me...

(spit)

Lastly and finally... I been havin' these thoughts about all these commonists who want to take away my guns and make my kids marry queers and I reckon if yer gonna kill the queers then ya' might as well just go ahead and kill these commonists while yer at it 'er they'll sho nuff grow you another batch of queers and then you'll have to start all over... Right???

(spit)

And lastly, maybe we shouldn't even worry so much about queers since they really is just people who the commonists turned into wide stancers... Maybe we should just kill the commonists... Then we wouldn't have to worry about them makin' new queers and takin' our guns away... Yeah, that's a much better ideaz...

(spit)

Get 'er done,

Rufus Tompkins

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 10:06 AM

I presume the two posts since my last are comprehensible to whoever posted them & were intended to make some communication. They are completely opaque to me.
Please don't trouble to explain: it really doesn't matter in the least.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Paco O'Barmy
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 02:51 PM

Only Chinese laundry laundrymen should Lift Shirts!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 03:03 PM

Let's try this again, just to see if it penetrates some of the denser skulls:
Pedophilia = sex with children. Not hard to understand, right?
Homosexuality = sex with same gender. Also not to hard to understand.
Those who have sex with the same gender children, are homosexual pedophiles.
Those who are defenders of homosexuality, perhaps because they are homosexual themselves, are deluding themselves, to not call a spade a spade. Of course not all pedophiles are homosexual, but that does not excuse those who are. Likewise, those who are heterosexual pedophiles, are, indeed, child rapists. This is not rocket science, rocket men!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 03:14 PM

Ake... "Another poster made the very good point, that all men may have a propensity to the abuse of children,..."

That is totally fucked up. Seriously, that is just fucking warped.

I have checked in on this thread as I did the last one, but it is DEFINITELY time to leave the trolls and the worthless inane posts alone.

Let this thread and the shite therein fade away.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Paco O'Barmy
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 03:15 PM

Why not hang them all? Then I wouldn't have to waste £64 on a fxxking CRB check just to work in Schools!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: frogprince
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 03:29 PM

I don't think anyone here would deny that there is such a thing as a homosexual pedophile. And there is no way that anyone here would excuse a pedophile's actions because he is homosexual. But are there any real statistics clarifying:

What percent of known male pedophiles have a clear preference for boys?
What percent of them have a clear preference for girls?
What percent will gladly settle for whatever child is available?

I suspect that it would be more than a little difficult to obtain and sort that data in a reliable fashion; but if we had it in hand, it could help put some of this in perspective one way or another.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 04:04 PM

Froggers, I think there were some stats on another thread, which was dealing with pedophile priests, and those stats are overwhelming, in favor of homosexual pedophiles, in the Catholic priesthood. That being said, I don't think anyone has posted anything in regards to outside of those particular clergy.

You might look up NAMBLA(North American Man Boy Love Association), who is an organization for homosexual men, trying to get 'civil rights' to young boys, because of discrimination, due to their age. Their motto is,"Sex before eight, before it's too late".

By the way, I can't recall any other group of sexual oriented people who have such an organization. Perhaps, it's just a co-incidence that it is MAN/BOY(?).

If I have the time, and/or inclination, I can find an address for you.

Though, psychologically there are similarities in their make-up, I don't have any stats in front of me. I posted the similarities on the first thread about the pedophile priests, but I think Joe has replaced it with another thread.
Again, those similarities were dealing with the pedophile priests, who took a vow of celibacy, and not all pedophiles, homo or hetero.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 04:10 PM

"Froggers, I think there were some stats on another thread, which was dealing with pedophile priests, and those stats are overwhelming, in favor of homosexual pedophiles, in the Catholic priesthood."

"I think" i.e. "I haven't a clue if there are any or not"

In fact, there are none.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 04:25 PM

As usual frogprince, you ask very pertinent questions.

questions I have been asking for some time, but the answers do not appear to be in the public domain.

I will ask another pertinent question, would publication of the answers be an infringment of the the human rights of paedophiles?

We live by the rules of the madhouse.

I believe that very few paedophiles would be interested in children whom they were not sexually orientated towards.

I knew a homosexual who lived in a sham marriage.....the couple fostered children near to where I live, they fostered mainly boys of about my own age.
All the boys were abused by the paedophile, but neither of the little girls were touched.
Also homosexual paedophile rings which have been in the UK papers lately and included in their number one of the leading British "Gay" activists, abused exclusivly boys.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 04:38 PM

""Being African is not behavioural and catagorising them in this way would is racist""

Being gay is not behavioural and categorising them in this way is HOMOPHOBIC, and YOU should be ashamed of yourself.

""You just brush off Keith's figures as if they didn't exist, although they support everything I have been saying about the need to have greater control over the disease.
Worse.....You attempt to turn these figures into a stupid, witless joke""

Just as YOU brush off the plethora of facts and figures which have been quoted, which disagree with your hard wired, bull headed, NEED to debase and denigrate gays.

If anything here is a stupid witless joke it is your attitude toward a group of people who cause you no harm or inconvenience, and the majority of whom have no knowledge of your existence.

I can't help thinking that they are more lucky than we are.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 04:56 PM

Child abuse cases where boys are victims frequently get more coverage in the media (certainly in Britain) than cases where the victims are girls.

It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that male victims are seen as more newsworthy because in a patriarchal culture like ours, boys are more highly valued, so their abuse is more shocking.

In other words, even in an area such as child abuse, sexism rules the roost.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 05:05 PM

Smedley - yes good point. The 'seduction' of an underage girl, seems to attract less condemnation that the 'sodomy' of an underage boy. While the deflowering of virgin girls ("jail-bait", "nearly-legal", "Fruit-vert") has ever been casually perceived as a desirable & understandable manly enterprise, the sodomising of young males has been deemed quite the opposite. In fact, once at least, there was the presumption that somehow male rape (man or boy) was far more disturbing for a male, than it could possibly be for a female (as women like men, so being raped by one would be nearly like having sex).

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 05:05 PM

Interesting ,if highly debatable Smedley.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 05:07 PM

""Of course not all pedophiles are homosexual, but that does not excuse those who are. Likewise, those who are heterosexual pedophiles, are, indeed, child rapists. This is not rocket science, rocket men!""

Significant omission there GfS.

You just couldn't bring yourself to add the other side of the coin, could you?

So I'll do it for you NOT ALL HOMOSEXUALS ARE PAEDOPHILES!!!

YOUR agenda is very plain to see, and with every twist of the truth you make your bigotry more obvious.

God help the unfortunates who find themselves being counselled by possibly the most vicious, bigotted, hateful, and incompetent carer in the business.

Don T

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 05:11 PM

Feel free to debate it, Ake. Some 9not all) of your posts strike me as exemplifying the point I made, namely that the abuse of boys is an issue that causes greater alarm. Would I be wrong in thinking that you thought this ?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 05:56 PM

You would indeed Smedley, I am disgusted by the abuse of children of either gender.

But we are at the moment, discussing homosexuality.

I also think that human "morality" is a very thin veneer indeed

Heteros and homos abuse children, but I feel the family structure and the production of offspring has a profound effect on the sexual behaviour of heters......in general terms.

As I said on another thread, it appears that homos have thrown away natures rule book....and there is a rule book no mmatter how often it is denied; unwritten, but still valid after ??million years.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 07:37 PM

How, then, do you account for the frequent cases of homosexual conduct amongst animals in nature, Ake?

All this, though is besides the point.

I agree completely with you that HIV should be eradicated.

I agree that completely with you the abuse of others, especially the young, is abhorrent.

I agree completely with you that homosexual is not personally attractive to either of us.

I also submit, however, that homosexuality is not sufficient grounds to deny an individual the right to marry as he pleases and that the same legal coverage afforded to heterosexual marriages should be extended to all humans regardless of sexual preference.

This however does not shelter anyone from the consequences of crimes, which are covered under criminal justice. What we are talking about here is the curtailment of civil rights under the law.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 09:11 PM

"but I feel the family structure and the production of offspring has a profound effect on the sexual behaviour of heters......in general terms."
Not sure what 'heters' is, but surely it depends on the family.
Would that include the father that was found guilty of raping his daughter for six years that was reported in today's paper, not an uncommon occurrence in some families apparently?
"homos have thrown away natures rule book"
Can I buy a copy of this on Amazon - or are you selling them from home?
Another step out of the closet - keep going and you'll get there.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 11:04 PM

Sorry, forgot to sign in

The brilliant Don T writes:"Significant omission there GfS.
You just couldn't bring yourself to add the other side of the coin, could you?
So I'll do it for you NOT ALL HOMOSEXUALS ARE PAEDOPHILES!!

GfS:Never said or implied they were. That's just your preconceived notion of what you (almost) think I said, or mean.

Don:"YOUR agenda is very plain to see, and with every twist of the truth you make your bigotry more obvious."

GfS:Truth?? You actually know the truth?..Ok, what is it?

Don:"God help the unfortunates who find themselves being counselled by possibly the most vicious, bigotted, hateful, and incompetent carer in the business."

GfS: Oh here comes the bigoted bullshit again, something that is thrown around when you have no FACTS to back it up!

Being gay is not behavioural and categorising them in this way is HOMOPHOBIC, and YOU should be ashamed of yourself.

GfS:You must have missed my post, about the lesbians, and the child custody battle..scroll down its there, complete with link to the article.
OH, and the rest of your blather about it not being behavioral..PROVE your statement, or shut up!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 11:17 PM

The truth is that sexual orientation is a complex condition and is not an individual choice (except in the purest most metaphysical sense that existence itself is).

The truth is that marriage is a social convention built solely on agreements made among humans.

The truth is that hatred of humans by category is a toxic behavior pattern.

The truth is that civil justice works when it is uniformly applied, and when not, not.

Any other questions?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Dec 09 - 11:38 PM

Nope. But this has nothing to do with the price of eggs!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 12:43 AM

Just casually passing through and thought I'd drop this off.

big•ot
Function: noun
Etymology: French, hypocrite, bigot
Date: 1660
: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance.

####

prej•u•dice
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Latin praejudicium previous judgment, damage, from prae- + judicium judgment
Date: 13th century
1 : injury or damage resulting from some judgment or action of another in disregard of one's rights; especially : detriment to one's legal rights or claims.
2 a (1) : preconceived judgment or opinion (2) : an adverse opinion or leaning formed without just grounds or before sufficient knowledge b : an instance of such judgment or opinion c : an irrational attitude of hostility directed against an individual, a group, a race, or their supposed characteristics.

Carry on.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 04:01 AM

Don:"Function: noun
Etymology: French, hypocrite, bigot
Date: 1660
: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance."

On that subject you ARE an expert.

By the way, since when, on what post did I ever indicate I hated them???
I think you've misunderstood me, ever since the Prop 8 thread.
Just because I have an understanding on what homosexuality is, and what it is not, doesn't mean I have any hatred at all, of them...

I just think the people making it something that it isn't, and turning into something its not, are far more obnoxious...and then give lame, semi-literate diatribes, with no supporting FACTS, never studied, about human behavior, and use that to justify their own guilt and delusions....That's what you've mistaken for 'hatred' of them!

But then, it's all about you.

Most of the 'learned opinions' that have come at me, have come from completely uneducated ideologues, whose closest they've got to a classroom, is when they were trying to play at the 'Stu U', for tips, while trying to figure out the secret chord progression of Neil Young!
.......then come on here, and try too hard, to be tragically hip!
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 05:35 AM

"You would indeed Smedley, I am disgusted by the abuse of children of either gender.

But we are at the moment, discussing homosexuality."


Oh - but Ake, it was you who brought Child abuse into this discussion not Smedley.

Ducking out again I see.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 05:46 AM

And you point was tat one of your issues with homosexuals is that they have a natural propensity to abuse children.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 08:04 AM

I have found the following link on the internet that is more than interesting. Paedophilia and Homosexuality points to the observation generally that homosexual males are no more likely to target boys than anyone other sexuality. Homosexuality and homosexual pedophilia are very different things. The figures saying that homsosexual males make up a high percentage of paedophiles has come about erroneously in many 'studies' as the observation of them being homosexual at all is has been a self assessment. I suspect many paedophiles, given the choice of calling themselves homsosexual or an outright paedophile, will call themselves homosexual. That does not mean they are homsosexual.

Studies on the whole subject are rare and, personally, if the actual ethics of carrying out such a study could be sorted, I think it could finally dispell the mythical connection between normally orientated homosexual males and paedohilia. The figures are also messed up by the amount of men out there who are married to women but predate on young men/boys.

If you have the time try and read the whole peice as there are lots of anomalies but the important thing that comes across - that is pointed to - is that the vast majority of male homosexuals are just that. Male homosexual and not paedoophiles. It's another myth that needs getting rid of.

Lest we forget, the whole abuse thing is not just about sexual abuse either in my eyes. Sexual or physical abuse are often one and the same to a victim. Abuse is abuse. Thousands of girls have been abused in care too, which is seldom mentioned, and suffered under draconic rules and punishments.

Abuse, paedohilia and rape are all centred on power and control. The sexual aspects of some of these crimes are just one part of the whole thing. It's not always about sex but it is always about power.

On to families. Sadly, one has to remember that most abused children actually know their abuser. I think statistically the figures suggest that a child is far more at risk from someone within their family than they are from a stranger. That also goes for domestic abuse (naturally) and abuse of older people.

There is nothing liberal in these figures. What is called for is a major study into true abuse of all kinds and, far from just pointing fingers, it should be done to highlight those at risk and those most likely to commit the offence. Just appointing scapegoats is not an option and never should be.

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: frogprince
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 10:06 AM

"homosexual men were no more aroused by pictures of boys than landscapes (Freund, 1963)."

Golly, that goes to show you that a homosexual male is so messed up that if he can't get a little boy he's apt to hump a tree!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 10:14 AM

"By the way, since when, on what post did I ever indicate I hated them???"
Something about hitting people with purses wasn't too bad a hint I'd say, wouldn't you?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 10:26 AM

Or are we confusing hatred with contempt?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 12:50 PM

Jim:"Or are we confusing hatred with contempt?
Jim Carrol"

Who knows? but one thing for sure..you have it right.....you're confused. Perhaps, the speck is in your own eye!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 01:15 PM

I see the feeding frenzy continues.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 02:30 PM

Long article, but well worth it.

FYI

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 02:49 PM

Another excellent article. Very informative.

FYI-2

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 03:10 PM

Don, FINALLY you have posted a reasonably intelligent post! I'll comment on it more, when I have just a bit more time, but at present, I had to put off a couple of things to read it. As soon as I'm free, I'll go though a couple of things with you on it. I may surprise you....(again?)
Regards, GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 03:15 PM

GfS:

1. Do you believe that all homosexuality is based on an individual decision? If not, does it come from a genetic quirk? Something else?

2. Do you believe lesbians and male homosexuals are suffering from the same syndrome, from the same cause?

3. Do you think homosexuality is evil?

4. Do you think homosexuality is reversible or curable, in all cases or most cases? If so what do you think such a reversal requires?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 Dec 09 - 03:36 PM

GfS, It isn't that my posts haven't been highly intelligent and perceptive, it's that you didn't like them. Too painfully true for you to handle. Do try to keep the personal invective down. It really says more about you than it does about me.

I'm curious to read your answers to Amos's questions.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 07:47 AM

Don... Two really good articles and discussions. Both are interesting in the extreme and I like the connection brought in with other animals as well as the twin studies.

The part about female sexuality was interesting in the first article "What Makes People Gay?". the comment "More surprising was just how different the story with women turned out to be. Most women, whether they identified as straight, lesbian, or bisexual, were significantly aroused by straight, gay, and lesbian sex" bujt no conclusion as to bisexuality being the 'norm' for females is made. It does, however, explain why women on average do not tend to stress sexuality as much as males. Women appear to have a far more fluid approach to sexuality and it is not as great a part in their make up as maybe in men. My own ideas on this has to do with women, on an evolutionary scale, having had to be far more social with each other than men have had to be on average. "On average" is a very important statement as there will always be extremes so we have to talk about 'the most in general.

Most of my female friends show a fluidity of thought on sexual matters and, to that extent, it may also be why women happily share their experiences with their partners so freely with other friends. It's merely just another subject to chat about. They really don't stress about it. Men, while they will talk to each other about sex rarely share their own sexual actions with their partners. All this said, I guess this is more to do with gender differences rather than sexuality and people being hanged for their gayness so I will try not to stray so far from the topic. What does stand out is the gender bias in research. Very few studies on female sexuality and whole rafts of them on men. This whole fascination over men and trying to explain their sexuality seems to have gripped science as much as it has other areas of human thinking/activity.

In the end I do believe science will find the whole answer and, as long as that is not used to discriminate then it is all well and good.

Thanks for pointing the articles out!

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 09:54 AM

"you have it right.....you're confused."
Not really - it only appears so to those who are incapable of thinking out of their box maybe.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: kendall
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 01:48 PM

I wonder how many homophobes have actually analyzed the word Homophobia?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 02:58 PM

Good point, K. Most definitions begin with "irrational fear".

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 04:11 PM

Analised homophobia......sounds a bit dodgy tae me!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 04:21 PM

ake... odd for you to leave yourself that wide open. But, anything for a joke is okay in my books.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 04:33 PM

Now... is there any chance that this thread can fall off the board?

HINT HINT HINT?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 05:40 PM

No homophobe would admit to being anything less then a confident healthy fearless red blooded uber-hetero.

Therefore to admit to having any kind of fear of Gay people would be a sign of weakness and impossible as their impression of gay people is that they are weak, effeminate and puny and certainly nothing to be feared.

"I ain't afraid of gays" etc

so the same fear that makes them homophobic also prevents them from admitting that that is what they are.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Wesley S
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 07:12 PM

FYI - Houston Texas has just become one of the largest cities to elect a gay mayor.


MSNBC Story

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 07:24 PM

Grey mare eh?....Oh well it IS cattle country!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 08:30 PM

I'm familiar with the species.

THIS GUY is holed up just a few miles from where I live.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 08:39 PM

Attempt to follow that link, Don, produced a pop-up forbiddingly headed FORBIDDEN! What can be with 'THIS GUY', I ask myself. The imagination boggles...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 08:55 PM

Dunno, MtheGM, other than he doesn't like billy goats clip-clopping over his bridge. The link works fine for me.

Here's another link to the same guy:   CLICKY.   I hope this works for you.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 09:37 PM

Yes, thanks Don. Got the troll OK. Can't say I see exactly where u are coming from or what connexion is from Billy-goats Gruff to the thread — but the clicky worked OK...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Dec 09 - 10:40 PM

Referring to the trolls that are inhabiting this thead. The Billy-goats Gruff are the multitudes of rational folks who have the temerity to disagree with them.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 02:41 AM

Of course - sorry, forgot that connotation of 'troll'. Silly me. Thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 12:53 PM

Wesley:

I think Harvey Milk still owns the record on this.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 02:25 PM

""Now... is there any chance that this thread can fall off the board?

HINT HINT HINT?""

Careful now Gnu, or you'll find youself accused of attempting to stifle the right of free speech of those who are trying to demote a whole group of human beings to second class citizen status.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 02:37 PM

Fascist!

;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Wesley S
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 04:11 PM

Amos - Harvey Milk wasn't the mayor of San Francisco. He was a city councilman or something similar.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 04:37 PM

Ah, thanks, I misremembered. He was shot the same day as the Mayor, wasn't he?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Wesley S
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 04:42 PM

According to the movie "Milk" - and who could doubt Hollywood for historical accuracy - the mayor was shot first and Harvey was shot soon afterward. If I'm remembering correctly.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 14 Dec 09 - 05:30 PM

Don... I take severe umbridge at your post. It's "gnu" with a small "g".

Better than a large mind, tho, eh?

Gosh... it's hard to imagine a mind so large that you can't fit logic, reason, compassion, tolerence... into it. Kinda sad innit?

Of course, I have always said I dislike gay parades and gay "Days" and such. I mean, no need for a public display of ANY sexuality promotion. And no need to proffer ANY such to children in any way, which is what happens eventually from same.

But, as for the subject, if I had to endorse a death penalty choice, I would choose intolerant assholes rather than gays. I mean, if somebody had to go, clean up the intelligence gene pool first eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 02:12 PM

I wouldn't refresh this without a good reason...

from New Scientist on same sex relationships in nature.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 02:24 PM

Gay events? I love 'em! Love the celebration, the flamboyance, the carnival.. Any excuse for a party, is a very good excuse, and gay folk can do it so well.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 02:54 PM

"The problem is that while we can observe the sexual behaviour of animals, we often have little inkling about what motivates it."

Like we know what motivates it in humans ...

(actually Bill I liked the article, I just thought that was a funny observation.)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 04:31 PM

Hi, ..Was super busy, and couldn't get back as soon as I wanted to..

Great article, which also does not come to any conclusions,..BUT, there is something very interesting, toward the end, that I'll refer to. But First I'll address the questions Amos posed, and in answering them, rather than 'proving a point', which is NOT what I'm trying to do, but rather open up larger avenues of thought, about this and other subjects.
Great answers, as well as art, usually comes up from the 'street'!

AMOS:"GfS:

1. Do you believe that all homosexuality is based on an individual decision? If not, does it come from a genetic quirk? Something else?"

GfS:
There's is a huge possibility, that your last choice has the best option,'Something else?'.
If I were to believe the rhetoric, of defensive homosexuals, and their 'champions of political correctness(?)', Then they are in favor of saying that they have no choice...which makes me think that, with that thinking, they are neither given, nor allowed a choice! This is nonsense! Of course they have a choice..to do anything they want. I thought 'liberals' were liberal enough to allow them that, and not take it away. Your last illustration in the article mentions just that....but, how do we get there?..Where did this come from, that maybe we haven't explored yet?..I'll propose something a little further down....
Genetic quirk?....Not so much, as something that may have happened as a fetus. T thought the article just lightly touch on a really good thing, but possibly only scratched the surface..,again, I'll try tio tie that together, with the others.

"2. Do you believe lesbians and male homosexuals are suffering from the same syndrome, from the same cause?"

GfS
Yes, and no. If we are talking about something going on, in the womb, to those, very very possible. But there are many homosexuals, who were NOT born that way, and 'acquired' that as they grew older. Those, in particular, are far less victims of anything, except their own bitternesses, fears, unforgiveness, and self absorption. That is a different category, as far as CAUSE, than the former, the ones from the womb. In short,, some are born that way, and others are hiding behind that rationalization, though it does not apply to them, in their case....Fair enough?
In regards to lesbians, most of us have heard that SOME women have 'penile envy'.do that make them a lesbian, either latent, or overt? No!....unless its taken too far. If it gets to the point where the woman starts to resent her own femininity, and acts upon it, yes, it would be considered a form of 'latent homosexuality'..much the same as CERTAIN women may dress, competitively for other women, or to 'prove' something to, or impress other women, as a focus. The reasons may vary, but again, when it gets to be an obsession, then it could open the door, to greater manifestations, to 'satisfy' an empty place in her heart.
Then again, there are other reasons that I'd love to share with you, but, I think the point has been made. If you want to go into those further, just ask...without the nasty accusations, or remarks. I think with an open mind, it could be not only fun, but mind-opening. and enlightening.

Amos:"3. Do you think homosexuality is evil?"

Gfs:
This is the question, that caused me to wonder, 'Where are you coming from?", or "Where do you think I'm coming from?"
So, to try to clarify one's perception of 'evil', I'll have to use MY perception, on what I think evil is. On an earlier post, I was rather clear on it, but in case people were only scanning my posts to find something to bitch about, I'll repeat; Most people try to do the right thing, given the choices they have. I mean, like, how many of any of us, set out to make a stupid, wrong decision?..then do it. However, if you make a bad decision, based on the only information you have, and the information was bad, or fraudulent, you still would not be an 'evil' person. That only means, that you were deceived..but tried to make the best decision you could, with what you had to work with. Once you find yourself, discovering that you had made a mistake, then you'd go about making a corrective decision, based on the new info, and again your decision making would be base on making the best decision, to correct, and make good on the final outcome. So, that is not what I consider 'evil'...so, in that context, a child, who has been that way from the womb, is not 'evil'. Remember now, we have two different types. One from the womb, as the article alludes to, and the others, who 'acquired' the tendencies growing up. I'll comment on those, when I get back from an appointment...so don't draw any pre-mature conclusions to this, till I get back...
.......To Be continued!!!...................Gotta' run,
Regards,
GfS
4. Do you think homosexuality is reversible or curable, in all cases or most cases? If so what do you think such a reversal requires?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Elspeth Hart
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 04:51 PM

I know you said no premature comments but this is just me thinking out loud.
"4. Do you think homosexuality is reversible or curable etc"

Firstly I want to say that this is possible as it is possible to turn yourself gay. I vaguely remember a documentary about it that said if you associate sexual thoughts of whichever thing you're trying not to be with something bad, then that works. Say trying not to be a gay man- for every sexual thought about another man you use a system to make sure it's associated with negativity. But may I just say that this is considered very unhealthy and an unwise route to take.

Also...I see no reason for LGBTIQ people to change at all. Evil has nothing to do with their sexuality and everything to do with the nature of the relationships they engage in. If the nature of the love is good and pure, as it ought to be between a man and woman or any other combination, then there is no evil there.
What ought to be considered immoral are the same things as would be considered immoral in any heterosexual coupling.

Now, please don't think I'm drawing premature conclusions from your writing. Just that 4. got me thinking again and it seemed a relevant place to comment.

...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 05:01 PM

GfS:

Thanks so much for your very interesting discussion, the clearest presentation of your ideas I have seen (IMHO).

Look forward to your addendum.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 05:47 PM

"Evil has nothing to do with their sexuality and everything to do with the nature of the relationships they engage in. If the nature of the love is good and pure, as it ought to be between a man and woman or any other combination, then there is no evil there."

Agreed. One of the greatest wrongful associations some posters are attempting to assert, is a sexual link between adult homosexuality or *mutual mature sexual attraction between the same sex* and paedophilia or *adult sexual orientation and predation towards sexually immature children.*

I dunno, maybe because I was raped by men who liked little blonde girls, I get on well with men who like men?
I'm sure the resident Circus Therapist can offer an opinion!

I'm fortunate in terms of never hating men (unlike other survivors I've known) who I generally get along well with - especially faggots, queers, bummers and men who like to put their willies in other men's anuses and mouths (I can do more details for GfS & Ake etc. just PM if interested).

I dunno, I just seem to kinda get along with these fruitcakes for some reason.. ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 06:17 PM

Hahahahaaa... I think I was wrong about you to a certain extent.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 06:46 PM

From Bill's linked publication.

"WHEN the documentary film March of the Penguins came out in 2005, some Christians tried to exploit it to promote a conservative social agenda. To them, the penguins' apparent monogamy and selfless parenting affirmed the rightness of traditional family values.

This is a logical error sometimes called the "naturalistic fallacy": you cannot draw inferences about what is right from what happens in nature. Penguin behaviour tells you nothing about human morality.

The same applies to same-sex sexual behaviour in animals (see "Homosexual selection"). It might be tempting to use animal examples to refute claims that homosexuality is unnatural and therefore wrong. That would be a mistake. We have no need for fallacious arguments to support basic human rights"

Qite correct....and my objections to the normalisation of homosexual practice have been purely on health grounds(statistics are available)

My objection to homosexual marriage....again the normalisation of homosexual practice on health grounds and the attempt by homosexual activists to re-define "marriage", allowing it to encompass homosexuality in the face of opposition from the vast majority of Christains worldwide
Nothing at all to do with "evil"

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 06:53 PM

There is a very important difference between the notion of "having no choice", which GfS rebuts roundly, and the statement that homosexuality, as a condition, is not something resulting from choice.

Heterosexuals have the same choice as regards their sexual yearnings as homosexuals, viz., to indulge them, or not. No-one on this thread had argued this is not the case. But having that choice whether or not to practice sexuality is very different from the question of whether the sexual leaning is itself in-built or taken on.

While I agree with GfS that many homosexual individuals--more males than females in my experience--seem to have strains of emotional suppression of some kind in their make-up, I do not know whether this is a causative vector of homosexuality or a resultant vector from it. I suppose it could be either, depending on cases.

Again, I await the second chapter of GfS' discussion with interest.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: fundi3891
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 07:13 PM

Firstly, the death penalty is, for any rationally unimpaired thinking person, a misnomer. The deeds of the living are caused BY THE LIVING and to sentence to death is to succumb to ignorance and evil. If you condone the death penalty, you are an accomplice to murder. There is no two ways about it.

Secondly; homosexuals come in many shapes and forms, as does 'love'.
There are as many purely hedonistic homosexuals as there are purely ascetic. It is up to certain relevant governing bodies to decide the respective rights of homosexuals. ie - rights to bringing up children etc

The main concern I have regarding progressive attitudes to homosexuality is how far they can be taken before being phased out in lieu of more efficient/economical PRODUCTION of 'cannon fodder'...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 07:41 PM

"....allowing it to encompass homosexuality in the face of opposition from the vast majority of Christains (sic) worldwide."

?? Why would the opinions of Christians make any difference whatsoever to doing what is fair?
"...my objections to the normalisation of homosexual practice have been purely on health grounds..."

So you assert on more than one occasion, but I do tend to doubt that...
(am I calling you a liar? No...not directly. It just seems to me that you avoid points that would contradict 'health' as a major objection.)

Look... overeating is a serious health problem, as is smoking and driving too fast! But I don't see those condemned as a 'lifestyle' problem. Why not just treat careless sex practices like alcoholism instead of vague insinuations that homosexuality should get its own version of prohibition?

What WOULD you suggest to reduce health concerns?

It is the case that many, many homosexuals observe rules that reduce relevant health concerns, yet the argument seems to be against **homosexuality**, not just careless habits. It all 'sounds' like a moral argument, no matter how many disclaimers are offered.
WAS being homosexual objectionable before HIV/AIDS? WILL it be if they find a vaccine?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 07:50 PM

"WAS being homosexual objectionable before HIV/AIDS? WILL it be if they find a vaccine?"
      
If HIV/AIDS was recognised back in the sixties, Homosexual practice would never have been de- criminalised!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 07:55 PM

Like Bill D I pick up on this: "My objection to homosexual marriage....again the normalisation of homosexual practice on health grounds and the attempt by homosexual activists to re-define "marriage", allowing it to encompass homosexuality in the face of opposition from the vast majority of Christains worldwide
Nothing at all to do with "evil"

ake, this seems an odd explication of your views. As an atheist, what do you care what the "majority of Christians worldwide" thinks?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 10:07 PM

Okay, I was only able to pop in for a quick 'look-see'....and, as most can see, I have not jumped on the bandwagon of proclaiming anything being evil, except for when one deceives another, intentionally, for selfish motives, without regard for the person they are deceiving, usually to manipulate them, or to bring intentional harm to that person...that's evil! But, to be born with a condition, is in no way 'evil'.

That being said, I'll have to leave, again(drat!), but I'm very much looking forward to sharing my thoughts with you!...and, Thank You all, for being patient, with my schedule. I've got some more insights, that I think you may find very interesting...for, at least, some mental chewing gum.
Thanks for hanging in there!.......TO BE CONTINUED......
Regards, GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Bill D
Date: 15 Dec 09 - 10:55 PM

"If HIV/AIDS was recognised back in the sixties, Homosexual practice would never have been de- criminalised!! "

Ok... that's clear enough for me to know what basic attitude drives the tenor of most of your posts on the subject.
but...ummm.. you did avoid once again "coming out of the closet" and telling us what you would have the world DO...

once more: What WOULD you suggest to reduce health concerns?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 03:53 AM

"Ok... that's clear enough for me to know what basic attitude drives the tenor of most of your posts on the subject."

What kind of smarmy remark is that?

I don't believe in criminalising homosexual practice, as I've stated on all the various threads on the subject, I was simply responding to your query.
I suppose you are old enough to remember the attitudes at that time, would you disagree with what i've said?

At least the other promoters of the homosexual lifestyle here, don't try to hide behind smarmy language....my opinion is as valid as yours and backed by the facts!

There are many things which can be done...and have been done to improve the health statistics. I have no time to go into them now but the most important thing is to realise and admit that there is a problem.

Months have been spent on this forum by supporters of Homosexual marriage etc, denying that very fact.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 04:35 AM

"What kind of smarmy remark is that?"

An accurate one.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 05:20 AM

"This is a logical error sometimes called the "naturalistic fallacy": you cannot draw inferences about what is right from what happens in nature. Penguin behaviour tells you nothing about human morality.

The same applies to same-sex sexual behaviour in animals (see "Homosexual selection"). It might be tempting to use animal examples to refute claims that homosexuality is unnatural and therefore wrong. That would be a mistake. We have no need for fallacious arguments to support basic human rights""


Noone is drawing observations of nature to show that homosexuality is moral or not.

YOU state that it is unnatureal - a psychological defect that runs contrary to nature and natural law. A perversion that goes against natures purpose - the purpose of procreation.


Observations of nature show that Humans are not anomalous to the rest of nature.

They show that the rest of nature also exhibits the same bahaviour.


They show that if Humans only had sex to procreate that we would be the anomaly.


The point isn't that these observations support any "liberal" explanation.

THE POINT IS THAT THEY SHOW YOUR ARGUMENT TO BE WRONG.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 10:28 AM

"....allowing it to encompass homosexuality in the face of opposition from the vast majority of Christains (sic) worldwide."

I don't believe that, upon examination, you would find a majority of Christians, vast or otherwise, so why pray should their opinions carry more weight than those of the Buddhists, Muslims, Shintoists, Zoroastrians, Pagans, Agnostics, and Atheists, to name but a few?

Have you sought their point of view, Ake, to support your opinions, or are they just more of the second class citizens who inhabit your dark and murky conception of how the world should be.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 10:46 AM

""At least the other promoters of the homosexual lifestyle here, don't try to hide behind smarmy language....my opinion is as valid as yours and backed by the facts!""

There goes that red herring across the trail again. It's getting a bit battered and frayed, and I think you need a new one.

Nobody here has promoted, is promoting, or will be promoting homosexuality as a lifestyle.

You and GfS are the only posters here who believe it IS a lifestyle.

We simply recognise that it exists, that it is none of our business (and none of yours), that it harms us not one bit, and that it does not, and cannot, deprive gays of their civil rights and legal status.

Now you can take as many of your opinions as you like, and present them as fact, and you can post on other forums, and cite your own posts as authority for your contentions on this one, both of which you have done.

You will still be wrong.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 11:15 AM

Not wishing to jump ahead of anything to be continued... I have caught up most of the last bits of the thread and find that STILL some of the old myths are still circulating.

Lesbianism and Penis Envy was a Freudian thing, which really just about says it all. The guy was positively sexist in his ways of treatments for women psychologically. Men, too, can get penis envy but they do not become lesbian! Do men suffer "womb envy" I wonder? I am heavily biased at any concept I find with his name attached so forgive me from not being able to be objective where he is concerned. IMHO he knew nothing about women, their lives and, especially, their psychology. Quite an arrogant statement really, considering who he was, but I shall be very kind and say he is 'old school' for sure. Thankfully things have moved on since then. But that would be another topic for sure. Conceptually so many things he said about women have been very damaging and are now considered artefacts. That said, some of the structures he suggested as existing in the brain have recently been 'highlighted' in modern scanning so, who knows? I still think he knew little about women ;-)

Elspeth mentions about non associative thought patterns and negativity. Sadly they tried all that way back all of just 30-40 years ago by 'plugging' gay men 'into the mains' and giving them an electric shock if they shown any excitement at seeing a naked male. It was called aversion therapy and is now illegal in many countries. Lots of gay men killed themselves back then too due to stigma, being treated as criminals and a 'subspecies'. Very often it was a case of 'man's inhumanity to man' as women were often treated entirely different for having same sex relationships. Homosexuality in men was criminal and women were disregarded because no penis was involved. So much revolves around the use of penises! I do not think there were many women lawmakers back then though.

There is also mention of: "I see no reason for LGBTIQ people to change at all. Evil has nothing to do with their sexuality and everything to do with the nature of the relationships they engage in". Only the T and I (transgender and intersex) part have nothing to do with sexuality. The former is to do with gender and the latter to do with a physical condition. Many people group these groups and it causes much confusion but they are poles apart as regards sexuality and gender. The distinction is important.

I eagerly await further revalations :-)

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 11:31 AM

I add my voice to Don T's refutation. ake, no one here fits your description: "the other promoters of the homosexual lifestyle here"

Talk about smarmy.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 12:54 PM

And I. I am not a "promoter" of a "homosexual lifestyle" as it is so quaintly put. I am, however, a fierce advocate of civil rights for any minority group, especially any minority group whose way of life does not impact mine in any way whatsoever.

The color of someone's skin or the shape of their eyes or the nature of their religious beliefs (as long as they don't try to force them on me)--or what they do in the privacy of their own homes does not affect me in any way.

And is none of my, or anyone else's, business.

Why should anyone else care?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Bill D
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 01:58 PM

thanks to those who saved me some typing...

"I suppose you are old enough to remember the attitudes at that time, would you disagree with what i've said?"

I am old enough...and I lived in good old **Kansas** at the time....THEY sure would have tried to retain criminal statutes for LOTS of sexual practices, but since when does being able to get lots of votes for smug conservative ideas change what is "fair & reasonable"?

and disagree with what you have said? *shrug*...I guess it depends on what state you live in. Some places have more reasonable populaces & legislators.

"There are many things which can be done...and have been done to improve the health statistics. I have no time to go into them now..."

well, we'll be here when you think of some and have more time.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Donuel
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 02:09 PM

" Don Firth - PM
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 12:54 PM

And I. I am not a "promoter" of a "homosexual lifestyle" as it is so quaintly put. I am, however, a fierce advocate of civil rights for any minority group, especially any minority group whose way of life does not impact mine in any way whatsoever."

___________________________________

The Ugandan legislators do not have your advantage of freely stating your simply put opinion. If they do, they face the eventual crime of supporting homosexualty. All those who have tried to say something similar to Don have been labled Homosexuals for saying essentially the same thing as Mr. Firth.

The Ugandan bill will pass with a sweeping majority vote in favor of jail and execution of homosexuals. The Sponsors know they face some economic sanctions but I wou bet they are talking to evangelists who may have promised to pipe in money from the mega churches.


PS First Firth, go forth firmly with the fifth.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 03:32 PM

Verily!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 04:09 PM

Cuba, although hosting over 2 million tourists per year has the lowest hiv/aids infection rate in the world.

Some details.

LESSONS LEARNED

What has been understood and misunderstood about the Cuban HIV/AIDS program? And what are the lessons from Cuba regarding HIV/AIDS? Some others have attempted to address these questions.

A group of Cuban and French researchers and health professionals surmised that the policy of extensive testing and contact tracing "may be an important factor," as well as education through the public media and schools. However, the rising infections were "worrying," especially among homosexual and bisexual men (39). A detailed report by Gorry stressed the integrated nature of all elements of the Cuban program, suggesting this was a clear "rights-based approach" in terms of privacy, health promotion, peer education, and participation, as well as guaranteed treatment and counseling (40). Gorry considers the major challenges for Cuba to be the impact of the US economic blockade on the health care system, underreporting of infections, the steadily rise in HIV infections among gay and bisexual men, and the persistent cultural stigma toward sexual diversity and the disease (40). With regard to underreporting, however, if the estimates of one Cuban study in 2003 (4) are accurate, this would seem to be less of a problem than elsewhere.

During the past decade, the main developments in Cuba's program have been the rise of the day care program, the Living with HIV courses, the increased role of peer educators, and, since 2001, an ARVT coverage rate of 100%. No neighboring country has this level of treatment. The Cuban infection rate among sexually-active adults has risen gradually in recent years, from 0.1% to nearly 0.15%. Nevertheless, this rate is still well below that of any of its neighbors. The reasons for Cuba's relative success, this paper suggests, are not well understood outside Cuba. During its two-decade experience with HIV/AIDS, Cuba's methods have been alternately ignored or misunderstood. Misunderstandings appear to be most prevalent in the US literature.

Outside views of the testing regime have been criticized through anecdotal material centering on complaints over privacy. Yet the formal practice of targeted testing, patient consent, and legal privacy protection are not so different in Cuba than in many developed countries. Nevertheless, the Cuban emphasis on social responsibility and its related moral pressures do create a distinct climate for testing and thorough contact tracing. It is likely that Cuban health professionals see such moral pressures as a plus, not a problem.

Isolation of patients has played little part in Cuba's program or its success. There has been no quarantine for the past 20 years, a period corresponding to most of the epidemic in Cuba. The 1986-1989 quarantine period was excessive, however it was not aimed at homosexual men, who at that time constituted about 20% of infected persons in the late 1980s. The sanatoria continue to play a lesser, but probably important, role in the HIV program of respite and treatment. However, extended voluntary residence in the sanatoria has led to a new challenge for social inclusion, a concentration of a minority group with high levels of psychological, social, and family support problems.

Cuba's approach to HIV education programs evolved over the 1980s and 1990s by incorporating some important outside influences. "Health promotion" began to supersede "prevention," particularly through peer educator-led activities. Since the 1990s, some international agencies have been directly engaged with HIV education in Cuba.

Finally, one uniquely Cuban feature of the overall HIV/AIDS program has been its strong intersectoral cooperation; that is, the coordinated work of Cuban government agencies, schools, media, and community. HIV education is thus not treated as an isolated program, but is supported by sex education in schools, television programs, and broader "sexual diversity" campaigns.

In spite of the serious effects of the US economic blockade, which limits access to foreign medicine and impedes scientific and professional exchange, Cuba's HIV/AIDS program has drawn on its intersectoral cooperation to help link community education, epidemiological surveillance, targeted testing, and thorough contact tracing. These elements are in turn backed up by a free public health system and a strong commitment to social solidarity. Cuba's experience deserves serious study by those concerned with effective and inclusive approaches to HIV/AIDS.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 05:07 PM

"The Ugandan bill will pass with a sweeping majority vote in favor of jail and execution of homosexuals."

You may be right but I doubt it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 05:09 PM

A considerably more civilized approach than Uganda's!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 05:15 PM

Cross-posted, Ebbie. I was refering to Ake's post about Cuba's approach to HIV/AIDs.

Ake, I presume the "Gorry" mention in the article is Connor Gorry, the travel writer (Lonely Planet series) who is now based in Havana and has been lately writing about the Cuban health care system.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 05:16 PM

Ake:

You are a stubborn cuss, which I respect. As such, you have repeatedly said that those of us in favort of extending the civil rights of marriage to the gay community are ignoring the concomitant HIV/AIDs problem.

Quite the contrary. There is no doubt AIDS/HIV is a problem. It just has absolutely no reasonable hard-coupled connection with whether or not minorities should be discriminated against.

No-one claims cancer-victims are discriminated against because they get radiation therapy. But if you tried to deny them the right to marry, you'd be facing serious charges of bringing back extreme eugenics. A really bad idea. I trust the parallel does not escape you.

A


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jeri
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 05:39 PM

A representative from CDC has replied.

The technical notes to the HIV/AIDS surveillance report are here.

It's too involved to paraphrase it or interpret it. Based on what I DID read, I think changes in reporting requirements, testing methods, and in programs that allow people to be tested for free, may effect the results. You all read it for yourselves if you wish. I need more time to really grok it.

GUEST,999 did good to question the statistics. The biggest problem with statistics is that people often don't know or care what they really mean because they're blinded by their bias.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Bill D
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 06:15 PM

"the Cuban emphasis on social responsibility and its related moral pressures do create a distinct climate for testing and thorough contact tracing. It is likely that Cuban health professionals see such moral pressures as a plus, not a problem."

Oh, I don't doubt it! Cuba is a pretty monolithic society still..... when the government says "do this!", they are often consequences if "this" is not done.

It would be interesting to see the US try to institute some of the more... ummm... insistent.... aspects of such a program, as in 'moral pressures'.

Still, one can't argue with the basic concept of much education and country-wide programs to highlight the issues.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 06:28 PM

Thank you Amos....I think you're wonderful too, but I don't concur with your idea that there is a parallel between hiv infection and cancer.

Hiv rates in homosexuals are rising steadily everywhere,
as opposed to a small but steady drop in new hiv infections in heteros.
This difference must surely be explained by the lifestyle choices made by homosexuals,(extreme promiscuity, anal sex, intentional risk taking, etc) these choices seem to go hand in hand with homosexual practice.......or the statistics are completely wrong.

The risks inherent in homosexuality are well defined, and with the will, relatively easy to avoid, whereas cancer can strike any body at any time and although we can lessen some of the risks (like smoking), cancer is not caused by any particular behaviour....therefore the parallel does not exist.

If the rise in homosexual infection rates continues, the practice should be actively discouraged with a compulsory testing and contact follow up scheme instigated.

Just as they have done in Cuba.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: TIA
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 06:54 PM

Let's try again.

Once there is a vaccine for HIV, will you object to homosexual relationships?

"yes" or "no" will do ake.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 07:19 PM

As Sanity appears to be busy, I am forced to hold the fort singlehanded; as such I allow myself the luxury of responding mainly to people for whom I have a degree of respect.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 07:24 PM

Valid question, Ake, whether you respect the person who posed it or not.

Inquiring minds want to know.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 07:27 PM

Oh, and once again, Ake, it's necessary to remind you:

Homosexual activity does not cause HIV. It may transmit it, but it does not cause it, as you keep saying.

"Spontaneous generation" was a medieval myth.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Bill D
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 08:20 PM

"...I allow myself the luxury of responding mainly to people for whom I have a degree of respect."

*grin*... I guess I asked too many pointed questions.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 08:29 PM

Ake:

Sigh. You missed the parallelism I was offering.

CIvil rights are civil rights. Medicine is medicine. Health issues are NOT coupled to civil rights of the sort being discussed here.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 10:08 PM

It appears to me that ake is going to be talking mostly to himself. We're going to miss him. :)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 11:24 PM

But I have great respect for anyone who refuses to answer a simple "yes or no", and in so doing answers it QUITE clearly.
Thanks for your prompt (and rather expected) response.

We shall go forth knowing exactly what each other thinks.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 11:32 PM

Ake:

Do you think having the possibility of a stable single partner in a relationship supported by social recognition--as in stable hetero marriages--would increase or decrease the incidence of AIDS in a homosexual community?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 16 Dec 09 - 11:33 PM

Well spotted, TIA!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 03:36 AM

Amos... the designation of marriage does not in itself keep a relationship stable, although of course being in a long term monogamous relationship would probably have a beneficial effect on the hiv/aids figures relating to homosexuals.

The trouble is that it seems, in general terms, homosexuals are uninterested in "marriage" or monogamy and seem to prefer the "frisson" of risk taking,hedonism and extremely unhealthy sexual conduct. This behaviour seems to be part and parcel of the homosexual lifestyle.....with a few exceptions.

A regime of testing and contact follow-up, allied to a realistic education policy,would IMO be much more beneficial....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 03:47 AM

Bill....I think I have responded to most points you have made, but if you continue to post in the manner of your last two messages I may have to re-assess our relationship   :0).

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 05:36 AM

Dang!!..I just was winding up a long post, and its 3:30 A.M. here, and I mistakenly closed my tab, and lost it.....I tried getting it back, but to no avail. So I'll get this off, probably tomorrow. Meanwhile, Amos, what did you mean by reversible or 'curable'...Sorta sounds like you think its a disease.....was that a slip?? (No jab intended, but for all those who thought that, why?)
Anyway, I've got some interesting things to share....(wish I didn't close it).........till then, clarify that for me, ok??..
Anxiously waiting to get back,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 04:03 PM

""The trouble is that it seems, in general terms, homosexuals are uninterested in "marriage" or monogamy and seem to prefer the "frisson" of risk taking,hedonism and extremely unhealthy sexual conduct. This behaviour seems to be part and parcel of the homosexual lifestyle.....with a few exceptions.""

If your first point were true, there would be absolutely no reason for the current interest in acquiring the right to marriage, and we still have nothing but your somewhat less than impartial, and far from convincing assertions about what homosexuals prefer.

Have you been sitting in gay bars, taking notes?

If you were to climb down off your pinnacle of false self righteous morality, and visit a few nightclubs, you would be surprised at the volume of evidence of heterosexual promiscuity, just waiting for an accomplished statistician such as yourself.

When you've succeeded in making gays second class citizens, you will undoubtedly need another outlet for your righteous wrath, so maybe I shall have helped you a little in your quest to make the world conform to your cosmic plan.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Bill D
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 04:25 PM

"...I may have to re-assess our relationship   :0)."

I did get a bit pointed, didn't I? ☺ ...I really tried to see a neutral position, based on facts, in your ongoing points, but as you notice, I was not the only one who detected a wee bit of morality-based bias in your opinions. Perhaps a couple hours face-to-face and detailed Q&A would resolve some of them, but here we have only words.

I know the "behavior" you point to...and object to, but how much it is a RESULT of being unable to contract the same 'marriage' types as heterosexuals is unclear. Even IF you were correct about behavioral patterns, you don't seem to be as concerned about "... risk taking,hedonism and extremely unhealthy sexual conduct" in heterosexual individuals. Disease and societal problems (such as rape) are well documented there also.
You see? So many are 'on your case' here because you seem to be making a case for same-sex relationships being inherently more objectionable, and most of the arguments for that are largely subjective.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 05:39 PM

Bill ...Homosexual relationships are objectionable mainly due to the health risks which come with homosexual practice.
I dont care in the least what Don T, Don Frith,Lox,Tia,or any of the "feel good sisterhood think of me,and certainly don't worry about them geing "on my case". If I found them in agreement with my opinions, then I would really worry!

I have read all they have to say on all the Homosexual threads, and understand that they see this matter as a political issue.
They have no real interest in Homosexual wefare, or in addressing the obvious health problems encountered by homosexuals.
Their only interest is in winning a political point; and it is a complete waste of time attempting to engage them in any sort of constructive discussion.

Amos... "CIvil rights are civil rights. Medicine is medicine. Health issues are NOT coupled to civil rights of the sort being discussed here."
Completely untrue, close family members of DIFFERENT sexes who "love" one another and wish to marry or even live in a civil union are forbidden to do so by law.....Their rights are infringed due to unspecified "health issues"

And before you cop out by saying that incest is illegal....Most members of this forum remember when homosexuality was illegal.
If homosexuality was still deemed to be illegal by a bunch of corrupt politicians, would you still be saying that you were in favour of "gay" marriage?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 05:52 PM

Ake:   "They have no real interest in Homosexual wefare, or in addressing the obvious health problems encountered by homosexuals.
Their only interest is in winning a political point; and it is a complete waste of time attempting to engage them in any sort of constructive discussion."

And you, sir, are a bloody liar.

And it is you who refuse to engage in any sort of constructive discussion.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 06:00 PM

Pardon me, Ake, that might have been a bit harsh. Let me put it this way:

You have no qualms about falsifying statistical data, scientific facts, and the motives and intentions of those with whom you disagree.

Well . . . no, that's pretty much what I said the first time.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 06:04 PM

"Homosexual relationships are objectionable mainly due to the health risks which come with homosexual practice.
I dont care in the least what Don T, Don Frith,Lox,Tia,or any of the "feel good sisterhood think of me,and certainly don't worry about them geing "on my case". ake

My, my, how you have changed. It was not too far back in time when you had a LOT more concerns than that.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 06:26 PM

Fancy a bit of elucidation Ebbie?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 09:03 PM

"They have no real interest in Homosexual wefare"

Unlike you who are helping them ...

... by asserting that they are closet paedophiles, that they are aberrations of nature ...

... and by getting very descriptive about what you imagine they do ...

... with each other and with children ...

You come across just like nick grffin when he tries to convince us that he really loves people with different coloured skin ... all awkward toadying and smarm and sleazy one liners ... all backed up by this twisted ... erm ... wisdom? ... that noone else understands ... all based on your putrid fascination with male homosexual sex ...

... oh yes ... and rape ...

and then just when you think there couldn't possibly be more slime you get this ... ;O)

Yuk!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,TIA (of the feel good sisterhood!)
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 09:06 PM

"Homosexual relationships are objectionable mainly due to the health risks which come with homosexual practice"

So, when there is an HIV vaccine to eliminate the health risks, will you no longer find homosexuality objectionable?

Yes or No will do.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 09:26 PM

Ake, when you show utter contempt for those who don't agree with your pronouncements and try to call their intelligence and personal integrity into question, it's pretty hard to further credit anything you say. As has been said of you by others, you frequently try to discredit an argument you don't like by inventing fictions about the intelligence and motives of the one who puts forth the argument (fallacy of the straw man) and then you attack the person on that basis rather than address their argument (fallacy of the argumentum ad hominem). That's verbal "slight of hand," and an attempt at deliberate deception.

When you try to pull that sort of stuff, it's pretty hard to take anything you say seriously.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 09:37 PM

"Homosexual relationships are objectionable mainly due to the health risks which come with homosexual practice"

Tia,

I read a report in todays Metro which claimed that teenage girls these dayds catch an sti in the first two years of bcoming sexually active.

They then go on to catch one every two years after that.


Not much on its own, but when taken in context of the figures showing that teenage girls and young women are the highest demographic who suffer from chlamiydia, ghonnorhea, HPV and syphiliis, it becomes very sad and concerning.

But obviously they aren't anything to worry about regardless of the long term consequences of these infections ... in the case of HPV, it results ultimately in cervical cancer and can never be cured. (HPV is genital warts in case you didn't know)

If Ake blelieved his own argument he would have to admit that the sexual practices of young heterosexual women are also unhealthy according to his logic.

But I'll stop myself there ... because Ake doesn't give a shit about all that.

He has his blinkers on and he is charging forward with his view regardless of wht other evidence is lying around.

He even asked someone earlier on to leave out inconvenient evidence to make the discussion easier for him.

He is posessed by that very special combnation of loathing and fascination that the sun taps into when it puts an article about paedophiles next to pictures of a 15 year old celebrity sunbathing topless on holiday.

Hipocrisy, self satsfied judgemantalism and sleaze are his trademarks - and his preferred targets are ALL vulnerable minorities - immigrants - "tinkers" and homosexuals.

Sorry Ake but you have been so busted on this thread and on others.

But carry on ... your freedom to spew pseudo philosophical prejudicial bile is unhindered her as it always has been.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 09:51 PM

Oh I forgot ... and moslems ... Ake has a problem with Moslems because his Goan friend told him oall about then so now he knows and he is wise to their ways.

... carry on ...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 11:48 PM

Ake:

Civil rights--not incest--is not a health issue. The guarantee of equal rights under the law will definitely not exacerbate the health issues of homosexuality, and in fact would probably reduce them to some small degree. Allowing equal rights with respect to marriage is if anything an incentive against promiscuity which is a major vector in the health risks you are complaining about.

The health risks you talk about are no more grounds for denying basic civil status of equality than, say, being caught up in a flue epidemic is.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 12:23 AM

ake, you really want me to post some old opinions of yours on gayness and gay practices?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 08:36 AM

Homosexual relationships are objectionable mainly due to the health risks which come with homosexual practice.
I dont care in the least what Don T, Don Frith,Lox,Tia,or any of the "feel good sisterhood think of me...

I have read all they have to say on all the Homosexual threads, and understand that they see this matter as a political issue.
They have no real interest in Homosexual wefare, or in addressing the obvious health problems encountered by homosexuals.
Their only interest is in winning a political point; and it is a complete waste of time attempting to engage them in any sort of constructive discussion"

What is objectionable about homosexual relationships that is not objectionable about other sexuality and practices? Am not sure if I am numbered among the "feel good sisterhood" but I can say that I have no political agenda whatsoever with this thread. The thread was and has become about supporting homosexuals with humanity and fairness. That is not political. It is about treating everyone with the same rules and respect... until they prove otherwise they do not deserve it. I am as interested in homosexual welfare as I am in the welfare of all other human beings... the homosexual tag makes no odds to me. It has no validity in my thoughts and treatment to all genders and sexualities. The PERSON matters. As to people's sexual habits... well this has been done to death but I will repeat once more that ALL sexualities play their part in promiscuity and sexual risk taking. If we are going to make excluions based on a single kind of sexuality, then I consider it to be prejudiced in the least. Singling homosexuals out will not change the statistics for other sexualities.

As for constructive discussion, in the main, this thread has been highly constructive by many despite it being destructive by some. What I have find refreshing is that, as far as bigotry and hate goes, it will get short shrift from the majority here. That shows great hope for the future if catters are the example for the general populous. Death is no trivial matter for any group of individuals but if I am going to get animated and campaign for their health then it has to be an 'across the board' health warning and service for everyone.

I'm happy to be a card carrying member of the liberal minded, feel good sisterhood, if I need to be labelled by those who see it all diferently, but in fact all I really am is an open minded individual who has no axe to grind with anyone who has never done me any harm. Live and let love, I think I said way back at the start of this thread.

Christmas is rapidly coming... is "Good will to all Men (and Women to be inclusive, liberal and fair ;-)   )" to remain some distant dream?

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 12:06 PM

Amos ...as always you are one of the few here who confines himself to addressing the issues, but you dont seem to have grasped the parallel I was making.

I'm rushing out now, but as there doesn't seem to be anybody else deserving of a responce, I'll get back to you as soon as I can.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 12:13 PM

Indeed ... none of us is deserving of a responce ...

I wonder which word has been misspelled

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 12:56 PM

". . . there doesn't seem to be anybody else deserving of a responce [sic]. . . ."

Translation:   I don't have a response, so I will simply ignore and hope nobody notices.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 02:36 PM

Even better- the lack of response is a very loud response in itself.
Or maybe he really does not have time to type YES or NO.
Now *that* is a busy fellow.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 02:45 PM

"The bee is such a busy soul,
It has no time for birth control.
And that is why, in times like these,
There are so many Sons of bees."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 04:41 PM

Hi gang....just got back and I know you've been fretting, so what is there to answer.....hmmm abuse.....oh yes some foul language....more abuse.....bullshit from Don n' Lox (didn't I see that duo play together one time?)....Oh my god! TIA is a woman...now that's a surprise......I woulda never guessed..honest! and I fancy myself as a bit of an expert.

Well TIA, as I am always the gentleman, I will attempt to answer your question.

If a vaccine against aids were to be developed, I would be pleased that lives were being saved, but the fact that we had developed a vaccine, would not make homosexual practice safe or healthy; we would simply be controlling the RESULTS of some the unhealthy physical aspects of homosexuality, and ignoring others like associated psychiatric problems etc.

BTW....I have never "Opposed homosexual relationships", that is for homosexuals themselves to come to terms with.
If they wish to live a lifestyle withall its associated risks that is their own business.

Right from the beginning, I have opposed the promotion of homosexuality by politicians and activists, as a safe, healthy and normal lifestyle. This includes the legalisation of homosexual marriage and the fostering of young children by male homosexuals.


Now, when is someone going to answer my question regarding homosexuality, incest, and civil rights???

Its rather like saying, if prostitutes were guaranteed free from STD's prostitution would be acceptable

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 04:51 PM

Sorry...something went wrong with my eyesight!!

Hi gang....just got back and I know you've been fretting, so what is there to answer.....hmmm abuse.....oh yes some foul language....more abuse.....bullshit from Don n' Lox (didn't I see that duo play together one time?)....Oh my god! TIA is a woman...now that's a surprise......I woulda never guessed..honest! and I fancy myself as a bit of an expert.

Well TIA, as I am always the gentleman, I will attempt to answer your question.

If a vaccine against aids were to be developed, I would be pleased that lives were being saved, but the fact that we had developed a vaccine, would not make homosexual practice safe or healthy; we would simply be controlling the RESULTS of some the unhealthy physical aspects of homosexuality, and ignoring others like associated psychiatric problems etc.
Its rather like saying, if prostitutes were guaranteed free from STD's prostitution would be acceptable!



BTW....I have never "Opposed homosexual relationships", that is for homosexuals themselves to come to terms with.
If they wish to live a lifestyle with all its associated risks that is their own business.

Right from the beginning, I have opposed the promotion of homosexuality by politicians and activists, as a safe, healthy and normal lifestyle. This includes the legalisation of homosexual marriage and the fostering of young children by male homosexuals.


Now, when is someone going to answer my question regarding homosexuality, incest, and civil rights???

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jeri
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 05:01 PM

One of the lowest 'risk' groups is lesbians, and they're homosexual.
What this says to me is that if you have sex with a man, you're at risk. If you have sex with a lot of men, you have a lot of risk.

It's not homosexuals who are the problem, it's men.

Granted, if you only have sex with one man, and you're both negative, it doesn't matter who puts what where.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 05:07 PM

"I too think homosexuality is repugnant,against nature and based on psychological problems. ... the answer is to turn away and let the homosexuals get on with their lives,but unfortunatly this is getting harder and harder to achieve, as "gay culture " ouzes from every media orifice with all its nasty innuendo,like little boys behind the bike shed and god help anyone who tries to stop them."

Hmmmm. I wonder who could have written this?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 05:13 PM

I don't see anything in Ake's arguments that constitute a strong point against same-sex marriage. If he's really concerned with sexually transmitted diseases, one would think that reducing promiscuity by encouraging stable, monogamous relationships would help that a great deal, hence the argument for same-sex marriage with all the legal benefits and protections thereof.

By arguing against same-sex marriage, Ake contradicts his claim that he is concerned with reducing HIV/AIDs. By wanting to deny it to same-sex couples, he encourages promiscuity.

Don Firth

P. S. Now watch him writhe and twist and call me names.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 05:13 PM

Just stick to the issues Ebbie!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 05:14 PM

First, you will definitely need to rely upon your fancied expertise to know whether I am literally a member of the "feel good sisterhood" that you lumped me into.

Second, that was a very good stab at an answer. Thanks.

However, I still disagree that you are purely looking out for the welfare of homosexuals. Jeri's post is a good example of why your assertion can't possibly be the entire story. Here is another: the highest rate of HIV in the world is in Swaziland. Here, due to culture, there is absolutely no (open) homosexual community or meeting places. Transmission is almost exclusively through heterosexual intercourse.

So, would you support (for health reasons of course) the banning of heterosexual relationships in Swaziland?

This is not a clever trap. Call it a consistency check.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 05:23 PM

Be fair Tia, I would be interested in your response to my question.

And I did not lump you into the "sisterhood"....and not only because I though you were a man!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 05:29 PM

"...prostitution would be acceptable!"

In some places, it is. (Holland, for example)(at least, the last I heard)

Prostitution, like homosexuality, is a problem when people do stupid things while indulging, and these are what get the headlines. I indulge in neither, but life has been such that I never had the need or desire. BOTH have a long history in human societies...(ancient Greece, etc.)

I'm afraid, ake, that you are unlikely to convince many that your main concern is really health. You may BE quite concerned about health, but it always feels as though you began with strong moral and social objections and have resorted to health concerns to justify them. That is the kind of attitude that is not always even obvious to those holding it. Can I state this with absolute certainty? Of course not.
All I can do is attempt to show counter-examples to some of your claims and recognize that human rights should apply even when many don't **like** who is getting them.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 05:36 PM

First, for the record (which is right here BTW):

---------snip------------

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 17 Dec 09 - 05:39 PM

Bill ...Homosexual relationships are objectionable mainly due to the health risks which come with homosexual practice.
I dont care in the least what Don T, Don Frith,Lox,Tia,or any of the "feel good sisterhood think of me,and certainly don't worry about them geing "on my case". If I found them in agreement with my opinions, then I would really worry!

---------snip------------

Second, yes, I will answer your question right away. In the swirl, I am not sure what it is, so please pose again.

Thanks.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 05:36 PM

Right Jeri, I think I agree with that... it is indeed men who are the problem, in homosexuality and in child sex abuse.

I have always made that clear in any discussions here.

Two men are an infinitely more dangerous sexual grouping than a man and a woman for many reasons, some of which i have listed earlier in this thread.

And what is the name for an exclusively male sexual grouping?......That's right....homosexuality.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 05:38 PM

"Two men are an infinitely more dangerous sexual grouping than a man and a woman"

Not in Swaziland.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jeri
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 05:52 PM

And what is the name for an exclusively male sexual grouping?......That's right....homosexuality.

Homosexual means same-sex, and they don't have to be men. I'm pretty sure you're scorn/bigotry/icky feelings are only related to male homosexuals though.

What kills me about this thread, and most threads involving anything do do with homosexuals is how fast people let themselves get shoved into their respective roles and how fast polarization happens and how easily the subject of the thread is twisted into the same old/same old. Homotextuality.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 05:56 PM

Ake, what, intrinsically, makes two men "an infinitely more dangerous sexual grouping than a man and a woman?"

I know three male same-sex couples personally and I see nothing "infinitely more dangerous" about them that any male-female couples or female-female couples I know.

What do you mean, "dangerous?"

It sounds to me like you're trying to drag out the dead horse of "spontaneous generation" again.

And, yes, I expect an answer to this question.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 06:14 PM

On the original thread name..."Death penalty for homosexuals".

I have just learned that the death penalty is being called for in cases of "homosexual rape, when the perpretator is aware that he is hiv positive".

A private members bill has been presented to the Ugandan govt and is at present being debated.

This is simply a point of information, so don't draw any inferences.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 06:16 PM

Wrong Tia......Anywhere

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 06:24 PM

Are the "sisterhood" all dead from the neck up?

The health figures for lesbians are on a par with heteros.
The promiscuity figures, no of sexual partners, average length of relationships are all very good.

I can never understand why they continue to ally themselves with male homosexuality which seems to contradict everything they believe in.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 06:26 PM

Answers to my question please......in a sealed envelope if you would prefer!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 06:42 PM

""Just stick to the issues Ebbie!""

If the post Ebbie quoted came from you Ake, I'd say she was bang on the point.

That post is an example of a particularly nasty kind of bigotry, and if it is yours, it shows the mendacity of your high moral stance on the subject of health risk.

You may not give a damn about what I say, but you can't stop me from being right, while you continue to drip this kind of toxic venom into every thread concerning gays.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 06:43 PM

Hehehehehe... in a sealed envelope?

Just thought I would check in and read the last few posts. Seems like youse are still poking each other without coming to a climax. A lot of useless foreplay IMO.

Too bad. I mean, youse can get your asses WAY up in the air on either side of the issue but the fact of the matter is this... gay ain't goin away. It's a fact of life.

See ya next week.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 06:55 PM

Tia...You've misread my post.....or my punctuation's up the creek.

I'm afraid it's worse than you thought, I lumped(and I mean lumped)you in with Lox n'the two Dons....my sincerest apologies!:0).

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 08:51 PM

Ake, you haven't answered my question.

What, intrinsically, makes two men "an infinitely more dangerous sexual grouping than a man and a woman?"

And no, I am not a member of a "sisterhood" and I am not dead from the neck up. I'm perfectly aware, as are all of those here whom you try to denegrate with your insults, that you are simply anti-homosexual, and all your humanitarian-sounding concern for the health of gays is nothing more than a smokescreen for your blatant prejudice.

So--answer my question. If you have any kind of answer.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Joybringer
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 08:58 PM

I see Former Wales and Lions captain Gareth Thomas has just annouced he has a charm to cure piles.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 18 Dec 09 - 10:08 PM

Yeah. Piles can be a real pain in the ass. . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 19 Dec 09 - 07:36 AM

Why do people always assume that gay men are all into having anal sex? So many are not.

As for rugby... that's the game where men play with funny shaped balls isn't it? ;-)

---

One thing is for sure, trying desperately to get back on topic: hanging someone for their sexuality is most definitely bad for their health so that is reason enough to campaign it never happens. State sanctioned murder is still murder :-(

Being gay, whether by choice or by birth (and I believe it to be the latter) should never be a crime.

---

I did a search on t'internet for the "feel good sisterhood" but could find no statistics at all as to who is a member or how many there are. I guess that will be one of the great unknowns, however, I do think it's probably genetic ;-)

Have a great weekend everyone

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: TIA
Date: 19 Dec 09 - 07:47 AM

ake -
If you want an answer to your question, you need to ask it :)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Dec 09 - 08:45 AM

"P. S. Now watch him writhe and twist and call me names."

He should be so lucky??

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Dec 09 - 01:34 PM

Tia baby....I already asked twice.

I never ask three times, I just hit the road.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 19 Dec 09 - 04:11 PM

Amos never got back, about that 'curable' part of his post....so if you'd do that, I'll answer your last question of four, and give you something rather unique(too bad), and rather higher, to think about.

Everybody's haggling over the overt 'symptoms'(as Amos may be referring to), but there's something else, way deeper to go into, that I betcha dollars to doughnuts, that our 'esteemed, and agenda-sponsored' study groups never even considered, as to looking for a 'cause', and the Christian 'Right', completely overlooks, and the liberal,'any new trend to shock the mainstream, for a further radical statement group', never occurred to them, and frankly a lot of small minded people, including politicos...well its more than likely, out of their intellectual reach.

In the article I posted, regarding the lesbian fight over custody, in which one of the lesbians 'renounced' homosexuality, and the Dr. Cohen link that I posted, and the fact that I know two ex-homosexual males, and three ex-lesbians, I found the last part of Amos' link interesting....and so very shortly afterwords, I find everyone squabbling again, and the dialogues got.....ummmm......small? All the scientists in the article, admit, that one thing discounts another, or if the other thing has something to do with it, that eliminates the other possibility..and yet, you rocket scientist geniuses, are duking it out with each other, like your experts, while the homosexuals are trying to justify their existence!....Well, if that sounds too harsh, think it through a little further.....and the straight supporters, not knowing the cause either, are supporting something they admittedly know very little about..like, THE CAUSE, and therefore, the end EFFECT, both on the individual homosexual, or society at large......Doesn't it seem logical to know 'lots' of things about something before you get so vehement about it..one way or another???

So, while waiting for Amos, to clarify himself, and there is no 'trick or loaded' question or answer, I'd love to move forward...maybe rock the researchers, while we're at it. Some of you may be 'rocked' as well, instead of just stoned', (just thought I'd throw that in for good measure).

Anyway, here is something to amuse yourselves with, though so truthful that it is, it's exactly what's going on, in this thread, whenever the 'opinion-cats', get a hold of something. Might be worth some self examination. You may have heard it before, but read it through again thoughtfully. Imagine, one unemployed musician, one political expert, one news announcer, one homosexual, one ordinary guy, and one psychiatrist(BTW, I'm not a psychiatrist), having and 'astute' conversation.........(Enjoy)

John Godfrey Saxe's ( 1816-1887) version of the famous Indian legend,


It was six men of Indostan
To learning much inclined,
Who went to see the Elephant
(Though all of them were blind),
That each by observation
Might satisfy his mind.

The First approach'd the Elephant,
And happening to fall
Against his broad and sturdy side,
At once began to bawl:
"God bless me! but the Elephant
Is very like a wall!"

The Second, feeling of the tusk,
Cried, -"Ho! what have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me 'tis mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant
Is very like a spear!"

The Third approached the animal,
And happening to take
The squirming trunk within his hands,
Thus boldly up and spake:
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a snake!"

The Fourth reached out his eager hand,
And felt about the knee.
"What most this wondrous beast is like
Is mighty plain," quoth he,
"'Tis clear enough the Elephant
Is very like a tree!"

The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear,
Said: "E'en the blindest man
Can tell what this resembles most;
Deny the fact who can,
This marvel of an Elephant
Is very like a fan!"

The Sixth no sooner had begun
About the beast to grope,
Then, seizing on the swinging tail
That fell within his scope,
"I see," quoth he, "the Elephant
Is very like a rope!"

And so these men of Indostan
Disputed loud and long,
Each in his own opinion
Exceeding stiff and strong,
Though each was partly in the right,
And all were in the wrong!

MORAL.

So oft in theologic wars,
The disputants, I ween,
Rail on in utter ignorance
Of what each other mean,
And prate about an Elephant
Not one of them has seen!


With Smiling Regards,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 19 Dec 09 - 04:43 PM

"I too think homosexuality is repugnant,against nature and based on psychological problems. ... the answer is to turn away and let the homosexuals get on with their lives,but unfortunatly this is getting harder and harder to achieve, as "gay culture " ouzes from every media orifice with all its nasty innuendo,like little boys behind the bike shed and god help anyone who tries to stop them."

Hmmmm. I wonder who could have written this?



Thanks Ebbie,

I think it has reached the point where this loathesome leopard has his spots exposed for all to see.


He claims now to care for Gay peoples welfare.


But as you have shown with this quote his motives are a long way from that point.


I've had enough of him myself, but I'm right behind you all the way.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 19 Dec 09 - 04:44 PM

ake,
The only question you pose in any post that contains the word incest is;
"If homosexuality was still deemed to be illegal by a bunch of corrupt politicians, would you still be saying that you were in favour of "gay" marriage?"
yes.

There ya go, now quit crying about nobody answering your question.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Dec 09 - 05:27 PM

Well Tia, that answer opens up another question, why don't you complain about the infringement of the "rights" of other sexual minorities?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 19 Dec 09 - 05:34 PM

"Well Tia, that answer opens up another question, why don't you complain about the infringement of the "rights" of other sexual minorities?"

Like who?

Are you implying Paedophiles?

(of course - I keep forgetting - homosexuals are all paedphiles deep down too.)


Ake do you know what the term "mutual consent" means?

No ... never mind ...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 19 Dec 09 - 06:15 PM

And why do you *not* care quite so deeply about the health of Swazis ?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 19 Dec 09 - 07:10 PM

OH WAAAAA! Quit bickering.......JEEZ!.., talk about sucking someone into a emotionally immature argument!..Let's be small!

Amos, you around?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 19 Dec 09 - 07:16 PM

It's beginning to look a lot like Christmas . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 19 Dec 09 - 07:23 PM

Ake made a statement some time back, claiming that two men make "an infinitely more dangerous sexual grouping than a man and a woman."

When someone makes a statement like this, it is expected by any rational person that they have a reason or some kind of data to back it up. I have asked Ake the same question several times now:

What, intrinsically, makes two men "an infinitely more dangerous sexual grouping than a man and a woman?"

Yet, Ake simply blows right by it, ignoring the question. It seems that he considers me and a couple of other people not worth answering. And why might that be? Because we have the nasty habit of zeroing right it on the foundations of why he thinks the way he does, and he knows that if he tries to defend his position, it will reveal that he can't give a reasonable sounding answer that won't make his bigotry and prejudice obvious for all to see.

Even him!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 19 Dec 09 - 07:25 PM

Anyone for a rousing chorus of "Joy to the World"?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 19 Dec 09 - 08:26 PM

...don we now our gay apparel fa la la la la la la la la

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 19 Dec 09 - 08:28 PM

TIA;"......don we now our gay apparel fa la la la la la la la la"

Or come as you are...(wink)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 19 Dec 09 - 11:47 PM

Sorry, I have been on the road all day, and just got back. GfS, I am not sure what it is you are asking me about but I will have to re-read the back-thread in the morning.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 04:27 AM

Sure thing..Hope you had a good road.
Regards,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 07:13 AM

Hi Sanity.....I know you are right, we should be looking at causes and effects....and trying to understand why things have got so confrontational....and trying to encourage people to accept the need for a worldwide medical inquiry into hiv/aids and male homosexuality.

but it's difficult to keep focused, when trying to defend your stance faced by a baying mob.

Most people in that situation tend to fall back into a default mode of "one liners" and point scoring.
I'll try to do better......Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 07:16 AM

"Most people in that situation tend to fall back into a default mode of "one liners" and point scoring."

Some even descend to answering questions, providing evidence and in some cases maintaining a consistent position.

But you wouldn't Catch Ake stooping as low as that.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 07:23 AM

Now this is funny!

    ROFL

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Elspeth
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 07:47 AM

Concerning LGBTIQ: I know the T and I are not to do with sexual orientation...I put them in because I feel there is a lot of uncertainty around their rights in the same way as there has been with homosexuality.

Also, I may be late in making this comment, but I feel when people bring christianity into this coul they please...I don;t know...specify something like fundamentalists? because I know a LOT of people, myself included, who are actually christians and what a christian ought to be instead of predjudiced fundamentalists giving the rest of us a bad name. Also as you can probably tell I have no problem with homosexuality....may have something to do with having been very in love with a girl for most of my teens...maybe =)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 07:47 AM

"I too think homosexuality is repugnant,against nature and based on psychological problems. ... the answer is to turn away and let the homosexuals get on with their lives,but unfortunatly this is getting harder and harder to achieve, as "gay culture " ouzes from every media orifice with all its nasty innuendo,like little boys behind the bike shed and god help anyone who tries to stop them."

Hmmmm. I wonder who could have written this?

This post has been extensively cut in a typical "hatchet job" by one of the most devious posters on the forum, but I stand by all my remarks even tho' they were made many years ago.

In common with the vast majority of heteros (if they were being honest) I find homosexual practice repugnant, this does not mean I think they deserve to die from what shoul be a very preventable disease. Also, even given all the shit about fruit flies and penguins, the practice is "against nature", as the primary purpose of "nature" is to facilitate procreation of every species. The link with homosexuality and psychiatric problems is well documented.

Homosexuality can't be banned, and criminalising it is on a par with criminalising depression or substance addiction, so I am in favour of letting homosexuals get on with their lives in private, as long as the appropriate health education is provided.
The promotion of homosexual culture by the media and "liberal" ideology does make this course more difficult.

In conclusion, Ebbie leaves out the agreement with my "repugnance" remark, by one of the more thoughtful contributers to this thread, who is in favour of "Gay marriage" etc.....Miss Tomahawk indeed!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Elspeth
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 07:57 AM

Although it irks me no end, I have to say that the comment "I find homosexual _practice_ repugnant" is actually a valid comment...I mean it works the other way around. I have a heterophobic lesbian friend who actually feels nauseous at the idea of heterosxual "practice"

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 08:04 AM

Ah....another honest poster! Welcome Elsie that's four of us already.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 08:49 AM

Hello again Elspeth :-)

I think in many ways we may be luckier in the UK as the law is lots more specific and clearer in many areas to do with all discriminations. Alas, many of our laws are also 'tag ons' whereby an initial law has been passed and then they have added groups into it as laws have changed. They do try though and I think the UK probably is quite good with it all. That said, it does not and will not stop people disagreeing with others having 'equal' rights. I guess it's a human thing? That confusion you mention still abides in abundance but is getting lots better here.

What you say about Christians is quite right too. And other 'people of religion' (other religions). Most just want to practice their faith without being vehement or upsetting anyone else on various topics. Indeed, the vast majority of folks I know who have a faith and religion actually preach a message of love for all, live and let live, judge yea not, etc. This has changed a lot too in my lifetime as people have become more open minded and educated as to other's lives. Fundamentalism, in most things, is often a far cry from that being carried out by the majority of followers.

Fighting for rights and existance is so complicated :-(

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 09:01 AM

I think you are right in our being luckier in the UK...of course there are a lot of things that aren't right, and as you say many of our laws are indeed "tag ons" which is a shame. But overall, yes I think it's dealt with well.
It probably is a human thing...it wouldn't be normal for everyone to agree.

Exactly, there is a lot of confusion of 'faith' with 'religion'. People who have faith should of course be free to practise their religion, but there is a lot of religion without true faith that tends to be all about the achaic practices and NOT "love for all". Which, by the way, I heartily agree with as the most important message/practice.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Elspeth
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 09:02 AM

That was me btw, the previous post.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 09:17 AM

Elspeth, sorry... my post and reply blanked out so I am putting in another if someone can remove the blank.

I fear your Guest reply may disappear too so I have made a note below of your anwer to keep it on the forum :-)

I look forward to the day we can all be friends and have respect. It is a dream, I know, but I can dream wondering what it would be like. I think it is healthy for people to disagree on a lot of things. I would certainly not want a cloned society, but respect and education must be high on the list toward achieving peace in the end :-)

mp

Elspeth wrote "I think you are right in our being luckier in the UK...of course there are a lot of things that aren't right, and as you say many of our laws are indeed "tag ons" which is a shame. But overall, yes I think it's dealt with well.
It probably is a human thing...it wouldn't be normal for everyone to agree.

Exactly, there is a lot of confusion of 'faith' with 'religion'. People who have faith should of course be free to practise their religion, but there is a lot of religion without true faith that tends to be all about the achaic practices and NOT "love for all". Which, by the way, I heartily agree with as the most important message/practice"

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Elspeth
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 10:42 AM

Yes, it's not about all agreeing on the matter is it? It's about having respect for eachother. I certainly have friends that disagree with me on subjects that could be considered hugely important, but as it is I get on with the people they are, and don't bother myself that their ideals are perhaps different to my own.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Bill D
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 10:46 AM

"...the primary purpose of "nature" is to facilitate procreation of every species."

Nature doesn't have a 'purpose' in the sense we mean it. Evolution DOES work in such a way that procreation is usually assured. That is sort of automatic, or we wouldn't be here, but 'nature' produces many variations on the theme which don't affect the procreation aspect. Perhaps there's some 'purpose' in that also.

I DO know that when I was still in my teens, and saw some of those good-looking gay guys, I was quietly relieved that they were not competing with ME for girl friends.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 11:20 AM

"I DO know that when I was still in my teens, and saw some of those good-looking gay guys, I was quietly relieved that they were not competing with ME for girl friends"

The subject of gay men and the women that 'love' them could be a whole thread in itself. So many women will still fancy a gay man even if they know he is gay. Being gay does not stop them being attractive.

We used to say things like "All the decent men are either already married or gay" and, while not factually correct, many women find gay men make excellent friends because sex is taken out of the equation. It's a very relaxing relationship that is fun, friendly, loving and safe. Some men do not like their wives/girfriends talking to other men but would not get upset if it was a gay man at all. So they, too, feel unthreatened by the relationship. Gay men (and I am generalising) really treat you wonderful, are great conversationalists, know how to have a fun time, are not interested in you sexually, and can dance ;-)   Forgive any stereotyping. This has just been my own experience. Any other women out there agree?

We are getting into a "When Harry Met Sally" type thing here, I know, but I do actually belive that men and women can have platonic friendships where sex does not raise its head. Being friends with a gay man (men) just takes it a step further and there is no threat percieved at all from sex. Do other women feel the same way? I know most of my females friends do. This is not a slight on straight men in any way, but there is just something I cannot define that is intrinsic with a female-gay male friendship. For the record I have nothing against straight guys trying to date lol

So, I suspect that while you were grateful that the gay men were not competing directly that you still actually came across women who were nonetheless attracted to those same men?

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 11:35 AM

Procreation f every species is certainly one of the major dynamic vectors of life, but I wouldn't attribute to "a purpose", beyond it being an inherent struggle by every organism. Postulating it as an "assigned attribute" is what you might call a "Blind Watchmaker" argument.

The trouble is that it seems, in general terms, homosexuals are uninterested in "marriage" or monogamy(Ake)

Ake, this is an outrageous assertion when you look at how hard large portions of the gay community are trying to get the right to legalize their monogamous relationships. Maybe you've just been exposed to the "young buck" section of the population, of the type who lead risky lives no matter what their sexual orientation.

GfS: I asked if you thought homosexuality was reversible or cureable. That doesn't mean I think it is a disease, but that I was curious whether you do and whether or not in your view it is remediable. i think it is not, outside of reincarnating in the correct body type.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 11:51 AM

Devious:
1. departing from the most direct way; circuitous; indirect: a devious course.
2. without definite course; vagrant: a devious current.
3. departing from the proper or accepted way; roundabout: a devious procedure.
4. not straightforward; shifty or crooked: a devious scheme to acquire wealth.

It is true that I prefer the stiletto over the bludgeon or even the hatchet - it is less messy and just as efficient.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ake: "This post has been extensively cut in a typical "hatchet job" by one of the most devious posters on the forum, but I stand by all my remarks even tho' they were made many years ago."

No so, my slippery friend. Here is the ENTIRE post:

"I must give my support to "cruiser"in this thread. He has had the courage to say what many of us feel about homosexuality, but are too intimidated by the politically correct "Gay"pressure group.
I too think homosexuality is repugnant,against nature and based on psychological problems.
"Cruiser says the answer is to turn away and let the homosexuals get on with their lives,but unfortunatly this is getting harder and harder to achieve, as "gay culture " ouzes from every media orifice,
with all its nasty innuendo,like little boys behind the bike shed
and god help anyone who tries to stop them....Ake
PS At least folk music seems to be pretty clear of this scourge.
Just shows what well adjusted ,sensible hetros we are."

Feel better now? Incidentally, even though it "was many years ago" (2004), does this mean that you have changed your views?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 11:51 AM

Almost everything we do as animals has a) survival, or b) reproductive reasons behind it. We have to survive to sexual maturity in order to procreate in other words. When we look at almost all we do there is some strategy tying in a, b or and and b above... until we come to homosexuality. That then seems to fly in the face of evolution and procreation. BUT most animal groups display homosexuality and that it continues to survive in the gene pool it must have some evolutionary advantage ultimately linked to a and b above.

Of course gay people actually do reproduce so as to why the genes continue is not so hard to answer as to what the evolutionary advatage is of homosexuality in nature. That said, many homosexuals never reach sexual maturity because of hate deaths and suicides :-(

One train of thought is a kind of 'keeping you hand in' approach to reproduction and the fact that humans developed pleasurable orgasms means anything that gives that pleasure will be utilised. There are as many ideas as for why it happens as there are detractors of it being evolutionary. That it exists, and will likely continue to exist, is without doubt really.

I found a short precis type idea which expalins some ideas. Hope it is of help.

What_is_the_scientific_explanation_for_homosexual_behavior


The thread is going a little off topic and I apologise for my part in that already

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 12:11 PM

Ake's most recent post states:

"I am in favour of letting homosexuals get on with their lives in private, as long as the appropriate health education is provided."

I see.

So now you're line has evolved to a point where you are saying the same thing that is being ... er ... "promoted" in schools.

... oh no ... one thing missing ...

that homosexuals deserve the same civil rights as everyone else.

In other words, that homosexuals should not be discriminated against.



2 key points here Ake that you may dick to avoid as much as you like but that this thread has come down to.


1. Have you changed your view of homosexuals since 2004?

2. Do you agree or disagree with discrimination against homosexuals.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 03:50 PM

Amos dear boy, dont be so shocked....See here, the Williams Institute,UCLA School of Law, have found the take up figures for homosexual marriage to be exceedingly low...about 5 new homosexual marriages to 1000 new heterosexual marriages.

Why So Few? Looking at what we know about same-sex marriage
By Stanley Kurtz
National Review Online
June 5, 2006

Why have so few gays chosen to marry? A new study by Maggie Gallagher's Institute for Marriage and Public Policy (iMAPP) estimates that, in countries that legally recognize same-sex unions, typically between 1 percent and 5 percent of gays and lesbians have entered into a same-sex marriage. Obviously, that is a very low number. Much of the argument for gay marriage turns on the claim that same-sex couples need the cultural, legal, and economic benefits of marriage. Yet if only a small number of gays actually marry, the practical impact of the change on gays themselves would be minimal.

The fundamental purpose of marriage is to encourage mothers and fathers to maintain stable families for the children they create. It would be a mistake to undercut that purpose by redefining marriage, whatever the take-up rate for same-sex unions. Yet, for those receptive to arguments for same-sex marriage, the case for this reform would be greatly weakened if it turned out that only a few gays actually marry.

And there's more at stake than numbers. Since the "conservative case" for same-sex marriage holds that marriage will import a more conservative ethos to the gay community, we need to know something besides how many same-sex couples actually marry. If substantial numbers of gay couples take advantage of the legal benefits of marriage, while simultaneously rejecting traditional marital norms (like monogamy), that would greatly weaken the "conservative case" for same-sex marriage.

Despite the few short years formal same-sex marriage has been available, we can now offer some preliminary answers to questions about why so few gays marry, and how those gays who have married understand their unions. The iMAPP study covered only countries that have formal same-sex marriage, with data going back, at most, five years (for the Netherlands). Yet a turn to Scandinavia provides a fuller story. A series of recent empirical studies on Scandinavian registered partnerships have made available a fascinating body of data about a same-sex partnership system that has been in existence for 17 years in Denmark, 13 years in Norway, and 12 years in Sweden (19 years if we go back to the same-sex unions Sweden created in 1987).

The new studies show that after nearly two decades of Scandinavian registered partnerships, only a very small number of gays have actually entered legal unions. And there are clear indications are that even many couples who have registered may be doing so more for legal benefits than because they aspire to traditional marital norms. In short, there are now clear signs that same-sex marriage is not working the way its defenders claim it should, even for gays.

Complete article

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Elspeth
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 04:07 PM

I'm sorry, but there being a low take up on gay marriages does not mean that it ought'n't be legal for those who choose to. Many heterosexuals decide not to marry, or remain "living together" for many years, even their entire lives, why shouldn't the gay population have the same reasons for staying unmarried? Some people in striahgt relationships live together and have children together and consider themselves lifelong parteners and still do not marry. I think this is a personal choice (though a slightly odd one) and everyone should have their pick.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Bill D
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 04:17 PM

To answer mauvepink... sure, I know that 'some' women were attracted to gay guys, but whatever relationships *I* saw were usually just friendship. It was kinda rare for that to interfere with women also wanting straight BFs.
(sometimes having a gay friend allowed a woman to go places and do things and feel safe from being hit on by other guys. I knew a couple of gay guys who often acted as escorts for women friends at a bar or something.)

Oh... and I knew several people of BOTH sexes who were quite bi-sexual. It never seemed like a conflict and they didn't make a big deal out of it...it was just 'known'.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 04:23 PM

Agreed Elsie, but Amos did accuse me of an "outrageous assertion" in stating...."The trouble is that it seems, in general terms, homosexuals are uninterested in "marriage" or monogamy".

My link makes it clear that my assertion was quite correct.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Elspeth
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 04:33 PM

I think it's a generation thing...no offence of course, but most people gay people I know of my generation do want to settle down. The gay people far more than the straight! Almost as if to prove that being gay isn;t something dirty, just a fact and not making them promiscuous in a way...and actually a lot of the gay people I know are fair more honourable (dating wise) than the straight ones.

I know a LOT of bi peoploe, myslef included her, that get very angry when it's implied that most bisexuals are just promiscuous when I can tell you honestly that I have never cheated or slept around nor do I have any intention of doing so and I am most _definately_ attracted to both sexes.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 04:55 PM

I think I should make it clear, that I am referring to male homosexuals in health issues and promiscuity.

The figures for lesbians are as good or sometimes better than heteros.

Can you clarify something for me? what is the proper way to describe a woman who is sexually attracted to other women exclusively.
I always thought the word homosexual described a man sexually attracted to men?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 05:06 PM

Ebbie...I haven't changed my views and have explained them pretty clearly above.

Oh BTW...the next time you get your "stiletto" out of the woodpile, make sure you get it plumb between your victims shoulder blades....I think the old eye to hand co-ordination may be going..:0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 05:23 PM

Well, it's been awhile, and I notice that Mr. Snide, who simply ignores questions that he can't answer or doesn't answer because it would reveal too much about the basis of his attitudes and beliefs, has not answered the question I posed some time back.

What, intrinsically, makes two men "an infinitely more dangerous sexual grouping than a man and a woman?"

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 05:33 PM

While scrolling through the thread, to get caught up, I caught this, from mauvepink's link, the very first sentence,..now pay attention!......"This question asks for scientific explanations rather than religious or moralistic answers.
Unfortunately, there is not yet a conclusive study which tell us exactly what causes homosexuality."

Isn't that EXACTLY WHAT I SAID???!!!

And to Ake, Homosexuality refers to sex with the SAME gender, either male to male or female to female...not exclusively to men.

Okay, We are having some company arriving very shortly. Being as the thread is now 'discussing the issues a little deeper, and delving into the moralistic, religious, psychological, and the scientific aspects of this, getting back on, will be among my top priorities!! Because there is a lot more to share with you, and hopefully you may all be receptive, because somebody's missing something, by just looking at one aspect!!..Remember the story I posted, of the 'Blind Men and the Elephant'!!...If not, re-read that post carefully...and hopefully understanding,and open mindedness will prevail.....because if WE, as musicians fall into the trap that has everyone squabbling, we are no better, and have NOTHING to say. It wasn't always that way. Years before, it was the musicians and particularly the 'folkies' that had a LOT to say, and we made a difference! We can't just fall back, remembering those times, and think that we still do, just because WE ONCE DID!! There was a time that we were the thinkers, not the followers.Perhaps we should 'wise up' and be the thinkers, once again, and stop chanting symptomatic mantras of disinformation and politics, that limit science, instead of expanding it!!!...or co-opting it!!!!
With Much Regards,and Hope,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 05:35 PM

I guess this person, referred to as 'Mr. Snide' cross posted. Don, lighten up, you might miss something.........AGAIN!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Elspeth
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 05:43 PM

well Ake, I was going to provide a definition of homosexual, but that's already been provided acurately. However some other terms might be useful. Gay is now generally used to mean male homosexuals however in it's original use in connection with homosexuality it was used to refer to all of it...much as one could use the word "queer" nowadays, although some people find that offensive. for the record when I say "gay" I mean anything _not_ heterosexual.

I was thinking about the question of male promiscuity...the most obvious thing that can be drawn form this is that men are, in general, mnore promiscuous. It is also more acceptable for them to be. They might be called a player possibly...but no one will really accuse them of sleeping around or any of the unpleasant names that come with that. So it stands to reason that in a lot of situations two men will not form a permanent relationship, because it is more natural for them not too. However there are some permanent relationships, possibly because of the more feminine side present in a lot of gay men.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 05:57 PM

Apologies... I never put my name on so I guess the previous will dump itself at some point?

Here it is again....


Thanks for that Bill. I think there is a great deal in what you say as sometimes having a male partner to a function does cut down on attentions. It makes perfect sense and, of course, gay men often love mixed company in any case :-)

Elspeth, I have heard all sorts of arguments about bi men and women. Being greedy, fence sitters, can't make their minds up, etc etc. But what people do not realise is that for those whose bisexuality is not all about sex (and most genuine relationships are of the heart and not just sex) then they face the same obstacles as straight people. Finding the 'right one' no matter the gender. Being bi often means being a person lover in that you do not care what genotals a PERSON has as long as they have something that is good between the ears and in their hearts that each can relate to. What most people forget is that bi folk, while maybe doubling a chance of a relationship, also double the chance of getting their heart broken :-(

akenaton... loving the same gender is homosexuality, no matter the gender, but over time homosexual seems to have become to mean exclusively male. In fact it is male or female. Thus...

homosexual [,hEUmEU's*lksjUEl or ,hQm-] noun
    1 a person who is sexually attracted to members of the same sex

adjective
    2 of or relating to homosexuals or homosexuality

    3 of or relating to the same sex Compare heterosexual

Lesbian, on the other hand, is exclusively female. Before then they were tribades or friccatrices.

Hope this helps

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Elspeth
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 06:16 PM

thank you mauvepink! I agree exactly with that statement about being bisexual! so many people don't realise that for the majority of people that are truly bi, it is indeed all about the person. But gees, the number of time I got called greedy was _almost_ funny. Particularly as when I came out at 15 I had only really dated one boy and one girl and never slept with anyone. Ignorant people are so capable of cruelty.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 06:27 PM

""What you say about Christians is quite right too. And other 'people of religion' (other religions). Most just want to practice their faith without being vehement or upsetting anyone else on various topics.""

Which of course is exactly what most homosexuals would want, and what they should be able to do, were it not for the interference occasioned as a result of fundamentalists trying to relegate them to some lesser status than themselves.

I never cease to marvel at the number of different fears that seem to afflict religious zealots, but, given the choice of allaying their fears, or protecting the civil and legal rights of those they fear.....well, I've made my position plain.

I have no truck with bigots of whatever stripe. I look down on no man, and I look up only to a carefully chosen few.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 06:59 PM

""The fundamental purpose of marriage is to encourage mothers and fathers to maintain stable families for the children they create. It would be a mistake to undercut that purpose by redefining marriage, whatever the take-up rate for same-sex unions. Yet, for those receptive to arguments for same-sex marriage, the case for this reform would be greatly weakened if it turned out that only a few gays actually marry.""

Once again a comment which is not germane to the issue.

1. Exactly how would permitting same sex marriage "undercut" the nature or function, or the "fundamental purpose" of heterosexual marriage?

That statement is arrant nonsense.

2. The number of marriages so far taken up is immaterial. Civil rights are not granted on the basis of how many citizens suffer discrimination, but rather on the basis of ensuring that no citizen suffers discrimination.

In point of fact, the small number of same sex marriages might quite well be due to the short time for which this has been possible, and quite likely the opposition of many churches to celebrating such unions.

In the USA specifically, it is unclear whether it will even be possible to marry, as there is doubt, even in the States which are for this reform, whether it will be overturned.

For gays, a policy of "Wait and See" might be wise, given that permission may be rescinded by the veto of one man, mayor or governor.

Whatever, I don't think the figures of gay marriages to date can be considered significant, as an indicator of the long term position.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 09:31 PM

By "Mr. Snide," I was not referring to you, GfS, but if you want to put the shoe on and announce loudly to all that it fits, be my guest.

And I haven't missed a thing.

Don Firth

P. S. The question remains unanswered.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 20 Dec 09 - 10:13 PM

"Mr.Snide", is no way to convince your intended reader, that you wish to raise him 'up'(?) to your understanding. Let's do this as a way to bring this to a symbiotic conversation, rather than trying to vindicate ourselves, to be 'recognized', as being 'right'. Truth to tell,most all your points have either been in error, or limited...Fair enough?...No slam or slur intended, in the least,..but WE can do, and BE better than that. The lesbians think they have a corner on being 'right', the male homosexuals think the same, those opposed, think they do, so on and so forth. Those who are, have all the reasons they are, those opposed, do so, because they do not like the effect that they see, and don't like it for one reason or another..both can be 'RIGHT', from their perspective, but, instead of beating each other over the head, UNDERSTANDING, at this point, may be in order....wouldn't you say?..unless all you want, is people to understand, that you should be acknowledged, and worshiped, for your political stand......which has NOTHING TO DO with CAUSE OR EFFECT...its just your political stand..okay? I would rather we talk to each others hearts, and minds, to understand, and to be understood, than play politics, just to placate each other...wouldn't you?
Let's give it a shot....and get somewhere, where others CAN'T!
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 12:47 PM

GfS, where the snideness comes in with you and Ake is that you two were the first to try to refute those who did not agree with you by attempting to denigrate them by insulting them on a personal level, calling them "stupid," calling them such things as "liberal fascists," and generally trying to lump them (us) into some fictional political movement dedicated to promoting homosexuality when that is not the case at all. The primary concern is the matter of civil rights (which is not a political issue, it's a human rights issue), which you and Ake simply refuse to recognize.

Recently Ake listed a few names of people whom he regarded as sufficiently stupid and contemptible that he would no longer bother to answer them. The fact, of course, is that these were the people who were asking the difficult questions—questions that he either could not answer or was afraid to answer honestly for fear of revealing too much about his prejudices and motives.

And you tried to undercut my credibility by building a whole fictional scenario about my being morally remiss and, hence, emotionally disturbed because of a relationship of mine that I happened to allude to on another thread, that occurred over forty years ago, and about which you know absolutely nothing. That, GfS, is fighting dirty. And I didn't start it. You and Ake did.

Neither you nor Ake seem to be willing to discuss this matter in reasonable terms without resorting to insults, so your attempts at "reconciliation" here (if that is, indeed, what it appears to be) tends to ring hollow.

Show good faith by refraining from the insults and pigeon-holing (e.g., such things as accusing us of a "political stand," which you used in your most recent post) and give straight answers when they are asked of you and we might have a basis for rational discussion.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 02:15 PM

Don, Okay, you stated your position...are you done with that yet?...so we can move on???

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 02:47 PM

See what I mean, folks?

GfS has no intention of discussing anything in good faith. Insults and brow-beating is all s/he has in his/her repertoire.

And the best Ake can come up with is to try to insult someone by dinking around with the spelling of their name.

Bloody childish!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 03:31 PM

Does GfS ever post about anything other than homosexuality and men bumming each other?

I haven't noticed anything but homosexual posts from GfS myself. GfS is into Homo discussions - but this is a Folk discussion board. So, does GfS belong on a Folk discussion board, or on a Homosexuality discussion board? Go figure?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 03:56 PM

You've got it, Crow Sister. In his/her last 200 posts, GfS has posted only four times on music threads. The vast majority of posts have been dedicated to the trying to quell the same-sex marriage issue.

Ake's history is pretty similar. His posts tend to deplore homosexual practices, implying they actually create the AIDs virus, and seem to dwell on the lurid details of anal intercourse.

What's the word? Obsession? Fixation? Fetish?

I think that about says it.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 04:47 PM

As these posters are obviously only interested in homosexual chat, maybe GfS & Co' could take their personal (and no doubt fascinating?) preoccupation with "Men putting their willies into other men's bum holes" interests away from a err supposed *Folk Music* board, and on to a more focused Homosexual/Gay/Lesbian discussion board, where it might be better appreciated?

Just a thought?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 04:49 PM

Sad bastards, get a life.
If you've nothing to say dont say anything.
Have either of you posted any positive information or ideas to this thread?
Aren't you ashamed of your vitreolic abuse....not even saved by a modicum of wit.....and you wonder why no one responds to you?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 05:37 PM

Well, there we have it again! What is Ake's post of 21 Dex 09 - 04:49 p.m. if not a perfect example of the vitriolic abuse that he complains of?

Right again, Crow Sister. They should get their own forum. Or, perhaps, move in together.

Don Firth - has left the building.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 05:53 PM

"Have either of you posted any positive information or ideas to this thread?"

Err, yeah: how about taking your obsession with men bumming each other elsewhere! Even the most pro 'gay rights' peeps I know don't bang on about gay gay gay stuff as relentlessly as you two!

You go *on and on and on* about it. Man, thinking about men bumming each other must take up every bloody waking moment of your life!
It's OBVIOUS to everyone that you are utterly OBSESSED with gayness/bumming/mens willies & bum-holes/err etc.

Do something else for a change, take a break, find another obsessive hobby like trains or bird spotting or something..
For everyone's health & peace of mind! Jeeze man!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 05:57 PM

No one responded to them? Ake, you responded within TWO MINUTES! lol

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 06:07 PM

Don, stop 'recruiting'. We were on a good roll, exchanging good information, and every time you're caught, accusing, and usurping the thread, you resort to the same, worn out tactics, instead of moving forward, and thereby hijacking the thread to focus on only your point of view....which has been proven, either inconclusive, or divisive, just to steer the attention to you. May we go on??...with your imperial permission..or do we have to endure more of your off topic meanderings?

You've stated your political stance...ok..You've posted links, that come to no conclusion, as said in those links....you've gathered 'support' of those who think that non bigoted, dissenters, are bigots and haters...and brought nothing new to understanding the CAUSE, of what you so ignorantly champion. Just take a rest, and let's see what may come out, that may INFORM you...instead of spouting your non-supported opinions....and this time let them, or us speak, without jumping down our throats. YOU MIGHT LEARN SOMETHING....God forbid! ....not to mention, there may be something of interest to OTHERS.....unless, of course, keeping people uninformed is your method of control. You have offered NOTHING,except your link, which was not authored by you. Why don't you ALLOW a discussion on that link, which is what was being done. Perhaps, you did not even read the entire link, yourself, or understood the ramifications of what they were saying. Forget character assassinate Ake, or myself, or anyone else disagreeing with you. You're wasting time and space, in doing so. Now, I'll get around to your question, when I'm finished with Amos', though I think in answering Amos' questions, yours would be answered as well!!

Look at this quote from you..."GfS has posted only four times on music threads. The vast majority of posts have been dedicated to the trying to quell the same-sex marriage issue.

Ake's history is pretty similar. His posts tend to deplore homosexual practices, implying they actually create the AIDs virus, and seem to dwell on the lurid details of anal intercourse.

What's the word? Obsession? Fixation? Fetish?"

You actually went through the forum COUNTING OUR POSTS...THEN ACCUSE US OF BEING OBSESSED???????? Look who is calling the kettle black!
(and BTW, your count is wrong).
Chill out. When I get back, and have the time, I'll post, what I did before, and lost.......jeez!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Elspeth
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 07:48 PM

ok...I know this is going to seem a little bit off topic (seeing as the current topic appears to be verbally kicking the shit out of eachother) but on the healthcare/education side of things: Don't you find the whole obsession with male gay sex quite worrying? What I mean is, in sex ed it get banged on and on and on about...and lesbians don;t even get a mention. Just a thought that if people are going to be educated about the ins and outs of peoples sexual preferences surely it should run across the board? From a purely educational and safe-sex perspective it is surely important to cover all of it? For instance, stop obsessing over condoms for STI prevention in gay and straight sex without so much as mentioning dental dams and suchlike.

Now I know that is somewhat off topic...but it seemed an interesting point to me, and it might be something related to talk about that gets away a bit from the gay men obsession and the personality clashes, at least for a little while.

What are your thoughts?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 07:51 PM

"if people are going to be educated about the ins and outs of peoples sexual preferences"

Interesting turn of phrase . . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 07:57 PM

You're getting a bit funny in your desperation, there GfS.

No, I didn't go "through the forum" counting your posts, you idiot my dear fellow. It's a pretty easy tally to get if you know how, and it only took me about twenty seconds.

You're getting a bit frantic, it would appear. You and Ake have long since been rumbled as a pair of trolls. Has nothing to do with anyone other than the two of you trying to highjack the thread.

There is no serious discussion here. You two have rendered that impossible, as you will undoubtedly attempt to do on any future thread touching on this subject.

The interesting part is that both of you have chosen this subject as a wall to tag, like a couple of juvenile delinqents with cans of spray-paint. Speaks volumes about you two.

TTFN

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 08:28 PM

Although I disagree with both GfS and Ake on this issue, I see nothing that makes either of them trolls, Don, no offence intended to anyone.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: curmudgeon
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 08:36 PM

Did anyone else notice that Ake just posted to a music thread (the Big Boys)? Coincidence?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Elspeth
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 08:38 PM

hi 999, yes...I rethought that particular phrase somewhat, but only after posting XD. Nevermind, it's accurate I suppose.
Shame my offer of slightly alternative conversation hasn't been taken up...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 08:48 PM

It was not me who first identified them as such, 999. I thought about it some and came to the conclusion that my informant had a sound theory. The behavior is typical:   take an "anti-" position, keep repeating the same things, don't answer reasonable questions, and use lots of insults and personal abuse, especially commenting on the stupidity of people who obviously have the facts. They've done it, both together and separately, on a number of threads now.

As long as I'm here,

This is the sort of thing that homophobia encourages.

The Story

Wait for the sarcasm. It'll be right along.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 08:57 PM

Yeah, I can't say I've ever thought of Ake and GfS as trolls. I really think they believe what they're saying - warped though their thinking may be....
I don't like the idea of people calling other people trolls in the first place. It tends to be a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Recently, I've been corresponding with a guy who was a friend of mine when we were students in a Catholic seminary. At the time we were in school, I think people would have called him a "liberal intellectual." He left the seminary and was in a homosexual relationship for a number of years. More recently, he became a conservative and then married a woman, and he says he's been happily married for a number of years. To me, his political and religious views are distressingly conservative (and he thinks mine are distressingly liberal), and he is staunchly anti-homosexual. He's the first "reformed homosexual" I've known; and frankly, I don't know what to think. He certainly seems sincere.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 09:24 PM

Well Joe, the only response I have to your comment is the old yorkshire saying:

"there's nowt as queer as folk!"

... oops ... there goes another can of worms ...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Dec 09 - 09:37 PM

As far back as Kinsey, but more recently others as well have hypothesized a sort of "grey area" in which gender orientation is somewhat wavery. Not quite the same as "AC/DC" perhaps, but where the person can swing either way. Here, a "cure (?)" may be possible. But I posted a link on the Prop 8 thread (can't find the post where the link is right now, but I'll keep trying) to an article about a thoroughly peer-reviewed attempt to cure homosexuality through psychotherapy. It involved counseling, along with a lot of aversion therapy (electrically shocking the subject when they viewed "inappropriate" sex objects).

Results? I don't remember the exact figures, bit the study included 202 self-proclaimed homosexual men who, incidentally, said they wanted to be cured (self-selecting sample, perhaps?). Anyway, after treatment, the recidivism rate was something like 68%, some like 20% gave up sex entirely in favor of celibacy, none entered a heterosexual relationship, a substantial percentage of them (including some overlaps) became clinically depressed or developed other psychological problems, and six of them committed suicide.

The experiment was declared an abject failure.

I'll keep searching for the link (even if that is interpreted as my being "obsessed," but truly open, inquiring minds do want to know).

Don Firth

P. S. By the way, in my checkered but long career, I've met two people, one who said he had been gay, and another "ex-lesbian," who both claimed they were now cured ("being Saved" had something to do with it). If you think that ex-smokers are rabidly opposed to smoking, you ought to have met these folks! They absolutely raged and screamed and frothed at the mouth if the subject of homosexuality ever came up!

What was that Shakespeare quote about protesting too much?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 02:30 AM

Well, good God! You, (Joe, and even Don), are now sounding like me! My biggest contention was that, yes, it is reversible....and look at all the 'back-biting' that has gone on! ..and Don, you argued adamantly that they couldn't change, and you knew two who had, all along! So, pardon me, if I seemed to get a little,..umm,...irritated at you. So very strongly, you argued on behalf of a lie! Okay, enough said about that(I hope).

Now, to answer Amos,...actually, in light of the post, in which Don claims he knows of two that have, Joe knows one, I posted a link in which a doctor, was, but is not now, and offers therapy to those(Dr. Cohen), I know two ex-homosexual males and three ex-lesbians, plus the last of the article Don posted, I think its safe to say, YES, it is reversible....BUT, what could be the CAUSE, if it is not genetic, but apparently people are, in fact, born that way?.......Let's take a stab at it, because no research, that I know of, has pursued this possibility(read:probability).

Just follow me through this, if you will....it won't hurt!(wink)

Being as the interests of homosexuality are concerns of the 'religious', psychological, scientific, and sociopolitical communities, somewhere lays a bridge of understanding that speaks to all their 'concerns'.

For those born, from the womb, homosexual:
Let's start with some basic facts, that we know...'Energy can neither be created nor destroyed'..right?(Einstein)....So, does that include our own very life force? Perhaps, when that life force, some say 'God'(as the giver of live), some say, the collective conscientiousness, you might argue, a bunch of chemicals re-acting randomly, but somehow, that life begins to take shape, in the womb. That energy, or conscientiousness, grows, and is nourished from the mother, and basically, is one with the mother, or at least certainly attached, right? Whether or not, you want to argue for what it is, or is not, or when in becomes 'a person', as the pro-life, or pro abortion folks do, is not the issue, right now..ok? The fact is, mama's blood is his or her blood, from the same place....so are the electrical impulses, that run the neurological system too. ..Still with me?.. Those are the little impulses that take messages to the receptors in the brain...matter of fact, they help set up the receptors, sorta like programming a hard drive, from one computer to another...ok? So far, simple enough.

When the life's force began, it is a blank slate, as far as we know, unless you want to argue that it came from a collective    conscientiousness, such as what people might consider 'God', but nonetheless, it is a blank slate, not knowing, or even having a concept of right, or wrong, or good, or bad, or up or down, etc, etc.

Now, we have all heard of babies being addicted to certain substances, such as crack, or heroin, or whatever, if the mother was using, during her pregnancy..the child is born already addicted, because the receptors have been chemically set up to need whatever substance the mother was taking...right?

What if she was not taking any substances, BUT she(the mother) was very upset, and/or distraught emotionally. Would that set up, the receptors in the child????...from the neurological impulses she is sending throughout her body???? From all indications (and studies), YES!...Now we're getting somewhere!.....What if>>>>>>>

What if the focus on her being upset/distraught, was the man who impregnated her, justifiably or not,..or just perception, real or imagined(not the issue), or even another man in her life, or just men, in general? It could be a frustration, disappointment, a feeling of self inadequacy, guilt...anything...wouldn't you say those receptors are now getting programmed?..and could inhibit male traits in the fetus' neurological system to be affected?? ..and thereby cause a 'short-out' in other systems being formed, in the child?

Okay, I was going to go on further, but I didn't want to have a giant post. Maybe little doses of new things to consider, and the possibilities of ramifications, set in motion.

If you want, we can expound, and take it deeper, as to the psychological traits, and/or set up, and the 'why's', and inherent outlook that the child is going to be born with, and the frustrations, he may encounter with his father, that develops in the formative years.

But first, we can talk about it INTELLIGENTLY, and calmly, and I'd love to, but not to a crowd of contentious opinionated people. Keep an open mind. Just what I posted here, so far, should give pause to some serious thought...might even break open some new doors of perception. How 'bout it??....Let's get heavy! Ask more if you want more...but let's not argue, let's discover together?

GfS

P.S. PBS also had a program, dealing with the same thing, for what its worth.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 04:33 AM

I have been away for a week (on holiday with my partner - being gay all week in another country, doing REALLY GAY things like visiting museums and eating in restaurants and sitting by the beach and even looking around cathedrals with not one single bolt of lightning hitting us) and this thread is STILL high on the first page???

You people really ought to give it up.....but as you clearly can't or won't, and I am one of the very very few who write on this topic here who is happy to declare their homosexuality, here are two more thoughts to digest.

Firstly: GfS' contentions about 'reversible' sexuality, and all the accompanying gubbins, starts from what is to me an utterly false premise: namely that same-sex attraction is a 'condition', the 'causes' of which need identifying as a prelude to their eradication. Whatever the attempted niceities of the argument, those with GfsS' mindset have a vision of an ideal world where everyone is straight. Needless to say, I do not think that would be ideal.

Secondly: if sexual orientation can be changed, as is thought in some quarters, should we not be seeking to change (at least) some unhappy heterosexuals into happy homosexuals ? There is at least one precedent for this - in the 1970s feminist movement there were a minority of women who found heterosexual sex so at odds with their political views (they were, in their own eyes, sleeping with the enemy) that they ended their couplings with men and formed lesbian relationships instead.

That particular historical moment is an issue which many contemporary feminists prefer to downplay, as it feeds into stereotypes of feminism equalling 'man hating', but it did happen, even if only in a tiny number of cases. Interestingly, and pleasingly perversely, this strikes me as directly comparable to the man Joe Offer knows, who has 're-trained' himself to live a heterosexual life because he could not equate his ideology with his established sexual desires.

I would be interested to know what others addicted to this thread make of these points. The name-calling (and yes, I know I am guilty of this too) won't take the discussion anywhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 10:35 AM

Smedley,

It isn't the name calling that worries me, Its the brazen Museum Visiting, meal eating, beach siting and cathedral exploring that horrifies me.

Sickening!!

How do you live with yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 10:36 AM

Welcome home Smedley :-)

I do not think it is reversible as I do not think it is a condition. I do think some people's sexuality is 'fluid, but bisexuality has that covered generally. As I said much earlier in the thread, of course gay people still marry opposite genders. It's not really rocket science that they have and do. Lots' of people try to 'conform' to the het stereotype and it impossible to to do, eventually letting their own trues sexuality through. Some stay in the closet, Some kill themselves.

To those who think a person can change sexuality then why do people kill themselves rather than become something else? If it were that simple I am sure they would just change. Change is better than death. I postulate they do not change because they cannot change. So why should they be expected to or need to?

Yes, some people are unhappy with their own sexuality but I further postulate that the unhappiness is far more environmental/cultural than it is intrinsic. Politics are not involved, liberalism, idealism, feel-gooding sisterhoods or anything. It's a humanity issue. Let people be who they are and keep your nose out of their affairs. Look after your own more and the rest will fall in place. It's really quite that simple with sexuality.

I, too, have heard of people 'reforming' their sexuality.... but I jave not believed it for a minute. And, even if such phenomena exist I think it must be extremely rare. In sexuality no-one should look down on anyone. We ALL have more more in common with each other than we do not. Those differences are often what makes life interesting and relationships worth having (at all sorts of levels)

This is just my opinion when all said and done. It does not matter that I have to be right. It does not affect me. But being open minded about homosexuality with never do me any harm either (except from the insults I may have to suffer for daring to allow gay folk breath!)

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 10:40 AM

Lox... please refrain from architcturalism. They really cannot help liking buidlings! I thinks it's in the bricks ;-)

(I love sitting in empty churches personally)

Time we had a light note on here :-)

lol

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Elspeth
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 10:59 AM

I just want to say hooray for Smedley.
Primarily for posting something that didn;t involve any name calling =) I'm sincerely interested in the topic of this thread if the name calling etc could just stop!
And secondly it's nice to see someone out, and humourous about it (I'm liking the cathedral visiting- I find it particularly enjoyable myself, along with not being smited that is =D)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 11:12 AM

You know Elspeth I actually think that a lot of people begrudge homosexuality becaues it's 'sufferers' really know how to have a great time! Gay people know how to have a fantastic time and not take themselves too seriously. I am almost sure jealousy plays a part in some dissenters thinking often...

I prefer to miserable than gay ;-)

But seriously: I too respect those who are openly out but not throwing it in people's faces. Wearing sexuality on your sleeve can be very unattractive but being proud of who you are should never be put down.

I'll shush a while now. I have posted three times in the last hour!

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 11:36 AM

A few thoughts here:

Somebody implied that Don F is alone on this site. I want everyone to know that is not the case at all. It is just that he speaks very well, for me and probably for others.

It also occurs to me that if sexuality were that easy to turn, does that imply that straight people can be talked out of hetereosexuality? I can't quite picture a straight person being subjected to 'aversion therapy' so that s/he becomes gay. I can understand that the person could be turned into celibacy!

How about it, GtS and ake? Want to try a little aversion therapy? Think it'll work?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Steamin' WIllie
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 12:33 PM

You know, in the time this thread has been waffling...

They could have given the Act Presidential assent, hung a few and repealed the ruddy thing by now!

I think one way of drawing it to a conclusion is to thin out the contributors a bit;

If you have stated that you do not understand homosexuality, then -
a) If you have no wish to try to understand the lifestyle choice then STOP POSTING
b) IF you don't understand but have empathy for the disgusting actions of so called Christians then KEEP POSTING

If you think you understand homosexuality then -
a) If you are not gay then STOP POSTING (what exactly do you understand then?)
b) If you are gay then KEEP POSTING (about the role of these so called Christians, not about asking people to understand your lifestyle. Start another thread if you must.)

Oh, heck, 99% of opinions would disappear. I would be told I am limiting free speech and this thread would continue as an excuse for discussing gay issues....


When, forgive me if I am wrong, we should be discussing the role of so called Christian sects in promoting death sentences for things they don't understand.

ZZZZZZZZZZZ

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 12:46 PM

GfS, once again you are trying to put words in my mouth.   (PTUI!!!).

Reread what I posted at 21 Dec 09 - 09:37 p.m. I describe an thoroughly peer-reviewed experiment at "curing" homosexual subjects that totally failed to effect verifiable cures and resulted in a high percentage of recidivism, the next highest percentage simply choosing a life of celebacy, many of them developing psychological problems including clinical depression, and six of the subjects committing suicide.

And as for the two people that I mention (one "former" gay and one "former" lesbian), it was pretty obvious that there was no cure at all. From the time they were "saved" (i.e., "accepted Christ"), they denied their homosexuality vociferously and abstained from sexual activity entirely. Now, you may call that a "cure," but most reasonable people would not. It is a simple case of denial, and if you are any kind of competent counselor, you would see that.

Don't try to make it look like I am agreeing with you when I am not!

Don Firth

P. S. And again you cite Cohen, the "reformed" homosexual, whose method of treating his homosexual subjects is to cuddle and caress them and assure them that they are loved! He has long since been shown to be an exploiter and a charlatan.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 03:13 PM

Thanks for the welcome & the hooray. I don't think I've ever been hoorayed before.

(note to certain contributors: "being hoorayd" is not an arcane, virus-riddled homosexual practice...)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 03:54 PM

Sedley, if we are to leave this thread wiser and better informed, are sentenses like the one above(in brackets), really necessary?

If you want an adult discussion on this subject, surely you can dispense with that sort of attitude. Leave that to the politically motivated.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 04:07 PM

Sanity.....Very interesting contentions,I can certainly see the sense in what you've written.

My problem is,how do I get myself into the position of accepting as fact that babies can be born homosexual?
I do understand that a mothers fears, phobias,revulsions etc may be transfered to the baby in the womb, but it is surely much more likely that mothers feelings are transfered psychologically after birth and during the first few years of life ...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 04:25 PM

Another example of how not to hold a discussion....by MP

This is just my opinion when all said and done. It does not matter that I have to be right. It does not affect me. But being open minded about homosexuality with never do me any harm either (except from the insults I may have to suffer for daring to allow gay folk breath!)

For daring to allow gay folk breath!.........I have read nothing here about anyone wanting to deprive homosexuals of "breath"(code for life)

The bracketed part of MP's last sentence is slipped in to remind everyone that those who oppose her views are homo haters and would like to see homosexuals dead.

The tactics of deceit

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 04:43 PM

I doubt anyone could argue over the cornucopia of evidence that shows estrogen has on foetuses. For sure male sperm rates later in life and the actual testicular disorders can be affected by estrogens and xenoestrogens during fetal and neonatal development. There is also much research been done on the effects of estrogen on brain development in utero and on the gender sensitive areas of the brain. There is no doubt that hormonal 'soaking' or 'drops' can affect foetal 'hard-wiring' of both genders and much more research will come to light as to the mechanisms as more work is done. Some things that are reasonably constant and statistically evidenced are index/ring finger ratios in gay and straight populations. This is obviously set in utero as is handedness (which many will know, despite barbaric ways to stop people using their lefts hands in the past, failed)

The chances that sexuality is fixed in the foetus, due to hormonal affects during cerebral development, are pretty high BUT quite how it happens and when is open to much more research and discussion. The topic is not without some controversy even within science. As with gender too, which may or may not be linked to the genitals a child is born with, you cannot change the hard wiring.

Occasionally people's hard-wiring gets distrupted, say after a stroke, and the nerves find new pathways if the survivor is lucky. Some cause personalty changes but seldom is sexuality reported to be disrupted. That said, sexuality is often a neglected topic for the stroke survivor.

In short. Nature will have its way!

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 04:56 PM

Akenaton wrote "For daring to allow gay folk breath!.........I have read nothing here about anyone wanting to deprive homosexuals of "breath"(code for life)

May I remind you of the topic of this thread? Hanging by nature would deprive those hung of their breath!

It's not just thread I have stood up for gay rights either so please don't arrogantly, and wrongly, presume "The bracketed part of MP's last sentence is slipped in to remind everyone that those who oppose her views are homo haters and would like to see homosexuals dead.

The tactics of deceit". I have been called for holding the views I have many times. It will happen in the future too. Please do not lecture me about deceipt or how I choose to have discussion with people. When you have the art right yourself then you may lecture me. I refuse to get into name calling. I have been pleasant to you and others on this forum who have disagreed. I have presented my side and that is all. Bullying me now will not change my mind nor endear your arguments more.

You have a wonderful time doing what you do but I think if you check you will see I have not changed my stance once throughout this thread and nor have I changed my tack or opinions.

Whether I am right only time will tell as regards the research and nature but I am far happier being me with my views than it seems you are being you with yours. I agreed to disagree with you way back, on pleasant terms. Bully away and try and change my words. Enjoy!

:-)

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 05:22 PM

It isn't bullying .. its ... god - what is it ...

... bloody minded, myopic, fearful, pompous, farcical, absurd, ...


... I can't wait tto read Ake and GfS's research paper on the causes of homosexuality.

I bet there's a big section on bumming.

And another big section on priests and choirboys.

There will be nothing about africa, nor on the sexual health issues of adolescent girls and young women.

There will be a big prologue explaining why all inconvenient evidence has been ignored.

And there will be a post script in which the two authors massage each others egos.

Assertions in Chapter 2 will be backed up by references to the same assetions made in chapter 1.

The asertions in chapter 1 will come with recommended further reading ... (chapter 2) ...

When the whole thing is dismantled piece by piece by a legion of critics, the authors will ignore it and form their own club.

They will stick out their tongues and defiantly announce "well we didn't want to play with you anyway" before mincing off to conduct some more 'research'.

The world will look forward to theiir conclusions wwith eager anticipation.

No one will findd it remotely funny ....


... no really ... they won't ... especially when Ake starts reasserting that paedophiles are just gays who don't have access to grown ups.

... and they'll start to feel sick when he starts describing in lurid detail the scenario that 'disgusts' him the most.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 05:41 PM

MP...I dont think anyone in Uganda is about to insult you...do you?

The insults you refer to, you obviously expect to come from those who are engaged in discussion with you and who do not share your opinions.

I do not believe in Capital Punishment, for homo or hetero criminals, no matter what they have done, but the US still retains the "death penalty" in many states I believe.

Please dont think that you are being bullied, I was simply pointing out how easy it is to "load" a seemingly innocuous post.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 05:46 PM

Ake, I deeply and humbly prostrate myself in apology. How remiss of me, one of those inflicted by the 'scourge' (to use your own term), to introduce some humour here. Obviously I just don't feel bad enough about myself.

Oh, and in my earlier, lengthier post I raised two perfectly serious and relatively unexplored points which you have ignored in favour of your rather limp swipe at my decision to resort briefly to levity.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 06:01 PM

Well....Do you want a serious discussion, or a verbal punch up?

I dont see much levity in "virus riddled homosexual practice"

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 06:05 PM

Still waiting for your thoughts on my earlier post. Don't derail yourself via an evaive detour into humourlessness, it doesn't suit you.

And there is levity in everything, although never *just* levity.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 06:10 PM

Thats because "virus riddled homosexual practice" describes your view of homosexuals, and as you have said, this is something that you abhor.

The rest of us (including Smedley, who by the way is pretty well informed on the subject of homosexual practice) see this phrase for what it is - utterly preposterous.

And the only way you can cope is to suggest verbal fisticuffs.

As if to remind us that there ain't no gayness in you ... no sirree ... you're the rootinest tootinest cowboy in the wild west!!

You're so manly!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 06:17 PM

Did you hear a buzzing noise just then Smedley?   :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 06:25 PM

Ah, a smile from Ake to refute my humourlessness jibe.

And if Lox is right, just be careful I don't smile back. The cowboy was always my favourite one in the Village People.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 07:00 PM

I'm sorry about ignoring your points...I got side tracked whackin' the flies.

I should think that changing sexual orientation must be very difficult especially after a number of years, and I dont really think it would always be in the interests of people to change orientation, one way or the other.

I should think the psychiatric problems would be multiplied for homos or heteros

My main reason for becoming involved in these threads, is to try to illustrate how minorities can be manipulated by political ideologues, in this case "liberals"
The Homosexual marriage issue is a very good example of a minority being dragged kicking and screaming to claim "rights" which hardly any of them want. Our resident "heterosexual homosexual activist" Mr Peekstock being a typical example of the genre.

I'm amazed that you can joke about a disease which is showing a steady increase in the figures and continuing to decimate your community.....Are you really happy to allow these figures to climb, rather than address the reasons why they are so bad in comparison to heteros. Your remark about "virus ridden homosexual practice" may have been a joke, but it betrays a lamentable lack of understanding about the real extent of the problem and a lack of will in addressing it.

Honestly, does what I have written strike you as bigotry or hatred?
If it does, I'm sorry, I dont mean it as such.

Perhaps you would like to explain your position, or even comment on my linked figures on homosexual marriage take up rates...and why homosexual rights should be different to other sexual minorities.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 07:37 PM

"I should think the psychiatric problems would be multiplied for homos or heteros"

Did I say pompous? I forgot to add delusional!

Dr Ake, is this area of research covered in your joint paper?



"My main reason for becoming involved in these threads, is to try to illustrate how minorities can be manipulated by political ideologues, in this case "liberals"".

Or in other words, to bang on about your oft repeated, monotonous, one dimensional view that your freedom of speech is somehow restricted by a conspiracy of "liberal Fascists".


I remember when I first encountered this.

It was on the gollywog thread when you referred to Azizi for no other reason than it was a thread about racism and she is black.


Then on the G20 Demo thread you introduced the hot potato of immigration into a thread which otherwise contained no mention of imigrants, and you started blaming the credit crunch on them.


On another thread you claimed to know all about how Moslems think they're better than us ... because your mate from Goa said so ...

But most relevantly, on a thread about the church and child abuse, you stated that this happened because of Gay men joining the priesthood rather than come out of the closet, and then, being stuck for other gay men to have sex with, abusing children to get their kicks.

This developed on a couple of different threads, and you have basically held the view throughout that Gay men will naturally predate on children if they can't get another man.


In this thread you would have carried on with the same view if it were not for the diligence and patience of a few of us who gave you so much rope for such a long time that you tied yourself in knots with it.


Now you are trying to pass yourself off as friend, health advisor and psychiatric researcher working to improve the lot of Gay men and women world wide.


But your true colours are simply too well documented on this website.


You loathe what gay people do and you think they are all closet paedophiles.

And your imagination has furnished you with vivid enough depictions of how this works that you are "disgusted" on a fairly consistent basis.


Myopic doesn't cover it ... you have a blind spot the size of canada that obscures your vision and allows you to pretend you are being honest and objective by shutting out all evidence to the contrary and by shutting out anyone who makes your position look shaky ... which is just about anyone who disagrees with you ... or indeed engages with your ideas intelligently for more than 5 minutes.


You remind me so much of Nick Griffin and the way he behaved on question time, that it wouldn't surprise me if it turned out that you were him.


Good luck fella.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 07:48 PM

Fuck it.....Knew I had missed one!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 07:56 PM

Ake:    "The Homosexual marriage issue is a very good example of a minority being dragged kicking and screaming to claim 'rights' which hardly any of them want."

Really? Some 18,000 homosexual couples in California got married during the brief time that the law was in effect before out-of-state religious groups squelched the same-sex marriage law with Proposition 8.

Anyone who is really interested in reducing homosexual promiscuity and transmission of HIV/AIDs ought to be in favor of doing whatever is possible to encourage stable, monogamous relationships.

No, "liberals" are not "dragging" same-sex oriented people "kicking and screaming" into claiming their civil rights. The move toward same-sex marriage and equal legal rights has been initiated by gays and lesbians themselves. That is not just an opinion, it is historical fact.

I don't know about the other states where same-sex marriage laws have been passed, but in Washington State where I live, although the state does not yet recognize same-sex marriage (yet), the recently passed domestic partnership law has produced a definite increase in the number of same-sex couples who have applied for such status. And there has been an increase in the number of marriage ceremonies requested of churches that perform such ceremonies since the law went into effect. Recognition by law as having the same legal rights as a marriage, plus sanctification by a church, whether the state recognizes the relationship as "marriage" or not. And that's since November, when Initiative 71 (sponsored by the same out-of-state religious groups who sponsored Prop. 8) was defeated by the voters and the recently passed domestic partnership law went into effect.

Sorry, Ake. You are picking your "facts" out of your own wishful thinking.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 07:59 PM

What a vivid imagination ...


... I dread to think what happens when the flies are down ...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Dec 09 - 08:06 PM

Oh I forgot - and you went on about Tinkers being drug pushers and thieves in another thread.


Each time a minority is brought up Ake, it is you who brings them up.


You don't bring them up in threads about minorieties, you bring them up as scapegoats in threads on other subjects.


When new threads are initiated todiscuss the issues which you raise (and which you claim are suppressed) your voice is notably absent.


So it is in fact you who seizes on minority issues for your own political purposes.


And this is so well evidenced on the mudcat that I needn't bother with any links.

Just check out Akes posting history.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 04:06 AM

Mexico allows "the free uniting of two people" and become one more place in the world where human rights has overcome repression of equal rights.

I thinks it's a great step forward. Even the UK does not allow such marriages but does have the civil partnership legislation in place to try and cover it.

It appears that liberals may be all over the world! I can hear all the kicks and screams in Mexico as I go out to work.... ;-)

I wonder which country will be next?

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 12:55 PM

What a screed of misrepresentation from the three posters above.
They are not worth the bother of once again refuting their shite.

Fortunately all my posts are available in context in this thread and in all the others to which I have posted.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 01:07 PM

"What a screed of misrepresentation from the three posters above.
They are not worth the bother of once again refuting their shite."

Which is to say, you don't have an answer.

The data I gave in my last post is dead-on accurate, and it blows your contentions (speaking of "shite") right out of the water. Give it up, Ake. History is passing you by.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 07:38 PM

Ahh, It seems that the only posters, are the homosexuals, who were not 'born' that way, but opted for being homosexuals, after the fact....which is indicative of the hostility, in replying to those, who are not homosexual...except for Don..which in deed is very interesting, because, and without ANY contentious intent, I have a question to ask him.

You posted that the persons you knew who were ex-homosexuals did so, in the course of being 'saved'. So my question is somewhat two part, and being as you say you are Bible literate, and attend a Christian church, the question is, according to what I believe was the tone of your post, regarding those two, do you think their being 'saved' was sincere, or valid?....and if not, why?....and if so, then what do you think happened, to cause them to also renounce homosexuality? Same question to Joe Offer.
Do you think the power of whatever happened to them was greater, than that of being homosexual??

Only questions.....not trick questions, nor baiting, okay?
Regards,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 07:49 PM

"Do you think the power of whatever happened to them was greater, than that of being homosexual??"


Instead of asking them why don't you just look at history and the many famous homosexuals who covered it up and married women and even had kids by them.

The power of cutural taboo and denial are two things not to underestimate.


It could be comparable to chinese teachers and academics "confessing" during the cultural revolution.


Sometimes people will say anything when the pressure to conform becomes too great.


Its a crucial issue for a young gay man ... come out and face the music, or stay in and live the easy life ... I don't know what I'd do.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 10:10 PM

Lox:"Instead of asking them why don't you just look at history and the many famous homosexuals who covered it up and married women and even had kids by them."

Not even remotely interested on who was, or why they felt they had to cover it. That is only feeding a rationalization. We're going for ANSWERS!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 10:19 PM

GfS, these two people are not friends of mine, they were merely acquaintances for a brief time. I met them when our church was discussing the issue of adopting the Affirmation of Welcome (and scroll down) some years back.

The main sticking point for a few people in the congregation was whether or not to include all of the inclusivity clause in the statement: ". . . . regardless of our race, age, gender, marital status, physical and mental abilities, sexual/affectional orientation, national origin, or economic status." A couple of people objected to the "sexual/affectional orientation" part, quoting a few Bible verses. So before we put the matter to a vote of the entire congregation, we had a couple of general meetings of the congregation to discuss the matter in depth.

Several people who were not members of the congregation and whom we had never seen in church before came to the meeting, including the two people in question. Out of approximately 250 people, there were about a half-dozen—including these two people, who I emphasize were not members of the church—spoke out against including that phrase, citing a number of Bible verses, and talking about "perversion" and "it's against God's laws."

The church's two pastors, the synod bishop, and the church council (which I was on at the time) had discussed these verses at length in terms of the history of the times, what modern theology has to say about them, and whether or not those prohibitions were relevant today, especially in terms of outreach to as many people as possible. Among other things, the matter is not mentioned in the Ten Commandments, nor does Jesus say anything about it.

The two people in question spoke at length and quite passionately, talking about how they had led a "life of sin and degradation" until they had been "saved," at which point they renounced their homosexuality. I talked to them a fair amount, as did others, and learned that they had "accepted Christ" at one of the regular revival meetings held by a local Pentecostal church. Very fundamentalist. This church was focused totally on personal salvation and matters of stopping people from "sinning," whereas Central Lutheran is geared toward community service, taking what Jesus said in Matthew 25:35-40 as its primary mode of operating, feeling that, if this is rightly seen to, personal salvation will take care of itself. In short, Central "evangelizes," not by buttonholing you on street corners and demanding to know if you've "been Saved," but by showing by the example of what the church does.

GfS, for various reasons, which would be too long to go into here, but with sound theological roots, I think the phenomenon of "being Saved" is modern misunderstanding of the teachings of Jesus. "Being Saved" is less theological and more emotional. Hell-roaring preachers often scare the stuffings out of the naïve by their vivid descriptions of hell-fire and damnation. I don't think Jesus wanted his followers to love their neighbors and take care of them when they needed care in order for the followers to avoid going to Hell, he wanted them to do it because it was the right thing to do.

Many people have given up a lot of bad habits by "being Saved." Alcoholics have quit drinking, smokers have stopped smoking, philanderers have given up messing around, and criminals have gone straight because they've been convinced that they were going to burn in Hell for eternity if they didn't "accept Jesus as their Savior" and renounce their sinful ways.

And convince a naïve homosexual that he or she will go to Hell if they don't give up their "sinful perversion," and he or she will probably do it.

Fear. Is that a valid "cure?" I think not.

I am not a fundamentalist. I am, indeed, Bible literate, but I do not believe that the Bible is literal history. It is myth, metaphor, and allegory. This is not to say that what Bible says is untrue, it's that, say, the Book of Genesis is a creation myth, in much the same vein as the Native American myth about the world being creating variously by Raven or Mother Turtle. When Jesus spoke of the Good Samaritan, I don't think he was talking about a real incident. He was responding to a question, and it's as if He'd said, "Well, let me put it this way: suppose this traveler had fallen among thieves, and. . . ."

Let me put it this way:   in talking to these two people and asking questions about them from people who knew them, I learned that whether they were "cured" of their homosexuality or not had not been established. They have given up sex entirely. Does that mean that they had been cured of their homosexuality? I think that remains to be demonstrated.

In a meeting of the entire congregation (this took place in the early 1990s, by the way), we overwhelmingly voted to accept the Affirmation of Welcome in its entirety. Out of a congregation of about 250 people, I believe there were about a half-dozen dissenting votes. We did lose three of the older members who couldn't accept it. They went to other churches. But within a very few months, we added several dozen new members to the congregation. And no, they were not all gay. Some were, but most of them were young people, including young (heterosexual) married couples, many with young children, who wanted to got to a progressive, open-minded church. One that practiced what it preached.

By they way, I'm no longer on the church council. I served a full six years. My wife, Barbara, is currently on it, though.

Does that adequately answer your questions? If not, ask further.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 10:52 PM

Thank you, Don, for your answer. In your answer you mentioned a couple of things that were not clear, as to what I was asking. I was not aiming at whether or not it was consistent with Christian beliefs, or even in fact if it was a 'sin' or not. What is of interest, and to more than just the two of us is, whether or not it mattered if your two 'acquaintances' did this, out of something powerful that came to them?...or something they reasoned with?..or out of an emotion?...or was it something they 'renounced', as a form of 'repenting'?
You did. in fact said they gave up having sex, altogether, which I think is pretty heavy-duty. Somewhere, as you noted, they seemed to think it was wrong, so they quit. If they offered any more to their explanation, I think it would be of interest. Joe seems to have something similar, in his acquaintances, however, in his situation, Joe said the man was married, now to a woman...and I believe, Joe's person was Catholic, not Pentecostal.
I know what my acquaintances claim, however, I was going to leave them out of it. I tried to get them to come on, but they didn't even want to discuss the matter, especially to people who were still into it....which I thought was a bummer. Nonetheless, it's how they wanted it, so I won't press them...for now. That being said, they did share some of their thoughts, in retrospect, and we've had some rather in depth conversations.
One way or another, let's hope this will be an enlightening experience, for not only yourself and me, but for anyone who is 'tuning in'!
Again, thank you for your answer. Please, if you will, clarify, what I inquired about, about your answer.
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Elspeth
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 11:12 PM

Does anyone here _actually_ want to discuss the topic supposedly at hand?

If you want to know my opinion on it...I think these so called "Christians" are nothing of the sort (I wish they would find themselves a new name...you know "Church of Hate" or something like that...) and what they're doing to encourage the death penalty in Uganda is very wrong. It disgusts me.

Now, does anyone have something RELEVANT to say?

You know...instead of complaining about how eachother conducts a discussion?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 23 Dec 09 - 11:44 PM

Elspeth, Your post is very telling. You are saying Christians are behind the death penalty in Uganda, while others are posting observations regarding people 'renouncing' homosexuality, and becoming Christian. When I read your post, it sounds as if you are getting uncomfortable about confronting what these people confronted, and their response to it. We are just probing.
Do you think calling Christians the "Church of Hate", when Don has posted the "Affirmation of Welcome", is consistent with being the open minded, liberal lesbian, who is looking for acceptance, by the mainstream??? After all, it was the homosexuals who are crying 'bigotry'....what is this, in light of that????
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 01:03 AM

With the caveat that I did not know these two really well, having encountered them in about four congregational meetings and talking to them face to face a few times, my assessment was that there was not all that much reasoning involved in their decisions. It was primarily emotional—the emotion of fear.

I believe that, from the start, from their first sexual awareness, they found themselves attracted to members of their own sex, and from what they had absorbed from the culture around them, they felt there was something wrong with them. They didn't respond to members of the opposite sex like most of their peers, schoolmates and such. They found themselves attracted to members of their own sex. And they undoubtedly picked up the general belief that what they were feeling made them "queers" or "fairies" or "dykes," as the case may be. Sexual awareness usually sets in in a big way during one's early teen years, and the pressure to blend in and be like everyone else is pretty strong. And to get the distinct impression that you are what others would call "a pervert—" Rough go for a kid. And then, added to that, the idea that if they followed their urges, they would be committing a "sin."

So. If someone who is a long practicing homosexual and is not of a particularly philosophical or critical mindset wanders, or gets dragged, into a revival meeting where they get a promise of "redemption" for their "life of sin and perversion," along with the threat of eternal Hell-fire if they don't, they might just "come forward" as the preacher bids them. Carrot and stick.

Interesting to note that, despite the numbers of people who come forward at revival meetings (such as Billy Graham's televised "crusades" some years ago), only a small percentage of these conversions actually stick for more than a few days. How well and how long they stick generally tends to be directly proportional to the element of fear of what would happen if they "backslide."

No, I think a true conversion comes with a lot of long, hard thought and soul-searching, not with a sudden burst of hope spurred on by fear coming from a charismatic, pulpit-pounding preacher.

So I believe that the only "powerful" thing that came to them was the aforesaid preacher and his emphasis on Hell-fire if they didn't repent, i.e. mortal fear. I don't think there was any real reasoning involved, strictly the fear and the promise of "redemption" if they "accepted Christ as their Savior."

"Renounced" as a form of "repenting?" Yes. And as I say, they didn't just renounce homosexuality, they renounced sexuality.

I did notice that these two people seemed to have an underlying emotional base of anger. They were both very confrontational, even when responding to fairly innocuous comments and questions.

Thanks, GfS, for an opportunity to put forth serious observations and opinions with the hope that they will be taken, in turn, seriously.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 05:43 AM

"Not even remotely interested on who was, or why they felt they had to cover it. That is only feeding a rationalization. We're going for ANSWERS!"

Before you can establish the significance of any higher power on their "change of heart" you have to rule out other possile influences.

That is the most basic form of scientific method.

Cultural taboo has been the most significant persuader of all consistently throughout history, so it has to be factored in.

Leave it out and your "actual answers" are meaningless.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 06:30 AM

Returning to questions Ake asked me, further up this page.

I don't know if the 'take-up' of the option of gay marriage is low, as I suspect it depends on which particular concoction of statistics is at hand. I do have two observations, however.

Firstly, the commercialised gay subculture invests heavily (both financially and symbolically) in encouraging a lifestyle premised on hedonism. Generations of gay men have now grown up thinking that ''''the scene'''' (as it's commonly called, at least here in the UK) is the be-all and end-all of being gay. If you buy into that belief, then the 'settling down' option can look dull by comparison.

Secondly, a small minority of gay activists have vocaly criticised gay marriage as an 'impersonation' of heterosexual conventions and thus some sort of sell-out of homosexuality's radical potential.

Unsurprisingly, I don't share either view (it would make this post intolerably long to go into why, though if you're desperate to know, ask away).

Ake's second question asks if I equate homosexual rights with the situation of other sexual minorities. I'd have to answer that on a case by case basis, but my rule of thumb is that if sexual activity of any kind is conducted unexploitatively and by consenting individuals, then the law has no business in interfering. Also, at a slight tangent, I can think of plenty of heterosexual set-ups that wouldn't meet those criteria.


For what it's worth, one main reason my partner and I opted for a civil partnership was that it secured us some equality with married couples over things like inheritance & taxation matters (how romantic!!!!) and next-of-kin rights. My partner is a nurse and has witnessed ghastly occasions where a long-term same-sex partner of a patient is elbowed out of the way by a 'biological family' who suddenly appear, often after years of no contact, to seize the decisions over how the patient should be treated. I'd love to know what our most vociferous anti-gay contributors think about that - or about the case of a friend of a friend who was evicted from his home of forty years by the distant (and hysterically homophobic) relatives of his deceased partner.

I have gone on a bit!! Happy Christmas.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Elspeth
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 07:33 AM

GfS. I'm nnot uncomfortable with confronting anything like that. I just feel nthat this conversation mostly consists of verbally beating eachother right now and I thought it would be good to look at the actual topic the thread is about.

I referred to them as the "Church of Hate" because I do not think they act very Christian, and guives the rest of us a bad name. People immediately assume you are prejudiced against all sorts of things if you associate the word "Christian" with yourself. Now I'm happy to call myself a Christian generally as it most closely fits in with what I believe. However I really dislike it when I get associated with things like this just because of the name in common!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Elspeth
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 07:41 AM

May I just add to that it disgust me that _anyone_, especially any person that calls themself a christian, would encourage the death penalty for _anything_.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 09:01 AM

Hey folks,

You might think I'm crazy, but I tthought I'd just return to tthe thread topic for a minute ... before the "gays are unnatural and weird perverts" mob comes riding back into town ...

thought you might find this interesting.

The Archbishop of York (Ugandan Born) has condemned the Bill going through Ugandas parliament.


click here

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Elspeth
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 11:33 AM

"The Archbishop of York (Ugandan Born) has condemned the Bill going through Ugandas parliament"

Well that's something nice to hear =)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 01:30 PM

Hello Smedley, Thank you for answering so concisely and civilly.

Just a couple of points; in my link further up the thread,I cited figures from Denmark, Norway and Sweden, countries which legalised homosexual unions up to twenty years ago.....these countries show the take up of homosexual unions to be very low in percentage terms compared to heterosexual.
The figures also appeared to show that the few homosexuals who opted for Union or Marriage, did so mainly for financial and benefit reasons rather than the traditional reasons, like "providing a stable environment to bring up children"
The researchers seemed to come to the conclusion that this amounted to "redefinition of marriage"

On civil rights and health issues, many here say that civil rights should be given to all equally regardless of health issues, but that does not happen in the real world....people of different sexes who engage in incest are forbidden by law to have sexual intercourse, to marry, or even to join in civil union, because of "related health issues". Mating between mother/offspring, father/offspring is extremely common in nature

These people are denied their "rights" because of "health issues", while the homosexual health figures on life expectancy, hiv/aids etc are equally bad, or worse.

So as I have been saying for months "rights" are not universal, but conditional. Denial of rights also applies to other groups who are deemed unsuitable, like people who are suffering from addictions or severe psychiatric problems.

This state of conditionality seems to blow a huge hole in the "gay rights" argument?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 01:34 PM

Sorry Smedley, I meant to add that ones "civil rights" seem to depend more on how vociferous ones pressure group is, than on fairness and equality...Ake.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 01:46 PM

Ake,



"This state of conditionality seems to blow a huge hole in the "gay rights" argument? "


Only if you look at it in a shallow facile way and have the agenda of proving an untenable position.


To compare Gay with Straight you also have to examine the motivation of straight couples.

You assert that its all about procreation.

Not always.

Once you go east of europe it becomes all about money.

Even within Europe, there is social pressure to get married.

Some people get married at the age of 80 for the sake of companionship.

etc etc etc etc ....

Most importantly perhaps, when a straight couple gets married, the world says "congratulations".

When a Gay couple gets married, the world has a debate.



Thats when people like you come out of the woodwork and start banging on about your fixation with anal sex.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 02:07 PM

Smedley I'll re-post the Scandanavian figures.....They are interesting, please read them, and if yo've time get back with your views....Ake


LINK

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 02:15 PM

I think it time for someone to remind that heterosexual anal sex is pretty widespread too, as a variaiton [or even, I believe, with some couples, at least at one time, as a contraceptive device].

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 03:50 PM

Hahahahaaaaa! Pretty widespread... heheheheeee. I prefer a finger, myself.

Come on PEOPLE! 703 posts are not that far away!

Wha? Oh. Check the last drawn out, assinine bunch of crap... it was 2297 posts. Surely you can make it to a combined 3000... and far beyond. I have faith in you.

Merry Kissmeass!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 04:18 PM

Look out, Ake! Here comes one of those pesky flies again!

I can't verify whether the figures in the article you linked to are actually accurate or not because I haven't been able to find a reliably unbiased second source that will verify them.

AND

The article has a definite thrust toward a conservative bias, which is not surprising, considering that the article was from The National Review Online. The National Review is the Conservative magazine was founded in 1955 by the late Conservative pundit, William F. Buckley, Jr., and describes itself as "America's most widely read and influential magazine and web site for Republican/conservative news, commentary, and opinion."

In the past, the magazine supported Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan, and Pat Buchanan as Presidential candidates. Many of the magazine's commentators are affiliated with such think-tanks such as the Heritage Foundation and American Enterprise Institute. Prominent guest authors have included Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, and Sarah Palin in both the online and paper edition.

I would not accept anything found in this magazine unless I was able to find corroborating information from another, far less biased source.

Don Firth

(SWAT!!    Hah! Missed me again!!)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 04:51 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 04:54 PM

WHACK!!! (wipes away the juice)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 05:14 PM

Ake ... thats disgusting ... I mean I know you are prone to graphic and depraved fantasies, but whacking off in public ...


P.S. ... the link you have provided is a press release, not an independant synopsis.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 05:18 PM

No, Ake, I think you managed to smack yourself in the face with that one.

I browsed through several of the articles posted on the Williams Institute web site, and just about everything I read directly contradicted the assertions and statistics that you've been posting all this time. If you're referring to a specific article, you'd better point it out, because it certainly isn't leaping out at anyone.

In fact:    CLICKY!!

Wipe your nose, Ake. It's bleeding on your shirtfront.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 06:03 PM

It should be clear from my link that the Williams Inst is funded in support of a "Gay and Lesbian academic programme", that is why I printed the link in the first place.

Why should an organisation which supports a "Gay and Lesbian programme", print DUBIOUS statistics against homosexual marriage take-up.....That proves to me my figures are correct, I would not be able to say the same about the figures quoted immediately above this post.
For a start, the Scandinavian figures are over a twenty year period as opposed to a much shorter period in the Californian figures.
Also my article states that when homosexual unions are first introduced, ther is something of a rush....this soon tails off and drops dramatically as time progresses.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 06:20 PM

So, there are far less fags and dykes? What a revelation! Kinda makes one wonder what all the fuss is about then, don't it?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 06:42 PM

gnu....you didn't claim your 700......every little helps...:0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 06:59 PM

Pfffftt.... why don't yout make 703 next... much more apprpriate... 3000 posts... unreal.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 24 Dec 09 - 07:01 PM

Hmmmm... why not? 3000. Makes more sense than the rest.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 25 Dec 09 - 01:42 AM

Ake, you might want to actually read some of the articles. Several of them completely contradict what you keep saying. The Williams Institute is a department of the UCLA Law School that analyzes data about gays and lesbians. You might want to read the article where they state that 5% of the households in the United States are made up of same-sex couples.

And further:

LOS ANGELES -- A new study published today by UCLA's Williams Institute finds that same-sex couples eagerly take advantage of the ability to marry or form civil unions when presented with the opportunity. More than 85,000 couples have already signed up for legal recognition in eleven states--40% of all same-sex couples in these states.

I'll leave it as an exercise for you to find the rest of the article.

Have a happy Christmas. We're having a houseful of guests for Christmas, so I doubt I'll be around until afterward.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 25 Dec 09 - 02:14 AM

MERRY CHRISTMAS, EVERYONE!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 25 Dec 09 - 02:38 AM

Yes indeed — straight and gay; wankers and spankers; oral and moral; standers and bedders and sex·in·the·headers —

A MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL OUR READERS

Michael

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 25 Dec 09 - 03:22 AM

··· and even the chaste and straitlaced and the virgins with no urgin's ···

YULETIDE LOVINGS 2U ALL

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 25 Dec 09 - 06:24 AM

""May we go on??...with your imperial permission..or do we have to endure more of your off topic meanderings?""

If you would really like to move on and discuss the issues, how about giving your response to some of the questions which heretofore you have studiously ignored, in favour of attacking other posters for their style of writing or knowledge of the English Language?

A couple of examples are repeated below, the first, a question in response to a comment from Ake, to which, I already know, he will make no sensible reply. The second, a statement by me, which I consider self evidently true, in response to his persistent claim that homosexuals are, as a group, promiscuous, and uninterested in marriage.

1. Exactly how would permitting same sex marriage "undercut" the nature or function, or the "fundamental purpose" of heterosexual marriage?

That statement is arrant nonsense.

2. The number of marriages so far taken up is immaterial. Civil rights are not granted on the basis of how many citizens suffer discrimination, but rather on the basis of ensuring that no citizen suffers discrimination.

This is not politics! It is not pro-Gay propaganda! It is a matter of civil liberty, and civil rights under the law.

So Gfs, you said you wanted to discuss. Let's have your response to the questions posed, and not the writing style.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 26 Dec 09 - 11:46 AM

Don:"This is not politics! It is not pro-Gay propaganda! It is a matter of civil liberty, and civil rights under the law."

I hope this addresses your post.....
IF,(big 'IF"), the homosexual question, is a matter of being born that way (genetic, but unsubstantiated, and never proven), then, in deed, that is one issue. But in all the studies, even the ones you posted, those ACTUALLY BORN, with a condition, is no more than 2%,...and as low as .2%. This is not a matter of race, creed or color, or even national origin.
Now, if people are 'adopting' that claim, then it is THEM, that are infringing with other people's civil rights, by co-opting those who are truly born with homosexual leanings, to accommodate an acquired preference, either by choice, or by immaturity. Face it, whether hetero, or homo, people are far more inhibited about admitting who and why they chose to have sex with, and for what reason. Couldn't it be something as simple as they were just horny, and leave out the 'ennobled' crap about being 'in love', when after all, they were just 'in heat'??? Like it, or not, let's not feed each other a line of hogwash, which amounts to not much more than bar talk!...and make a 'civil rights' issue of it!!!!
Now if people want to live together, and do whatever they do, that is their own business. If, or when they want 'out', or want to go 'straight', which happens, contrary to your position, but inconsistent with the FACTS, as noted by several posts, including your own, then it is YOUR position, politically, that would DENY them help, or counseling. How is that equal civil rights???????

I think getting to the cause(s), is far more constructive than beating this issue, ad 'infinitum', and ad 'nauseum', and getting nowhere.

You've stated repeatedly, that homosexuality, was irreversible, but posted posts, that say differently. Joe as well, as with myself. So, why apply the 'civil rights' issue to where it clearly does not apply??
I personally think you may be sincere, with your concerns, but to apply them here, I also think you are sincerely wrong.

I was going to address another post, regarding this, and now by jumping off to this, I think, unfortunately, that it may just turn into the needless bickering, instead of getting to any understanding, as we were before.
I think exploring what IS the CAUSE, is key, to coming to an understanding, just how much the premise is, in regards to whether this is truly a civil rights issue....and I would think, that would concern you.......unless I'm wrong, and you are just waving the civil rights banner anywhere for anything.....and I think you may be just a bit more intelligent than that!

So, let's look into the CAUSE, before we make any claim, as to a 'cure'(Amos), or whether, people can re-define marriage, just to suit their sexual fantasies.

Doesn't that seem to be a more logical, honest and intelligent approach, as opposed to irrational doling out of applying a civil rights posture, which in FACT, would end up DENYING them of their real civil rights????....and psychological/medical aid, for a condition, that the same political agenda denies existing??? This is a deceptive distraction, which has potentially dangerous consequences, that reach far beyond this issue. Think it through.
Sorry, the thread took this turn...but let's make the best of it, and hope cooler heads prevail!
Regards,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 26 Dec 09 - 11:50 AM

Don Firth,
I'm sorry...I got the two Dons confused. Don Firth, I thought I was posting, in reply to you, and it was Don T.
That being said, I hope the post covers a few points we were addressing. I'm sorry, again, my mistake.
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 26 Dec 09 - 01:22 PM

I have just read GfS lengthy post and can see where he is on this now better. But, Gfs, whether whoever is right or wrong about if it is genetic or a choice (Icertainly do not think it a 'condition'), and if it is that people will do as they will, straight or gay, just because they may be horny and not actually be in love, why should any of them be actively discriminated against?

My basic premise, is that ALL people deserve to be treated with respect and true EQUAL RIGHTS (that does not necessarily mean we treat all people the same but that we treat everyone with no prejudice) and that we make allowances for all the diversities that exist out there. So, on the grounds of race, religion, gender, disability, sexuality, etc., etc., no-one should be singled out.

In essence this is not about whether people are born a certain way. It is about treating various sections of the human race less favourable because they do not conform, cannot conform or are different to the so called majority. That can never be right.

I, say, we aqs folk singers actively discriminated against people who saing, say, country and western - gave them different set of lasw and rights - we would think that so very bad and wrong. We ALL share music, but we all have different tastes. Much of that is down to choice I guess. I still think in the case of sexuality it is not a choice but, even so, why should someone who is homosexual be tretaed differently than someone who is straight? And if they choose to have a one night stand then so what? Straight people do it all the time. And those who want to be married should be able to do so without the fibre of society feeling threatened by their inclusion. For that is what EQUAL RIGHTS is all about, make no mistake... it is about inclusion of minorities (if they wish to be included) and not exclusion.

Why do so many people struggle with that actual concept? I know I have equally made a long answer. It is on the things covered in your post not not aimed at you. It is a general reply.

I keep saying I will not make any more replies to this thread but still feed I need to to try to find some ground on which we can all agree and not feel so diametrically opposed on both sides. The sad fact is that this has been the case for years and I fear for some time to come. It most certainly is not about me wanting to attack anyone with a different view or opinion or about me being right (though obviously I have made a stand on a given side of this). Me being right is not important. Treating people right is. That is what matters.

Hope you all had a great Christmas :-)

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 26 Dec 09 - 02:07 PM

GfS, much as I am reluctant to engage with you during the season of goodwill, can I ask you why you are so obsessed with the 'cause' of sexuality ?

Or to be more precise, with the cause of *my* sexuality.

All I know & care about is that as soon as I had sexual desires, they were focused on people of the same gender as myself. I dare say you feel likewise about the other-sex pull of your heterosexuality. Why are you so incessantly desperate to deny that simple and easy to grasp pont ?

The civil rights issue emerges as soon as a whole vast machinery of prejudices, discriminations and inequalities are imposed on me because of what I feel (less so than once, but progress is fragile and contextual), but are not imposed on you because of what you feel.

Fundamentally, that is the basic issue at stake here, despite your ceaseless blustering.

The only cause I would be interesting in fathoming is whatever causes your monomaniacal obsession with same-sex love.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 26 Dec 09 - 03:08 PM

Smedely...Not to speak for Sanity who is well able to handle the arguments of anyone here, but dont you think the "liberal" establishment is much more obsessed with "same sex love" than either Sanity or I.
Sanity is addressing the "causes" of homosexuality because the "gay" lobby insists homosexuality is genetic, without one shred of evidence.
I am addressing the health issues associated with homosexual practice, and the dangers of promoting homosexuality as a safe and healthy lifestyle.Marriage is to be redefined to accomodate homosexuality.
This promotion is in fact a tactic to turn what should be a health issue into a political issue.
As I have said many times sexual minorities are not all treated with "no prejudice" nor should they be if the welfare of these same minorities and society at large is to mean anything at all

Before anything is normalised the reasons for the abysmal male homosexual health figures must be discovered.
If the present increase in the male homosexual Hiv/aids figures continues for say another five years, would you still maintain that no action needs to be taken(the why dont you leave us alone syndrome)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Ebbie, away from home, house/dog sitting
Date: 26 Dec 09 - 04:43 PM

I recently read a book that explored the 'causes' of same sex attraction and, given that most homosexual people don't propagate, why male (Female homosexuality has not been seriously studied) homosexuality has not died out

I don't have the book to hand - I am not home - but there were two hypotheses put forth:

1) It is possible that the 'gene' is carried in the female siblings of a homosexual male and transmitted to their own progeny to emerge farther down the line. There is some evidence to support that possibility.

2) The other postulation is that homosexual males have been persecuted, for generations, so that it has not been safe to come out, and therefore many men have married and had children, never daring to live openly according to their own desires. That, of course, does not mean that these closeted men have not had homosexual contacts- just look at some recent infamous examples of that- nor does it address bi-sexuality.

But they concluded that if #2 turns out to be the correct answer, the possibility exists that the incidence of homosexuality will decline as it becomes safer.

Speaking of 'safer', ake, you bang on about the "horrendous" health risks that homosexuals face- but I have never heard you say a word about hang-gliding, ice-climbing, mountain-climbing, or bungee jumping, or even the most dangerous activity of all: commercial fishing. You might even say that it is catching, since many children of the risk takers take up the same lifestyle.

For that matter, many children of obese parents also become obese, What should we do about it?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 26 Dec 09 - 05:38 PM

Ake, once again I refute the notion that 'causation' is at all relevant, except to those who still wish to stigmatise and (by implication) eradicate. I'll start being interested in what caused my sexuality once I've seen large numbers of heterosexuals do the same.

The whole 'cause' thing is (to interpret it kindly) a red herring, or (to be more suspicious) a strategy of persisting in discrimination.

I don't, by the by, need remindig of the havoc caused by HIV; I'm certain I've lost more friends to the virus than you have.

And as for your worries about homosexuality being 'normalised', it doesn't need to be, as it's already normal. It's what my normal self normally is, every normal day of my normal life.

It's just as normal as heterosexuality, or bisexuality. It is, however, less common.

I'm well aare that I can never persuade you or The Sanity Beast of this view, but on reflection I'm not primarily writing these posts for you. It's more a case that I would hate some poor conflicted soul who is in any sort of turmoil over being gay to read your posts (and even more so those of GfS) without some sort of measured, reasonable, queer response being offered as a counter-voice.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 26 Dec 09 - 06:41 PM

HIV had its origins in African primates and is believed to be transmitted to humans by the bite of monkeys, especially humans who were hunting monkeys to sell illegally as "bush meat." The virus is transmitted from one human to another in bodily fluids. This can, and does, include by blood transfusion, which is why blood banks carefully screen blood doners. During both homosexual AND heterosexual sex, bodily fluids are exchanged. This is what makes HIV a venereal disease—but not exclusively a venereal disease, since it can be transmitted non-sexually.

HIV is NOT spontaneously created by homosexual practices. The concept of "spontaneous generation" (the idea that life forms such as mice, flies, and other vermin are created by heaps of rubbish or garbage, when in actually the vermin existed before the rubbish heap did and were attracted to it, not created by it) is totally untenable. Many scientists, including Louis Pasteur in 1859, proved that not only does this not happen, but that it is biologically impossible.

Male homosexual activity does not create the AIDs virus. This is a scientific fact that one of the debaters here absolutely refuses to accept.

One very effective way to reduce the spread of HIV/AIDs (in addition to the careful screening of blood—and, for that matter, organ—doners) is to strive to reduce the combination of unprotected sex and promiscuous sex. One way (embraced by many gays and lesbians themselves) is to encourage stable, monogamous relationship among gays and lesbians in the same way that stable relationships are encouraged among heterosexuals in order to reduce the spread of venereal disease AND the incidence of unwanted children conceive accidentally, along with, of course, the idea of the immorality of conjugal relations "without the benefit of clergy."

Consider the documented and demonstrated enthusiasm of the gay/lesbian community for the idea of the legalization of same/sex marriage (despite the unsupported denial of those who oppose the idea). This enthusiasm is shown by gays and lesbians themselves, and is not the product of the fictional "liberal establishment, dragging gays and lesbians kicking and screaming" postulated by at least one or more of the anti-same-sex marriage debaters.

As to the "causes" of same-sex orientation, although a "gay gene" per se has not yet been isolated, the evidence is certainly there that it is a hereditary characteristic has been pretty solidly established by the same methods that Gregor Mendel demonstrated in the mid-1800s. Same-sex orientation appears to run in families, same as eye-color or other hereditary characteristics, and in the case of male homosexuality, there are indications, as Ebbie points out, that the hereditary factor is transmitted by some members of the female side of an extended family.

Mendel establish what happens, and now, geneticists are establishing the mechanisms by which it happens.

Another connection with the female side is that the expectant mother does not release the necessary hormones to the fetus at the appropriate time in its development. Thus, although the Y chromosome determines the child's physical structure as a male, the mis-timed hormones determines the child's sexual orientation as female.

In short, geneticists looking for a "gay gene" may have been looking in the wrong place. The male homosexual may not carry the gay gene, the gay gene may have been carried by his mother.

Advocates of the "gender orientation is simply a matter of choice" school of thought may cavil at the fact that although these findings are not yet solidly accepted by all biologists and geneticists, they are accepted by a large number of them.

If the advocates of the idea that gender orientation is a matter of "choice" were honest about it, they would have to concede that there is far less evidence for their position than there is for the contention that gender orientation is determined by hereditary factors.

When the Central Lutheran Church congregation was discussing whether or not to adopt the "Affirmation of Welcome" in its entirety (including the gender orientation phrase), a gay acquaintance of mine said, "Considering that being gay can get you discriminated against, made fun of, hated, beat up, and even killed, why on earth would a person choose to be gay?"

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 26 Dec 09 - 07:27 PM

"I am addressing the health issues associated with homosexual practice, and the dangers of promoting homosexuality as a safe and healthy lifestyle.Marriage is to be redefined to accomodate homosexuality."


Safe sex = healthy


Unsafe sex = unhealthy


Risks of unsafe sex = AIDS/HIV, HPV, Ghonnorhea, Syphillis, Chlamydia.


Those at the greates risk from AIDS are Gay men.

Those at the greatest risk from the rest are adolescent girls and young women.


HIV can become AIDS and kill you.

HPV can cause cervical cancer and kill you.

Neither can currently be cured but remain in your system till you die.




Ake's solution = to teach that homosexuality is not healthy.



The issue he deliberately distorts to excuse his homophobia is that of sexual health.


He deliberately ignores STI's in young women and AIDS in Africa.


Inconvenient evidence is ignored.


The same mantra is peddled again and again.



Ake    Some people are Gay .... Get over it!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 26 Dec 09 - 08:09 PM

"The civil rights issue emerges as soon as a whole vast machinery of prejudices, discriminations and inequalities are imposed on me because of what I feel (less so than once, but progress is fragile and contextual), but are not imposed on you because of what you feel."


IMO, that is the single best post on this thread. Brilliant, Smedley.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 26 Dec 09 - 08:26 PM

"the dangers of promoting homosexuality as a safe and healthy lifestyle."

Who has promoted homosexuality as a safe and healthy lifestyle?

And where?


Smedley, you will note that even if I get an answer to the first question, I will definitely get none for the second.


"Marriage is to be redefined to accomodate homosexuality."


Can someone define marriage?


Are there exceptions to the rule?


Why are these ignored in heterosexuals but focussed on in homosexuals?


"This promotion is in fact a tactic to turn what should be a health issue into a political issue."


What promotion?


Where?


And how does it turn a health issue into a political issue?



The health issue is SAFE SEX and UNSAFE SEX


Bringing in sexuality makes it a political issue.


That means you Ake.



You are fixated on Gay Sex in an unhealthy way.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 12:22 AM

I think this thread would go a lot more smooth, if we could all stop projecting what each other think, and re-acting to those presumptions. Ake's position, which is 'after the fact', about health issues, while being a valid concern, is not the sole concern, as he has stated in the
prop 8 thread. I think, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, is that when he posted the health issues, and the AIDS/HIV stats, the thread got detoured, into those arguing if he was saying AIDS was caused by homosexuals, which, of course he did not say, nor is it true. So everyone starts re-acting to that argument, and insulting each other, when is people had just read what he was posting, ABOUT THAT SUBJECT, ALONE, there should have not been much controversy....but because things are taken out of context, misquoted, and argued defensively, instead of just taken in, we end up with these divisions...instead of building upon, and more insights shared.

As to myself, and asked why, the subject is of interest to me....originally, in the Prop 8 thread, I specifically stated, BEFORE, I offered an opinion, that I reserved offering one, unless I could dialogue with someone who was truly educated, on the subject...because I am!....Though the focus of my practice, did not focus on that issue exclusively, I did NOT want to engage with those who primarily were unschooled on the subject, other than their 'feelings' about it!..............which outcome is certainly obvious to what this has evolved into.

How come, with the max. of 2% of homosexuals being that way from birth, do ALL homosexuals claim they were of that 2%???...What about the remaining 98%???

Why do people INSIST on it being genetic, when the scientist conducting the studies, say that that is NOT conclusive???...nor can find the gene???

Why do homosexuals INSIST they had 'no choice', until they get out of it?????..and 'renounce' it???

How can homosexuality be such a brain lock, and yet an emotion, such as 'fear', as said by Don Firth, perhaps 'fear of going to hell', and they snap out of it????.......How come people don't 'snap INTO' it?

I've got more thought provoking questions....and that being said, I'm NOT ATTACKING homosexuals, or homosexuality, but I'm hoping that you THINK these questions through, BEFORE expounding some of your 'brilliant' expertise....because. frankly, some of you are making embarrassing asses of yourselves....respectfully, of course.

How, in San Francisco, can city government employees, can get sex change operations paid for with tax dollars, which include counseling how to cope with the operation, and gender 'transformation'...but you can't get them to pay for counseling, if you're feeling those tendencies, have a family, with children, and DON'T want to become homosexual...lose your marriage, and family???......Because some political hack says you have no choice, and can't change?????....Now whose CIVIL RIGHTS are being denied??????

Something to think about!
Learn HOW TO THINK...NOT WHAT TO THINK!!!!!!!!

Without attacking anyone,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 05:15 AM

GfS - here I go again, making points I know you'll ignore, but hey ho....

As a homosexual, I have never given very much thought at all as to whether my sexuality is genetic or not. It doesn't matter to me, honestly it doesn't. Interestingly, it seems to matter hugely to straight people, on both sides of this rancorous debate. (Indeed, I sometimes get concerned when liberal/'gay=friendly' straights try and argue on this turf - I fear you're playng into the hands of the homophobes, so be very careful.)

I don't care why I'm gay, I'm just happy that I am. I don't see myself as some sort of 'lab rat'. Whatever the balance of biological and societal factors, my sexual orientation is part of (but not the whole of) my core identity. Why should it matter to anyone how it happened ? Please explain why it interests you so much - I would be genuinely interested to know.

And as for the notion of 'changing' sexual orientation, this does happen - it happens (as I've said before) when individuals feel pressurised to change, in various 'directions', by political or religious or otherwise ideological beliefs. This does indeed challenge the 'it's all genetic' argument.

It also happens when people fall so much in love with someone that their previous sexual choices seem unsustainable.

Two of my best friends are women who live together in the most loving relationship that I know. When they met, one was married to a man, the other recently separated from a husband. Both had two children. Neither had ever had same-sex relationships before. Even now they don't use the word 'lesbian' to describe themselves, unless others insist that they do.

Eighteen years later, they are still together. Everyone in the scenario is very contented, even the former husbands, apart from one of the women's daughters. I feel for her and I'm sorry that she can't find it to accept how things are, but in my view she has no right to elect herself the sole adjudicator on how her mother chooses to be happy.

I know, GfS, that you would instinctively zooom in on that one angry and unsupportive person & prioritise her wishes above everyone else. And this is because you always, always put the happiness of heterosexuals above the happiness of others. You are irretrievably prejudiced that way. You cannot take off those blinkers. You seem trapped in a mindset premised on venom and retribution. I feel sorry for you.

I have gone on about this example because to me the matter of sexuality is not about statistics & percentages & 'science', it is about the almost-always-messy world of emotions and feelings and relationships. It's a complicated world out there. I think you should acknowledge that.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 05:47 AM

The word "homophobe" is overused Smedley.....as you probably know.

All the people that I have met, who could be loosely described as homophobic, are simply not sufficiently literate to put their concerns on homosexuality and its promotion into mainstream society, into a properly constructed argument, so they fall back into the use of abusive terms.......I have never come across anyone who has genuine hatred of homosexuals...maybe I've led a sheltered life.

Also referring to "sanity the beast" does not encourage intelligent debate.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 06:11 AM

The word 'homophobe' does indeed trip too lightly off some tongues.

However, it still merits use on some occasions.

Although you and I, ake will never agree about sexuality matters, I do not think it is a word I could reasonably apply to you (your attitude towards homosexuality strikes me as being too, erm, complex to be so briskly labelled).

GfS, I fear, is another matter. And yes, I had one verbal swipe at GfS but plese don't highlight that at the expense of ignoring the other, longer & more reasonable points I have tried to put to that person.

Back in the 1970s, you may be interested to know, the word 'heterosexist' had some political currency, coined on the model of 'sexist' or 'racist', to denote a person or viewpoint that subscribed to a view in the innate superiority of heterosexuality. I always thought it was a more useful, flexible term than 'homophobic' but the latter won out.

And if you have never met genuine hatred of homos, then lucky old you. Things could have been different, I'd suggest, if you were one.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 07:34 AM

"are simply not sufficiently literate to put their concerns on homosexuality and its promotion into mainstream society"

There are no sexual health concerns mentioned on this thread that are exclusive to homosexuals.

What Ake calls the dangers of homosexuality are in fact the dangers of unsafe sex for people of all sexualities.

The fact that he insists on ignoring this fact shows that his point of view is not backed up by his own rationale.

Ake's rationale supports an argument in favour of safe sex over unsafe sex.

It says nothing about homosexuals.

Yet he continues to talk about unsafe sex as if it the preserve of Gay men.

He continues to assert that homosexuality is an unsafe practice, despite having no rationale or evidence to support this view.

This shows that he is more concerned with proving that homosexuality is a problem than he is with the issues raised by his rationale and by the evidence he has provided.


In other words he has a problem with gays.


His other contention is that homosexuality is "promoted" in schools.

Ask him how this is done and ask for examples.

You will get no response.

Are there stalls in schools where gay people ask passers by if they want to sign up?

What aspect of homosexuality is promoted?

Is it the bit that plagues Akes fetid imagination?

Are there bumming classes?

No.

Is there a lot of homophobia in schools?

Yes!

How do I know? I know numerous boys and girls in primary and secondary schools and calling someone Gay is a surefire way to get a laugh or to start a fight and a great way to victimize and ostracize someone regardless of whether they are gay or not.


My daughter is at school. (do you have kids Ake?)


My daughters school, and every other school in the country, teaches tolerance for all sectors of society.

They do this to combat the behaviour I have described.

In other words, they protect the civil rights of their pupils and their pupils families.

As I have said elsewhere on Mudcat, My daughters childminder looks after another child who has two mums.

I am aware of other children with the same type of family.

The school does not tolerate teasing or other ways in which children of gay couples are subjected to homophobia.

The schoool does not tolerate homophobia against gay couples by either children or homophobic parents.

I would add that I do not think there is such a thing as a homophobic child. Children are by nature open minded and accepting until taught to discriminate by a bigot.

Ake for example would happpily teach kids that gays are sick perverts who should be avoided.

His smokescreen and his homophobia are both utterly pathetic.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 07:47 AM

Smedley,

I disagree with you.

For the reasons I outlined in my last post I believe Ake is homophobic.

I see GfS as holding no particular point of view except that which is different to all others and which ensures she gets as much attention as possible.

I get a feeling that she has a good heart but is misguided. She'd probably be a lot of fun in the real world, but you'd have to be realistic about her unpredictable behaviour.

Ultimately, in my opinion, she just wants to be listened to and loved.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 08:50 AM

Smedley wrote: "As a homosexual, I have never given very much thought at all as to whether my sexuality is genetic or not. It doesn't matter to me, honestly it doesn't. Interestingly, it seems to matter hugely to straight people, on both sides of this rancorous debate".

It matters not to me either, personally, but I do argue the genetic side in order to show that gay people do not have a choice. But even if they did have a choice. I am not bothered. It's their choice to make, not mine. But I still find no earthly reason why someone should go through all the hurt and pain inflicted on them if they could so easily choose to get out of it. THAT proves to me more than anything it is not choice. And that is why I state what I do. Personally though it makes not a ha'peth of difference to me. Where there is *****phobia, hatred and bigotry and would always try and speak up against it.

I have lots of friends who are full on gay and I have heard enough from them to make me feel I know what goes on for them. The emphasis above though is that I have lots of FRIENDS who are gay. Not I have lots of gay friends. They are FRIENDS... makes no difference what comes with it because all my friends are very individual and different. I have friends that are solidly Christian but not in your face with their religion. I have folk friends who are tranditionalsts! OMG! ;-) Etc., etc,. A friend is a friend.
---------


As regards homophobia and bigotry... I think much could be gained by researching it and finding out why some are completely entrenched. What causes homophobia type questioning and research may gives us more ideas as to why, in the face of all that is known, it still prevails. The truth with homophobia, of course, is that it IS a choice. People do choose to be homophobic. Some cannot help it, nor want to change it, nor want to get help for it, and some would never acknowledge they were homophobic, but that they are, or do a good job of showing 'true colours' is plain for others to see. Bigotry is a little more entrenched into human psychology I fear and may not have the same primers as homophobia. TOLERANCE is all that is needed. With that would come ACCEPTANCE, hopefully. So teaching tolerance, not promoting anything but plain simple humanity to others, has to be one of the ways forward. Of course many are simply accepting of others and their differences from the start. That is the best thing to see. Being tolerated is okay but being accepted is much better. We all seek validity on things in our life. We are human.

In short. I'll say it as I have kept saying it. I am not bothered what causes homosexuality. It does bother me what causes homophobia and hatred because that in itself has been and still is a great cause to the loss of the life of many individuals.

It's frightening when you see it in place and the great harm it causes. I know Smedley will be no stranger to its insidious horrors and anyone who has never witnessed it's viciousness and inhumanity has to be lucky. It is not uncommon, along with the other hate crime type offences, but then some would also deny the need for that legislation too.

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 09:48 AM

Yadda, yadda yadda, blazoo goof goof.....anything but answering my questions!
Look, at where the snide remarks come from...Happy people??..Emotionally mature people??
You talk about being accepted, yet have an axe to grind, regarding straight people. Perhaps you should take your own advice.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 10:33 AM

Blazoo goof goof - I have tried this on several translation websites but without success.

I have no wish to be 'accepted' - if anyone has a problem about me being gay, it's something they need to sort out with their analyst, their conscience, their brain cells, their deity or their alcohol stash.

And do I have an axe to grind ? Only with one-track-minded homophobes.

As for emotional maturity, it wasn't me that said blazoo goof goof......

I cannot answer your question, Sanitary dear, as I do not acknowledge the premises on which they are based.

(If none of GfS' jibes were aimed at me, then I have no need to post the above. But just in case.....)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 11:14 AM

""Before anything is normalised the reasons for the abysmal male homosexual health figures must be discovered.
If the present increase in the male homosexual Hiv/aids figures continues for say another five years, would you still maintain that no action needs to be taken(the why dont you leave us alone syndrome)""

You bring this point up every hour, on the hour, and try to insinuate that no research into the causes of homosexuality or HIV/AIDS has been carried out.

In point of fact, both are among the most assiduously and minutely researched subjects in the whole field of biology.

The perils of promiscuous sexuality are not, as you well know, limited to any sexual orientation, yet, when it is suggested to you that the introduction of a stable monogamous option would assist in reducing risk, you dismiss it out of hand as being not worthy of discussion.

You claim that take-up is low, but fail to realise that the number of anti gay bigots screaming their heads off in an attempt to control what is none of their business, may bear some considerable responsibility for that.

You don't want solutions, you want homosexuals repressed, and eliminated as in the past.

As to your comment that there is not one shred of evidence for homosexuality being anything other than a lifestyle choice, that is so ridiculous that I can't imagine even you truly believe it.

But just in case you do, please tell me at what age you looked at the two possible "lifestyles" available to you, and made a conscious decision to stick it only to girls.

I use that crude language so that you will understand the question, you having used that kind of pejorative slang repeatedly.

Now I will wait to be told once more that I am not worth a response. There are an awful lot of people in this world that you consider inferior to you, and generally the qualification is the ability to ask questions to which you have NO ANSWER!.

Try how you will to conceal it, your ulterior purpose is abundantly clear to all.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 11:33 AM

""I have never come across anyone who has genuine hatred of homosexuals...maybe I've led a sheltered life.""

If that statement is true Ake, it would explain a lot.

I know the internet has opened up the world, but I never thought I would be able to communicate with an alien on some very distant planet (which planet, by the way Ake?).

A short enquiry at your local police station, or at the A&E at the local hospital, should give you a clue as to the number of battered, broken, bodies appear regularly, having had an encounter with one of those gay bashers of whose existence you appear to be unaware.

I should have thought you would want to know them as they are doing their best to get rid of the "problem" for you.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 03:09 PM

I'm sorry to inform you of this, GfS, but when you posted this:

Yadda, yadda yadda, blazoo goof goof.....anything but answering my questions!
Look, at where the snide remarks come from...Happy people??..Emotionally mature people??
You talk about being accepted, yet have an axe to grind, regarding straight people. Perhaps you should take your own advice.

You managed to completely negate all of your previous pleas to have a calm and reasonable discussion. That is not the kind of post, expressing contempt for those with whom s/he doesn't agree, I would ever read from a person who actually wants a reasonable discussion.

I have tried to state my points in a reasonable, straightforward manner, as have others on this thread, and rather than you responding to questions put to you, you respond with a post like that!

Other that merely giving lip-service to it (especially when your back is against the wall), YOU are the one who is not demonstrated good faith.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 03:16 PM

Jeez!....Here we are back again to the 'Bigot', 'Homophobes', 'Anti Gay Bigots', and 'Haters'...and the like. When all else fails, and you have nothing to say, or can't answer a simple question, or even have a hard time thinking, or pursuing an original thought, or considering a new thought, some very boring people resort to name calling.

At least Don Firth, and myself had 'spirited', and 'creative' disagreements..in which actual knowledge and provocative thoughts were expressed. This other junk is banal!

Anyone out there capable of the concept of 'considering'?..outside of yourself?

Jeez, I betcha' their 'folk' music is just as uninspired and boring!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 03:21 PM

Hey Don, we cross posted. If you read my earlier posts, you might have flashed that I had mistaken Don.T's 'off our train of thought' post, for yours. Sorry. Don't get thy knickers in a twist. We were doing fine. What questions were you referring to?.. and while posting, respond to mine as well....this CAN turn around...again to something a bit more informative!
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 03:26 PM

Like I just said, GfS. Others beside me have attempted to have a reasonable discussion with you, but you can't seem to refrain from getting snotty when it's not going your way.

I've been around awhile, GfS, and I've had lots of discussions with lots of people on lots of subjects. From debate in high school to philosophy and logic classes in college, to many discussions over a coffee or a beer with lots of intelligent, well-informed people (including a few you may have heard of). I've heard it all before.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 03:49 PM

My posts to this thread have been the most rude I've ever made anywhere..

I do apologise for being offensive to any individuals I've been personally rude too. I don't like being offensive to people. Though sometimes it happens, and I do regret that (yes, honestly).

I'm afraid these threads tend to make me very angry, so sometimes I blurt out what I'm feeling. Especially as I find so much of these threads are a complete joke! Quite frankly, if it were up to me I'd have "discussions" like this banned as I find them so offensive. So what can one do but laugh & take the piss?

In any event - so refreshing to hear speak of same sex LOVE rather than the incessant stuff about 'gay sex viruses'. LOVE is magical and real and it happens between boys and girls in all kinds of combinations.

And good for anyone that finds it wherever they find it.
Happy Xmas all :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 04:16 PM

They're Rioting in Africa (The Merry Minuet)
(Sheldon Harnick)

Intro:
    There are days in my life when everything is dreary
    I grow pessimistic, sad and world weary.
    But when I'm tearful and fearfully upset
    I always sing this merry little minuet:

They're rioting in Africa
They're starving in Spain
There's hurricanes in Florida
And Texas needs rain.

The whole world is festering
With unhappy souls
The French hate the Germans,
The Germans hate the Poles
Italians hate Yugoslavs
South Africans hate the Dutch
And I don't like anybody very much

But we can be grateful
And thankful and proud
That man's been endowed
With a mushroom shaped cloud

And we know for certain
That some happy day
Someone will set the spark off
And we will all be blown away

They're rioting in Africa
There's strife in Iran
What nature doesn't do to us
Will be done by our fellow man.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 05:02 PM

GfS

"Anyone out there capable of the concept of 'considering'?..outside of yourself?"

You've had this said to you many times in your life haven't you.

And you haven't really ever understood it, but you know it has a powerful meaning, so you use it from time to time as a diversion tactic when all else are failing.

If you were able to be considerate you would not talk about smedley as if he were a lab rat. You would be aware that he is human and you would have some empathy for his context.

If you were not totally self absorbed and if you didn't exist in a 'room full of mirrors' you would see how preposterous your posturing as some kind of Phd Student with a specialization in sexuality was.

As it is, any kind of attention is good for you and making 'controversial' statements and being a 'maverick' are the best ways you know of getting more.

In fact, your apperent 'radical' and 'edgy' style is like ether. It evaporates and disappears in the blink of an eye, which is why you think you have to keep repeating the same mistakes over and over.

Real substance scares you. You are afraid that you might not be able to understand it on one hand, and on the other hand you are afraid of what you will find out about yourself if you do understand it.

I see you as a pinball pinging around the mudcat having no lasting impact on anyone and but being happy as long as your existence is acknowledged.

You get most satisfaction when one of the grumpy old men shakes his fists at you and you are most likely to attack the ones who have compassion for you and have the patience to engage with you.

I have neither particularly, but I don't mind giving you the odd little theatrical fist shake from time to time if thats what you like.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 05:21 PM

GfS, at 26 Dec 09 - 06:41 p.m., I posted a reasonable summation of the whole discussion, including objective answers (all verifiable to anyone who cares to look) to the issues that you and Ake keep raising, and you blew right by it without comment and went right back to the same assertions you've been making since the Prop. 8 thread. I'm afraid it's you who doesn't answer questions or issues raised.

When you called for a calm, well-reasoned and civil discussion, you just reasserted the same arguments you've been using all along, and when you got the same refutations, you simply returned to responding abusively—as you did before.

'Round and a'round she goes. . . .

I think it's probably time for Ake to come in and spell you. But then, he does the same thing.

I'm getting bloody bored with this!!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999--in the spirit of the season . . . .
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 06:41 PM

Deck the halls with boughs of holly,
Fa la la la la, la la la la.
Tis the season to be jolly,
Fa la la la la, la la la la.

Don we now our gay apparel,
Fa la la, la la la, la la la.
Troll the ancient Yule tide carol,
Fa la la la la, la la la la.

See the blazing Yule before us,
Fa la la la la, la la la la.
Strike the harp and join the chorus.
Fa la la la la, la la la la.

Follow me in merry measure,
Fa la la la la, la la la la.
While I tell of Yule tide treasure,
Fa la la la la, la la la la.

Fast away the old year passes,
Fa la la la la, la la la la.
Hail the new, ye lads and lasses,
Fa la la la la, la la la la.

Sing we joyous, all together,
Fa la la la la, la la la la.
Heedless of the wind and weather,
Fa la la la la, la la la la.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 06:50 PM

Just curious, GUEST,999. Do you have anything to say, or are you just pissing in the punchbowl?

Don Firth (has left the buiding)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 07:10 PM

Do you have any idea how nasty you have become, Don. It was a joy to read your writing and see you express your thoughts just a while back. Lately, you've become a miserable old fart. Dictatorial, pissy, and fuckin' rude. This I tell you because someone has to let you know, not because you 'demanded' an accounting. I owe you NOTHING! So, either lighten up or get stuffed, and it's not up to you to ask why I post what I did. You used to be smart enough to have a sense of humour and verve. You lost that quality somewhere. Too bad.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 08:03 PM

I don't think so, 999. I'm still my sweet, serene self.

I do believe sincerely in civil rights for everyone, and when someone wants to limit the civil rights of a minority group, I see nothing wrong with opposing that attempted limitation strenuously. There are quite a number of well-known historical figures who felt the same way. Most of them were villified at the time, but history has recorded them as "the good guys."

Incidentally, those who single out specific groups and attempt to either oppress them or limit their civil rights (same thing, really) are call "bigots." Dictionary definition. I don't define anyone as a bigot. They define themselves by what the do and say.

Now, if you go back through the threads, both this one and the Prop. 8 thread, I think you'll discover that I most certainly didn't start the name-calling, and I have never impugned the intelligence of someone with whom I did not agree. GfS and Ake do that on a regular basis, calling me and others "stupid" and "knee-jerkers" and accusing us of being "liberal fascists."

So I'd suggest that you do a little research before you start popping off at someone.

Now—do you actually have anything of substance to add to the discussion, or is joining in the personal abuse your reason for being here?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 09:14 PM

Despite all the shit you post Don.....your only arugment amounts the belief that all sexual minorities should be treated equally.

A dozen times I have made the argument that this is not the case and provided facts to prove it. Rights are conditional on health psychiatric considerations and homosexuality at the moment contravenes both these considerations.

You really make no attempt to argue a case, but rely on the usual abuse about homophobes(a tactic that Smedley has called into question).....and the sympathy vote from the intellectually challenged.
You have a nerve to attack 999 about his posting style, 999 has proved his open mindedness on this thread, as well as his wit and humour.
Something sadly lacking in yourself or your sidekick

Oh and by the way, the next time you dramatically announce "you're out of here!!" or "Don Firth has left the building"....for fuck sake don't disappoint everybody!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 27 Dec 09 - 09:45 PM

Ake, my post at 26 Dec 09 - 06:41 p.m. is pretty much a summation of everything I have been arguing all along.

And I did not say all sexual minorities. I do not condone pedophilia, either from homosexuals or heterosexuals. But there are already laws on the books covering that ("Age of consent").

And as to Ake's remark about "all the shit" I post—did you take note of that remark, GUEST,999?

Ake, both you and GfS use the tactic of misrepresenting what those with whom you disagree say and then attacking them on the basis of your misrepresentation—just as you did there, in your most recent post. That's one of the more transparent fallacies and it's been pointed out to you on numerous occasions, but you keep using it.

I do not believe your protestations of caring for health and welfare of male homosexuals. If you really cared, you wouldn't be trying to lock them into a life of promiscuity by denying them a perfectly viable alternative.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Wesley S
Date: 28 Dec 09 - 10:25 AM

Death penalty for homosexuals?

You might just ask them to read all 745 posts to this thread a few times. That should do it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 28 Dec 09 - 10:27 AM

Wesley, you may well have a point.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 28 Dec 09 - 07:07 PM

""A dozen times I have made the argument that this is not the case and provided facts to prove it. Rights are conditional on health psychiatric considerations and homosexuality at the moment contravenes both these considerations.""

So now, as well as having a built in propensity for paedophilia, they are all disease ridden nutcases who should not be allowed access to the same rights as the rest of the population.

You just get more and more and weird Ake, and more and more strident with your fatally flawed concepts of both homosexuality and medicine.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 28 Dec 09 - 08:37 PM

"You just get more and more and weird Ake, and more and more strident with your fatally flawed concepts of both homosexuality and medicine."

Not to mention his concept of civil rights.

He trys to suggest that denying homosexuals their rights constitutes caring for them ...

... and he thinks that losing an argument constitutes a threat to his freedom of speech.

But at least he has admitted that he believes homosexuals should not have the same rights as us.

It serves as useful further evidence of the truth of his position.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Donuel
Date: 29 Dec 09 - 04:34 PM

With so many quotes from others in each others posts I lost track of who is psychotic or sadistic or both.

I do know that the Nazi's and Soviets had wonderful mental institutions and that 'health psychiatric considerations' were crafted to prove that Jews were sub human. The discovery/invention of new kinds of perversion came in very handy for the State to imprison, enslave or destroy the lives of "undesirables".

The uptight positions taken might reflect personal reflections or inner demons that became menacing. Relax, no one gives a shit.

I support civil rights.

Take them away from even one group only and you have destroyed civil rights. Its like having the freedom of speech ... except of course for Paul Burke,


or Bill D and John from Kansas and others like 999 to be named later ... like the entire state of Alaska and...

you see now? It is no longer a freedom of speech.
Same with Civil Rights. Yep it will even include people you won't like... which for some people is a lot of people.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Elspeth
Date: 29 Dec 09 - 07:19 PM

"Rights are conditional on health psychiatric considerations and homosexuality at the moment contravenes both these considerations."

Donuel and the others are right. sorry Ake, rights are not conditional. And even if they were it is not homosexuality that contravenes botht hese conditions. A person just _is_ homosexual, that doesn;t automatically give them health issues. Some of their _personal_ choices may lead them to have health issues but that is on an induvidual basis the same as it is for any other part of society. Homosexuality is just something people are. It's not a group like...a particular church group or...vegans. lets take vegans! I know several Vegans who have serious eating issues because they don;t know how to feed themselves a properly balenced diet. Are we supposed with hold their rights because their private life might cause some health issues for them? No, of course not. If we provide rights for people who create their own issues why on earth should we not for people who just happen to be gay and hence associated with STIs? It's not a club! It's not a label that gives you the right to deny their rights! It's just that they happent to prefer people of their own gender. It's irrelevant. You can;t start taking away rights because you think someone has chosen an unhealthy lifestyle. That goes for gay and straight, people who stuff themselves with junk, fat people, skinny models, every teenage boy that sleeps around etc etc. or...say you had a hereditary disease would you think it fair for them to ban you from marriage and sex because of the risk of it being passed on? No. Of course you wouldn't. because, it's totally irrelevant!

Also, do you think STIs and other health issues are that much more prevelant in homosexuals? Why do you think that?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Elspeth
Date: 29 Dec 09 - 07:27 PM

of cours ehtinking purely of safe sex here...do you think the high levels of STIs in homosexuals could be because they don;t have the worry of pregnancy? I mean if you don;t have to use protection to prevent an unwanted pregnancy it's not as high on the list. Or maybe it's just that men sleep around more and in a hpomosexual paring there isn;t a woman there gonna flip out about not using protection cos she doens;t want to get pregnant? Did it occur to you that perhaps if hetero couples weren;t so concerned about pregnancy the levels of STIs would sky rocket?
Also are you aware of the HIV/AIDS levels in some areas of Africa? The colossal numbers of AIDS orphans? You don't get orphans from homosexual pairings obviously. So what does that tell you about the spread of STIs there?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Elspeth
Date: 29 Dec 09 - 07:30 PM

just scrolling through and realized that Don T said a lot of what I just said further up the page...didn't see Ake admitting anything though.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 29 Dec 09 - 07:47 PM

""just scrolling through and realized that Don T said a lot of what I just said further up the page...didn't see Ake admitting anything though.""

No!....And you won't see any admissions in the future, either.

Ake has three hard wired postures:-

1. He fawns all over everyone who agrees with him (yes, both of them), congratulating them on their superior intellect and insight.

2. He ignores all questions which he finds impossible to answer in a manner which supports his prejudice.

3. Those who persistently expose the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of his arguments, he categorises as deluded idiots, promoters of whatever he happens to be decrying at the time, or liberal fascists, whatever that is.

He is consistently biased, mistaken, and blinded by his prejudice, but he is never, never, wrong!......According to him, that is.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 29 Dec 09 - 08:42 PM

Game, set, and match.

Case closed.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 02 Jan 10 - 05:41 PM

Some are from birth, something they got from the mother....we can admit that....
Though some, it is not 'genetic'....we can admit that.
Some, 'acquire' it along the way....we can admit that.
Most likely, they seek out others, who have the same inclinations...we can admit that.
Sometimes, they spread disease, by what they do, and some are more careful....we can admit that.
Most don't like to hear that it is, or maybe 'wrong'...we can admit that.
Most think it feels better, than without....we can admit that.
Most of those who 'acquired' it along the way, are more defensive about it, than those who are born 'with the need'....we can admit that.
Most have to hide, and be secretive about it...though it usually shows through...we can see that.
Many feel they can't change....we can see that.
Many want government programs to help them with the health issues...we can admit that.
Many think that it is a civil rights issue, they can be allowed to do it, if they want....we can see that.
Many have advocates to support that issue...we can see that.
Many think it is not a detriment to society at large, so don't feel they should be looked down upon....we can see that.
Many feel that as long as they are doing it, they should be able to have families, as if it didn't matter....we can admit that.
Many think it makes them liberated, and higher than others...we can see that.
Some think they can see more onto a wider spectrum of things, so it makes them more artistic....we can see that.
Some actually think they are more intelligent, because of it...we can see that.
Many don't see any reason to stop, and feel that being not accepted because of it makes them an exclusive minority.......we can admit that.....
So what's all the fuss????
I mean why all the 'discrimination' about it all??
They are as wise as the next person, aren't they???...
So wise, that they aren't 'prejudiced' are they???
They are open minded about it, and other things aren't they??
Again, why all the fuss???....I mean if they want to do it, why not???
Oh you wise and 'hip' ones.....
I'm talking about heroin addicts.....any preconceived similarities, must be just in YOUR head!
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: olddude
Date: 02 Jan 10 - 05:46 PM

DON'T FEED TROLLS PLEASE

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 02 Jan 10 - 06:18 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guiest from Sanity
Date: 02 Jan 10 - 06:21 PM

olddude:
"DON'T FEED TROLLS PLEASE"

You're right, I won't!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 09:50 AM

Corruption and repression — including violence against women and children and abuse of prisoners — are rife in Uganda. According to The Times's Jeffrey Gettleman, officially sanctioned homophobia is particularly acute. Gay Ugandans are tormented with beatings, blackmail, death threats and what has been described as "correctional rape."

The government's venom is chilling: "Homosexuals can forget about human rights," James Nsaba Buturo, who holds the cynically titled position of minister of ethics and integrity, said recently.

What makes this even worse is that three American evangelical Christians, whose teachings about "curing" gays and lesbians have been widely discredited in the United States, helped feed this hatred. Scott Lively, Caleb Lee Brundidge and Don Schmierer gave a series of talks in Uganda last March to thousands of police officers, teachers and politicians in which, according to participants and audio recordings, they claimed that gays and lesbians are a threat to Bible-based family values.

Now the three Americans are saying they had no intention of provoking the anger that, just one month later, led to the introduction of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill of 2009. You can't preach hate and not accept responsibility for the way that hate is manifested.

We don't have much hope that they will atone for their acts. But right now the American government, and others, should make clear to Uganda that if this legislation becomes law, it will lose millions of dollars in foreign aid and be shunned globally. NYT

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 05 Jan 10 - 11:50 AM

There are few things as scary as people who are convinced they are right.

Scott Lively

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 06 Jan 10 - 11:47 PM

Ebbie:"There are few things as scary as people who are convinced they are right."

From Ebbie's Post:"It should be no surprise, therefore, that modern Ugandans are very unhappy that homosexual political activists from Europe and the United States are working aggressively to re-homosexualize their nation. Ugandan citizens report a growing number of foreign homosexual men coming to their country to turn desperately poor young men from the slums into their personal houseboys, and that some girls in public schools have being paid to recruit others into lesbianism."

Ebbie, you are absolutely correct...Great post!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 07 Jan 10 - 02:51 AM

I believe in the rights of homosexuals, but there are things I wonder about. I tried to convince my Rwandan priest friend that homosexual marriage wasn't such a bad idea, and he got quite distressed. He says there is a deep-seated taboo against homosexuality in most parts of Africa, that it isn't acceptable in any way. Now, my friend is very tolerant about most things, but he just couldn't imagine homosexuality being acceptable.

What right do we Westerners have to impose our "enlightened" views on African culture? Yes, discrimination against homosexuals is an injustice, but how far are we allowed to interfere with other cultures? As I understand it, the taboos against homosexuality existed in Africa long before Christianity arrived there.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 07 Jan 10 - 03:26 AM

I had sworn not to enter this thread again, as everything useful had been said, and it was only been kept alive, primarily, by the incessant bigoted crowing of GfS.

Joe's point does reqire a response, I feel, so here are three thoughts.

(a) The person to taled to, Joe, is not just from Africa but also, as you say, a priest. His views about African attitudes to sexuality are thus filtered through a religious conditioning that also represents a Western 'imposition' on to African culture; your question, Joe, about the relationship between Western & African cultures also needs to bear in mind that Christianity is also an 'import', and one intimately connected with colonialism.

(b) Even though almost all Anglo/Americans, me in this post included, do it, it is risky to speak about 'African' culture or attitudes or beliefs. The continent of Africa contains vast numbers of cultures and their beliefs are not collapsible into a single 'African' viewpoint. Is your priest friend fully knowledgeable about every culture in every epoch on that continent ?('Western' and 'European' are also risky generlisations, of course.)

(c) Whatever we think about this, in recent decades the models of homosexual identity developed in Western cultures have become influential in non-Western cultures (this applies not just to the African context). Those who wish to live their lives as people identifying as 'gay' can look to Western cultures and see templates to aspire towards. I don't deny that this causes conflict, in some cases, with longer-established value systems (by which I emphatically do NOT mean Christianity). But we can't turn the clock back and say to those people 'bad luck, you have to give up your hopes of living in a particular way because of your cultural background'.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 07 Jan 10 - 04:25 AM

"What right do we Westerners have to impose our "enlightened" views on African culture?"

The civil rights campaign seeks to impose nothing on anyone.

It seeks to remove impositions from a group who are denied the same civil rights as evryone else.

I don't understand why the attempt to protect people from discrimination is painted as a fictional attempt to 'convert' people.

This is the same misconception that leads people to talk about the "promotion" of homosexuality.

Such a promotion does not exist.

What does exist is the refusal to allow an increasingly small minority of heterosexuals to discriminate against homosexuals and subject them to violence and lives of shame and misery.

We did not accept Apartheid in south Africa.

Should we have allowed apartheid on the basis that it was south Africas internal affairs?

What about the human rights of citizens of Zimbabwe today?

In particular opponents of Mugabe?

Should we accept that African culture is just that way and we are wrong to impose our values on Zimbabweans?

Why is wishing to protect the human right of homosexuals different to protecting the human rights of political dissidents?

Besides which, if we do decide that we are wrong to "impose" our values, then what are we saying about our view of Africans?

Do we imply that we need to accept that Africans are just different and that we shouldn't expect people like Mugabe or Idi Amin to comply with our western dogma of human rights?

Does it follow that the rulers under Apartheid were right to segregate their society in recognition of these differences.

Joe, your rationale opens up a very dangerous can of worms.

And the answer to the questions I have asked above is a very resounding NO!.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Penny S.
Date: 07 Jan 10 - 05:34 AM

I have a concern about this issue as a hidden driver behind a new news item about events in Uganda. Suddenly it is news that in that country there is a considerable trade in human - usually child - sacrifice in order to gain benefits from traditional spirits or deities.

Now I don't like that, in exactly the same way that I don't like the imposition of penalties, including death, on homosexuals.

But this has been going on some time without notice being taken. So why has it surfaced as an issue now?

And polygamy is in the news, too. But that's all right, because it is traditional.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 07 Jan 10 - 02:24 PM

I may be mistaken (Ebbie can correct me if I am) but it appears to me that GfS missed the point that Ebbie was making.

I believe Scott Lively of the "Pro-Family Resource Center" is the "scary person" she is referring to. Lively is spreading a lot of pretty vicious anti-homosexual propaganda, and GfS is underscoring and endorsing it.

I believe that the heinous motives that GfS ascribes to homosexuals and to those whom s/he considers to be promoters of homosexuality speaks volumes about him/her.

Among psychiatrists, that's called "projection," counselor.

Physician, heal thyself!!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 08 Jan 10 - 12:41 AM

Not at all. Don, I knew what she was saying...she wanted us to believe only parts of the post, and to have an implied bias against the author, who hasn't said anything scary in the post, at all...nor has anything been shown to convince even the most impartial observer that Lively was speaking a lie, or anything whatsoever, that is unfair...and I know what 'projection' is, Don....stop projecting!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Penny S.
Date: 08 Jan 10 - 04:58 AM

I think that, in an apparently reasonably written piece, given the author's obvious bias, the claim that there are homosexuals actively proselytising in Uganda is very scarey.

If it is true, it is scarey, and needs evidence and opposition. If it is false, it is scarey, and needs exposing as false.

None of the homosexuals I know have behaviours like this. Small sample, I know.

What is described seems more like the attested behaviour of paedophiles targeting either males or females, and regarding non-Western areas as places for predation.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 08 Jan 10 - 05:04 AM

Penny, I'm not sure whether you're aware of GfS' track record. S/he is virulently, implacably hostile to any even vaguely pro-gay comments or outlooks. You'll be wasting your time trying to put rational arguments, as her/his sole reason for contributing to threads like this one is to parade her/his frighteningly entrenched and vindictive loathing of homosexuals.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Penny S.
Date: 08 Jan 10 - 05:21 AM

Actually, I realise I wasn't clear about who I was referring to - it was Scott Lively's piece that had reasonable writing in it.

I recognise the attitude and agenda of GfS. I never describe users of caps as reasonable. Or those who claim to represent sanity.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 08 Jan 10 - 05:42 AM

Ok, but be warned GfS will be after you at the hour when their coffin lid creaks open & they rise to stalk the earth.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 08 Jan 10 - 06:04 AM

Penny,

"the claim that there are homosexuals actively proselytising in Uganda is very scarey"

The claim that there is an axe murderer hiding behind your computer desk is scarey.

But it has nothing to do with reality.


Besides which, how does a homosexual proseletyze?


'Roll up roll up - people of uganda have you considered homosexuality?'


Or maybe its "alright darling, fancy a shag?"


And what are we assuming about the nationality of the homosexual doing the proseletyzing?


Is he from Europe or Africa?


I once spent some time in Ghana, and while I lived there I stayed at the lavish home of a very powerful guy who tendered privately for infrastructure regeneration projects throughout Africa.


He pontificated at length on many subjects, but one of his hoobby horses was the idea that homosexuality was a european import to Africa that had never previously existed there.


This is obviously utter bollocks. They just keep a very very low profile.


It is basically the same view expressed in the "lively" article above.


I first heard it in 2008 so it is an OLD myth.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 08 Jan 10 - 06:59 AM

When my wife and I worked in China in the late 1980s, a Chinese colleague [female] similarly assured us that there was no homosexuality in China. This is a known phenomenon in countries where it is not acceptable.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Jan 10 - 07:04 AM

Can't believe this for/against the death penalty for homosexuality is still running.
Professor Challenger was right - dinosaurs still do walk the earth.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 08 Jan 10 - 08:28 AM

"This is a known phenomenon in countries where it is not acceptable."

Excuse the liberty MtheGM, I know what you meant, but I thought I should clarify your meaning as follows:

This is a known phenomenon in countries where it is not accepted.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 08 Jan 10 - 08:45 AM

Indeed Lox - I apologise for clumsy form of expression.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Mr Happy
Date: 08 Jan 10 - 09:37 AM

.........just listening beeb news about Ulster's First Minister's wife, also a member of Ulster parliament, describing homosexuality as 'an abomination'

She should be sacked [IMO]!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Jan 10 - 12:55 PM

Be very careful in your terminology lads.......we're just waiting for that fatal slip!      :0)

Prats!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Den
Date: 08 Jan 10 - 12:59 PM

What about Iris Robinson, she made a view comments earlier this year.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 08 Jan 10 - 02:04 PM

"Be very careful in your terminology lads.......we're just waiting for that fatal slip!"

No not really, MtheGM has no history of consistently expressing and then unapologetically defending homophobic and Racist political viewpoints.

My purpose was to ensure his copmments could not be misused by either you, GfS or the other troll.

"Prats"

I take it you're argument has been so comprehensivwly demolished that that is all you have to offer.

Never mind.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Jan 10 - 06:08 AM

It appears that Iris, wife of the first minister of Northern Ireland, Peter Robinson, at the same time as declaring that homosexuality was 'an abomination', was 'putting it about as if it was going out of fashion'.
For centuries the church, declared homosexuality a 'mortal sin' and dictated moral values to the world, while their clergymen (and women) were running the world's largest and most protected paedophile ring and raping and abusing their way through their parishoners' children. Their superiors stood on the sidelines blessing them with their inaction and assisting them if they got into difficulties.
Perhaps if we all stood by own own beds instead of trying to look into other peoples' the world might be a better place to live in.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Penny S.
Date: 09 Jan 10 - 12:12 PM

Lox, I meant that about the claim of proselytising in the same sense as that of the axe murderer. There is no evidence for this, is there? On the other hand, making the claim is also scarey.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 09 Jan 10 - 01:29 PM

The not-very-pro-gay brigade who have 'proselytising' as one of their recurring fears never really answer the question that goes:

if heterosexuality is as wondrous, and homosexuality as vile, as you so evidently and sincerely believe, why on earth would anyone be persuaded to 'jump ship' from the former to the latter ?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Jan 10 - 02:01 PM

Jim Carroll....I can hardly believe you wrote that!

All I know about Mrs Robinson, is that she had a short affair with a young man.
You claim that she was "putting it about as if it was going out of fashion".....I take it that means Mrs Robinson was a "tramp", an immoral person, sexually promiscuous, or any one of the phrases some men use to demean women.
If this had been a man and a young lady it would hardly make two lines.....double standards and why bring it up in this context?

Sex outwith marriage will always be part of life.....its just nature at work......totally different from homosexual practice with all its associated problems, which have been well documented here

What has any womans normal sex life, to do with their views on homosexual practice?
Men and women are designed to have sex together and will continue to do so as long as humanity is to survive....nothing abnormal there

I would suggest you are attempting to blacken this womans character by highlighting a marital mistake that any of us may have been guilty of. We dont even know about the womans state of mind, some say she had been receiving treatment for depression.

There must be a word for people like you in the "liberal" handbook
Shouldn't take you long to find it.....It'll be on the dog eared page, containing homophobe, bigot,etc!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Jan 10 - 03:37 PM

"Jim Carroll....I can hardly believe you wrote that!"
Oh, please believe it!
Mrs Robinson pontificated on the morality of others while having an extra-marital affair. It transpires that she then, without declaring it to Parliament, as she was obliged to do, borrowed £50,000 from 2 businessmen to give to her lover (payment for services rendered?).
Her husband is now resisting demands for his resignation.
I have no interest whatever in Mr or Mrs Robinson's politics nor her morality other than her role as a hypocrite in daring to judge that of others - that is what "their views on homosexual practice?" have to do with me; their taking advantage of their priveliged position in society in order to condemn the behaviour of others.
I find your somewhat overblown outrage, taken with YOUR inclination to judge the morality of others both interesting and entertaining!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: M.Ted
Date: 09 Jan 10 - 03:52 PM

Guest from Sanity--I thought that you were talking about Bluegrass pickers--

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Jan 10 - 05:20 PM

"putting it about as if it was going out of fashion".....Your words!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 09 Jan 10 - 05:25 PM

Cuucuucachuu, Mrs. Robinson. Jesus loves you more than you can know.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Jan 10 - 05:26 PM

"Services rendered" so she's a prostitute as well?

Where the fuck is the Sisterhood when you really need them :0)

Come on girls, forget supporting "homosexual rights"...we've got a real live male chauvanist here, dissin' one of the sisters because she took a young lover.....bite the balls off him!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 09 Jan 10 - 05:42 PM

Ake, I believe the question at this point not male chauvanism, but hypocracy, n'est-ce pas?

You have a real talent for getting the wrong end of the stick.

(Just dropped by to see how this thread is regressing. Returning now to the real world.)

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Jan 10 - 08:18 PM

'akenaton'
I have become very tired of mealy-mouthed moralists like yourself telling me what is 'normal' 'moral' or 'right'
Now you appear to be saying that marital infidelity by people who use their position in society to obtain large sums of money to pay for their 'little weaknesses, after having told us how we should behave, is fine as long as it is by people who are "normal" - ie not "an abomination" (that's how the lady described homosexuality - pretty much the same as you have).
The lady paid her lover - not the other way round; nothing to do with her being a prostitute - please pay attention.
I'm sure your 'normal' friends are very grateful for your undying support - especially as you have appeared to tip-toe around the financial shenanigans involved in this fascinating affair.
Methinks - the homophobe doth protest too much!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 03:45 AM

Don:'Ake, I believe the question at this point not male chauvanism, but hypocracy, n'est-ce pas?'

Interesting..(scratches head)..Don, don't you realize that that is one of the most deflective and projective things you've said?? You, who claim to go to a Christian church, and are a self declared expert on the Bible, meet two(or was it three..who cares?) EX-homosexuals, and you think they are not for real, about it because they claim that they were 'born again', and renounced homosexuality??..I mean, that's pretty strange, to think you go to a church, and worship a God, who is powerless to change lives?!?!?!? So, are you being a hypocrite in church, or on here??
Same with Joe Offer, he meets an ex-homosexual, who won't even talk about the lameness he came out of(homosexuality), and marries a woman, and you refuse to believe, that God can do that??
I've met three, and Dr. Cohen is another, whose son graduated as a medical student and delivers a speech to his graduating class, that his father USED TO BE a homosexual, and again, you think that can't happen??...and you have the gall to accuse another of being a hypocrite????
Just think about it. I don't need to elaborate. You're of legendary intellect, in your own mind, you figure the flaw the trip you're on. Hunt deep within yourself, and figure out what doesn't fly.
And don't bother trying to 'ennoble' your position. I'm almost laughing so hard, I can barely type!
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 03:51 AM

What an interesting thread. Homophobes, theophobes, random nonsense posters, and a few quiet voices of reason.

We'd like to know a little bit about you for our files
We'd like to help you learn to help yourself
Look around you, all you see are sympathetic eyes
Stroll around the grounds until you feel at home

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 04:36 AM

Cool logo mousethief.

Jim... the "finanancial shenanigans" if proved, have nothing wharever to do with Mrs Robinsons views on homosexuality!

You have said that she is extremely promiscuous and that she "pays" for sex.....without any evidence to back up these assertions.

This makes pretty clear, your view of women in general.


Go get him girls!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 04:42 AM

Hi Akenaton, nice to see you're still on, at the same time!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 05:20 AM

"This makes pretty clear, your view of women in general."
How; are you claiming that all married women have extra marital affairs? - I'm certainly not.
Don't really expect an answer to this .
You have implied that marital infidelity and political/financial wheeler-dealing (or are we all in a position to attain loans of that size) are preffereable to a stable homosexual relationship.
Says everything that needs to be said about your world
And those prices - £50,000 - he must be good!!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 06:36 AM

Iris Robinson is to step down as a Member of Parliament, If her husband is forced to follow her, as seems likely, it is possible that the Irish Peace Process will be at risk.
It's nice to know that our well-being is in safe hands!

The twisted world of a homophobe:
"There can be no viler act, apart from homosexuality and sodomy, than sexually abusing children"
(Iris Robinson, House of Commons)
"I cannot think of anything more sickening than a child being abused. It is comparable to the act of homosexuality"
(Iris Robinson, Belfast Telegraph}
"I have a very lovely psychiatrist who works with me in my offices and his Christian background is that he tries to help homosexuals — trying to turn away from what they are engaged in. I'm happy to put any homosexual in touch with this gentleman" (Iris Robinson, Radio 5)
Coo-coo-coo-choo indeed!!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 08:24 AM

Jim Specifically stated that he saw Iris Robinson as showing double standards.

He specifically made clear that that was the meaning of his post.


He has never made any comment on the character of women or referred to any stereotype or engaged in anyt form of slander.



What he has done is a masterful, nay artful job of making monkeys of Ake and GfS by showing that Robinsons double standards are not the only thing she has in common with them.

Hypocrites and bigots, all three.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 10:06 AM

Well I've broken my New Year's resolution... not to post anything further on this particular thred. But something here is worth mentioning and I am not singling akenaton out. It just so happens the quote is taken from his posting...

"Come on girls, forget supporting "homosexual rights"...we've got a real live male chauvanist here, dissin' one of the sisters because she took a young lover.....bite the balls off him!!"

I cannot speak for other 'sisters', as you have referred to them in the past here and now, but I can speak for me. I can say that what I have supported on this thread, as have others, are not homosexual rights, but human rights. The fact some of those humans are homosexual actually has no relevance in reality to what I would and have have argued for. That all people be treated fairly by and within the law, fellow humans, society at large, across the world. It really is a simple concept.

I see nothing in Jim Carroll's posts on this thread that remotely points to him being chauvanistic in his intentions. I think he would have said the same against a male politician taking a female lover in similar circumstances. What he is commenting about is the two-faced hypocricy, as I read him, rather than the actual gender of the person saying it. Bigotry is bigotry no matter which gender's lips it is issued from.

That PEOPLE have affairs, can be promiscuous, and 'spread it around' has actually been mentioned lots on this thred. It's not just homosexual males that do it. But the majority of us know and accept that well enough. What we find upsetting and grossly unfair is to see people in power condemning a minority and then showing similar behaviours themselves. "let him (or her) who is without sin cast the first stone..." an all that. Indeed some of the basis for a great deal of homophobia is to try and throw people off the homophobe's own sexuality and habits. Not always, but it happens. Those that shout the loudest in sone scenarios actually have the most to hide. In the end it is human nature. Some human beings like to hate. Others like to be more favourable to their fellow brothers or sisters.

I am happy to wear the title of a feel good sisterhood badge wearing gay loving liberal. There are far worse things to be thought of and known by. But as for Jim Carroll's comments, I can assure you, they never offended this sister one bit. Unless I have read him wrong he was not being a chauvanist or offensive to women generally.

The poor man gets to retain his testicles! ;-)

Jusr my opinion again

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 10:07 AM

800!!!!!!!!!

And are we any the wiser ?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 10:16 AM

Smedley... I just learned that really ought to use a spell checker before posting anything ;-)

But seriously, in answer to your question, I think many will be wiser for all sorts of reasons, good and bad. I personally have learned a great deal on this thread and have been actually quite thrilled to see so much positive thought and support for human rights as a whole. That can only be good for the future, yes?

Yes, indeed, I think much good has come from this thread, far more than bad. There is a lot to be optmistic about when you look deeper. No room for complacency though is there? Ever?

All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men [women] to do nothing [my brackets] credited to Burke

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 11:50 AM

MP....You don't half talk bollocks at times(hope they're not poor Jim's)

Do you not even consider the life expectancy/ health figures pertaining to homosexual practice?

"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men [women] to do nothing" [my brackets] credited to Burke.


Dont you realise that you braindead "liberals" are doing nothing; and preventing homosexuals from investigating the reasons for the very bad hiv/aids, promiscuity and life expectancy figures, by denying they even exist.

As I said before, its a case of letting them die rather than upsetting your "liberal" consciences.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 12:02 PM

A married woman takes a lover....Ive read this happens at some time in almost every marriage.
Jim calls it "putting it about as if it was going out of fashion" and as a woman you're not offended.....I dont believe you!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 12:19 PM

How do you know I do nothing? Where do you get your crystal ball from? I have not and do not deny that ill health figures and mortality exists. It does so on our roads every day, in war zones, on weekend nights out, and all other various diverse scenarios. How many children never reach maturity to even have sex? Do you canpaign for them and against their abusers and murderers? I simply do not single out gay men in the argument. Human beings are risk takers and sexual creatures. Get over it!

I give each year to HIV/AIDs charities, as I do to Cancer charities, the NSPCC and Diabetes UK. Because disease is not just something that effects gay paeople. It affects us all in some way or another. If not directly it does so by taking away people we love, respect, admire or care for. There, but for the grace of God go I...

If being braindead is the alternative to what what you and your ilk subscribe to on this thread, I will happily add that to all the other labels that have been directed. No matter how many times I tell you that humanism is the basis and not liberalism you will insist of having it your way.

You win! There. You have it. Winning you is not important. Stopping the mindless hatred of people who are different than ourselves is.

Happy New year by the way to all on the thread.

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 12:27 PM

Why should I be offended? Some women do put it about. Just like some men do. That does not mean they all do.

Truth is you do not want to believe that people can hold opposite opinions to you and still be worth any validity or respect. Call them, wear them down, put them down... Believe as you will. You do already and that is the sadness in all of this. Not that you have a different opinion or viewpoint but that you are willing to call and abuse those who you have no idea about at all. I am no liar. Believe me or not. It's really no longer importanat to me what you think. But ask yourself this. Why should I say I am not offended if I am? I would have thought this thread shown I was not unhappy to dispute reasonably things I disagree with or that offend me. Fact is Jim Carrol's words did not offend me at all. You accusing by inference that I am lying does.

This is just becoming more sad but I will not join in with a slanging match or name calling. I am who I am. It's really that simple!

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 12:30 PM

Happy New Year to you too, mauvepink.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 12:57 PM

Nice rant MP, but you only addressed the points I made in the most cursor4y fashion.

Do you not think "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men [women] to do nothing" was offensive t6o others on this thread with a different viewpoint?

I think you are naive and mistaken in your opinion, but I would never imply that you were evil.

Regarding Mrs Robinson,as far as wqe know she has had one short extra-marital affair.....Jim says she "puts it about as if its going out of fashion".
He should withdraw that remark. If he does not, his views on women will be obvious.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 01:11 PM

"putting it about as if it was going out of fashion"
Probably not the best phrase to have used: I apologise if it has given any offence; it certainly wasn't intended - though it has given our homophobic wing an opportunity to divert the attention away from their own bigotry.   
"Regarding Mrs Robinson,as far as we know she has had one short extra-marital affair."
Well no actually - Mrs Robinson's name has been linked to extra-marital affairs in the past, though the family has managed to silence these accusations with their not inconsiderable wealth. Don't know if The Irish Times in the UK is the same as that in Ireland - full details to be found there.
My posting was to draw attention to the hypocracy of somebody who has openly used her position in society and her religion to put over her offensive views while failing to live up to the standards she demands of others.
As I said earlier, Mrs Robinson's affairs are none of my business, other than the effect they might have on the stability of a country that has undergone a horrific period over the last forty years.
The responsible position she and her husband hold in relation to the delicate political situation here in Ireland calls for them to tread act responsibly; it really is what we have a right to expect from them. I has just been announced on the news that Sinn Féin are determined to make the peace process work - not a supporter, but a nice piece of political propaganda for them - don't you think?   
For the record; I am not a male chauvanist, I find any form of stereotyping and bigotry - homophobia, racism.... not only offensive, but extremely dangerous and quite often deliberately used to ferment hatred and violence.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 01:29 PM

"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men [women] to do nothing [my brackets] credited to Burke"

Just to clear this up as it is being used contextually out of place. I used that phrase in response to the thread subject and topic. In other words I have taken a great deal of notice that people will not stand idly by and do nothing. People (good men & women) have stood up against the idea of hanging homosexuals and the ideas that lie behind such hatred. That was why I used that quote in the particular response I made about me thinking that much has been learned and accomplished.

Personally I am cheered that people speak out against blatant hatred.

I cannot spell it out any better than that. No accusation of evil was levied against anyone on this thread as, long though it has been, I have not seen a single soul advocating hanging or in support of that as a solution. I may be wrong but I have no intention of reading the whole thing again.

People can have differing viewpoints. That is not evil in itself. Nowhere have I said otherwise but you have obviously taken me as meaning those who hold other views? Please, judge me by my actions, not what you think they are. Somewhere in there has been some misunderstanding and I hope the above clearly points out my meaning and the use of that quote.

I am sure that you do think me "naive and mistaken in your opinion". That is your perogative and right too.

My new years resolution is totally trashed now! ;-)

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 01:30 PM

"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men [women] to do nothing [my brackets] credited to Burke"

Just to clear this up as it is being used contextually out of place. I used that phrase in response to the thread subject and topic. In other words I have taken a great deal of notice that people will not stand idly by and do nothing. People (good men & women) have stood up against the idea of hanging homosexuals and the ideas that lie behind such hatred. That was why I used that quote in the particular response I made about me thinking that much has been learned and accomplished.

Personally I am cheered that people speak out against blatant hatred.

I cannot spell it out any better than that. No accusation of evil was levied against anyone on this thread as, long though it has been, I have not seen a single soul advocating hanging or in support of that as a solution. I may be wrong but I have no intention of reading the whole thing again.

People can have differing viewpoints. That is not evil in itself. Nowhere have I said otherwise but you have obviously taken me as meaning those who hold other views? Please, judge me by my actions, not what you think they are. Somewhere in there has been some misunderstanding and I hope the above clearly points out my meaning and the use of that quote.

I am sure that you do think me "naive and mistaken in your opinion". That is your perogative and right too.

My new years resolution is totally trashed now! ;-)

mp

(apologies I never logged the name. Hoepfully the blank guest will be taken out by a moderator, thanks)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 01:51 PM

GfS, give it a rest! From the blather you just wrote, your ignorance of the variety of what falls under the heading of "Christian belief" is abysmal. Also your diddle-headed attempts to "psychoanalyze" me verges on the idiotic. No competent psychological counselor would ever say some of the things you do, so you are confirming my suspicions that you a) took Psych 101 in college; and b) got a C- in the course, and that's as far as your knowledge of psychology goes. I've heard your kind of blather from lots of college freshmen taking their first Psych course. And I'm also aware that any tarot card-reader or crystal-ball gazer can hang out a shingle and declare him/herself a "counselor."

Also, you are projecting what you think that I think the nature of God is. Way off base, "counselor." I'm not as primitive as you would like to believe I am—or as you probably are.

The three "ex-homosexuals" that I met are very unhappy people, verging on the point of depression. Also, they are obsessed with the matter of homosexuality and never miss a chance to rage against it. It is obvious to all who are acquainted with them that they are not ex-homosexuals, they have merely stuffed their sexuality back into the closet and are in an extreme state of denial.

I am fully aware that you have more than just a vested interest in the idea that gender orientation is a matter of free choice, i.e., flip a coin. The idea that it might be genetic absolutely terrifies you.

Judging from what you said in the other thread about your father, the obvious conclusion is that you are scared spitless of the genes your own body carries.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 02:24 PM

Nice deflection, Don. You completely avoided what I was saying, with your own bit of blather. Either your God can change lives, or He can't...and if He does, you seem to object! In any event, Homosexuals CAN terminate that inclination...like it or not!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 02:36 PM

Happy New Year to all in this mini-madhouse from me too. Even to GfS, who has a vested interest, it seems, in not being happy.

And YES homosexuals CAN terminate that inclination ! So can heterosexuals ! in the 15th & 16th centuries in Spain lots of Jews & Muslims terminated those inclinations and coverted to Christianity !

It's amazing how you can reinvent yourself if there's enough social & cultural pressure........

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 02:38 PM

"Don't know if The Irish Times......"
Should read 'Sunday Times' - of course.
The only reason Mrs Robinson enters into this discussion - apart from her vitriolic statements about homosexuality - is that she is/was a politician who has used her priveleged position to express her view on the subject in the most hate-filled rabble rousing terms - to reiterate:
"There can be no viler act, apart from homosexuality and sodomy, than sexually abusing children"
"I cannot think of anything more sickening than a child being abused. It is comparable to the act of homosexuality" only for it to be discovered that her own behaviour was less than perfect.
The lady is a bigot and a hypoctrit and held a position in society where neither can be said to be acceptible for national stability.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 02:51 PM

It won't surprise anyone, but may delight some as it did me, that Ulster's homos are having a high old time all over the internet revelling in Mrs Robinson's exposure & fall from saintliness.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 02:54 PM

I'm quite surprised this thread is still limping on.

GfS et al - the most that can be concluded about people who have had sex with the same and with opposite genders is that they are bisexual. Men are - famoudly - just sexual. The straightest of the straight is quite happy to get a bit from one of the lads when they're all in prison together, so sexualty is hardly a fixed reference.

The real issue is why do people like Ake and GfS have such a hang up about what other people do with their sexual organs. I just find it very odd and a little disturbing.

If Ake reckons that early death and/or HIV infection is a "gay thing" then he should pop off to Africa where 22.4mn people have HIV and where it is overwhelmingly a heterosexual disease - in Swaziland for instance the HIV infection rate is about 25% of the overall population.

In USA and Western Europe, that HIV is mostly a "gay thing" is now a footnote in history as the new UK infection rate by heterosexual transfer has been approaching and exceeding the homosexual transfer rate for a long time now - as at August 2009 the male/male new infections were only at 44% - source, UK Health Protection Agency.

Because "straight" people are in such denial about their risky behaviours they are less likely to get tested and treated and the prevailing view amongst health agencies is that the heterosexual figures are the tip of an enormous iceberg.

Add to that the well-documented tidal wave of heterosexually acquired STI's amongst straight teenagers in the UK, and the only statistical conclusion is that heterosexual communities are paying the greatest price for their loose morals and grotesque sexual hygiene.

Anecdotally, there is a view that gay people are at greater risk of mental health and depression problems leading to physical ill health, but surely that is just because of the vile treatment they get from the likes of sexually insecure bigots like Ake and GfS?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 02:57 PM

GfS, have you ever read The Sparrow, by Mary Doria Russell?

Rather than a science-fiction novel as it appears to be, it is very much a novel of ideas. Specifically religious and philosophical ideas.    REVIEW.

But never mind, GfS. Even if you did read the book, you still wouldn't get it.

My concept of God is not as primitive as you seem to think—or that your concept apparently is.

If the Cosmos and all that it is in it was indeed created by an Intelligence that we call "God," the nature of this entity is so far beyond human understanding that anyone who claims to know "the Mind of God" or what God would or would not do in any situation is merely spouting vapor. Bloody nonsense!

So, GfS, don't you try to tell me what God would or would not do in any given situation.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 03:01 PM

Royston, lots of bullseyes in your post. Set your watch for Ake & GfS to swoop in with their patented tropes of misrepresentation, goalpost-moving, faux-concern and bluster. They're a bit like Batman & Robin of this thread (and we all know what THEY got up to in the Batcave).

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 03:04 PM

Ake,

Noone has rejected or ignored the gay Aids and HIV stats.

You on the other hand have ignored the dangers of syphillis, gonnorhea, chlamidia and HPV amongst young women and older adolescent girls.

You have also requested that people ignore the stats about hetero Aids in Africa.

You have also rejected any interppretation of the stats other than your own, regardless of the fact that your interpretation has been shown to be fundamentally flawed repeatedly.


Jims views are obvious as he has stated them clearly.


Ake's views are also obvious as he has also stated them clearly.


Ake's view are that homosexuals are a "scourge",

that homosexuality is a lifestyle,

that homosexuality is "promoted" in schools.

That homosexuals have more "rights" than heterosexuals

that homosexuals are abhorrent perverts,

and that homosexuals are closet paedophiles.


This are all spelled out clearly in Akes posting history.



The best Ake can do with Jim is INFER a meaning fom a post making an entirely different point.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 03:12 PM

Royston....all the points you mention, have been dealt with further up the thread...while you were having your siesta...... for the last couple of months.

How about getting yourself up to date?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 03:24 PM

"Royston....all the points you mention, have been dealt with further up the thread..."

Which you keep ignoring, blow right past, and continue to post your own interpretation of the stats you carefully select, Ake. What Royston posted needs to be repeated until you finally get it.

Oh, blow it! You won't get it because you don't want to get it.

You two guys are so bloody transparent.

Don Firth

P. S. Out of here for the rest of the day. Real life intrudes.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 03:45 PM

HIV figures for UK 2008

New infections 38% Homosexual.....62% heterosexual
Taking into account that homosexuals make up only 2-3% of the population, these figures show that in percentage terms infections are vastly more common among homosexuals than among heterosexuals.
Royston's bald figure of 44% is completely meaningless!

Turning to new heterosexual infections, 66% are among those of black african ethnicity.    16% UK aquired.

These are taken from the source cited by Royston and were available to him before he posted.

You're a cheat Royston, but to make your argument and the argument of the lynch mob seem to stack up......cheating is required :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 04:24 PM

Sorry Ake, you are too thick to get into an argument with me.

HPA figures.

http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1237970242135

Page 8, table 2. New HIV infections in the UK to end of June 2009. Not even the full-year figures.

I doubt you can do the math, so here we go.

Total number for H1 2009 - 2,896

Male to male vector - 887 cases = 30.63% of total

Straight sex vector - 1,256 cases = 43.37% of total

Oh dear Ake, aren't you a proper shit for brains. I clearly stated I was using the most recent (Aug 2009) figures. You are from the Keith school of evidence aren't you? Just find some out of date stuff that suits your prejudices? Hmm?

And as this argument is about HIV incidence, it hardly matters whether it is African HIV, Peruvian HIV or whatever. Oh, unless you are also racist about disease as well as homophobic.

Fact - in the UK, new HIV infections are predominantly a heterosexual problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 05:54 PM

"How about getting yourself up to date? "
You might try the same yourself - I reckon with your ideas, you've got about thirty years to catch up on.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 06:04 PM

From
this link

"There are around 2,800 new cases of cervical cancer diagnosed in the UK each year, that is around 55 women every week."

From this link

"'High risk' HPV types have been found to be present in close to 100% of all cervical cancers."

From
this link

"Cervical cancer is the second commonest cancer of women worldwide, with approximately 500,000 new cases with 270,000 deaths annually (Munoz et al., 2006; Parkin and Bray, 2006). Persistent infection with high-risk HPV types is detectable in 99% of cervical cancers (Munoz et al., 2006)."

and

"Information on the prevalence of high-risk HPV infection is available from a large cross-sectional study of women having routine cervical screening in the UK (Kitchener et al., 2006). This found evidence of current high-risk HPV infection in 40% of women at 20-24 years of age, declining with increasing age."

Ake

According to YOUR logic, these stats show conclusively that heterosexual sex among young women is unsafe and should not be promoted as being a healthy lifestyle choice.

Those were YOUR criteria.

It would be wrong to allow them to die for the sake of some "liberal" ideal of human rights wouldn't it?


Roll up roll up and watch the double standards roll.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 06:44 PM

Don, What a friggin' cop out. You just can't admit that you might have learned something, that corrected your faulty assertions. Even 'Smedley', an admitted homosexual, has the balls to admit that homosexuals CAN terminate their inclinations. You just can't admit that you have been wrong...well good luck. It's a good thing that you are not in charge of who would be allowed to be treated, or get medical support, for anything that they might want to get treated for, if it disagreed with your political stance!..We'd all be in a world of hurt!
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 06:55 PM

By the way,

From this link

"At the end of 2008, women accounted for 50% of all adults living with HIV worldwide"


A statistic which shows:

1. that denying homosexuals the same rights as the rest of us would not be an effective solution to the problem of HIV/AIDS

2. how Ake has hijacked the HIV issue as a lame lifesaver to hide his homophobiia,

3. and how little he really cares about HIV/AIDS or he would take an interest in learning enough about it that he might be able to develop a more useful approach.


The only justifications left to him are those he has yet to deny - the ones born of his fascination/revulsion for homosexual sex and his instinctive 'knowledge' that gay people are dangerous, mentally ill, disease infected perverts who need access to other gays or they might rape a child.


The Pharoah wears no clothes.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 07:14 PM

If a Gay man went to his doctor and said he wanted to be cured of his gayness, his doctor would apologize and say that there is no treatment.

If a gay man came to me saying the same thing, I would say "If you don't want to sleep with men, then don't sleep with men. If you would like to find a girlfriend then go and find one."

Any trained psychologist or counsellor would merely act as a facilitator to assist their patient to work things out for themselves.

Some non Gay men make the mistake of experimenting with homosexual intimacy and later regret it.

Some bisexual men swing from men to women.

Some gay men force themselves into relationships with women to fit in with social and cultural demands.



If you want to be 'cured' then it follows you want to be with a woman.

If that is because you like women, then you aren't gay.

If it is because you are afraid of the consequences socially, that means you are surrounded by homophobesand has no bearing on whether you are gay or not.


So GfS's idea of a "cure" is, accordiing to current knowledge, utter nonsense.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 10 Jan 10 - 07:37 PM

Interesting to note that the veiws of our two resident 'phobes coincide pretty well with those of Mrs Robinson, and are not a million miles away from giving the thumbs up to the original question, as posed.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 12:05 AM

Neither one of you two have any idea what I think..only what you think, I think....and to tell you the truth, you think pretty small.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 02:49 AM

In fact Ake is not just a bigot and a fool, he is a liar.

This graph from the HPA

http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1252660014250

Is the best summary of their 1999-2008 new UK infection data.

I shows that heterosexually acquired HIV has outstripped homosexually acquired HIV for the entire period - in some years by a factor of at least 3 to 1.

Oh dear Ake, by your rational we now need to do something to control these filthy heterosexual types, don't we? For what do you think heterosexual people are now receiving the AIDS punishment? GfS, anything to say about this?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 03:15 AM

Royston, you continually fail to take into account the ratio of homosexuals to heterosexuals in the population.

I will reapeat it again for you, but if you can't understand how this works, I think you might be better to stick to facebook.

Homosexuals make up 2-3% of the UK population.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 03:35 AM

Understandable figures from Roystons source

LINK

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 03:38 AM

Actually, I'm opposed to all forms of infidelity, hetero or homo. What is being particularly overlooked on this thread, and any other threads, similar to this nature, is people can do anything they want, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. In the case of hetero infidelities, let's face it, because of selfish, self absorbed, and immature behavior, often when there is two married people with children involved, affairs, cheating and such, devastates the children, of that marriage, not only when such piggish behavior is found out, and the family breaks, because of it. Not to mention,that the love made between the mother and father, creates an ambiance in the household, and whether or not, the adults are aware of it, that ambiance, does, in fact, remain in the home, and is nurturing to the children. A loving family sets the tone of the home, that children are raised, and is a covering of protection for them.
Anyone who was raised in a warm and loving home, can remember how it was when mom, and dad, were openly affectionate with each other, and as children, the comforting, happy feeling that was enjoyed by the little eyes, and hearts who were around it....Anyone remember that?
All this emphasis on sex, for sex sake, whether it is hetero, or homo, is usually shallow, and nourishes no one, except the very temporary itch it scratches.
Compare a loving couple's children, and the children of single parents, who parade a bunch of prospective mommies or daddies, in front of their kids, and getting their 'opinion' on who they like better, for their 'pick' of a new parent....not for the well being of the children, or family, but to re-assure, that particular parent's ego, or insecurities.
Also, children of broken homes, more often or not, blame themselves for one or the other parent leaving, and has a tragic sense of their own love's worth, because that child loves both his parents, and he grows up feeling that that love was not 'good' enough to cause them to stay together. That child grows up with a feeling that his love is ineffectual. I imagine many in here can relate to that, and it is truly a sad, and rather cruel, thing to impose on the child, who no one is relating to, as the parent pursues their own particular selfish crap!

Does that answer you question?...If not, I can gladly elaborate, if I thought anyone would benefit from it, or if it would spare one more person from being hurt by it.
With Warmest Regards to All,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 03:41 AM

Sorry link didn't work

try here

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 03:51 AM

Hi, Ake...over there across the pond.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 04:22 AM

Royston is free with the gross accusation "liar"
He has used it against me in other threads.
He should have read my 9th December post on this thread.

Some UK stats.
(Our situation is different because we have immigrants from Africa where it infects more heterosexuals than in western countries.)

Although only about 1% of the total population of Britain are adult gay men, almost half of the people living with HIV are gay men.

This means gay men are about 90 times more likely to be living with HIV than other people.

Similarly, although African people account for about 1% of the population in Britain, 33% of the people living with HIV are African.

This means African people in Britain are about 50 times more likely to be living with HIV than other ethnic groups.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3856963.stm

(Without the African dimension, gay men would account for rather more than the 53% quoted for USA)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim McLean
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 05:10 AM

A hundred years ago homosexuals were severely penalised; 40 years ago or so homosexuality was legalised; my concern is that it soon may be made compulsary.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 05:30 AM

'Neither one of you two have any idea what I think'
Why shouldn't we - every bar we go into has its resident redneck.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 05:37 AM

GfS said:

"Even 'Smedley', an admitted homosexual, has the balls to admit that homosexuals CAN terminate their inclinations."

Oh GfS, have you ever thought of a career in comedy??? Yes, I did say that, in the context of a lengthier post, the rest of which you excised because it attacks your views.

Some years ago, I wrote a review of a stage show for a newspaper. I hated the show & the review was 99% negative. I did, however, predict that despite its shortcomings the show would be "a huge hit".

Next time I was passing the theatre, there on the billboard was the phrase "A Huge Hit" with my name appended.

Your selective mangling of my words, GfS, brought this incident to mind. I wonder why.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 10:09 AM

"Royston, you continually fail to take into account the ratio of homosexuals to heterosexuals in the population."


And you continue to ignore the ratio of women dying as a result of HPV.

What is that ration again?

100% to 0%

And what percentage of young women women are thought to be infected with HPV?

40%

So according to Ake's own methodology, yet again, we must conclude that heterosexuality amongst young women is unhealthy and should not be promoted in our schools.


Either that, or Ake admits that his reaoning is fundamentally flawed.

You can't have it both ways.


To insist on double standards is to prove that you are exactly what you appear to be.

A twisted, hateful, bitter, hypocritical and deceitful homophobe.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Mr Happy
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 10:15 AM

HPV?

I didn't know what that is, for me & others, here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HPV

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 11:00 AM

Sadly the HPV linkage is not just for cervical cancers either. 70% of cervical cancers are caused by HPV-16 and HPV-18 and these are increasingly being shown to possible links with oral and pharyngeal cancers too. There is an argument that the current vaccine for HPV be extended to males. More work needs to be done but the research seems sounds enough along with the figures.

And lest we forget... one does not have to be promiscuous to get HIV or HPV. You only need one exposure ultimately. Whilst the chances of contracting such disease increases with promiscuity and un-safe sex, that does not mean a one off exposure will not occur.

I suspect less judgements and a more humane approach to caring for anyone with any disease should be the way forward. We are all, potentially, only one love affair away from such diseases. Anything that encourages a stable, monogamous relationship, for any gender, has to be on the right lines. I know I have made mistakes in the past that could have been disasterous. Given the incubation of some of these disaeses, they could still be disasterous. But for the grace of God...

I certainly have no wish to cast any stones...

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 12:00 PM

Smeds:"Oh GfS, have you ever thought of a career in comedy??? Yes, I did say that, in the context of a lengthier post, the rest of which you excised because it attacks your views."

Don't flatter yourself! The rest of your quote does not attack my views. Rather shows the pedantic semi-literate blathering of someone who is acting like their parents told them to stop sucking their thumb.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 12:23 PM

Jim Mc Lean.....Nice to see you on the thread.

Sanity... "Howsitgaun ma auld freen".....   :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 12:26 PM

MP.....Perhaps you would open a new thread on HPV, the issues seem completely different from the ones we are discussing here.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 12:27 PM

HPV is a false analogy.
It is likely to be transmitted equally by gay or straight penetrative sex.
It is just that men do not get cervical cancer.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 12:33 PM

my god, you are all barking mad. Good AIDS, bad AIDS, worthy sufferers or not. You're all sick! Why aren't you ashamed of yourselves?

Black, white, gay or straight, HIV will get you if you're not safe, celibate or monogamous. Where it enters hetero communities like in Africa it is a hetero disease. Where it enters gay communities it can be for a while, a gay thing. The numbers show it is on the way to being a mostly heterosexual problem in this country. Your racist fantasies notwithstanding.

Where is the evidence for this 2-3 or even 1 percent gay thing? I thought 10pc was the accepted estimate. It's not relevant to this discussion, it's just the first time I heard it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 12:36 PM

OK, GfS, I have attempted in the past to be as patient as I could with your idiocy. Now you have taken to directly insulting me.

I won't bore others who read this with a list of my qualifications and professional achievements (and others who have read this thread will make their own judgements about how 'semi-literate' I am), I will instead respond with my considered judgement of you based on wading through your embarrassingly banal and one-dimensional posts.

You have an obsessive prejudice against homosexuals. Every sentence you write suppurates with venom. You seem eaten up from the inside by bitterness and loathing. You despise me because my health, happiness and ability to counter your homphobic bile represents a continual refutation of your passionately clung-to fantasy that homosexuals are inadequate or damaged or in need of help.

I wish you all the ill will in the world.

Or, as Allen Ginsberg once said, go fuck yourself with the atom bomb.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 01:03 PM

Ake, Keith, GfS

I know that I should get up to date on this thread but, gawd, more than 800 posts of homophobia and racism is just too much for me.

The point Lox is making about HPV and any other STI is that the incidence is sky rocketing amongst straight people.

This means that straight people are suffering from grotesque sexual hygiene and morals.

This means that, now new UK HIV diagnoses are increasing so much faster amongst straight people and the other STI's show their behaviours to be so risky as regards unprotected coitus and because the tissue damage from other STI's is a risk multiplier for HIV transmission, so you have the perfect storm for an exponential rise of heterosexual HIV.

This is how it played out in Africa, it is how it will play out here until people like you three are stopped from spreading your vile hatred that tries to apportion blame, and reserve consequences, for our shared human miseries.

Don't you get it? Not even a little bit?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 01:14 PM

I'm afraid they are becoming incoherent.

Perhaps a break for tea?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 01:20 PM

And while we are being candid, let's just clear up this whole 'gay plague' thing. As a percentage of the whole group, gay men suffer disproportionately with HIV infection.

The numbers show that this will soon be a historical irrelevance.

One of the reasons is the smaller pool of carriers. Infection can spiral very quickly. There is no moral dimension to this. It's plain old bad luck.

The other reason is that the primary vector is penetrative sex - where the options for gay men who wish to practice penetrative sex are limited. IS limited to anal sex.

Anal sex is a more efficient vector than vaginal sex because of the greater risk of tissue damage and bleeding. Again, no moral dimension. Just mechanics.

Vaginal sex can result in the same sort of tissue damage as anal and of course, as google will tell you and as the bible, torah and quran will confirm, straight couples have always enjoyed a bit of back door action.

In healthy, clean vaginal intercourse, the transmission rate where one partner is positive is A BIT less than in anal intercourse.

If the vagina, anus or penis is damaged or sore from, say, another STI, then the risk of transmission is multiplied across all vectors.

Keith, you have claimed to be a scientist, am I right or am I right in the sense of a general overview here?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 01:29 PM

Royston...How can we take you seriously?
Your statement " As a percentage of the whole group, gay men suffer disproportionately with HIV infection", directely contradicts what you said a couple of posts ago

I think another siesta is called for.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 01:50 PM

Smeds:"I won't bore others who read this with a list of my qualifications and professional achievements (and others who have read this thread will make their own judgements about how 'semi-literate' I am)..."

More Smeds:"I wish you all the ill will in the world.
Or, as Allen Ginsberg once said, go fuck yourself with the atom bomb."

I know. You're so mad you want to stomp your feet and throw your Martini across the hot tub!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 02:06 PM

The point, Ake, is that you bandy about an old statistic to make a point that, in your view, gay men have deserved or brought upon themselves, or are responsible for HIV/AIDS because you believe them to be immoral or hygienic or whatever your prejudice happens to be this week.

The increasing rate of heterosexual diagnosis in the UK, the experience of HIV where it first emerged in straight populations and then the shocking STI data for young heterosexual folks in this country show your point to be as wrong as your 'evidence' is selectively misleading.

The mechanics of HIV transmission and the risky practices that straight and gay people indulge in also proves that your differentiation is futile.

But I suspect this is all too complicated for you. Anything of intellectual substance to contribute?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 02:09 PM

The point being made about HPV, as with other STI's, is that they are rife across the whole sexuality spectrum where safe sex is not used. I never actually brought HPV up but it, among with other STI's, are actually worthy of mention. They are all analogous in respect to sexually transmitted diseases. Whether I initiated it or not I am happy to involve the comparisons to show that STI's - period - affect all sexualties.

Just what, exactly, are the issues we are discussing here then because I am losing track. The thread went off topic, regarding the thread title, miles back and what has taken over 750 posts since then is to try and explain why this blast against male homosexuals is and always has been unfair. Human beings have sex, some lots more than others, some with multiple partners and some remain monogamous, no matter their sexuality. The vast majority here have stood up for the equal rights of all and not the singling out anyone because we are all in the same boat. We are all human.

Lets put it this way. If an openly gay couple, or a single gay male, came into a folk club and sat down next to me I would not be bothered one iota. My concerns would be about their songs, for that is what I would be there to listen to, and what their sexuality is has nothing to do with me. I would drink from the same glass or cup as they have been using. I would lend them my guitar. Whether I enjoyed their company would be down to them as people not their sexuality. Likewise if they enjoyed my company I suspect. I am far more interested in the whole person rather than one aspect of their life that has nothing to do with me. I would not consider for a moment that they are disease ridden or that being close to them will affect my health (no more than anyone else that is, as I try to avoid people who are coughing and sneezing all over the place no matter where I am!). In short, they are 'just another person to chat to, meet and listen to'. No biggy.

It's not gay men that scare me at all... They pose no threat to my health or my life by being out there around me - certainly not by being gay.

It's a new thread that is needed...

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 02:20 PM

"It's a new thread that is needed... "


should have read


It's NOT a new thread that is needed...


mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 02:23 PM

Hot tub, GfS ? Martini ? Do you get *all* your images of us faggots from re-runs of Starksy and Hutch ?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 02:56 PM

MP... This thread is simply a "follow-on" from the other threads on homosexual marriage, homosexual fostering, etc, the opening post runs......"Uganda is debating a law which would criminalise homosexuality, including the death penalty in some circumstances. The law is being promoted, apparently, by American Evangelical missionaries. Would any of our resident Christians and/ or homophobes care to indicate whether they find this to their taste?"
The post was designed to provoke heated responses, but as you know very well   "All we need, to allow evil to triumph, is that good men or women say nothing"..   :0)

On the other threads, we were debating the rights and wrongs of homosexual marriage and fostering, some maintaining that "rights" should be universal, some that "rights" should be conditional on the behaviour of minorities.....as in health issues, or the effect granting minorities their "rights" would have on other groups.....as in the re-definition of marriage to accomodate homosexual practice.

All these threads have basically been about whether rights should be universal, or remain conditional as they are at present.

These issues could pertain to any minority group seeking equal status, not just homosexuals.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 03:02 PM

Yes, GfS, I can admit it when I'm wrong, but I'm not wrong in this case. You are the one who doesn't dare admit that you are wrong because the whole defense you've built up for yourself is that sexual orientation is a matter of choice.

The three people I have met who claimed to have been cured of being homosexual were psychological basket cases. With them, "ex-gay" means depressed and perpetually angry. Also, all three of them have entirely given up sexual activity of any kind. And no friends, because not many people can stand to be around them for any length of time. Obviously, they have stuffed their true sexual nature back into the closet and are living in rigid denial. So much for your "cure."

You attack me on the basis of what you presume to be my religious beliefs, implying that I am a hypocrite because I don't believe in the power of God to "heal" gay people of their "aberration." Well, just because I'm a member of a church doesn't mean that I believe in an anthropomorphic God who looks like Professor Dumbledore and performs magic tricks. It's an easy enough refutation of your position if I were to simply respond, "Why would God change them? He made them that way in the first place!"

You are at odds with the medical and psychology fields with the contention, that sexual orientation is a matter of choice, and you cling fast to your hero, Richard Cohen, self-styled "ex-gay" who claims he cured himself and also claims he can cure others. His method? He lies on a sofa with his clients, strokes and caresses them, and assures them that they are, indeed, loved.

Is that the way you go about it, counselor?

You and Ake are at least partially responsible for such atrocities as the brutal torturing and pistol-whipping of Matthew Shepard, whose battered body was left hanging on fence on a country road in Wyoming, to be found by a passersby, who, at first, thought the body hanging on the fence was a scarecrow. Shepard died in a hospital a few days later of inoperable brain damage. Why was this young college student so brutally murdered? He was gay.

And the message upon which this whole Ungandan "kill the homosexuals" movement—read genocide—is based is found in Richard Cohen's book. What he says in his book is completely at odds with medical and psychological practice, and indeed, Cohen has neither credentials nor sanction by any professional organization. He's a charlatan. Yet, his book is being used as the basis for the passage of the "kill the homosexuals" laws in Uganda.

People like Cohen—and you—and Ake—spout the fictions that give psychopaths such those who murdered Matthew Shepard a feeling of justification for their brutality.

Here's your hero being interviewed, GfS. Watch it. Watch the whole thing, all 17 minutes of it.

Richard Cohen.

Further:   It's notable that both you and Ake snap onto any thread having to do with homosexuality, like magnets to a refrigerator door. You can't resist an opportunity to spread your misinformation. But why are the two of you so obsessed with male homosexuality? What this kind of obsession clearly indicates (and this is sound psychology) is that you are both latent homosexuals who are in rigid denial and can't miss an opportunity to argue, not with me and others—but with your own inclinations.

Don Firth

P. S. Okay, GoofuS, let's hear your vociferous denials, personal attacks on everything about me, and your general kicking and screaming tantrum. This one ought to be a doozy!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 04:05 PM

Portugal parliament votes to permit gay marriage

By Barry Hatton

Associated Press
Posted: 01/08/2010 07:40:04 AM PST
Updated: 01/08/2010 07:40:05 AM PST

LISBON, Portugal — Portugal's parliament passed a bill today that would make the predominantly Catholic nation the sixth in Europe to permit gay marriage.

Conservative President Anibal Cavaco Silva is thought unlikely to veto the Socialist government's bill, which won the support of all left-of-center parties. His ratification would allow the first gay marriage ceremonies to take place in April — a month before Pope Benedict XVI is due on an official visit to Portugal.

Right-of-center parties opposed the change and sought a national referendum on the issue, but their proposal was rejected and the government's bill was passed by 125 votes to 99.

Gay rights campaigners applauded from the galleries, hugged and kissed outside the building and ate wedding cake.

"This law rights a wrong," Prime Minister Jose Socrates said in a speech to lawmakers, adding that it "simply ends pointless suffering."

Socrates said the measure is part of his effort to modernize Portugal where homosexuality was a crime until 1982. Two years ago his government lifted Portugal's ban on abortion, despite church opposition.

Gay marriage is currently permitted in Belgium, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and Norway. Canada, South Africa and six U.S. states also permit it.

The bill removes a reference in the current law to marriage being between two people of different sexes.

"It's a slight change to the law, it's true," Socrates, the prime minister, said. "But it is a very important and symbolic step towards fully ensuring respect for values that are essential in any democratic, open and tolerant society: the values of freedom, equality and non-discrimination."

Like neighboring Spain, which introduced same-sex marriages four years ago, Portugal is an overwhelmingly Roman Catholic country and previous efforts to introduce gay marriage ran into strong resistance from religious groups and conservative lawmakers.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 04:10 PM

"HPV is a false analogy.
It is likely to be transmitted equally by gay or straight penetrative sex.
It is just that men do not get cervical cancer."


Keith, you have not misunderstood.


Here is Ake's reasoning.


-Gay men risk catching HIV when they have unprotected sex with other gay men which could lead to them dying of Aids later in life,

-therefore Homosexuality for them is an unhealthy lifestyle that should be discouraged and homosexual mens rights should be curtailed to protect them.


I can apply the same reasoning as follows.


Straight Women risk catching HPV when they have unprotected sex with men which could lead to them dying of cervical cancer later in life, therefore Heterosexuality for them is an unhealthy lifestyle that should be discouraged and heterosexual womens rights should be curtailed to protect them.


In fact, both positons are utter bollocks and the answer in both cases is to use a condom.


Ake also makes out that other demographics who suffer from AIDS are distinct from Gay men and should not be subject to the same restrictions as Gay men.

But as you have pointed out, anyone may die of AIDS, which means it is not an exclusively Gay issue.

Whereas Cervical cancer is exclusive to women.


By Akes reasoning, women should have their civil rights controlled by those who know best.


Now if it wasn't for those bloody suffragettes ramming their "liberal" dogma down our throats ...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 04:12 PM

"MP.....Perhaps you would open a new thread on HPV, the issues seem completely different from the ones we are discussing here."

Yes - they don't involve Gays ...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 04:14 PM

Oops ...

"Keith, you have not misunderstood."

should have read:

"Keith, you have misunderstood."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 04:32 PM

Don Froth:"Yes, GfS, I can admit it when I'm wrong, but I'm not wrong in this case. You are the one who doesn't dare admit that you are wrong because the whole defense you've built up for yourself is that sexual orientation is a matter of choice."

GfS: ALL sexual orientation?? ..like knocking up a woman, and leaving her pregnant, isn't a choice??...No, you were born that way...I guess that's what you mean.

"The three people I have met who claimed to have been cured of being homosexual were psychological basket cases. With them, "ex-gay" means depressed and perpetually angry. Also, all three of them have entirely given up sexual activity of any kind. And no friends, because not many people can stand to be around them for any length of time. Obviously, they have stuffed their true sexual nature back into the closet and are living in rigid denial. So much for your "cure."

GfS: You claimed in your post you hardly knew them, now you seem to have gotten intimate details of their life's outlook! I think you're full of shit!

You attack me on the basis of what you presume to be my religious beliefs, implying that I am a hypocrite because I don't believe in the power of God to "heal" gay people of their "aberration."


Gfs: No I didn't. I said you seemed to worship a God who is powerless to change lives...again, you're full of it!

"Well, just because I'm a member of a church doesn't mean that I believe in an anthropomorphic God who looks like Professor Dumbledore and performs magic tricks. It's an easy enough refutation of your position if I were to simply respond, "Why would God change them? He made them that way in the first place!"

GfS: You're wrong again!..Being so 'wonderfully Bible literate', you must have 'overlooked' the Gospel story, when Jesus was asked why a certain blind man was born that way.(oops)...remember the answer Jesus gave him??........UMMM fumble blather fumble...

"You are at odds with the medical and psychology fields with the contention, that sexual orientation is a matter of choice,"

GfS: Bullshit again! Some are born that way, as I described in an earlier post..and if you read your OWN post, about the guy who as he matured, and left alone to develop, he grew out of it. Oops, you forgot about that one...

"...and you cling fast to your hero, Richard Cohen, self-styled "ex-gay" who claims he cured himself and also claims he can cure others. His method? He lies on a sofa with his clients, strokes and caresses them, and assures them that they are, indeed, loved."

GfS: Personally, Dr. Cohen is not 'my hero'..He is just a person, who has had a turn around, and refutes your stupidly blind political crap, that you say is in the name of 'civil rights'. You indeed would deny anyone the RIGHT' TO CHANGE, and/or get medical treatment, based on your own PERSONAL political convictions(?)...Now just who is being narrow minded, and denying the right to even request help..and you think that the Fascist pigs, are somebody else....ya' got hoodwinked, Captain!

"Is that the way you go about it, counselor?"

GfS: No! It's all in perception...and you are indeed blind..blinded by something I find far more 'destructive' than homosexuality...and that is being a sperm donor, to a woman you deceived, and walking away from the child. You're just laundering your guilt(if you ever had the concept of right or wrong, or a conscience at all!!)...so you make excuses for everyone else to do what ever 'feels' good,..and make it so pompous, righteous, such a 'civil right'. YOU are the type of person that give reason for young boys begin to resent their masculinity!

"You and Ake are at least partially responsible for such atrocities as the brutal torturing and pistol-whipping of Matthew Shepard, whose battered body was left hanging on fence on a country road in Wyoming, to be found by a passersby,.....blah blah blah"

GfS: You are full of shit! How dare you make such a ridiculous accusation!
Your post shows beyond a shadow of a doubt, that you are irrational! I would think that a rational person would be totally embarrassed on making such an absurd accusation!...but then again, one would have to first have a dignity, to embarrass. You seem to have none!

"And the message upon which this whole Ungandan "kill the homosexuals" movement—read genocide—is based is found in Richard Cohen's book. What he says in his book is completely at odds with medical and psychological practice, and indeed, Cohen has neither credentials nor sanction by any professional organization. He's a charlatan. Yet, his book is being used as the basis for the passage of the "kill the homosexuals" laws in Uganda."

GfS: More evidence that you are a whack job! You've lost it pal, and anyone either side of this issue should clearly see that, by now. Just read your insane babbling!

"People like Cohen—and you—and Ake—spout the fictions that give psychopaths such those who murdered Matthew Shepard a feeling of justification for their brutality."

GfS: More off the wall wild, hostile, inaccurate frothing.


"Further:   It's notable that both you and Ake snap onto any thread having to do with homosexuality, like magnets to a refrigerator door. You can't resist an opportunity to spread your misinformation."

GfS: Speaking for yourself???? How come YOU are the one we find here??....spreading...ummm...what??? Perhaps your quote is revealing YOUR motive, that causes you to feel so compulsive, about the issue. Surely, your behavior toward that woman, who bore your child, and the child, could be an indication on just how much you are capable of 'loving' a woman..maybe you can't. I noticed in the post, when you went on about how Barbara was so interested in YOU, (Prop 8 thread), and all YOUR interests. You went on and on about YOU...You NEVER ONCE SAID THAT YOU LOVED HER....read it yourself! Want me to post it for you??

"But why are the two of you so obsessed with male homosexuality? What this kind of obsession clearly indicates (and this is sound psychology) is that you are both latent homosexuals who are in rigid denial and can't miss an opportunity to argue, not with me and others—but with your own inclinations."

Gosh, are you saying that homosexuals are really not as sound in the noggin' as you've previously indicated??.....Gosh, coming from you, that's quite a turn around!...but then again, you should know!


Don Firth

"P. S. Okay, GoofuS, let's hear your vociferous denials, personal attacks on everything about me, and your general kicking and screaming tantrum. This one ought to be a doozy!!"

GfS: Nope. I think you said enough to discredit yourself...all by yourself!

Happy now?.....You've got your heart's desire........all that attention!
Good Job!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 05:36 PM

sigh I was hoping it would not be so, but I see now that GtS is a woman. Since I am a woman myself, I always hope to find females more empathic and less dogmatic...

(Nothing personal, guys. Some of my best friends are male. *g*)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 05:40 PM

There are, sadly, a tiny minority of women who hate gay men for the reason that their existence means that **even fewer men** are interested in them.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 05:51 PM

..yeah?...but what if I was a guy? Then what?..You mean I would be in opposition to men who act like...ummm...perhaps Don, who has treated the first woman so...umm..'uncompassionately'?....gosh, that was polite!
Then would I be a principled guy?????

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 05:59 PM

Actually, it doesn't matter. Principles are principles, and have no gender bias........unless you wrongly subscribe to the thinking, that there is a double standard.....(wink)
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 06:26 PM

"All these threads have basically been about whether rights should be universal, or remain conditional as they are at present."

The bottom line is this. Why should any right afforded one human being be conditional to another human being based on outright ignorance, prejudice, bigotry, hate or any other 'condition' such as being different in any way?

There is no excuse. If one human being has a right to something then they all should and vice versa. What is so hard about this principle to understand? If we are to have HUMAN rights then they should be applied to all humans.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 07:56 PM

GfS:    "..like knocking up a woman, and leaving her pregnant, isn't a choice??..."

Once again, you run your keyboard with a total lack of information, only your own bile. As far as my being a "sperm donor" and walking away from my responsibilities and acting "uncompassionately," she was the aggressor in the liaison. When I offered marriage, she was the one who left. She had her own agenda, so if anyone was deserted, it was me. And no, I'm not going to explain any further because whatever I say, you'll try to make something sleazy out of it, just as you already have. You don't know anything about it, so you may as well stop making an ass of yourself.

GfS:   "You claimed in your post you hardly knew them, now you seem to have gotten intimate details of their life's outlook! I think you're full of shit!"

I didn't know them well personally, but when I asked "What's with them!?" I was told a great deal about them by people who did knew them well. Simple as that. Full of shit? Never take a laxative, GfS. Your head will shrink to the size of a raisin.

Re: God. Already answered that. Learn to read.

As to my "obsession" and the reason that I am contributing to this thread, you and Ake are spreading the same kind of hate messages that Richard Cohen spread in his book—messages that allow other bigots and homophobes such as those who murdered Matthew Shepard and the "kill the homosexual" factions in Uganda to feel justified in committing the atrocities they commit. I oppose anyone who spreads that kind of hate message.

Obessed? Damned right! I'm obsessed with human decency. Simple as that. It's a cliché, but that's because it's true:   "Evil triumphs when good men [people] do nothing." So when people like you and Ake spread your venom, I feel compelled to speak out.

Don Firth

P. S. See? I said that GoofuS was going to have quite a hissy-fit over my last post. Best s/he can come up with is libelous fictions and personal attacks.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 08:24 PM

"And the message upon which this whole Ungandan "kill the homosexuals" movement—read genocide—is based is found in Richard Cohen's book. What he says in his book is completely at odds with medical and psychological practice, and indeed, Cohen has neither credentials nor sanction by any professional organization. He's a charlatan. Yet, his book is being used as the basis for the passage of the "kill the homosexuals" laws in Uganda."

GfS: More evidence that you are a whack job! You've lost it pal, and anyone either side of this issue should clearly see that, by now. Just read your insane babbling!

You should answer this claim. Responding as you do just shows you have no answer, implying you know it's true.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 11:46 PM

Frotho:"..As far as my being a "sperm donor" and walking away from my responsibilities and acting "uncompassionately," she was the aggressor in the liaison..."

GfS: Aggressor??? So, she overwhelmed you???...What an unprincipled puss! Now you're blaming her?? LMAO!!

Frotho:"..When I offered marriage, she was the one who left. She had her own agenda,..."

Well, do you blame her?? She probably clocked what kind of self absorbed nincompoop, you are. I wouldn't want you around my kids either!..."her own agenda?"....

Probably went out to look for a real man....didn't she?

Frotho:"..didn't know them well personally, but when I asked "What's with them!?" I was told a great deal about them by people who did knew them well. Simple as that."

GfS: Well being such a 'champion of human decency', and a news reporter, why didn't you have the decency to ask them yourself? Lack of interest?..Too busy?..it wasn't about you??...self absorption? Report another story that you NEVER checked out the FACTS??....Sounds just like you!

Frotho:"...Re: God. Already answered that. Learn to read."

GfS: No you didn't! Who do you think you're kidding, this time??
If you think that your bit,"Well, just because I'm a member of a church doesn't mean that I believe in an anthropomorphic God who looks like Professor Dumbledore and performs magic tricks."..is an answer...its a dodge! Of course God isn't an anthropomorphic creature. According to your 'religion' , God is a spirit that gives the substance of life John 1:3-All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being. 4:In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men...9:That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world."......
...once again, what do ALL living things have in common??
The will to survive and reproduce....whether an amoeba, a plant, an insect, a fish, mammal..etc....When something interferes with one or both of those two things, and you had the ability to restore one of those two things of life back, wouldn't you do it, or direct them to the FACT that it can be restored??...and you think that is hate??? Maybe its called 'compassion'(look it up). Instead of making excuses for being so reckless in your youth, why don't you at least find out how you can help, instead of washing your hands with appeasement?..Too much effort, and compassion, eh?

Has it ever occurred to you, that certain VALUED qualities, sensitive qualities, that were damaged in people SHOULD be genetically passed down, if only they knew there was a way to get there??? You don't think, that deep inside certain homosexuals, that there is a place of deep pain, and wishing, 'if they only could...but I can't'. Now maybe I'm talking to the wrong guy, because of your LACK OF WILL to do that, but there are others, who know exactly what I'm saying! Your blathering about me hating homosexuals, is utterly complete nonsense.
When they get defensively nasty about it, I pity them, but I see hope, even if they don't, at that time.


Frotho:"......the reason that I am contributing to this thread, you and Ake are spreading the same kind of hate.."

GfS: Hate??? Bullshit again! You're the one denying them any way out IF THEY WANTED IT, with your stupid brain-lock!

Frotho:"...It's a cliché, but that's because it's true:   "Evil triumphs when good men [people] do nothing..."

GfS: That is exactly why I have to counter your disinformation, lies, and general politically biased bullshit! Funny, what is the quote.. uummm ...'Patriotism is the last refuge of despots!'...

Mousethief:"...You should answer this claim. Responding as you do just shows you have no answer, implying you know it's true..."

GfS: I shall, after I view the link,..and because you asked..okay? I just had to run, and I do now...but I will watch it and judge for myself. Contrary to what 'Frotho' says, Dr.Cohen, is not a hero of mine, and as I posted earlier, I wasn't much impressed with his methods, but, that being said, he claims to have renounced homosexuality, got married, and had children, one who went to an Ivy League university, and during the commencement speech, declared that his father was an ex-homosexual, which he says the graduate's mouths dropped open, because they were being taught differently. Those memos, which came out in the early 70's, 1973, I believe,(because I got one), were steering psychologists, and therapists that homosexuality was not going to be regarded as a psychological reproductive dysfunction....due to 'social and political pressures'!.......not science!!(<<< my accurate insertion). I guess someday, it may be 'politically incorrect' to be a senior citizen, too, the way medicine is being dictated by bureaucrats.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 11 Jan 10 - 11:51 PM

Thanks, GfS.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 01:06 AM

GfS, I'm not going to waste time and energy answering your tantrum point by point because anybody who reads this thread can see that you are simply raving and frothing at the mouth (which is the only "Frotho" around here).

But the lady's "own agenda" did not involve any antipathy toward me. The only "self absorbed nincompoop" around here is you.

You know absolutely nothing about my private life, and what you keep claiming about me is actually libelous and I can prove it. If you had the guts to use your own real name—as I do—I might be tempted to haul you into court and sue your ass off. But, coward that you are, you not only hide behind an inaccurate pseudonym, but you haven't even registered as a member. Even so, I could trace you down (the internet being a bit more porous than many people are aware of) and have you served with papers, but I probably won't because I don't want to dirty my hands wrestling with slime. But you really should think about the possibility. I might change my mind, haul your butt into court, and hang it out to dry.

You really out to be a bit more careful about the way you mouth off about people and things you know not of. There are such things as consequences.

By the way, do you realize just how downright bitchy your last several posts sound!???   Bloody fascinating!!

####

By the way, GfS, as to whether I'm a "whack job" or not for pointing out Cohen's claims being the basis of the anti-homosexual Ungandan laws, did you watch the video I linked to? I didn't know that the Ungandans were using Cohen's book that way until I watched the video. Maybe you should watch it and learn.

Nah! It'll never happen!

Don Firth

P. S. Hey, mousethief! Glad to see you're back! I've missed you around here and wondered where you'd got to!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 02:33 AM

lol I'm sitting here laughing - the thought occurs to me that if GtS really, truly were the therapist she claims she is she'd be in BIG trouble if the Board became aware of this thread - and others like it. lol

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 03:58 AM

GFS Said Has it ever occurred to you, that certain VALUED qualities, sensitive qualities, that were damaged in people SHOULD be genetically passed down, if only they knew there was a way to get there??? You don't think, that deep inside certain homosexuals, that there is a place of deep pain, and wishing, 'if they only could...but I can't'. Now maybe I'm talking to the wrong guy, because of your LACK OF WILL to do that, but there are others, who know exactly what I'm saying! Your blathering about me hating homosexuals, is utterly complete nonsense.

You need to get out more. Gay men and women have been having and raising kids for decades. Gay men and Lesbians enter into co-parenting agreements and artificial insemination arrangements or even do it the old-fashioned way if desires allow. Wealthier gay men go into surrogacy contracts with women. Most of the developed world now supports same-sex parenting, adoption and fostering.

So, any gay person that wishes to raise a family, can.

You see this is why I get pissed off debating with people like you GfS. You are such a shit for brains. You know nothing.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 04:10 AM

In fact, as an example of how marginalised you are, I remember in June last year I was flying from LA to Miami. There was a gay latino couple in Business with an obviously new-born bay that they were taking home.

They looked and behaved just like any "new" fathers would have done -proud, nervous, happy etc. A woman, the mother of one of the guys, was constantly clucking around them and the baby, so it became quite a spectator sport for the business cabin.

After the meal service, the cabin crew came forward with glasses of champagne for the couple, wished them all goodwill and congratulations, to which a spontaneous ripple of applause broke out through the cabin and anyone that had a glass, raised it.

I'm glad that aren't too many folks like you and Ake out there.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 04:20 AM

GfS - you state that certain homosexuals have "a place of deep pain" inside them and a yearning, you imply, not to be gay.

As a happy homo, I completely agree with you. And that pain and yearning is 100% (I know you luuurrrve statistics) caused by people like you. Those poor queers are tortured by self-hatred as a direct response to the external hatred you and your kind foster and disseminate for twisted reasons of your own.

As ever, all you peddle is poison. Don't ever bite your tongue, dear, you might get septicaemia.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 11:24 AM

In reality I am sure there are many homosexuals who are deeply unhappy with their sexuality, male and female. I know I have met quite a few. But I never actually heard one deny being gay. What they hate about their sexuality is all the hate and upset that they suffer struggling with being gay because of what is dished out to them or what they fear if they 'come out'. The discrimination, the rejection, the shear hate, the loss of family and friends in some instances, etc tec.

Yes, of course some try to live a 'straight life'. Some actually make a success of it. Some live terrible lies in marraiges and their partners too as a consequence. Some commit suicide. Some will never know happiness. And most of this agony is inflicted by a few people in society who would not give them breath if they could help it. A great many of those dissenters are actually gay themselves, sadly, and try to turn on their own in denial and hate. Why?

Because being gay, while easier in some countries than it used to be, is still not easy generally. There is always someone with a pointed look or glance, a comment, a thump or worse... just because you happen to be gay.

The question still outstanding on this thread by those who see homosexuality as a choice is this. If being gay is such an easy choice, why do so many men and women choose to be in such tremendous pressure ovens when all they need to do is love the opposite gender?

I suspect the mass on this thread know the answer, and in society generally nowadays, which can only be a great step forward

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 12:17 PM

"my concern is that it soon may be made compulsary."
Here we have an offensive display of a tiny group of obsessives being judgemental on the sexuality of others - really none of their business. I've witnessed thousands of cases of homophobes condemning homosexuality, even going out in gangs to beat them up, but I can't ever remember a gay criticising a hetro for being 'straight'.
It always seems to me that people who concern themselves with what goes on in other people's bedrooms must be very discontented at what goes on in their own.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 12:57 PM

"It always seems to me that people who concern themselves with what goes on in other people's bedrooms must be very discontented at what goes on in their own."

Right, Jim Carroll. I agree. One of them is in our midst flailing about; luckily he is one of only two. I think we should introduce them to each other in real time. :)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 02:18 PM

GfS, you've made a number of snotty, nasty-minded allegations about me based on something I revealed about my own personal life on the Prop. 8 thread. So, not for your benefit, but to set the record straight for anyone else who might be wondering what the hell you're blathering on about—

A few decades back, along with the civil rights movement, many women began taking charge of their lives rather than having their roles defined by an essentially patriarchal society. Writers such as Gloria Steinam and Germaine Greer were protesting such things as women getting paid about 70% of what men got paid for doing the same work, and generally speaking out for women's rights. Some (including some women) viewed this with alarm. but all-in-all, it was a good thing.

Among other things was the matter of marriage and reproductive rights. There were some women who did want to have children, but didn't want what they regarded as the restrictions of marriage.

Often, a woman would chose a man with intelligence and talent to breed with—someone they felt had "good genes." And that man may not be aware that he is being used primarily—as GfS so quaintly puts it—as a "sperm donor," and entered into the relationship under the assumption that it had some future to it that included him. But her agenda does not include marriage. She's a liberated woman.

So—after a time, it may then come to pass that the woman decides she wants to be married after all, especially to the man who fathered her child. But since a bit of time has passed, the man has moved on. And has married someone else. So she marries someone else. A good man and a good father, who raises the child as if it were his own.

The "sperm donor" stays away—in fact, is asked to stay away—so as not to be an interfering or disrupting factor in the newly formed family. So he bows to the situation, and accedes to the request.

Later, when the child is grown, she decides that he has a right to know who his real father is. So she explains the situation to him. Wanting to meet his real father, he contacts him, and they get together. The son is a bright lad, thoroughly understands the situation, is happy to discover that he has two families, and although the father and the son live in different countries, they manage to get together for an enjoyable few weeks a couple of times a year.

####

You see, GfS, the scenario you have built up about me is loaded with selfishness, lust, betrayal, tawdriness, anger, resentment, and general mean-spiritedness, and it springs from a mind reasonably well-suited to writing soap operas.

That says one helluva lot more about you than it does about me.

So—there's an end to it, GfS!! Get your mind out of the gutter.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 02:34 PM

An interesting tale, Don, but I fear its clarity and carefulness will be lost on poor dear GfS. In particular, your story shows how decisions about personal & sexual lives occur in particular social and cultural contexts, whereas if we can charitably credit GfS with anything resembling a coherent thought-pattern, it is a fervent belief that sexuality and sexual lives must be thought of in terms of utter absolutes, whether theological or 'scientific'.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 03:52 PM

True, Smedley.

GfS doesn't seem to grasp the concept that there are things other than raw sex involved in human relationships, whether same-sex or heterosexual. S/he seems to regard human relationships in strictly selfish, predatory, and physical terms, which would certainly make him/her a counselor I would steer well clear of were I ever in need of such service. Anyone with that kind of general outlook would do more harm that good.

I live in Seattle, where, I am told the percentage of same-sex oriented folks is about 12%, and Barbara and I are fortunate enought to have a wide number of friends and acquaintances, some of whom happen to be gay or lesbian. We know six couples (four male and two female) who live in long-term, stable relationships, and they seem to be just as close and loving as any hetero relationship. One of the men is a regular in our monthly "writers' critique" group and he and his partner are frequently guests in our home during holiday celebrations.

So it's not as if I'm viewing this from afar or making it up as I go along.

I don't think either GfS or Akenaton have the wit to grasp the idea that there is more to relationships than selfish sexual gratification (of whatever variety).

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 03:59 PM

ebbie and Jim.....the remark you quoted, was from a singer and songwriter, well known and well respected on both sides of the Atlantic.

His remark may or may not have been tongue in cheek....no matter , I am proud to have him as a cyber friend

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 04:20 PM

"Selfish sexual gratification" seems to describe what is practiced by the vast majority of homosexuals.
Smedley has already mentioned the "hedonistic wing", but going by the health/ promiscuity figures, hedonism seems part of the culture.

I dont mean that there are not homosexuals who are monogamous, of course there are, but the hiv/promiscuity say very clearly that they are a very small minority.

All males, hetero and homo are naturally sexual predators, but the hetero lifestyle in most cases involves the production and nurturing of natural children, leading to an extended family system.
In most, but not cases this seems to work very well, keeping most of the male "animal instinct's(just slipped that in for the sisterhood) in check.

As I said earlier the homo's have thrown away the rule book....anything goes.................Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 04:29 PM

Ebbie posted....."sigh I was hoping it would not be so, but I see now that GtS is a woman. Since I am a woman myself, I always hope to find females more empathic and less dogmatic..."
.
Could this be the "supreme irony"........Must ask my friend Little Hawk or Mr Mcgrath.....They are the acknowledged experts   :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 04:39 PM

"I dont mean that there are not homosexuals who are monogamous, of course there are, but the hiv/promiscuity say very clearly that they are a very small minority."

Do the statistics show that the majority of Gay men suffer from HIV?


No they don't.



"As I said earlier the homo's have thrown away the rule book....anything goes.................Ake"

And now Ake has crossed into new territory.

Whereas before he deceived to give his views an air of respectability, he has now descended into the realms of straightforward abuse.


Oh no, he's already been there, he calls Gays a scourge.


Well, in the interests of ensuring that there are no double standards,


Ake - you are a fuckwit and a closet nonce.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 04:41 PM

Ake says: "All males, hetero and homo are naturally sexual predators. . . ."

Need I say more about attitudes? I hope Ake is not going to now try to commit what is known as "the fallacy of self-exclusion." {"Every male except me of course."}

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 04:49 PM

"I am proud to have him as a cyber friend"


Well I don't want to be in your gang ...

... oh no ..

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 04:57 PM

Ake says: "All males, hetero and homo are naturally sexual predators. . . ."

Of course they are... by nature... same as you, Ache.

I cannot believe youse are still at this.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 05:13 PM

Exactly so gnu!......I do not exclude myself.....How their extended family is affected has a bearing on most people's sexual behaviour;

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 05:23 PM

"Exactly so gnu!......I do not exclude myself.....How their extended family is affected has a bearing on most people's sexual behaviour;"

Projection all the way.

I Exclude myself.

Many others on this site also would.


I have often heard murderers and rapists described as "sexual predators" as part of their psychological profile.

This would be to distinguish them from ordinary normal men.


Your admission fits with your fascination with your fantasies of homosexual sex and child abuse.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 05:24 PM

Ake said "How their extended family is affected has a bearing on most people's sexual behaviour"

One translation of this is: "Hetero men are only monogamous because women & families prevent them doing what they would otherwise like to do".

Is that what you're saying, Ake ? It's an interesting viewpoint, if you are.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 05:31 PM

"Is that what you're saying, Ake ? It's an interesting viewpoint, if you are."


It is an admission that reveals a lot about Ake.


It mirrors his view that the only thing stopping Gay men from raping children is the law.


It makes me wonder what Ake would like to do that women and the Law won't let him ...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 05:41 PM

Holy crap.... youse had better back up and read the thread and take your assumptions much more seriously. Otherwise, Ake will make YOU ache.

I am absolutely opposed to Ake, (and I have called Ake a troll... which is a very serious accusation that I should not have made) and I just check in now and then, but, gee whiz, take the time to oppose Ake on logical, founded grounds eh?

Is Ake a male? a female? a troll? Only Ake knows (kinda... hehehehe... have fun... see you in another million posts).

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 06:06 PM

Thanks for that gnu.....thats why I've always had respect for you.

Don and Lox have simply lost the plot.....Smedley seems a reasonable guy but......if you run around with the wrong crowd?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 06:13 PM

And I asked a reasonable question, not yet answered.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 06:20 PM

Sorry Gnu,

I just thought I'd give Akes Logic a whirl.


Around 6% of men are estimated to be Gay in the UK

Thats about 1,800,000 men.

About 83,000 of these have HIV.


That makes about 4.6% of Gay men who have HIV


yet Ake concludes that "I dont mean that there are not homosexuals who are monogamous, of course there are, but the hiv/promiscuity say very clearly that they are a very small minority."


I thought I would apply the same kind of extrapolation techniques to the information available on this thread and see what "facts" I could derive.


Its amazing what you can conclude when you are full of shit.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 06:21 PM

Smedley.....I think you know exactly what I mean,
I thought you wanted a serious discussion....with a few smiles thrown in.
If so dont get into the trap of being blatently abusive. look as the posts above, see how they get more and more strident, more incoherent: and it's nothing to do with commitment.....it's just lack of reason and control.

I would be happy to discuss what I posted with you, but I think, because of the "support" you are receiving, you are perhaps playing to the gallery?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 06:22 PM

Gallery schmallery, I'm merely seeking clarification.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 06:23 PM

In other words, Ake thinks that 95.4% is a minority.


DUH!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 06:29 PM

Here is Ake's reasoning.


-Gay men risk catching HIV when they have unprotected sex with other gay men which could lead to them dying of Aids later in life,

-therefore Homosexuality for them is an unhealthy lifestyle that should be discouraged and homosexual mens rights should be curtailed to protect them.


I can apply the same reasoning as follows.


-Straight Women risk catching HPV when they have unprotected sex with men which could lead to them dying of cervical cancer later in life,

-therefore Heterosexuality for them is an unhealthy lifestyle that should be discouraged and heterosexual womens rights should be curtailed to protect them.


In fact, both positons are utter bollocks and the answer in both cases is to use a condom.


DUH!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 06:39 PM

Well as you are obviously a thespian, I thought it might have come naturally :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 06:48 PM

"the hetero lifestyle in most cases involves the production and nurturing of natural children, leading to an extended family system."

Most cases?

I see ...

"The study of 11,161 people between the ages of 16 and 44 from across the UK found that a minority - one in five men and one in four women - have had one sexual partner over the course of their lives."


DUH!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 06:57 PM

From this article


""Teenagers these days are very casual about sex. They're happy to have sex with anyone they meet - they use phrases like 'let's play together?'

"I gave away vouchers for free STD tests to girls, and found that 82% them were infected.

"It's incredible. I suspect a lot of them may have HIV as well." "



So what should we conclude?


Heterosexuality among young women is unhealthy?


Or that kids need to be properly educated about using a condom.


DUH!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 06:58 PM

"Well as you are obviously a thespian, I thought it might have come naturally :0) "


Geddit .. Thespian sounds like Lesbian ...


DUH!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 07:46 PM

"All males, hetero and homo are naturally sexual predators, but the hetero lifestyle in most cases involves the production and nurturing of natural children, leading to an extended family system."

I do not actually think that all males are sexual predators. Is it possible you meant something different because I think sexual predation certainly does not fit the majority of men. All men (well, most I suppose) are capable of rape but that does not mean they are all rapists.

As to the production and nurturing of "natural children" leading to an extended family system. I have no idea of the figures but have you any idea how many absent (by choice) fathers of children there are in the UK alone and how many single mothers have multiple fathers to their offspring, none of which are present in the extended family system? There are a great many single parent families in the country so I suspect that hetrosexuality is not in itself responsible for any extended family system. To my way of thinking the only thing that would lead to an really good extended family system is the love, respect and responisbility of two people bringing up children they want and love. Whether those parents be straight or gay does not matter. This is no insult to single parents either. Things happen for all sorts of reasons. I do however point out the high incidence to show that the production and nurturing of children is not inclusive. They do not always go hand in hand.

THAT SAID... there are lots of single parents out there who have children they love and provide a great family background and home without a partner. Some of these single parent families may actually be better off without the other partner there. Love, respect and responsibility do not necessarily go along with being straight.

For clarity what, to you, is the 'extended family system'? Finally. What did you mean by 'natural children'? The expression puzzles me exceedingly so I thought to ask what you mean by it rather than assume anything about the comment.

Thanks

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 07:56 PM

"ebbie and Jim.....the remark you quoted, was from a singer and songwriter,"
Sorry, I wasn't quoting anybody and I don't get to hear too many singer-songwriters - you'll have to enlighten me.
I don't believe it to be an accident that the most sexually-obsessive organisation on this planet, the church, managed to produce, cover up and protect the world's largest, most persistant and longest lasting paedophile ring. While attempting to judge and control the sexual behaviour of their congregations (using pretty much the same arguments as our resident 'phobes'), they were also raping and abusing their children on a massive scale.
Says everything that needs to be said about all such people.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 10:25 PM

Ake wages a desperate selfless campaign to protect homosexuals from AIDS, but cares not a whit for the far more endangered Swazis of all genders and ages.

What an ass.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 12 Jan 10 - 11:08 PM

"ebbie and Jim.....the remark you quoted, was from a singer and songwriter,"

Is this the quote? I quoted only Jim Carroll. Who is this singer and songwriter?

"It always seems to me that people who concern themselves with what goes on in other people's bedrooms must be very discontented at what goes on in their own."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 02:55 AM

To clarify (in the hope of short-cutting more back-and-forth on this minor point) - several posts ago (middle of the previous page?), a contributor who is not (unlike me) one of the crazy band of regulars on this thread, offered an attemptedly humorous comment about homosexuality being 'made compulsory'.   Jim picked up on this, Ake responded to Jim, offering the (alleged) musical ability of the original 'joker' as significant in some way.

Hey ho.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 03:49 AM

Thanks for clearing that up Smedley.
So we're back to the pair of sickos who get it off by peering through other people's bedroom windows then?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 03:54 AM

Looks like it.......

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 10:35 AM

""Selfish sexual gratification" seems to describe what is practiced by the vast majority of homosexuals.""


I was unaware that you had such a close acquaintance with "the vast majority" of homosexuals, or is it just that you read minds at long distance?

Be very careful Ake. With each post you make, your true agenda becomes increasingly obvious.

As to your complaints about personal abuse, I will only make one comment. Having been called a prat, and a liberal fascist, and told that my contributions to this and other threads are worthless and undeserving of consideration, I can only agree with the poster above who rightly called you a fuckwit.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 02:13 PM

"The vast majority" of Indians walk in a single file.

At least the one I saw did. . . .

(Just passing through.)

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 03:01 PM

Smedley.... Depite what Lox writes, my use of "thespian" and "playing to the gallery" was small attempt at humour, as I assumed, that having reviewed a stage play you must have had quite a bit of theatrical experience.

Puns, especially hurtful ones are not my forte.

I have given up on most on this thread; as you've possibly noticed, I have stopped responding to several posters because they have become so offensive that gnu, one of my strongest critics has spoken against them

Mauvepink seems sincere and deserves an answer, but you dont do your cause any good by joining the rabble in comments like   "So we're back to the pair of sickos who get it off by peering through other people's bedroom windows then?"

I left this thread a couple of weeks ago, but the sight of the usual suspects clucking like hens on a midden proved too much to stand.

So it is not Sanity or I who are keeping this thread alive, but the spiteful and aggressive....oh so "liberals".

MP I'll get back later..... and you too Smedley....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 03:17 PM

"So it is not Sanity or I who are keeping this thread alive, but the spiteful and aggressive....oh so "liberals"."
It is you and your redneck friend who are spiteful and aggressive.
It is you who are judgemental over what is now a done deal - homosexuality is legal, and has been for forty years. It is redneck fanatics like yourselves who still keep the flame of homophobia burning by spreading your poisonous intolerance.
Your kind continue to spread misery and hatred toward people who have in no way attempted to influence you as to their sexual affinities - can you say the same?
"MP I'll get back later..... and you too Smedley....Ake"
Don't hold your breath folks - he promised the same to me when he was attempting to divert our attention from clerical abuse - and didn't, of course.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 03:27 PM

"they have become so offensive that gnu, one of my strongest critics has spoken against them"

In fact, Gnu has gone out of his way to reassure me that my earlier apology was unnecessary.


DUH!



"So it is not Sanity or I who are keeping this thread alive, but the spiteful and aggressive....oh so "liberals"."


Thats right Ake, your posts don't keep this thread alive, only "liberal" posts have that effect.


DUH!



Ironically, the actual catalyst for the restart of this thread was Joe Offers post concerning African attitudes.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 03:56 PM

Now, now... do not taketh the name of gnu in vanity.

Thanks for the heads up. Heheheehee... nah... hahahaaa....

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 04:12 PM

Well gnu, I hope you told Lox who the apology should have been directed to!

But I won't hold my breath, as he already owes me an apology for attributing the "colourful" description of homosexual rape, provided by ebbie....to me

Despite being called three times, he has neither the balls nor the brains to apologise.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Charlotte-Anne Wells
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 06:06 PM

Reading this thread a song comes to mind that everyone should listen to. "The Killing of Georgie". It tells a story, of a homosexual guy and how people all over the world, miss a friend.

I spend a lot time with young gay dancers, as part of my photography gigs in clubs. These young men are my friends, dance partners, models and co-conspirators in art. I hear stories all the time of fathers who can't accept their sons, mothers who stand in the middle holding on hard to both husband and child, sons who are still coming out and facing who they are in a world where gay bashing still happens regularly.

I'm bisexual, out and very happy with my life. Granted, I mostly date men these days, but my sexual identity is more than a hobby – its a political statement, that in some places could put me in great danger. And while I can straddle both gay and straight worlds, it does not armour me from the hateful words I hear daily about homosexualitI do speak out, but not all minds and ears are open to hearing a different perspective.I know the wrong word to the wrong person could get me in trouble, but that can't keep me silent.

I hold this space for my friends, bash back when needed, cheer loudly when its needed, and feel compassion for those who still find alternative sexual identities dangerous. We are such lovely, brave people, full of a desire to love and be loved, and yet we cause fear – a deep, primal fear in some cases.


Are we that scary that we fit in the same category as a terrorist? You mean loving and being loved is terrorism? Think on it…

Please listen to the song by Rod Stewart.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 07:43 PM

"Despite being called three times, he has neither the balls nor the brains to apologise."

I think you're the one lacking the brains mate.

Or you might have figured out by now that I see no reason to apologize to you.

If anything my abhorrance of your putrid jingoism has multiplied severalfold.


DUH!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 09:23 PM

Ake refers to the "colourful" description of rape that I offered up.

I din't mean it to be 'colorful', only graphic. It was in response to ake's fairly light-hearted reference to rape and what rape a heterosexual person/man would choose if he had to.

Well, I don't think that the term "rape" or the horrific act itsef is a joking matter. That is why I went into some detail; rape is NOT a simple sexual event- it is a hostile act of dominance.

So, "put that in your pipe and shove it"- as a person who frequently mixes metaphors said the other day.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 11:05 PM

Oh, my my! I guess if I got your goat, you must have a goat to be gotten!

I read the sniping rhetoric, and peace loving threats, and all it does is solidify, and prove what I've been telling you.

Look, I'm talking about compassion...you call it hate.

I'm talking about the free will for a homosexual, to decide to be hetero, and you call it homophobia. Not only that, our resident newsboy, wants to deny you to desire, want, or grant yourselves permission, to be what you want, if it crosses his political thinking. Hmmm...Then he calls it being 'liberal'. That's interesting! Something to think about. Maybe it isn't as 'liberal' as you've been led to believe...the political left, is going to dictate what you're allowed to desire(?)!

Personally, me thinks, that for him to be Mr. Political 'civil rights' champion, is just a ruse he tells himself, to make him feel important, and needed, no matter who he deceives, including himself, because that's all he's got. ....and who does he get to applaud him?? People who are stuck with the belief, that life doesn't get any better! Way to go!.....find people who have half the instincts of living organisms on this ball in space, called Earth, and tell them having half the attributes of life, gives them the right to convince those who Do have both the instincts, to accept their lack of completeness, and call it 'normal',..and we who are, must hate them, because we prefer the wholeness that we already have! This is utter nonsense!

Another personal side note, these political hacks want to tell us how to live our lives, what to accept, what to want, what we can say, what we can think, then get into stupid name calling, if we can see that they are just very little people, trying to hide their shattered egos, with self proclaimed 'noble' causes....when they have NEVER even raised their own kids! ...and you want to tell me about life????
Hey, to the self appointed mystics, and politicians and the such, If you have NEVER mounted a woman, and with her hearty help, and with full intention, conceived, brought forth a child, raised it successfully, with her hearty help, into mature adult life, you can just jerk off, get whomever you want to help you, and howl at the moon. You might know a lot less about life than you've deluded yourselves into thinking! You're a lightweight!!!!

Now, do I think that is the prerequisite for that I want everybody to be like??...NO! It's just those who can do it, and have done it, know, without a shadow of a doubt, that the little squeaky voices of the frail in will, or blinded to the longer point of reference, who want to suck their thumbs, (or other...never mind), stroking each other till you outlive your age of usefulness ....Well, pardon me, if you think you've had a higher experience!..Sorry, you haven't! Don't tell me, or others what to think, want, say, or what they can or can't achieve, or how fuckin' hip you are..you ain't! Be a 'political' activist, so you can FEEL important. recruit supporters from those you can't or won't help! You WANT them where they are, for your own sense of self importance, because, unless as you can keep them down, you've got nothing to say or do.....yes, it IS all about you!....Instead of developing the ability to honestly help any one, you keep them from desiring higher, and hipper things that you missed out on!...and once they hip themselves to that, you're clocked as a lame! That's why the ex-homosexuals, don't even want to go there, or deal with those who are. Who wants to go back to third grade??

Do I hate homosexuals? NO! Read it again...NO! Actually, its the furthest thing on my mind, except when I get on here, and read the gaggling and whining, and some of you stroking each other. Get a life....or at least, explore the other mysterious side, that you know nothing about!


Oh, and by the way, how could I pass this one up........

Don:"...So—there's an end to it, GfS!! Get your mind out of the gutter."

So yours can roll by??????

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 11:33 PM

GfS, you have confused me (which I'll admit isn't terribly difficult).

You said "If you have NEVER mounted a woman, and with her hearty help, and with full intention, conceived, brought forth a child, raised it successfully, with her hearty help, into mature adult life, you can just jerk off" -- indicating as it seems there is something wrong with those people who have not done this series of undertakings. With some vehemence, I might add.

And yet you say, "Now, do I think that is the prerequisite for that I want everybody to be like??...NO!"

You don't want them to be like that, and yet if they aren't, you're hostile to them. Which is it? Do you really think it's okay for them to follow their own path? Or does their doing so make them so despicable (if that's the right word -- choose one you prefer) that you can tell them to jerk off?

Please explain to me which you mean.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 11:47 PM

"I guess if I got your goat, you must have a goat to be gotten!"

Listen up. I've been looking for my goat for days. WHERE IS IT?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 11:49 PM

That was an attempt--albeit weak--to inject a modicum of humour into what is on occasion a thoroughly nasty thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 11:57 PM

Mouser, Sorry..and by the way, I SHALL get back to you regarding the link just that my time at present is limited.

What I was saying, that you inquired about, is, when someone who wants to assume power over other people, and dictate to them about life, unless they have experienced life, on that level(which many don't), don't tell us who have, what your interpretation, of how our lives should be..what we can think, desire, hope for, or what's best for us. They haven't a clue, as far as their personal experience...except spouting idealistic, uninformed, non-experienced, opinions of what is 'good' for us. I'm not hostile toward them, but rather annoyed, that they become a parody of themselves!...then try to tell us 'where its at'! They are light weights, afraid of life...with big mouths.
GfS

Sorry, if that was unclear. If its still not, clarifying it further should be a blast!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 13 Jan 10 - 11:58 PM

999, where'd you last see it?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,999
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 12:11 AM

THAT would be telling and likely open me up to the wrath of animal rights activists. LOL

Thanks for asking, GfS.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 12:19 AM

Yeah, then they'll tell you that having horny goats is cruel...especially if they want to mate with each other!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 12:54 AM

GfS, nobody but you and Ake are trying to tell people how they should live.

I haven't hear anyone here on this thread say that a gay person who is unhappy with his or her sexual orientation should not go to a qualified threrapist. All I am saying is that so far such attempts have not been spectacularly successful and have often led to undesirable—in some cases disastrous—results (depression and suicide). Anyone who contemplates "reversion therapy" should be aware of the possible risks and pitfalls before undertaking such a venture.

My quarrel is with those such as you and Richard Cohen who insist that gays should or must seek this kind of help rather than going ahead and living life their own way if this is what they want to do. I am especially disturbed by the fact that the writings of Richard Cohen, a man with no credentials—in short, as self-styled "therapist"—are being used to support the Ugandan atrocities.   And that, even though you may deplore what's going on in Uganda, you strenuously support Richard Cohen.

If two people of the same sex wish to form a domestic partnership—indeed, a marriage—I see no reason that they should not be allowed to do so. And that is the matter that started this whole brouhaha in the Proposition 8 thread and continued on into this one.

Is that so difficult for you to grasp?

And Ake. He keeps talking about the high rated of transmission of HIV among homosexual men, claiming that his heart bleeds for them. And yet he wants to deny them the very thing that would encourage stable, single partner relationships.

Is it any wonder that the word "hypocrite" keeps coming to mind?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 01:28 AM

Don: "I haven't hear anyone here on this thread say that a gay person who is unhappy with his or her sexual orientation should not go to a qualified threrapist." All I am saying is that so far such attempts have not been spectacularly successful and have often led to undesirable—in some cases disastrous—results (depression and suicide). Anyone who contemplates "reversion therapy" should be aware of the possible risks and pitfalls before undertaking such a venture."

There you go again.....Hey all you out there who might want the experience in life of bringing forth your own children, you might suffer depression and commit suicide!!

I only said, those who would WANT to evolve a little higher, than to have their highest experience in life, more than that of having their dicks stuck in someones poop!

Don:"My quarrel is with those such as you and Richard Cohen who insist that gays should or must seek ...blah blah blah"

Never said that. That's your interpretation. My post about Cohen was to show it was possible, when you were promoting the genetic thing..which, BTW, you later discredited with your own post(link from Boston)...along with other theories, which also that same post discredited.

Don: "If two people of the same sex wish to form a domestic partnership—indeed, a marriage"

Head on.....but don't insult marriage by calling it such....its just two people of the same sex, who can't get it on with the other sex, living and having sex together. Be happy and prosper...well sorta'.
If that's as high as you can get, fine. My deepest sympathies, that that's as high as you think you can experience.

Let me tell you a personal side note, (I seldom do that),..we delivered our children at home, alone..just us..and breathed their first breath into them, it was a rather sacred experience. Their isn't a time, when either of us hear the initial crack, of a newborn's cry, that our eyes don't fill with tears. Its awesome, and its an extension of your own life, and lineage, that was granted to you, to be conscientiously responsible for. We have met that responsibility, and have nurtured them to responsible adults who have children of their own. Our son, has deliver 6 of his 7, at home, alone, breathing their first breath of life into them, as well. Not only that, they are their first and only, and are still actively in love with each other, as if they were in their first year of marriage. Both of them glow, and have been used as examples, in the community that they live. All, of our kids, have their own children, own their own homes, and are the tightest families, you may have ever seen. If I could possibly share with you all, the fullness of life and joy that it brings us, I wish I could. It is a wealth, I wish could be shared with all.

I'll leave on a smiling note.
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 01:40 AM

So, GofS, are you saying that people who are for some reason unable to have children -- say, someone born naturally sterile, or a woman who has had to have a hysterectomy due to uterine cancer, are lower than people who reproduce?

You seem to think homosexuals who like being homosexuals and are content so being, are "lower" than people who have kids, and you want to encourage them to "evolve higher". So are sterile heteros who haven't and will never reproduce also "lower" than you? Why or why not?

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 01:47 AM

Mouser, No, they are not lower. But those who opt out, for merely sex, moreover, sex with those of the same gender, are ripping themselves off.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 03:50 AM

So, GfS has several grandchildren.

Who wants to join me in being a fly on the wall when one of them comes out as gay ??

Still, at least GfS has nailed their colours unequivocally to the mast. Anyone who chooses not to reproduce is inferior. And, it seems, the prime imperative to reproduce is to sustain and inflate one's own ego. Mmmm, real unselfish.

GfS, of course, has shown on so many occasions the nobility of thought and depth of insight only attainable by the breeding kind.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 03:56 AM

You don't allow for personal differences, GfS. I take your points; I am delighted you have had so ideal & fulfilling a family life. I had a wonderful ½-century marriage [see my recent post on the Do You Believe In Fate? thread]. We expected to have a family when we married; but after achieving her life's ambition of a higher education as a mature student my wife had an early menopause; so the children never happened along. Fortunaely we loved one another enough to be reasonably reconciled to this — it was not a grave disappointment to either of us, tho if we had reproduced the children would certainly have been welcomed & loved. But our loving partnership for all those years, until my darling's death a couple of years ago which I shall never cease from grieving tho I live another 22 years to 100, fulfilled our emotional needs.

And I have at least three pairs of homosexual friends, two male and one female, among my closest friends, all of them 'Civil-Partnered' under current UK law, who have all precisely the sort of relationship which my darling Valerie & I had: David and Brian, Ben & Dick, Mandy & Nicola, are all, I assure you, as happy in their relationships as were Valerie and I — and, in turn, tho in a different way, as were you and your life-partner with your children and grandchildren. We are all different — do not, please, go on being so prescriptive as to what brings fulfilment. There is more than one path.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 04:25 AM

MtheGM, thank you for that very eloquent post. GfS will, I fear, dismiss it as "banal", which is what s/he labelled any points I tried to make about the fulfilment of same-sex relationships.

Reproduction is, it seems, all that counts.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 05:36 AM

MtheGM, My condolences to you, and I mean that most sincerely. I have had a few close friendships with homosexuals too. If you have followed any of my posts, during the Prop 8 thread, I wrote about one, who was a musical, and sound engineering genius, and that's not an exaggeration! Both Dale, (the engineer/musician), and his partner, Mark, are dead now..died of AIDS, both of them. A terrific loss. During the time we did music together, he felt safe enough to open up to me. You think, I've been harsh on calling bullshit bullshit, he was phenomenal!..and he didn't take crap from other homosexuals either...especially the ones who colored their sexual 'orientation' as being anything other, than what it really was/is.

I'm not going to go into it, at this time, 'cause it's late, and I've been working in the studio. I just came up, and checked the thread before I went to bed. I posted on the 'Fate' thread, as well. I'll go check yours out, now. Good night.

Smeds, breeders???? Well it beats being suicidal,and proud of it!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 06:03 AM

Suicidal, GfS ? Another gratuitous insult to add to your swelling collection.   Although your bilious spew does nudge me close to feeling murderous.

Did your 'close gay friend' know that you regarded him, presumably throughout your 'friendship', that you regarded him as intrinsically inferior to you and your indiscriminately fecund brood ?

I have sent your paragraph about the sacredness of childbirth to the manufacturers of those greetings cards that pose silhouetted eagles soaring over a sickly verse. They might be able to use it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 06:05 AM

GfS

When I came back to this thread the argument seemed to revolved around Ake &/or you claiming that gay men were uniquely prone to, and responsible for, disease.

That was proven to be utter crap - if it was ever true it was only coincidentally true in the Western developed world because HIV happened to appear in the gay community. It was never true elselwhere and now the heterosexual West is catching up big-time.

So then you said, to paraphrase, that gay men could not form relationships and could never achieve much because they can't raise children and families.

That was also proven to be utter, utter rubbish. Gay people can and do raise children - either naturally conceived, artificially conceived or fostered/adopted. The same range of options available to straight couples. And it was pointed out to you that it's hardly easy for gay people to have their relationships supported and respected because of PEOPLE LIKE YOU filled with such hate and bile towards them.

So then you seemed to retreat to the fact that gay people were "less" than you because they can't emulate your "Little house on the Prairie" breeding choices. But many could, if they wished. The point is still fatuous.

So when MtheGM explained that he and his partner had been denied some reproductive choice by fate (and being gay is fate also), you were full of sympathy and agreed that, of course, one cannot judge or denigrate people because of a trick of fate that denied them your "ideal" life experience.

So with that out of the way, you have now retreated to the position that you regard gay men as nothing more than people whose...

"highest experience in life...[is]...having their dicks stuck in someones poop!"

Well, I'd rather have poop down there than filling my head, shit for brains.

So, GfS has finally nailed its colours to the mast. Good old fashioned bilious homomphobe who just seeks to reduce people, hopes, expectations and lives to a sexual act - which is an ubiquitous sexual act amongst men and women of whatever orientation in any event.

And, GfS, don't come here now with the tired old "I'm not homomphobic, some of my best friends are gay..." line. That's just so passé. That you once bumped into a tragic self hating gay guy who chimed with and reinforced your prejudices, means diddly squat.

Guess what, most gay people don't have HIV and don't die from AIDS. They have rewarding relationships and families - increasingly their own offspring - and that experience could be extended to many more if sickos like you would stop sabotaging progress and stop denigrating your fellow citizens.

Isn't the case now closed?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 06:21 AM

And just to pre-empt GfS complaining I edited her words, the full line is:

I only said, those who would WANT to evolve a little higher, than to have their highest experience in life, more than that of having their dicks stuck in someones poop!

So she sees gay people as needing or wanting to evolve [how patronising is that??] higher than their [present] highest experience. More than that [the experience] of having their dicks...

QED

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 08:53 AM

The other revealing thing about GfS' 'poop' comment is it shows that both s/he and Ake are obsessed with one sexual act, which (lke all those who have, erm, issues with homosexuality) they assume is the primary and defining form of erotic congress for all gay men.

This overlooks three somewhat crucial facts:
(a) straight folks do it too (and most who try it, really like it)
(b) not all gay men do it
(c) even those gay men who do do it, also do other things.

Over the years, this has puzzled me, but the conclusion I've reached is that they must see it as defining of gay male sexuality because they see vaginal intercourse as defining of heterosexuality as a 'perverse equivalent'. Consequently, nipping in through the back door becomes the focus of their contempt.

Years ago, when I was helping to run the 'gay rights' group (for shorthand) at university, we had a run-in with some fundamentalist Christians. "We offer you God's love", they said "but we cannot condone the act". Please note, THE act, singular. As if that's all we do. I remember telling them 'we get up to LOTS more than just that', but this didn't go down too well. If you'll pardon the expression......

Twenty-odd years later, here are GfS and Ake (the Laurel and Hardy of homophobia, or perhapd the Desi and Lucy) still rattled and traumatised by one sexual act above all others.

(Ake at least has his HIV rhetoric to fall vack on, since unprotected anal intercourse is undoubtedly a high-risk option these days. GfS cares nothing about health - s/he is all about loathing.)

And then they have the temerity to call *me* names.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 09:26 AM

For clarification, in the first line of my third paragraph, there shoud be a comma after 'heterosexuality'. And of course 'vack' should be 'back'.

You have to be careful what you say around here.........

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 04:03 PM

"I remember telling them 'we get up to LOTS more than just that', but this didn't go down too well. If you'll pardon the expression......"


Well smedley. thanks for bringing this back to the important issue that I raised earlier concerning the wonton 'visiting of museums', 'having a nice meal' and 'relaxing on the beach' that you and your partner shamelessly indulged in whilst on your recent holiday.

I am Shocked!!!!

Next you'll be telling us that sometimes you 'talk about your day at work'!!!!

Pervert!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 05:40 PM

Royston.....which is it with you.   Blind or nuts?
Did you not even look at the figures I posted, from your source for the UK?

A homosexual in the UK is almost 80 times more likely to contract hiv/aids, than a hetero UK citizen(excluding those from sub Saharan Africa).

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 05:55 PM

Lox, I am so sorry.

I have to confess that I recent ate a cheese and chutney sandwich.........homosexually.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 06:03 PM

What has me shaking my head is GfS's contention that breeding like a gaggle of rabbits means that one is more highly evolved. If that were true, there are quite a number of species, say, for example, gerbils, who would have wiped out war, disease, achieved space flight, and attained Nirvana by now. Hell, my sister's miniature poodle used to pop them out nine at a time!

Just a little side note as a matter of interest. Here we are on a planet where the immense surge in human population within the past few centuries has raised some pretty serious Malthusian warnings from just about all of the sciences. As of today, the world population is swiftly approaching 6 billion, 800 million, and at the rate we're going, we'll top 7 billion sometime next year.

That "hockey stick" graph that people keep talking about. Barbara has a world population graph magneted to the refrigerator door with an arrow pointing at 6 billion, saying "You are here," and another arrow pointing at 9 billion, saying "You don't want to be HERE!" We'll hit that point well before the century is over.

Interesting to note that the Indonesian government, worried about the population explosion, particularly in their country, have tried to encourage homosexual relationships, hoping that this will put the brakes on the frightening increase in population.

It's not working! Sexual orientation is not a matter of flipping a coin!

Yet, GfS talks about the glories of indiscrinate breeding.

By the way, Ake, were you aware that men are 100% more likely to get prostate cancer than women?

Beam me up, Scotty! There's no intelligent life on this planet!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 06:48 PM

"By the way, Ake, were you aware that men are 100% more likely to get prostate cancer than women?

Beam me up, Scotty! There's no intelligent life on this planet!!

Well, after a remark like that, the contention is certainly correct in your case Don.

BTW I'm afraid I must withdraw my opinion of Smedley, who seems more interested in acting the clown, than in serious discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 06:53 PM

Ake, a man is 100% more likely to have bollocks than is a woman

WTF is your point? Nobody can understand WTF you are talking about.

Another couple of years and UK Caucasian Heterosexuals will have caught up nicely. Still, what is the point of this?

That gay men have suffered disproportionately from HIV in the developed West is an accident of nature for the reasons I have explained and which you choose to ignore.

Because gay people don't generally have sex with straight people, the virus can stay contained to the group that is unlucky enough to contract it first.

Where it happens, by chance, to enter a heterosexual community it will tend for a while at least to be a heterosexual 'problem'

I hate to break it to you but ~whisper~ black and white people have sex together SHOCK!

HIV is not a gay/straight problem or a black/white problem, it is a challenge for everyone, nobody is immune or to blame for it. And you are bizarre.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 06:55 PM

Ake, honey, I'm diverse, I can do serious, less serious, whatever. A close scrutiny of this thread would show that you too have shuttled between various manners of expression, so don't deny that option to others, eh ??

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 07:12 PM

""Another personal side note, these political hacks want to tell us how to live our lives, what to accept, what to want, what we can say, what we can think, then get into stupid name calling, if we can see that they are just very little people, trying to hide their shattered egos, with self proclaimed 'noble' causes....when they have NEVER even raised their own kids! ...and you want to tell me about life????""

Boy oh boy, you JUST DON'T GET IT!

Nobody here has tried to tell you how to live your life.

Nobody here gives a shit about how you live, or even whether you live.

This whole thread is about trying to stop people like YOU telling others how to live THEIR lives, and depriving them of THEIR right to choose.

Incidentally, I have raised two fine children, who are at the top of their professions, with my wonderful wife, whose shoes you are not fit to shine, and I do not feel in any way diminished or disadvantaged by the presence in society of people with a different orientation.

They are welcome, as far as we are concerned, to live, love, and marry as they wish with our blessing.

I won't offend other members by saying what I would wish for you, I'll content myself with saying that you fall into the category into which I have already place your co-bigot.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 07:12 PM

Okay, I'll address a couple of the whines.....I wasn't the one dealing with the AIDS issue, except for a brief post in the 'Prop8' thread, though I have seen repeatedly Ake posting links from credible sources, that people dismiss, for whatever reason they claim. That is pretty silly to me. The stats are the stats. If you don't like them, take it up with the people who put the stats on their website. Ake is merely posting what he finds available. Fair enough?

BTW..I've never had an STD, nor has my spouse. No Herpes, no clap, no syphilis, neither of us has had yeast infections, no HIV, nor do we worry about getting them....no abortions, either. If you do, try changing your habits, hetero, or homo.

Next, my little phrase, Suicidal and Proud of it'. That was a bumper sticker we made up for our studio, because of what people came into record that sounded rather embarrassing. I felt it was appropriate in this case, because, after I posted my post, because 'Mousethief' asked a legitimate question regarding those who can't conceive, due to a couple of things, and one was uterine cancer...which of course can be a cause of death. Being as sexual promiscuity, hetero or homo, opens the chances up for forms of disease, and people do it by choice, to me that is suicidal. Furthermore, as I've said before, and this is a known FACT, which probably doesn't matter to some of you, 'All living things have two things in common, whether you are an amoeba, plant, fish, mammal, etc..and that is the WILL to SURVIVE and REPRODUCE. If you take one of those things away, you now have a form of death within your psyche..like it or not. Those are the TWO attributes of living organisms on this planet...sorry, I didn't make up the deal..its just the way it is. Fair enough?.if not, read your 5th grade biology book! When one chooses to give up one of those two, for anything, they take away one of the attributes of living organisms here..and, if you then promote it, like its some sort of 'hipness'...you get, 'Suicidal and Proud of it'! Rationalize it anyway you want, but by sheer definition, that's what it is.

Next, whoever it was, who alluded to my friend, who has since died, as some sort of 'token homosexual friend', to appear 'tolerant' toward homosexuals, stuff it! You know absolutely nothing about him or myself, and how I viewed him, or he, me.

As to our resident 'newsboy-Martin Luther King wanna-be' for homosexuals, stop pandering for recognition. You want recognition?...Get it from someone you are actually doing something FOR, other than getting them to give up, and settle for less in life...just to quell your sense of self inadequacy, in your personal life...(You don't need to post a refuting reply to that...just think about it.

Oh, and another one I just couldn't pass up. I went looking for the line, and damn, if it wasn't you!..(I thought it was someone else)..but....

Don: "What has me shaking my head is GfS's contention that breeding like a gaggle of rabbits means that one is more highly evolved. If that were true, there are quite a number of species, say, for example, gerbils,......"

Funny you brought that one up. Is that your animal of choice???

Look, I don't 'hate' anyone, for making homosexuality their choice. Actually, it seems that on here, the reverse is true. I think, the homosexuals resent anyone who doesn't buy their rationalizations, and they get offended, because the reasons a lot of us don't, they know in their heart of hearts, is true! If you want to be a homosexual, go ahead..don't rub our noses in it, glorify it, or teach our children that its just hunky dory. It's a trend, and like all trends, they recede...just like the hula hoop, and the twist.

Not angry, hateful, or gullible,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 07:17 PM

Ake.

50% of HIV and AIDS sufferers globally are women.

94% of Gay men in the UK do not have AIDS.


but you think that the way to deal with the HIV/AIDS problem is to educate kids that Homosexuality is an unhealthy lifestyle.


DUH!!!!


    ======== LA LA LAAA I'M IGNORING YOU LA LA LAAA =======


I think Ache "seems more interested in acting the clown, than in serious discussion."


Fuckwit.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 07:19 PM

Oooooops, cross threaded......check this out!!!

DonT: "Another personal side note, these political hacks want to tell us how to live our lives, what to accept, what to want, what we can say, what we can think, then get into stupid name calling,........"

"..........I'll content myself with saying that you fall into the category into which I have already place your co-bigot."

You should run for Vice President on Obama's next ticket!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 07:31 PM

Ake, you are amazingly thick!!!

That was a parody you the kind of highly significant statistics that you are so fond of spouting.

You're probably the only one here who didn't get the joke!

Sheeesh!!!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 07:32 PM

""It's a trend, and like all trends, they recede...just like the hula hoop, and the twist.""

Given that there are documented examples of this trend going back to Ancient Egypt, and Ancient India, it's kinda long lived wouldn't you say?

And if it's lasted thousands of years, it looks like it might be natural.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 07:59 PM

GfS

"All living things have two things in common, whether you are an amoeba, plant, fish, mammal, etc..and that is the WILL to SURVIVE and REPRODUCE. If you take one of those things away, you now have a form of death within your psyche..like it or not."

Wouldn't this imply that if someone has produced a brood of children and then decides they're getting too old to produce children anymore and they take action to stop reproducing, they then have a form of death within their psyche?

Also, where did you get this "form of death" thing? Can you point me to a neutral textbook or a finding in a peer-reviewed journal?

Finally, I'm still not completely sure about this "higher" status of people who reproduce. Higher according to whom? "Missing out" according to whom? What objective standard are you holding up and inviting us to compare our lives to?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: frogprince
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 08:01 PM

"I've never had an STD, nor has my spouse. No Herpes, no clap, no syphilis, neither of us has had yeast infections, no HIV, nor do we worry about getting them....no abortions, either. If you do, try changing your habits, hetero, or homo."

1. A YEAST INFECTION IS NOT AN STD, AND HAVING A YEAST INFECTION IS IN NO WAY EVIDENCE OF PROMISCUITY OR ANY OTHER PARTICULAR SEXUAL BEHAVIOUR! A substantial number of women are quite simply subject to yeast infections; if you've never had one, you're FORTUNATE, NOT MORALLY OR SPIRITUALLY SUPERIOR.
2. "If you [have had an abortion] try changing your habits..."
Does that include the habit of having been raped, or the habit of developing any physical condition that makes the pregnancy life-threatening?
3. You have now reduced all people who, for whatever reason, choose not to reproduce, not just to the level of less than human but to the level of less than living organisms.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 08:09 PM

"...neither of us has had yeast infections"

Just for clarity, I assume you are not including yeast infection in with STI's??? I certainly hope not in any case.

Yeast infections (Candida albicans for instance) *can* be transmitted sexually, but the vast majority of yeast infections happen to women and for various reasons. Vaginal yeast infection is not the only form of 'thrush'.Three in four women will experience at least one yeast infection in their life and many will have several infections in their lifetime. Babies can get Thrush as do the elderly. Mne get what I think is called "jock itch". Women are more prone due to estrogen effects but antibiotics, pregnancy, obesity, PMS, multiple sclerosis, using condoms and diabetes can all exacerbate it. Obviously some of those things also affect males. This list is not exhaustive and there are lots of factors that make yeast infection more prevalent in some than others.

Indeed we all carry Candida albicans in various orifices and in the intestine.

It is NOT an STI

Sorry to be pedantic on that point but it is important to kill any idea that it is an STI before it gets into the thread. In short, never having had a yeast infection just makes you one of the lucky ones, but there is no moral high ground that goes with the status. Yeast infections can heppen to anyone for all sorts of reasons and seldom is it down to sex per se. Virgins can get yeast infections and do!

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 14 Jan 10 - 08:15 PM

Sorry, Frogprince, you obviously posted as I was reading and replying. No harm done though. The point cannot be stressed enough as many young women put off going to the doctors thinking ill will be thought of them over having a yeast infection. Some end up infertile because of not being treated. That comes about because some out there still think it as being an STI...

No matter. All illness needs the right treatment, but stigmatising a very common ailment can prevent proper treatment being sought.

I am sure no judgenment was being passed or made but there was the implied idea of it being an STI and that was worth clarifying

:-)

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 15 Jan 10 - 02:36 AM

GfS, obviously I don't know how you speak, but I can't help hearing 'the WILL to SURVIVE and REPRODUCE' in a Germanic accent.

A Germany-in-the-1930s accent, to be more precise, declaimed into a microphone by a pointy shouty little man with a silly moustache as the tanks rolled into Poland.....

(His lot were very big on reproduction & very anti-gay too.)

Personally, I'm well aware that animals have this urge, and that 'homo sapiens' (the only kind of homo you really care for) is an animal, but there is this niggling little thing called several thousand years of culture that's happened since we stopped just being hairy grunty things lurking nervously in the woods and pumping out pups/cubs/chicks/foals/kids as fast as the reproductive cycle allowed. When you think of all the struggle and effort that has been put in to make us more-than-just-animals, it's almost as mind-boggling as your wish to stay defined by mere biology.

But I guess you're still happy to be down amongst the pumping grunters. Queen of the Pumping Grunters - please accpt this, free of charge, as the title of your next album.

Now where did I put my hula hoop........

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Jan 10 - 02:38 AM

GfS - I still do not think you have responded adequately to my last challenge. I reiterate that I do not share the low opinion of your motivations expressed by many on this thread. I think your chosen lifstyle, so based on a loving family of spouses, children, grandchildren, an admirable one FOR YOU.

But I repeat also that I think you are being over-prescriptive in the way you seem to be urging it as the best, even the only, one of the infinite options available in the finding of sexual and emotional fulfilment.

How about that then?

Michael

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 15 Jan 10 - 02:41 PM

R

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Paul Burke
Date: 16 Jan 10 - 07:49 AM

Gone from Sanity must include nuns, monks, and all other spinsters and bachelors and those who for whatever reason choose not to reproduce in his net of obloquy, and excuse bisexuals, especially those made for two.

He's wrong, of course, on the simplest of grounds- the probability of reproducing your genome is precisely zero for any sexual organism. So promoting other genomes close to your own is as good a strategy as reproducing on your own account. I'd argue that all humans are closer than humans to all animals, but most animals are, in the big view, pretty close to us too.

Moreover animals at the human level of complexity have something to reproduce that is far more powerful than the slow adapting gene complex- ideas. You can pass on a share of your genes to a few hundred people in the next generation if you're a randy old bugger (male, for females it's a dozen or so at most), but ideas can influence the behaviour of millions. So the legacy of the homosexual Alan Turing (computers, self- organising systems, much mathematical arcana that will take centuries to develop) is far greater and more fruitful than the most assiduous harem haunter.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 16 Jan 10 - 08:09 AM

Paul,

What an awesome post.

Your argument is profound, powerful and unforgettable.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 16 Jan 10 - 08:44 AM

There are some people out there who also live in full relationships who actually choose to be celibate too. Celibacy, I dare say could come under sexuality of a kind but, as it's more a choice thing I guess not. Nonetheless. A life without sex does not mean a life unfulfilled either. For some sex is not important at all and yest they are still very happy and whole individuals.

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Jan 10 - 08:49 AM

I fear I must differ from this view, Lox. For a start, if Paul had read with reasonable care he would know that GfS is female, not male; which matters & makes a considerable difference IMO.

Secondly, tho I take his general point [I think] I find much of its expression obscure to the point of incomprehensibility — what does this formulation mean, e.g. — "I'd argue that all humans are closer than humans to all animals, but most animals are, in the big view, pretty close to us too." — it makes no communication to me whatever.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Jan 10 - 08:55 AM

I should, though, welcome [3rd time of asking] some response to the challenges I have issued to GfS to justify the exclusivity & lack of empathy in her views — in which challenges I received praise & support from Smedley. She (GfS) seems to me to have become uncharacteristically reticent all of a sudden.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 16 Jan 10 - 09:19 AM

I am sure Paul can and will answer for himself but...

"what does this formulation mean, e.g. — "I'd argue that all humans are closer than humans to all animals, but most animals are, in the big view, pretty close to us too.""

I took that to mean that as humans we all have far more in common than we don't but as animals we are all pretty much close to what other animals do. I could be wrong but that was my interpretation. If I am right then it does make sense on a behavioural, genetic and evolutionary level for sure.

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Jan 10 - 09:48 AM

Well, you may be right mp, and thanks for trying: but I still find it a most obscure and obfuscating formulation. _ I mean, how can "humans be closer than humans" to anything. It's like saying "Fred is taller than Fred" — just doesn't make any sense at all that I can extrapolate.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Jan 10 - 10:22 AM

I agree Michael, I can't make any sense of the post....has there been the drink taken?

However it does appear to make perfect sense to Lox, who seems quite overcome.

No surprise there then.....

I've been away for a while and haven't fulfilled my promise to Mauvepink and Smedley, but I will, after I've concluded some very interesting conversations on another site...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Paul Burke
Date: 16 Jan 10 - 10:39 AM

Too much haste. Should have read, "I'd argue that all humans are closer to other humans than to other animals, but most animals are, in the big view, pretty close to us too."

I don't read GfS's posts closely, any more than I look at toilet paper after I've used it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Jan 10 - 10:42 AM

I think it was better the first time..   :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Jan 10 - 10:45 AM

and does Richards admission of a slip (can happen to anyone), say something about the intellectual capacity of Lox? :)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Jan 10 - 10:47 AM

Did someone say F.....T!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 16 Jan 10 - 10:50 AM

Thanks Paul — I take your point now.

I must say I think there is more hostility to GfS than is absolutely warranted — I find her accounts of her marriage and its satisfactions very moving — especially as my own, tho childless, brought me before it was snatched away from me all the true happiness I have had thruout my long life: but, as I have said, she makes IMO the mistake of being over-prescriptive of 'only one way', & lacking in empathy — points to which she seems oddly reluctant to rejoin.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 16 Jan 10 - 11:05 AM

Oddly reluctant, MtheGM, because you so succinctly sdummarised how she sees things. In GfS's world, there is an immovable hierarchy of ways to live, and no prizes for guessing whose is at the top.

You or I could say we've found our own paths to achieve great happiness, but GfS simply can't concede this, because difference is the enemy.   Unless you live life to the strictest letter of the GfS code, you can only be inferior.

I don't know whether to envy such certainty or be terrified by its utter rigidity.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 16 Jan 10 - 02:38 PM

I read Pauls post, and despite the clumsy wording I understood the meaning of it.

The content of his post was new to this thread and added an original and profound dimension to the issue.

It counters in very insightful philosophical terms the idea that a homosexual represents the end of an evolutionary line.

It demonstrates how homosexuals, despite not procreating, may have a significant impact on the evolution of their species.

In some cases, as in the example provided by paul, they may have a greater evolutionary significance than many heterosexuals.

This is a difficult concept to encapsulate in a short post, yet despite pauls hastee, he conveyed it well enough for me to understand.


Akes admission that he doesn't understand it and his subsequent barking and tail wagging says nothing of my intellect and plenty about Ake's.


Akes new tactic is to argue as follows

"I don't understand therefore you're stupid"

This is because every other argument he has presented has been destroyed, and he has been exposed for being a fuckwit.


DUH!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Donuel
Date: 16 Jan 10 - 03:10 PM

The Y chromosome is most respondsible for quick evolution.
I don't know if homosexuality is on the rise or not but the reasons for a genetic tweaking now and then are pretty obvious in face of a population explosion and the problems it may cause the species.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 16 Jan 10 - 04:56 PM

Paul's statement that "ideas can influence millions" opens the door to the concept that the influence a person can have on others is potentially a far more potent form of "immortality" than trying to pass your genes on into the future by spending all you spare time practicing rumpy-pumpy. An artist or musician who inspires others to participate or a teacher who imparts information and skills to many students, some of whom may, themselves inspire others and/or teach. That strikes me as a far more potent form of immortality that merely passing along one's genes.

It's ideas, not genes, that are the really important agents in changing the world.

Of course one swells with pride when one's daughter performs beautifully and gracefully at her ballet school recital and one's son whacks his first home run in little league baseball. And your oldest son, who, when his voice changed, turned out to have a nice light baritone, is chosen to sing the role of Billy Bigelow in his high school's production of Carousel—and, of course, when they graduate from high school and get accepted into college. . . .

But here are a few more of the unalloyed joys of parenthood:

You have an important business meeting in the morning, but you selflessly pace back an fourth from two to four a.m. with a squalling, colicky baby because your wife, who has done this for the past four nights, tells you that she has reached the point where, if she can't get some sleep, she is seriously contemplating murdering the entire family and fleeing to Mexico.

For the fourteenth time, your eighteen-month-old, sitting in her high chair, picks up her sippy-cup from the tray and throws it on the floor, giggling insanely as you dive to pick it up before its contents spill all over the floor—again! But this time she follows it with her bowl of Jell-O, which lands on the back of your head with a juicy "splotch!" She squeals with glee!

Your kid hasn't come home yet from the Saturday evening party. At two a.m., you get a call from the police telling you to come down to the station and pick him up. He and his buddies, working with precision teamwork, managed to shoplift a case of beer from an all-night convenience store, got absolutely splashed, and got caught by the police running up and down the street throwing rocks and smashing street lights.

Three weeks later, once again the kid stays out beyond his now rigid curfew. You are wakened at two a.m. by the sounds of a car engine revving and kids yelling. You go downstairs and someone is fumbling with the front door. It's your kid. It seems they've hit same convenience store, but this time they managed to shoplift only two six-packs, so one of the guys slipped out with a couple of bottles of cheap wine under his jacket. It wasn't a good mix. Your kid stands there in the doorway with a silly grin on his pea-green face and as you are gasping for breath and trying to regain the power of speech, he up-chucks on your bare feet!

Your sixteen-year-old daughter has been acting funny for a couple of weeks. Finally, she bursts into tears and confesses. "I think I'm pregnant!" The father? "Well, it could have been Michael. Or maybe Kevin. Or Sean. Or maybe Jason. Or maybe it was . . . ."

Your seventeen-year-old son, with a look of fierce determination on his face, says, "I've been wrestling with this for several months now, trying to figure out how to tell you. But I guess the best way is to just come right out with it and get it over. I'm gay!"

Bon Appetit!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 16 Jan 10 - 05:12 PM

It might bear mentioning that the subject of eugenics, which so inspired the Third Reich, was borrowed by them from early nineteenth century America. A sad perversion of Darwinism.

Paul's argument is a powerful one that raises an important point about the simplistic prescriptive tautologies offered by GfS and ilk. Systems which are complex--and we know of none more complex than human evolution--turn at many different points of inflection in response to a wide range of sometimes disproportionately small initial stimuli. Paul has sketched briefly how, for example, the choice of homosexuality might strengthen the path of human evolution by (a) creating a fecund field of ideation for the next generation which might otherwise not have occurred and (b) subtracting elements from the first-generation gene pool which changes the composite picture of that gene pool and those of the second and onward iterations in unpredictable ways.

LEaping to two-valued conclusions may work well for two-valued problem such as "eat or be eaten", but the impulse to do so is ancient and undiscriminating, and has almost no value in addressing complex problems like "optimizing the mating dynamics of the dominant species on a planet".

This is even more the case when adjudications of "goodness and badness" are added into the equation which makes it a polynomial of a highly complex order indeed. So complex that it seems to me that anyone who thinks they have a complete grasp of it is deluded or pretending, one or the other.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 16 Jan 10 - 05:26 PM

Give me fuckin' strength!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 16 Jan 10 - 08:47 PM

Ake, I am duly gobsmacked at the sheer brilliance of your rejoinder!!!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 17 Jan 10 - 01:38 AM

If you can't either (a) understand or (b) refute your opponent's argument, you can always swear about it.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 17 Jan 10 - 12:04 PM

♫♫♫   Oh where oh where has GfS gone - Oh where oh where can s/he be?   ♫♫♫

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 17 Jan 10 - 12:12 PM

Dunno, but I fear I cannot resist the childish temptation of helping to nudge this thread up towards the big 1000.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 17 Jan 10 - 03:25 PM

I dare you!

;-)

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 17 Jan 10 - 03:42 PM

To mousethief and anyone else who is waiting for a response to the gibberish being expounded by Amos, Paul,Lox,and Don in their last few posts......Dont hold your breath.

I've listened to a lot of repetitive nonesense on this thread, but I draw the line at attempting to rationalise "liberal" gobbledy gook!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 17 Jan 10 - 04:42 PM

Hey Ake,

Still expanding on your "I don't understand therefore you are stupid" thesis?

Admittedly also a new and original line of argument.


I am not optimistic about its effectiveness, but I wish you luck ... its all you have left ...

DUH!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 17 Jan 10 - 04:44 PM

getting close to the millenium ...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 17 Jan 10 - 04:51 PM

When you don't have an answer, it's an easy dodge to dismiss it as "liberal gobbledygook."

Cowardly cop-out, Ake.

And you're not fooling anybody!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 17 Jan 10 - 05:14 PM

I'm going to miss the millennial milestone as I need an early night, but never let it be said I didn't help.

Of course I could just post random giberish a few times in quick succession but there are others on this thread who do that sort of thing so much better than me.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Paul Burke
Date: 17 Jan 10 - 07:32 PM

akenaton: you're a hate-filled abuser. Is that clear enough for you?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 17 Jan 10 - 07:43 PM

This thread has pretty much passed its "sell-by" date and is beginning to smell a bit rancid. I don't think any minds are going to be changed and bigotry continues to ride the range, spawning all kinds of mischief. As has been pointed out a number of times before, science has discovered the link between primitive apes and modern, civilized humans. It's us.

Some of us are getting there, but others have a quite way to go yet.

GfS was last seen running toward the horizon with her ass on fire (emitting whelps at every bound), and after all of Ake's talk of kinky eroticism, I'm quite sure he's eager to go out on the moors and spend some quality time with his sheep.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 17 Jan 10 - 07:44 PM

""To mousethief and anyone else who is waiting for a response to the gibberish being expounded by Amos, Paul,Lox,and Don in their last few posts......Dont hold your breath.

I've listened to a lot of repetitive nonesense on this thread, but I draw the line at attempting to rationalise "liberal" gobbledy gook!""

Listened to it? You've been responsible for most of it, and the rest has oozed from the keyboard of your fellow bigot. You don't need to rationalise anything mate, because rational is not part of your vocabulary.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 17 Jan 10 - 07:45 PM

Liberal, WHO ME?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 17 Jan 10 - 07:46 PM

1000

Don T

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 17 Jan 10 - 07:48 PM

And, given its accuracy, that last post makes more sense than anything posted by our two resident homophobes.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 17 Jan 10 - 08:09 PM

Who ever said I was waiting for a response from one of the liberals? I had a few questions in to GfS, but we have so far managed to treat each other quite civilly.

But I don't have any questions pending with any of the gobbledy-gooking Liberals. When they're not overcome with frustration and posting out of their frustration (so to speak) I find them to be quite understandable, and very often find myself agreeing with them.

Of course it could be that I'm just as muddled in the head as you think they are in print (print of the pixel variety). I've been accused of worse by better. But that's not something I can do much about, innit?

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 17 Jan 10 - 08:25 PM

GG,

The law was mooted in the Ugandan legislature after a team of American evangelists came to Uganda to denounce homosexuality (and teach people how to recruit-proof their children against homosexuality, and about "curing" homosexuals, and how they are trying to destroy African families, etc etc) at some sort of a conference. This fed into the long-standing hatred already there on the ground, and led to the law being proposed.

When they found out about the law, the evangelical speakers sought to distance themselves from the damage their hate speech engendered.

So the short answer is that there are no American evangelicals who support this proposed law. But the long version is far more complicated.

The bigots in question are Scott Lively, Caleb Lee Brundidge, and Don Schmierer.

Here is an article about the whole thing.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 17 Jan 10 - 10:42 PM

Sorry, that's a response to a post on the first page -- didn't realize where I was. Please ignore. Obviously I'm as muddled as they say.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 12:49 AM

I'm very sorry that I've been away, so long...been in the studio, or raising help for the earthquake victims. I'm posting this, which is in NO WAY a value judgment, on homosexuality, but because of lack of time(I actually wrote an extensive post, but I accidentally erased it while closing a tab).
These are some figures, you can discuss it anyway you want, I will be back! Some favor either side of the discussion. As to this article, though it is thought provoking, it is rather neutrally void of personal bias, but does deal with some areas, brought up in this thread, including the 'traditional Christian' view vs. the scientific.

Sorry, time does not permit me to be on more.

Regards To All,
GfS

Does Science Show Homosexuality is Healthy?

The view that homosexuality is not a mental illness but is a healthy lifestyle is often given as the basis for changing the traditional Christian stance on homosexuality. But does science really show that homosexuality is healthy? This article will consider the findings of science.

There is no absolute standard for judging what is normal or abnormal. But there are some common empirical criteria that are commonly used to decide whether a behavior is healthy:

    * Emotional health
    * Psychological health
    * Physical health



Emotional Health

A major study by Bell and Weinberg revealed that 78% of male homo- sexual "affairs" (relationships entered into with an intent of commitment) lasted less than three years. Only 12% lasted five years or longer. Study by Alan P. Bell and Martin S. Weinberg, "Homo-sexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women", (New York, Simon and Shuster, 1978) p.314

Certainly, this shows a pattern of broken relationships that must be painful for many.

73% of the psychiatrists in the American Psychiatric Association who responded to a survey by Harold I. Lief said that they thought that homosexual men are less happy than others. 70% percent said they believed that the homosexuals' problems were due more to personal conflicts than to social stigmatization. Study by Harold I. Lief, Sexual Survey Number 4: Current Thinking on Homosexuality, Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality 2 (1977), pp.110- 111 (Cited in Growing Up Straight by George A. Reker).

David McWhirter and Andrew Mattison conducted a non-random study of 156 stable committed male homosexual couples. They found that none of the over 100 couple that had been together for more than 5 years had been sexually monogamous or exclusive. The authors, themselves a gay couple, argued that for male couples, sexual monogamy is a passing stage of homophobia and that many homosexuals separate emotional fidelity and sexual exclusivity. What matters for male couples is emotional not physical faithfulness.D McWhirter and A Mattison, "The Male Couple: How Relationships Develop", (Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall).

Many studies have shown that children of homosexual households are 2 to 4 times as likely to become homosexual themselves as compared to the general population. Timothy J. Daily, "Family Research Council: Insight: Homosexual Parenting: Placing Children at Risk". See www.frc.org/get/is01j3.cfm.



Psychological Health

In a national health care survey 75% of the nearly 2000 lesbian respondents reported they had pursued psychological counseling of some kind, many for treatment of long-term depression or sadness. J. Bradford et al., "National Lesbian Health Care Survey: Implications for Mental Health Care," Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 62 (1994): 239, cited in Health Implications Associated with Homosexuality, p. 81.

Homosexual men are 6 times more likely to have attempted suicide than are heterosexual men. Study by Bell and Weinberg, "Homo-sexualities…", Table 21.12

Studies indicate that between 25 and 33% of homosexual men and women are alcoholics. Study by Robert J. Kus, "Alcoholics Anonymous and Gay American Men", Journal of Homosexuality, Volume 14, No.2 (1987), p.254

Bell and Weinberg reported evidence of widespread sexual compulsion among homosexual men. 83% of the homosexual men surveyed estimated they had had sex with 50 or more partners in their lifetime, 43% estimated they had sex with 500 or more partners; 28% with 1,000 or more partners.Bell and Weinberg p 308

The same study revealed that homosexual men have to a great extent separated sexuality from relationship. The survey showed 79% of the respondents saying that over half of their sexual partners were strangers. Seventy percent said that over half of their sexual partners were people with whom they had sex only once. Bell and Weinberg pp.308-309. It should be noted that this survey was drawn from the San Francisco area at the height of the celebration by that gay community of its freedom from the restraints of "puritanical, middle-class values" and before the AIDS epidemic struck.

In their study of the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexuals published in Journal of Sex Research, Paul Van de Ven et al. found that "the modal range for number of sexual partners ever [of homosexuals] was 101–500." In addition, 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent had between 501 and 1000 partners. A further 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent reported having had more than 1000 lifetime sexual partners. Paul Van de Ven et al., "A Comparative Demographic and Sexual Profile of Older Homosexually Active Men," Journal of Sex Research 34 (1997): 354.

A survey conducted by the homosexual magazine Genre found that 24 percent of the respondents said they had had more than 100 sexual partners in their lifetime. The magazine noted that several respondents suggested including a category of those who had more than 1,000 sexual partners. "Sex Survey Results," Genre (October 1996), quoted in "Survey Finds 40 percent of Gay Men Have Had More Than 40 Sex Partners," Lambda Report, January 1998, p. 20.

Surely these are indications of either deep dissatisfaction, or else terribly destructive hedonism.



Physical Health

90% of lesbians surveyed had been recipients of one of more acts of verbal aggression from their partners during the year prior to the study, and 31% reported experiencing physical abuse (Lettie L. Lockhart et al., "Letting out the Secret: Violence in Lesbian Relationships," Journal of Interpersonal Violence 9 (1994): 469–492. ) and in another reference we see that "the incidence of domestic violence among gay men is nearly double that in the heterosexual population." Gwat Yong Lie and Sabrina Gentlewarrier, "Intimate Violence in Lesbian Relationships: Discussion of Survey Findings and Practice Implications," Journal of Social Service Research 15 (1991): 41–59.

The Medical Institute for Sexual Health further reported: "It should be noted that most studies of family violence do not differentiate between married and unmarried partner status. Studies that do make these distinctions have found that marriage relationships tend to have the least intimate partner violence when compared to cohabiting or dating relationships." Health Implications Associated With Homosexuality (Austin: The Medical Institute for Sexual Health, 1999), p. 79.

Lesbians are 3 times more likely to abuse alcohol and to suffer from other compulsive behaviors. Joanne Hall, "Lesbians Recovering from Alcoholic Problems: An Ethnographic Study of Health Care Expectations," Nursing Research 43 (1994): 238–244

A study of homosexual twins found that they are more likely to have attempted suicide than there heterosexual twin. R. Herrell et al., "A Co-twin Study in Adult Men," Archives of General Psychiatry 56 (1999): 867–874

The life expectancy for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 20 years less than for men in general. Robert S. Hogg et al., "Modeling the Impact of HIV Disease on Mortality in Gay and Bisexual Men," International Journal of Epidemiology 26 (1997): 657.

"A disproportionate percentage — 29 percent — of the adult children of homosexual parents had been specifically subjected to sexual molestation by that homosexual parent, compared to only 0.6 percent of adult children of heterosexual parents having reported sexual relations with their parent. … Having a homosexual parent(s) appears to increase the risk of incest with a parent by a factor of about 50." P. Cameron and K. Cameron, "Homosexual Parents," Adolescence 31 (1996): 772



Conclusions

Scientific studies show there is a correlation between homosexuality and personal distress. There is clear evidence that many live unhealthy lifestyles. But not all homosexuals are distressed. Not all homosexuals experience personal distress nor can it be concluded that such distress is an inevitable part of the homosexual experience even if it is very common. Further there is effort to muddy the waters by hiding this kind of data. The mental health community, rather than reflecting the majority view, seems to have committed itself to revising the predominant public response, to normalizing behavior that is rejected by the public.

It is comforting to share a common understanding with most of the people in society about what is good and bad behavior, healthy and unhealthy patterns of living. However, we are heading into a time where more and more people disagree on what is a healthy person. An increasing number of the people and institutions around us have very different understandings about good & bad behavior and healthy & unhealthy living.

We must also recognize that right and wrong are not always the same as healthy and unhealthy. Psychological abnormality and immorality are two different things although they sometimes overlap. Sometimes they are not related at all. Many conditions that are sins are not pathologies (idolatry, pride, sorcery, lust, fornication). Many conditions that are pathologies are not in themselves sins (anxiety, depression, psychosis).

Christians must recognize that neither society's consensus or judgment of whether a behavior is healthy has to match God's view or the church's moral judgment. New Testament Christians were clearly out of step with their society's understanding of what made a good character, a good person and a good life. Morality is not usually decided by democratic vote. By contemporary standards, a life consumed with greed, materialism, sensualism, selfishness, divorce and pride is judged healthy but God evaluates such a life and finds it lacking.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 01:06 AM

GfS

-- a sensible article indeed, on the whole — esp in its emphasis that NOT ALL....

But (& I hate to be a bore) I still await your promised response to my challenges to what I perceive as your over-prescriptiveness & failure to allow for differences in tastes and choices in lifestyles — your tendency to regard your way as the Best, even the ONLY Acceptable. It seems to be generally accepted around here that my questions are good ones, and that my assertion "There is more than one path" requires more response from you than it has so far received.

So - 3rd or 4th time of asking - how about that then? Not deliberately avoiding the point, surely, are we?

Regards - Michael

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 01:13 AM

Don't have time to do all of this but I'll start with this:

A major study by Bell and Weinberg revealed that 78% of male homo- sexual "affairs" (relationships entered into with an intent of commitment) lasted less than three years.

The study was done in 1970, long before the AIDS crisis and the resulting shift in attitudes about long-term relations in the gay community in the United States. It was a self-selected study done just in San Francisco, advertised mostly in public places such as gay baths.

The book by Bell and Weinberg says of itself:

It should be pointed out that reaching any consensus about the exact number of homosexual men or women exhibiting this or that characteristic is not an aim of the present study. The nonrepresentative nature of other investigators' samples as well as of our own precludes any generalization about the incidence of a particular phenomenon even to persons living in the locale where the interviews were conducted, much less homosexuals in general.

In other words the numbers can't be relied upon to say anything about gays either in that part of SF, or as a whole. The study was never meant to do that.

So much for that number.

Maybe somebody else would enjoy tackling the next?

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 01:54 AM

Okay, let's cut to the chase here. The article just posted by GfS comes fromt the Exodus Global Alliance web site. Clicking on the link that says "About Us," I find the following:

Exodus Global Alliance is a world-wide Christian organization helping people affected by homosexuality and promoting the message that "Change from homosexuality is possible through the power of Jesus Christ."

Exodus provides Christian hope and help to people affected by homosexuality; teaching those who respond to homosexuals with ignorance and fear about God's love and grace; and teaching those who uphold homosexuality as a valid orientation about God's Lordship and holiness. These two extremes fail to convey the fullness of redemption found in Jesus Christ, a gift that is available to all who commit their life and their sexuality to Him.

In addition to directly helping people through our member ministries, Exodus Global Alliance works to motivate and train Christians and churches in their role of restoring sexual wholeness to men and women who desire to overcome their homosexuality. We assist local church leaders in dealing pastorally with issues related to homosexuality. And we come alongside new and developing ministries to homosexuals in order to supplement and nurture their growth.

Not all Christians agree with this stance toward homosexuality.

That, I believe, is sufficient for now. More laer.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 01:56 AM

". . . later. . . ."

Don Firth

(it's past my bedtime)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 03:37 AM

I read 'later' the first time. Must say something about the power of gestalt, if nowt about homosexuality!

LoL

''''''
0 0
{ v }      Michael
~~~
§§§§§

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 11:38 AM

Interesting article Sanity, its amusing to see the homos using the old hetero "cheating husband" routine to rationalise their promiscuity figures. "Oh it didn't mean anything, it was only physical"

It bears out what I was saying about the vast majority of homos having thrown away the rule book regarding sexual behaviour, which in turn may account for the very high levels of promiscuity and hiv/aids associated with homosexual preactice.

Mousethief says correctly that this was an old study, but homosexual promiscuity/hiv figures have continued to worsen since then till the present.

The really telling figures are the life expectancy statistics, if the homosexual figures applied to the sexual behaviour of any other sector of society, an immediate public inquiry would be called for and a medical review would follow to establish the cause of the disparity,

David Kaufman rails against "liberal silence"

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 11:52 AM

I always doubt any paper where phrases like "X% of the Y surveyed report.... A, B or C" where there is no mention of whether that % or the people being interviewed are fully representaive or a good cross section of society.

For intance... "90% of lesbians surveyed had been recipients of one of more acts of verbal aggression from their partners during the year prior to the study". But if those interviewd were from a hostel to help abused women no wonder you get a figure like that. I suspect 90% of straight people suffer some verbal aggression as they go through a year, though not necessarily their partners.

Some figures are meaningless in some studies because of this oversight. "Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics" comes to mind in some instances. I would also be very skeptical about some of the research cited simply because they are so dated and things have changed massively since the 80's and 90's.

Just an opinion again

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 12:11 PM

ake, one question: Why do you care?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 12:14 PM

This silence is what many here would like to see continue, tho' it adds to the deaths and is certainly not in the interests of homosexuals.

The only group served by silence on this issue are the politically motivated "liberals" who see homosexuality as a "cause celebre"

Once again, the fight for "rights" seems more important to these pseuds than a fight for a decent lifespan.

We all know who they are....if you are in any doubt, just read this thread, or one of the others pertaining to homosexuality.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 12:22 PM

Ebbie....is there really anyone who doesn't care?

If one "doesn't care" about what is happening among the homosexual then they are indeed without heart.

If the homosexual health figures were transferred to heterosexuals, we would be in the middle of a catastophic epidemic...would you care then?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 12:28 PM

I suggest the liberals are not at all being silent, Ake. THey are standing up for equal civil rights, which is the central issue here. ALl your arguments in favor of discrimination on account of this rationalization or that justification do not add up to a sensible answer to the question of whether civil rights should be equitable, or discriminatory.

There are OTHER issues connected with homosexuality which have been frequently thrown into this thread and the earlier one on Prop 8. None of them change the core equation--equal protection under the law, equal rights under the law, is the only basis for a sane democracy.
If those rights are correctly established and defended then the rest of the questions can be confronted in their proper domains, such as the medical domain, or even the criminal domain in some details.

As for the traditional status of the institution of marriage, let me remind you that according to similar traditions, fifty years ago it would have been illegal for a person of Obama's hue to marry a white lady despite consent and intent on the part of both.

This is exactly the pattern of prejudice you are defending, asserting that a certain class is pre-judged to be not amenable to social function, without any evidence of individual offense or failure. THis is prejudgement in its most classic form.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 12:34 PM

The Liberals are also the ones working with local public health departments to promote safe sex education, early screening, needle exchanges, disribution of free condoms -- and whatever else they can think of to protect people's health. Very often it is the conservative Christians who fight against those efforts as well. Actually it isn't anybody else.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 12:41 PM

My questions to you akenaton remain unanswered so I have given up on getting any answers. I have waited patiently over a week.

I have no idea of what a psued is so I looked it up. False, artificial or pretentious person. I guess this can be added to all the other insults and words that have been hurled in the direction of people who hold the views I do. I will not be drawn into 'returning fire' and, as I see the thread now heading for a re-run of all what has already been said, the only difference being that the insults will becaome more frequent and harder, I'll be really taking a back seat.

You will have it your way in the end and that is your entitlement.

Just one thing... "If the homosexual health figures were transferred to heterosexuals, we would be in the middle of a catastophic epidemic"

... we are. STI figure's in the UK are on the increase monthly, HIV among them, and the biggest growth is being shown in the straight populous.

What actual solution do you propose to this, across the whole sexuality population? I say the whole sexual population because it affects the whole sexual population. There is a crisis in sexual health... stop making out it is only a gay problem with gay folk being affected. People from all sexualities are dying of AIDS, still being infected and living with HIV, and the whole gamut of other STI's are on the rise.

What should we do? No stats. No insults. No quotes. What is YOUR solution?

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 12:56 PM

The tradition of Marriage ...

Until 1991, the tradition of marriage was defined in Law as a husband having ownership of his wife.

Consequently, there was no such thing as Marital Rape in common law until that date.


Bloody liberal judges interfering with tradition ...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 01:27 PM

My point, ake, is that I suspect that your own knowledge of homosexuality and homosexuals is a cerebral one. In your isolated part of the world you may never have known an 'out' homosexual.

May I suggest that if you know some you would discover that they are just like you.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 01:44 PM

Ake - Can I also, please, draw to your attention as well as GfS's [from whom I still await a reply] to my post of 14 jan 03.56AM, regarding the respectable, loving, Civil-Partnered couples of my acquaintance whom I know to be as happy, faithful, secure, stable, as any heterosexual married couple I have ever known — including me and my beloved lost Valerie. They defy all the statistics you adduce, and the principles and precepts you appear to urge. Such couples are many, typical of a huge part of homosexual society [insofar as such a category can be isolated]. Where, please, do they fit into your reckoning?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 03:59 PM

Ebbie.....there are three homosexual couples in my area.....I work for them from time to time.

One is a lesbian partnership who appear very much like two old sisters very relaxed and behave very normally.
There are two male partnerships who do not mix with the locals, but have their own circle of friends who come to stay with them quite often. On their own, they appear "bitchy" and rather neurotic...like a man and wife who have grown apart and been consumed by bitterness.   They do not appear happy.

The only other homosexual I knew lived in a fake marriage and abused his male foster children sexually.....These children were my playmates when I myself was a child and into my mid teens.

I dont know what inferrences you want to draw from these details, but they are true, although of little value to this thread, I think.....other than to prove that I do know what I'm talking about.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 04:40 PM

Today being Martin Luther King Day in the United States, radio news features have presented a number of the speeches of Dr. King. In one radio address he made, he quoted Victor Hugo. The quote was from Les Miserables

If the soul is left in darkness sins will be committed. The guilty one is not he who commits the sin, but he who causes the darkness.

In his/her most recent post, GfS reiterates the contention that gender orientation is a matter of choice and that same-sex orientation can be "cured" with appropriate therapy. S/he has been told repeated, complete with verifiable documention, that this has long since been proven to be, not just ineffective, but psychologically detrimental to the recipients of such "therapy." The results of such attempts to "cure" homosexuality are generally a high rate (in the neighborhood of 70%) of recidivism, with the next highest percentage being complete withdrawal from any kind of sexual activity—abstinence. And that there is a very high rate of the subjects becoming clinically depressed, with about 6% of them committing suicide.

Not what one would generally consider good results. But both celibacy and suicide certainly have the effect of reducing homosexual activity!

And Ake keeps repeating the same frequently debunked statistics and expressing his heartfelt concern for the health of homosexual men, while, at the same time, ignoring the fact that HIV is only one of many diseases which can be transmitted by (but not only by) promiscuous and unprotected sexual activity (both homosexual AND heterosexual). And then, he wants to deny same-sex oriented people the choice of antidote for promiscuity, the promise of stable, single partner relationships. He keeps claiming that gays don't want such stable, monogamous relationships, preferring promiscuity, while gays themselves have amply demonstrated otherwise (the high level of same-sex marriage in California after the law was passed, but before it was rescinded by Proposition 8).

Ake wants to deny them the option because he believes they might not want to take advantage of it. What's wrong with letting them make the choice?

Both GfS and Ake keep spouting the kind of misinformation that homophobes and bigots in general—and the fundamentalist Christian anti-gay groups in particular—are promulgating:   the very same ideas that the Ugandan lawmakers are using as the basis for their effort to pass laws declaring homosexuality to be a crime punishable by death.

You know, I can see those laws being used like the Inquisition was sometimes used some centuries ago:   you dislike someone, or for some reason you want them out of the way, so you denounce them to the Inquistition as a heretic. Or, in more recent times, denouncing someone who is in your way to HUAC as a communist. The Ugandan anti-homosexual laws could be used the same way.

The guilty one is not he who commits the sin, but he who causes the darkness.

Take a good look in the mirror, you two!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 05:15 PM

Mouse and Amos....you are being disingenuous.
You know very well, that should any public body propose a medical inquiry into the link between homosexuality and aids, or even propose that homosexuals be treated as a special case to facilitate funding for such an inquiry, the full weight of "liberal" rights legislation would be brought down on their heads.

They would be charged with persecution of a minority, practicing bigotry and interfering with the rights of homosexuals to die 5 to 20 years before anyone else(a bit of irony there Amos...just for you), but you get my meaning?

By maintaining the silence "liberals" are not acting in the interests of homosexuals, but are preserving the status quo; and that status quo is very valuable to "liberals" in a political sense, in that they can appear to be protecting a minority, while in fact helping to exterminate it.

The figures state conclusively that homosexual men in the US are at least 50 times more likely to aquire hiv/aids than any other demographic........why does no one seem to care? why no enquiry?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 05:41 PM

I don't think Ake has a clue as to what "liberal" means. But it must be a great comfort to him to be able to blame everything he disagrees with on some ghostly bogeyman.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 06:12 PM

"liberal" does not mean liberal!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 06:29 PM

Ake, there really isn't a lot of point arguing with you as you are just so thick, but I would hate for anyone to read your drivel and get the wrong impression about the world.

If you go to your local GP / GUM Clinic / Gay Venue, you will find that an enormous amount of effort and resources are aimed at getting the safe sex message and condoms and what not to gay men. Inquiries held, lessons learned, resources and outreach deployed.

So your point is what?

People - gay or straight - get HIV by unprotected penetrative sex. Is that clear enough for you? Why do people not practice safe sex? I have no idea. But it certainly isn't a "gay thing" according to any figures - Africa or UK.

All your crap about 50% more likely is just crap. The statistic may be true, but what is your point? What are we supposed to infer from that? I explained to you why that is just a bad luck roll of the dice for gay men in "The West" - it isn't complex; if you have a disease that appears in a minority closed group of people practising the main transmission vector, that is where the disease will stay and infection rates will be high. Luck of the draw.

So in the UK, HIV has historically been concentrated in the gay community where it first appeared. The data shows that straight people are reversing that trend.

In Africa, where HIV emerged in the straight population; guess what? It's a straight 'plague' as you see it.

As Lox said, that gay men are 50 times more likely to acquire HIV than is Margaret Thatcher, is a meaningless statistic. that 96% of gay men are HIV negative is more informative (but you don't like that one)

GfS, you're even more absurd than I thought. Having exhausted your own spleen, you're now off to the religious nutters for a load of selective data from the 1970's (mainly it would seem). All the 'findings' are quoted out of context to serve a right wing agenda. All the 'research' appears to be of self selected groups - people accessing healthcare (mental and physical) services or social care services. That is to say that none of those studies are of the gay population in general and to quote them so selectively is akin to lying. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 06:32 PM

"a medical inquiry into the link between homosexuality and aids"

Lets examine this stroke of genius.

- Does Ake mean testing all homosexuals to discover what percentage actually suffers from HIV/AIDS?

if that is true and Akes motive is concern for AIDS sufferers, then why should we care about homosexuals more than other groups?

we should, by his standards, have another research project to study the link between HIV/AIDS and women, as 50% of HIV/AIDS sufferers worldwide are women.

OOOPS ....


Hang on - 50% of AIDS sufferers worldwide are women ... so it OBVIOUSLY isn't either exclusively or predominantly a gay problem and further research will only confirm that.


It would be a waste of money.

But Wait ...

- Ake might mean a scientific study to establish once and for all whether HIV/AIDS is somehow caused or originated by homosexuals.

For twenty years, scientists working for government research projects and private pharmaceutical companies have been working round the clock to learn about and try to understand what HIV/AIDS is, where it comes form and how to beat it.

Now that I have read Ake's post, I too want to know, why haven't those stupid scientists, with their millions of pounds/dollars of research money, taken the time to test the link between AIDS and homosexuality.

I think we should turn the research project over to Ake, as he clearly possesses a much deeper knowledge of scientific method and would stand a much better chance of finding out something useful.


You nob!


P.S. - how odd that two male gay couples should be anything less than open friendly and free with Ake, considering his selfless caring approach to male homosexuality.

I bet when Ake sees them he walks up with a hearty Grin and says "Hi I'd like to be your friend" to which they slink, curse and spit like Smeagol and Deagol from the Lord of the Rings.

Then again, maybe the truth is that Ake stares at them from a distance like a kid looking at a traffic accident, doing his best to radiate heterosexual manliness to deter any ideas they might have of bumming him, and they see him and think "steer clear of the homophobic fuckwit".

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 06:55 PM

I think, Ake , you should be more specific about what it is you believe I am staying hushed up about.

What vector of AIDS transmission do you think is being overlooked, exactly?



A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 07:32 PM

Far be it from me to try to answer for Ake, but in at least two threads now he has been trying to peddle the idea that the AIDs virus is caused by homosexual activity. In short, spontaneously generated where it did not exist before!

This notion got under way in ancient Greece. The idea was that piles of garbage and refuse created such vermin as rats, mice, flies, and other scavangers—not that the garbage attracted the vermin, but that the it created them spontaneously.

This belief prevailed among some (but not all) through medieval times and continued until surprisingly recently—including such nonsense as "recipes" for producing mice, for example. All along, there were those who questioned the idea of life being spontaneously generated by inanimate matter, but it was finally laid to rest once and for all in the mid-1850s by Louis Pasteur.

I have mentioned this several times in these threads, but our statistics-cobbling Ake refuses to acknowledge it and grips his collection of medieval beliefs all the harder.

While, at the same time, telling me—and others who consistently yank the rug out from under his make-believe world—that we are too ignorant and stupid for him to waste his precious time bothering to answer, and generally ending his rant by calling us something like "liberal fascists." Whatever the hell that is!

Easy dodge. But glowingly transparent.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 18 Jan 10 - 08:35 PM

My somewhat windy post earlier about comp[lex systems is better said thus, from the Sod and Murphy thread:

19.       Simple solutions only fit simple problems and appeal to those who do not understand the problem anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 19 Jan 10 - 03:19 AM

Hang on, folks, I think it's only fair to respect Ake's honesty and perspicacity.

He has, on his own admission, met SEVEN homosexual people.

Yes, a whole SEVEN.

Given this boundless depth of experience, he is entirely entitled to generalise about millions of other homos.

I mean, if I'd met as many as SEVEN heterosexuals, I'd be in a position to lump all of them together and pronounce upon the meaning of their lives.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Jan 10 - 11:05 AM

Seems Smedley, that you have picked up some bad habits from your Mudcat mates.

The inability to read what is posted, is common among the "liberals" on this forum. They are usually too keen to get their "stiletto's" back between their debating partners ribs, to be bothered digesting what is actually written.

I was asked by Ebbie if I actually KNEW any homosexuals. The people I mentioned live locally and I know/knew them reasonably well.

Of course, During my life, I have MET quite a large number of homosexuals, but as I know nothing about them or their relationships, they would not be pertinent to Ebbie's question.

Smedley...a little tip, just forget the sarcasm and try to concentrate, it will save you much future embarrassment......Seemples!! :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Jan 10 - 11:19 AM

Royston writes,
"Ake, there really isn't a lot of point arguing with you as you are just so thick, but I would hate for anyone to read your drivel and get the wrong impression about the world."

"All your crap about 50% more likely is just crap. The statistic may be true, but what is your point?"

Quite correct Royston that statistic is crap,what I actually said was
"The figures state conclusively that homosexual men in the US are at least 50 times more likely to aquire hiv/aids than any other demographic........why does no one seem to care? why no enquiry?"


And my point is........What the fuck "right", has a numbskull without even a rudimentary grasp of simple arithmetic got, to call me "thick"!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 19 Jan 10 - 03:44 PM

50% or 50 times, Ake.

If the only reason you have, to avoid the issue, is a typo then I will regard the issue as won.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 19 Jan 10 - 03:48 PM

Ake thinks 95% is a minority.

He thinks a disease suffered 50% by women is a gay mans disease.

Then he calls Royston "a numbskull without even a rudimentary grasp of simple arithmetic"



DUH!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 19 Jan 10 - 05:32 PM

Royston...please stop digging, I get no pleasure from watching someone making a complete arse of themselves.

Lox on the other hand is so far into the shit, that he has disappeared from the "radar".....silent and invisible. :0(

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 19 Jan 10 - 05:41 PM

"Lox on the other hand is so far into the shit, ..."

More fascination with things anal from the vivid and disturbed imagination of our resident window-licker.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 19 Jan 10 - 05:43 PM

I notice you didn't answer the questions, Ake -- Can't, or Won't? If Won't, why are you here?

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 19 Jan 10 - 05:44 PM

Ake said: "Royston...please stop digging, I get no pleasure from watching someone making a complete arse of themselves."

I rest my case. Nothing to add.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 19 Jan 10 - 07:17 PM

""Mousethief says correctly that this was an old study, but homosexual promiscuity/hiv figures have continued to worsen since then till the present.""

Then you will undoubtedly be able to point us toward the documented proof of that claim.

NO?   I thought not.

Another Ake confection of innuendo and guesswork.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 19 Jan 10 - 09:30 PM

See, the problem is, this is an area that I actually know something about. I worked for the Seattle-King County Department of Public Health in the HIV/AIDS Epidemiology division for 5 years. Homosexual promiscuity did NOT go up after the mid-80s, but went dramatically down. Of course AIDS prevalence went up after 1970 because in 1970 AIDS/HIV hadn't been discovered yet. So your statement as relayed by Don(Wwizetc)T consists of one falsehood and one tautology.

Have you even read And the Band Played On?

I can disprove any of your absurd claims just by a simple Google search. Throwing a lot of them together makes it virtually impossible to look them all up (some of us have real lives), but one only has to sample the beer from a few points around the keg to know it's all bad.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 04:45 AM

Royston, after a quarter of a century, there has surely been ample time for HIV to cross over to the straight community.
What is your evidence?
This from BMJ, 2005. "Although the number of people becoming infected with HIV through heterosexual intercourse in the United Kingdom is rising steadily, most of the overall rise in HIV diagnoses among heterosexuals is among people who originate from and were infected abroad, mainly in Africa.1 "
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/330/7503/1303

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 04:52 AM

And,
"Heterosexual spread of HIV in the general population cannot be observed when reliable data exist as in the case of Germany. The prevention campaigns have therefore been a waste of money and energy. Furthermore they did not lead to a substantial increase of condom use, but had a negative impact on the credibility of the institutions involved. (The danger, HIV concerns everybody, and the predictions were wrong.)
http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/cfepidem.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Peter Laban
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 05:31 AM

FWIW, in Ireland over 60% of new HIV infections is among heterosexuals, women accounting for over 50% of new cases and the young agegroups taking the brunt of the rise, due to risk behaviour.

See the Central Statistics office of Ireland or HIVinsite statistics for Ireland

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 05:50 AM

Time to get searching Mt.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 06:31 AM

Perhaps this      might throw a little light on the problem (from Peters source)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Peter Laban
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 06:42 AM

You're being typically selective.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Peter Laban
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 09:38 AM

And I mean that in the sense you're ignoring the fact that (in the words of the Central Statistics Office) homosexuals are no longer the largest contributors to new cases of HIV infection in Ireland.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Lox
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 09:46 AM

Ake,

I read the link you selectively took from peters source, and found this.

"But in countries where MSM face widespread discrimination and where there is a high degree of stigma attached to male to male sex, there is understandable reluctance on the part of MSM to give the true reason."


In other words, according to YOUR link, discrimination against homosexual men serves as an OBSTACLE to those who care about HIV/AIDS.


Your argument has been that homosexual men suffer because "liberals" will not take the brave step of limiting homosexuals civil and human rights.


So the link you provide explicitly opposes your opinion.


DUH!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 09:47 AM

Peter, you need to consider that the gay community is very much smaller than the straight and that, as in Britain, immigrants from outside Europe are changing the balance.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 09:49 AM

Just a quickie to say I've logged back on.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 09:51 AM

Re my last, obviously not changing gay/straight balance, but infection rate among gay/straight.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Peter Laban
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 09:53 AM

Peter, you need to consider that the gay community is very much smaller than the straight and that, as in Britain, immigrants from outside Europe are changing the balance.

Yes, that horse has been flogged quite extensively. In the Irish situation though, it's young people and women who take the lion's share of new infections. Not the immigrants or the gay community.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 09:55 AM

... Coming over here ... bringing their AIDS ... raping our men ...


Gay immigration ... Ake's gonna love this!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 12:04 PM

Peter's statistics are themselves very selective, in that they do not even mention homosexual infections, which in percentage of population, are the highest in any demographic, perhaps with the exception of African immigrants to the UK.

Attempting to correlate the "real number" figures for women(who make up more than half the population) with male homosexuals (who comprise 1-2%, is disingenuous.

Under reporting of homosexual infections is a distinct possibility everywhere.....and particularly in Ireland.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Peter Laban
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 12:40 PM

Peter's statistics are themselves very selective

They are not my statistics I was referring to statistics by the Central Statistics Office of Ireland and the site I linked to were statistics by the United Nations Health survey.

As for selectivity, they are statistics of new infections of HIV in the Republic and nothing else. And as such show that new infections by the homosexual population are outnumbered by those among young people and women. That's what they show and nothing else.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 12:55 PM

So when is ake going to go up in alarm when it comes to HIV infections among women and girls? Surely we deserve as much attention?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 01:00 PM

Well at least Peters stats support his view.

Ake's link says the exact opposite to what Ake thinks.

It states that discrimination and stigma are serious problems which hinder attempts to deal effectively with the AIDS problem.

In other words, we need to confront homophobia.

For example in schools.

Thanks Ake for providing us with such an illuminating link.


As for this ... "Attempting to correlate the "real number" figures for women(who make up more than half the population) with male homosexuals (who comprise 1-2%, is disingenuous."

Well I'm glad you've discovered the word "disingenuous" its just a pity that you haven't mstered iits meaning.


50% of HIV victims worldwide are women.

And as Ake has so cleverly pointed out, around 50% of people are women.


How do those figures correlate?


DUH!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 01:25 PM

Yes Peter, but the figures you quote(I didn't mean to imply that you had made them up), say very little about transmission rates, other than that women and men are almost equally suseptible to new hiv infection.

When the population is broken down into smaller demographics, we see that homosexual men are more than 50 times more likely to be affected than heterosexual men.

This of course affects the male /female infection ratio.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 01:55 PM

50 times more than what exactly? What does that 50 times really mean? The 50 times, for it to mean anything, has to be 50 time more in some real term. So, if you have a 0.01% of getting something and you are now 50 times more likely you then have a 0.5% chance. That is still a small risk than say the chance of you being killed by some other illness.

As a woman on HRT I am 4 times more likely than a woman not on HRT to get a thrombosis. But as the chances of gettinga thrombosis in the first place are so low, then being 4 times more likely is still low risk.

That 50 times more likely - and I am still at a loss as to how that is gauged - may be a high risk or still very low dependant on what it is compared to in the first place.

------

So, okay... we lock up all the gay men in chastity devices, to remove them from the dataset and any chance they could be blamed or included in the figures. That's them out of the way....

Now: How do we deal with all the other disease ridden risk takers having free and promiscuous sex? What do we do with those with HIV/AIDS, who are not gay but have got it through sex? How do we start judging them to try and rid the world of being sexually human?

That is why this singling of gay men is so stupid. Because even if they were not involved in the figures, we would still have HIV/AIDS and still have one heck of a health issue on our hands. Gay males are not scapegoats to be used for convenience. Get rid of gay men and we still have the same problem. The only thing that would be solved is with no gay men it would also kill off the homophobe but I have no doubt they would move on to blame someone else.

This is NOT a gay problem. It's a human population health problem.

Going even further back to the start of the thread. Love will be part way to solving the whole thing. Love, respect and acceptance of fellow humans. A common front against the disease itself, in order to find a cure, and an end to the discriminations that lead people to not seek help and advice.

HIV/AIDS will not be got rid of by hatred. It will not be got rid of by what is being called lberalism on this thread. Politicise it all you want but that will not stop it either. We cannot legislate against people having sex so the only end to this will education to try and stop people having unprotected sex, but ultimately finding a cure.

I ask again. What is YOUR solution?

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 02:34 PM

Good analysis, mp.

All of which goes to show that Ake's concern about AIDs rates is nothing but a smokescreen for that fact that he's a foaming-at-the-mouth homophobe, pure and simple.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 02:37 PM

If only one in ten Martians get infected with Jovian Flu, but 3 out of ten Venusians get it, that means Venusians are 3 times more at risk than Martians, or 300% more likely to get it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 02:41 PM

But, if there were a million Martians and only 100 Venusians, most of the infection would be Martians despite their much lower risk factor.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 02:47 PM

Smoking 25 a day only increases lung cancer risk to 25 times that for a non smoker.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 03:10 PM

Well MP....I dont really have a "solution", but sitting on our arses and pretending everything is fine is not an option.If the hiv figures for women showed that they were 50 times more likely to contract aids than men....the "sisters" would be in open revolt until steps were taken to find out why.

Homosexuality is being presented to the rest of society as being a safe and healthy lifestyle, which it is patently not.

Life expectancy is considerably lower than among heterosexuals...why?
Because homos are at least 50 times more likely to get aids than heteros...why? Because homosexual promiscuity figures...no of sexual partners etc, are much higher than among heterosexuals(if you deny that, please give your reason for the high hiv figure). Why are homosexuals in general so much more promiscuous?...I believe it has to do with the exclusively male hedonistic lifestyle.

If these figures applied to the hetero population, drastic measures would be taken to address them, beginning with a public health enquiry, compulsory testing, maybe even quarantine for certain high risk groups. This has already been tried in Cuba, which has one of the lowest hiv infection rates worldwide.

I'm sure love is a powerful emotion, but against a disease of this nature, it is about as much good as a hip pocket in a shirt!

The "cure" is not to stop having natural sex, if that were the case we would soon become extinct,(not such a bad thing when you look at some of the examples of humanity who post on this thread...eh? :0)
....but rather to start behaving with a sense of responsibility to society and for our actions...Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 03:47 PM

Ake is a lying illiterate fuckwit.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 04:02 PM

Like I said:   a foaming-at-the-mouth homophobe.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 04:25 PM

Ya gotta know your hate.

For example in 1950 about 80% of the USA was against INTERRACIAL MARRIAGE.

Today about 40% at most, are against same sex marriage.

Every rational and reasonable argument regarding gay marriage shows that it is simply against our Constitution to deny marriage.

People in their 90's get married so not having kids is not the issue, Besides gay couples have kids in several ways.

Hetero marriage is not diminished by any measure by recognizeing gay marriage.

There are no sound arguments against it EXCEPT ONE.
hate.

Without hate you got nothin.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 04:25 PM

Keith, it comes as no surprise to find you here arguing that AIDS is a gay and a black/immigrant problem. You disgust me. At least Ache is a fairly transparent closet gay self-hater.

I refuse to dignify with a reply, comments on virusmyth.org - a propagandist website for the view that HIV does not cause AIDS. Keith, you should be ashamed of yourself. I suppose you also think that there is no human role in climate change? Or that the world is flat? You going to that site is like you going to migrationwatchh.org for a balanced view on immigration.

Keith: Royston, after a quarter of a century, there has surely been ample time for HIV to cross over to the straight community.
What is your evidence?

The evidence Keith is in the data that 50% of all HIV carriers worldwide are women. That in Africa, HIV affects up to 25% of entire populations (in which you assert that only 1-2% are gay). The evidence is the steadily rising infecion rates amongst women and straight people in the UK and staggering rates of heterosexual infection in Eire (where there is little non-EU immigration).

You see, unless you are a racist or homophobic bigot, it doesn't matter much where people got a disease or what colour they are. The disease is what is important.

Now that HIV is rising quickly amongst straight people living and shagging in the UK, the rate of new infection will increase with more carriers, who will drive the rate of infection higher, increasing the number of carriers...get it yet?

It's what happens in straight communities in Africa, it's what happened to gay communities in 'The West'. It is what will happen in straight communities in The West if people like you and Ache don't start to get the point here.

Now, to the '50 times' thing. I explained this a few days ago but you chose to ignore it and keep banging on with the same tired old possibly true but still pointless statistic.

Let's say that we have population in one place of 200 hedonistic people.

180 of them are straight, 20 of them are gay.

They all secure sexual partners at nightclubs.

The territory has 20 clubs for straight hedonists and 2 clubs for gay hedonists.

Everyone goes out to get laid on a Friday night and the clubs are equally full.

Are either of you starting to get this yet?

Suppose one gay person and one straght person are HIV positive and enter their respective "pools"

Getting it yet?

My mathematical knowledge is not up to the job of calculating the increasing odds for each group but anyone can see how bleedin obvious it is that the infection rate in the smaller but tightly closed group is going to climb far more quickly than in the other group, all other factors (behaviourally) being equal.

This is the accident of comparably "low" heterosexual rates of infection in the UK, because it just so happened the disease emerged in people that don't tend to shag members of the much larger and dispersed "other" group.

Where it emerged in the majority group (Africa) it has been catastrophic to them and far more so than it has been to British homosexuals - 4% of the gay population -v- 25% infection rate in heterosexual populations in Africa.

It is NOT A GAY DISEASE.

How stupid can you two possibly be?

Keith - whisper again - black and white people have sex together. I know, Keith, it's a shock...deep breaths, in and out. It doesn't matter much who got it, where they go it, or what colour they are. The disease is here and infecting more straight people than gay.

So why are we banging on about gay people and "responsibility" for HIV?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 05:05 PM

Royston.."responsibility" not for hiv, but for their own behaviour which causes the problems I listed above.

And try to calm down y'all....I'm sorry for calling you a numbskull, I don't really think you are....least not compared with Lox n' Don T :0).....but you shouldn't go round sayin' folks are "thick" because they dont agree with you...OK?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 05:16 PM

Syphilis is a sexually transmitted disease caused by the spirochetal bacterium Treponema pallidum subspecies pallidum. The route of transmission of syphilis is almost always through sexual contact, although there are examples of congenital syphilis via transmission from mother to child in utero.

Like AIDs.

Syphilis is transmitted through and exchange of bodily fluids

Like AIDs.

Transfer of syphilis bacteria can be either prevented or greatly reduced by the use of a condom during sex.

Like AIDs.

From the early sixteenth century when it first manifested itself, syphilis was called the "French disease" in Italy and Germany and the "Italian disease" in France. The Dutch called it the "Spanish disease", the Russians called it the "Polish disease", the Turks called it the "Christian disease" or "Frank disease" (frengi) and the Tahitians called it the "British disease."

In short, blame it on someone you don't like.

Like AIDs.

It is not a "gay disease." It is a venereal disease.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 05:16 PM

and leave the abuse out with Keith, we dont agree about much politically but he's smart, honest and believes what he says.

He also is not afraid to support his political "enemies" when he thinks they are being attacked unjustly.
He is his own man, not some political automaton unable to think for himself, like many here.

Its time we all started re-assessing our political views if we can't see the right AND the wrong, we haven't really grown up...A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 05:22 PM

"Its time we all started re-assessing our political views if we can't see the right AND the wrong, we haven't really grown up."

And on that, Ake, we agree.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 05:34 PM

Homosexuality is being presented to the rest of society as being a safe and healthy lifestyle, which it is patently not.

You seem to have a hard time distinguishing between homosexuality and unprotected sex. They are not the same. The first is simply a fact about a person or given set of persons. As such it is neither safe not dangerous, except that hate-filled homophobes make it so. The latter is an activity which is very dangerous and foolish no matter who does it. You make a lot of the fact that a lot of people who fall into the category mentioned apparently partake of the activity mentioned. This does not make the category dangerous.

Also between homosexuality which is an innate preference for romantic and/or sexual affiliation with those of one's own sex, and a lifestyle which is a chosen habitual manner of acting. They are not the same. There is no such thing as "the homosexual lifestyle" because different homosexuals have all manner of different lifestyles, having this one thing in common: they are the lifestyles of homosexuals.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 05:38 PM

It amuses me no end that so many of you "true men" think I am a "closet homosexual"...you just said that a minute ago Royston...why do you pretend to think that? when my views on homosexual practice are the same as 90% of heteros.
I've had a long marriage, sired four sons and find women...all women, attractive, sexy and interesting.

I'll let all you "true men" into one of lifes little secrets....women dont want a man to be their "bestest friend" or weep on their shoulder.....most women want a man who makes them feel like A WOMAN.

Even Ebbie wouldn't be safe when I was around.....   :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 05:44 PM

One word, Ake: Rock Hudson.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 05:46 PM

Hark! The Thief of Mice rings out the clarion voice of reason and clear thought!! All Hail the Thief of Mice!!!



A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 05:48 PM

Not as long as I'm alive, ake! :)

Incidentally, ake, marriage, per se, means little. A happy marriage is harder to achieve, eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 05:48 PM

Ake: "responsibility" not for hiv, but for their own behaviour which causes the problems I listed above.

It sounds like you are beginning to understand the point. It is not about gay/straight, it is about risky behaviour.

The UK gay community - with all the demographics stacked against them have suffered infection rates at 4%.

Some heterosexual communities are at 25% infection rates.

So is it gay or straight people that have the greatest need, in your opinion, to "take responsibility" for behaviours? Anyone *choosing* unprotected sex is a fool and invites tragic consequences upon themselves. Gay or straight.

I don't call people thick for not agreeing with me. I call people thick for being factually wrong and for persistently failing to recognise and absorb the truth.

Keith is dangerous. Virusmyth.org. Fuck me, that takes stupidity to a whole new and terrifying level. Nobody can possibly take him seriously. That the lies he tells are invented by others, makes him no less a liar for telling them.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 05:59 PM

Recently we have discovered that a previously unknown retro virus is respondsible for chronic fatigue syndrome.


Retro virus, nano bacterial cacium deposits, inflamation, are all recnet breakthroughs in medical science which underlies a vast portion of human disease and causation.

Medical research has its pros and cons but mostly pros.


The irony is that scientific research is also respondsible for the original human contamination with retro viral monkey infections by a Belgian vaccine scientist. Opps that was AIDS.

Be it viri or killer bees or plutonium atoms, you can not isolate anything forever.

Is it gods will or human fallibility? I'd merely say, shit leaks.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 06:26 PM

Rock Hudson?? Wasn't he a movie actor? I didn't know he had kids.

I was talkin' about real people.....n' you cheated! that was two words

Wasn't he in that film "The mouse that roared?" ...or was it
screamed(sexily) :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 06:32 PM

Ah Ebbie doll, you'd need to have tried it to know..bet you wouldn't spend so much time with your "stiletto" wi' me fur a husband   :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Donuel
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 06:35 PM

real men don't need to advertise!
we all know how commercials work.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 06:46 PM

:0) Nice one Don!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 07:08 PM

Achy Breaky, just remember that what we post here today - and much, much earlier - is here forever.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 07:21 PM

The Puddock
A Puddock sat by the lochan's brim,
An' he thocht there was never a puddock like him.
He sat on his hurdies, he waggled his legs,
An' cockit his heid as he glowered throu' the seggs
The bigsy wee cratur' was feelin' that prood,
He gapit his mou' an' he croakit oot lood
"Gin ye'd a' like tae see a richt puddock," quo' he,
" Ye'll never, I'll sweer, get a better nor me.
I've fem'lies an' wives an' a weel-plenished hame,
Wi' drink for my thrapple an' meat for my wame.
The lasses aye thocht me a fine strappin' chiel,
An' I ken I'm a rale bonny singer as weel.
I'm nae gaun tae blaw, but the truth I maun tell-
I believe I'm the verra MacPuddock himsel'."
A heron was hungry an' needin' tae sup,
Sae he nabbit th' puddock and gollup't him up;
Syne 'runkled his feathers: "A peer thing," quo' he,
"But-puddocks is nae as fat as they eesed tae be."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 07:33 PM

Ach you Yanks hiv nae sense o' humour.....Lighten up!..its Christmas!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 07:48 PM

For your enlightenmennt and edification, Ake:

Mousethief is bloody brilliant!

Rock Hudson was generally considered by vast numbers of people to be the very image and epitome of the romantic he-man, and those were the roles he played in the movies.

To the general public's shock and surprise, Rock Hudson turned out to be gay. In fact, he was one of the earliest of the well-known people to die of AIDs.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 07:54 PM

Aye ah think ah know who mousetheif is Don....ah wis jist haein' a wee craic.....ahm sure she smiles...noo an' again...even if she is bloody brilliant...Take care o' yersell ah'm awa tae bed :0)
Guid nicht!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 08:03 PM

"Homosexuality is being presented to the rest of society as being a safe and healthy lifestyle, which it is patently not."

Homosexuality is as safe as any other sexuality... until unsafe sex is practised. But that goes across all sexualities. Forget this 50 times business that seems to be haunting you! What needs to be got rid of is HIV/AIDS

And, once again, homosexualty is not a lifestyle choice for the majority. It's not a lifestyle. It's a sexuality. Same as you have a sexuality. No need to ask why some gay men are promiscuos. Some straight men are too, and some gay women and straight women and bisexuals as well. It's an animal thing...

I also think you missed entirely my point about love...

But thank you for the reply on this occasion anyway.

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 08:05 PM

Wrong end of the stick yet again, Ake.

Nighty night.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 08:12 PM

Nae bother MP...Sorry it took sae lang, but ah don't think ah missed yer point, ah understand aw yer sayin', its jist ah dont really agree wi't...Guid night tae ye....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 08:25 PM

Here, this whisky's a curse!....It kin turn a right abnoxious auld reprobate intae a smilin' freen tae aw withoot him even knowin' it.

Nae wunner the buggers got roon the Indians sae easy...:0(

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 08:25 PM

"I'll let all you "true men" into one of lifes little secrets....women dont want a man to be their "bestest friend" or weep on their shoulder.....most women want a man who makes them feel like A WOMAN"

Personally, IMHO, no man can make me feel like a woman. I am a woman to start off with. Some women buy into the myth they need a man to validate them as a woman and some men take advantage of that need. I am sure there are many women who can make a man feel like a man for the same reasons. Like femininity cannot be given you either. Feminine is something you feel not something someone can give you. That said, I know many women would also disagree with me on that too. The point being that it is a personal thing, just like sexuality.

You may speak for some women, but you cannot speak for them all (no more than I can), because I know lots of women that take men as they are... straight, bi or gay. I have friends who do not need a man in their life to make them feel anything. What the heck is a "true man"?

Some actions will make some people feel more womanly, manly, feminine or masculine... but the emotion that drives those feelings comes from within. The trigger may be without.

I like men as friends and it's nice to have a shoulder to cry on occasionally. With me that could be a female shoulder just as easy as a man's. It could be a gay man's shoulder too! Makes no odds. Friendship is love without wings... but you can still love a friend. I think you will find lots of women have men who are friends and who they confide in. To me a "true man" is someone who is sorted in their head and knows themselves, secure in their own life and sexuality, not challenged by what others are getting up to, and happy to be getting on with their own life instead of other's.

The secret is not so secret

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Jan 10 - 08:35 PM

Guid night tae ye too! lol

Och!... Burn's Night rapidly approaches

Did I bring oot the Scot in yea? Cannae really be that a woman cannae do that? lol

Have a good night ;-)

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 03:16 AM

Royston, calm down.
I am not arguing anything as I have no special knowledge of this.
I was just surprised by your assertion that heterosexual HIV spreading was becoming comparable to the homosexual transmission.
Looking for specific evidence I did not notice that one site was virus denying. Their statistics I quoted were reputable but I completely withdraw them from the debate.
You neglected to respond to the peer reviewed British Medical Journal piece that refutes your claim.
I also add this evidence.
In 2007, about 77% of heterosexually acquired HIV that was diagnosed in the UK, was probably acquired overseas.


Amongst those diagnosed with heterosexually acquired HIV:

around two thirds are Black African

http://www.tht.org.uk/informationresources/factsandstatistics/uk/heterosexual/

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 03:24 AM

Previos post with BMJ link.
Royston, after a quarter of a century, there has surely been ample time for HIV to cross over to the straight community.
What is your evidence?
This from BMJ, 2005. "Although the number of people becoming infected with HIV through heterosexual intercourse in the United Kingdom is rising steadily, most of the overall rise in HIV diagnoses among heterosexuals is among people who originate from and were infected abroad, mainly in Africa.1 "
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/330/7503/1303

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 04:51 AM

Royston, do YOU not understand that "risky behaviour" and homosexuality are in most cases, synonymous?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 05:00 AM

In that case, Ake, what about the cases where they are NOT 'synonymous'? Both you & GfS are avoiding the challenge I have now issued to you [I think it's] 4 times, about how you respond to the existence of all the faithful respectable CivilPartnered couples of my acquaintance whose partnerships are as loving & stable as those of any other couple, married hetero, I have ever known - incl Valerie's & my adoring half-century marriage; & how could I say fairer than that?   However much you plead then an exception to your "in most cases", there they are. What have you to say about them?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 05:20 AM

Sorry Michael, didn't mean to ignore you, but would have appreciated an acknowledgment of my PM.

I think the cases you cite are indeed exceptions in the bigger picture of homosexual lifestyle. If we are to discuss this subject at all, it must surely be in general terms. There are exceptions to all types of human behaviour, but for the purposes of discussion we tend to generalise.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Donuel
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 06:36 AM

Ah no no no, The abductor of rodents or a burglarizing Mickey is not me. Brilliant and sneaky and clever is he. I am but an informed satirist like a sign post by the sea. Its not muse teeth or moose feet its Mouse Theif not me skittling on tiny feet in circles in a cast iron pot beneath the stove.





"Americans lighten up"
quote Akenaton



Dear Egyptian king and reformer of antiquity,
We as Americans grind our heros' bones for tea.
We drink it down and say "its such a pity".
We lighten up in mysterious ways
We embrace our heros and turn them into strays.

Oh sure we love our athletes
We love our amorous heros
We love our wealthy streets
We love more reducing heros
to sacrificial zeros.

When we are bored by excellence
When we are too envious
We cut the exhalted down to size
We even tingle with enjoyment if our victim cries.
Ohhh it feels so good you can't imagine.
From rags to riches to rage is our fashion.

For example todays newspaper page
shows Tiger Woods in a hood
sporting a beard with the grimice of a cynic.
Roaming the grounds
of a sexual addiction clinic.

sip GULP mmmm

AAhh what could be better than Tiger Woods tea.
You see...
Now we can gloat,
vicariously
We Are Now Better Than He.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 06:39 AM

Ake -

Grovelling apologies — I always acknowledge such informative PMs, but have checked back & find to my horror I failed to do so with yours — I think the phone must have rung & distracted me or some such. Many thanks for it now, belatedly -

& for your above response to my point re contendedly Civil-Partnered acquaintance. I can't feel the acquaintance I cite [which I could have added to, but 3 seemed enuff to be going on with] are so exceptional to any general rule here as to be disqualified from 'general-term' recognition. But I take your point, & am now content to cease urging this particular point so pertinaciously {tho an additional response from GfS, to whom it was originally addressed but who seems to have gone awol of late, would not come amiss}. As to how far it may or may not be relevant to the general argument will be for followers of this thread [hopefully of the non-abusive variety, of whom I hope there are more than sometimes may appear] to determine for themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 08:48 AM

Keith, Ake,

There is no relevance whatever - in the context of this discussion - to these UK statistics. You keep producing them in support of a claim that HIV is a peculiarly homosexual experience. That it has been in one country is irrelevant. Globally HIV / AIDS is overwhelmingly a disease of heterosexual people both in absolute number and in terms of the percentage of sufferers in individual populations.

Do you deny that - Yes or No?

If you deny it, where is you proof.

If, as you bloody well must, you accept it; then we are agreed that all that matters is changing the risky behaviours of all people - gay, straight, black, white - and caring for the ill.

The totally irrelevant spike in the percentage of homosexual men affected by the disease in "The West" is a combination of their risky behaviour (as it is equally for the heterosexual afflicted) but mainly is a result of demographics - a smaller and very closed and concentrated group of potential carriers. C'mon Keith you're the great demographer...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 09:46 AM

"Globally HIV / AIDS is overwhelmingly a disease of heterosexual people both in absolute number and in terms of the percentage of sufferers"
Yes, I do agree.
We are perhaps at cross purposes.
I assumed Ake had been considering the Western/developed countries in which almost all Mudcat members live.
In these Western/developed countries HIV / AIDS is overwhelmingly a disease of homosexual men both in absolute number and in terms of the percentage of sufferers, if you discount infection acquired abroad.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 12:10 PM

"...if you discount infection acquired abroad"

...and discount this and that and anything that points away from it being a gay plague, gay caused, spread and proliferating. I am not saying that is what YOU mean but so many would use the statistics to point that way. The fact is that on a global scale this is a human problem. No discounting... it has the potential to affect all of us in some way or another. Allowing gay men to be the scapegoats only puts off the real work that has to be done. Once that mist has finally been disposed of then the true effects can be seen... in all populations (I am only talking about sexually transmitted HIV/AIDS here and not other infectious routes).

ALL respsonsible adults, who have free open sexual encounters, of all sexualities have to play their part. This is the only way to stem this tide. People put their own house in order and help others do the same. As far as I am aware the gay population is trying a lot to educate and put their own house in order. One cannot discount anything. ALL causes have to be looked at and their effects limited.

Can you imagine if this had been the other way around? Where HIV/AIDS only hit straight populations first? Do you think the gay folk would then have blamed straights for giving it them? It's a stupid argument really to blame anyone.

Make no bones about it. This disease is about sex, sex, sex and what people see as vile what others do. How many people catch flu off each other every year? How many die of that? No-one blames one part of the population for it. But I guarantee if flu was sexually transmitted then all sorts of judgements would be passed as to who was responisble. It's a disease. An Illness. It affects human beings. Do we really need scapegoats? What we need is a cure...

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Paco O'Barmy
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 12:16 PM

Could this thread by any duller and more politically correct? Accept it people, homosexuality is UNNATURAL!! If it wasn't, every species on the planet would die out!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 12:19 PM

FACT is it is NOT unnatural is it?

Very many other successful animal species practice homosexuality and they do not die out. It's a biological phenomena that is not fully understood but it is most ceratinly NOT unnatural as it exists within nature.

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 12:27 PM

List of animals displaying homosexual behaviour

Homosexual behavious in animals

Homosexual behaviour widespread in animals according to new study

Animals prefer Homosexuality to Evolutionism


...some food for thought about whether it is natural or not

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Paco O'Barmy
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 12:29 PM

You people have to learn to accept that for the majority of heterosexual males like me, the thought of homosexuality turns our stomachs! The current onslaught by the left wing media has left ME in a minority! But believe me, us hetero's still mutter under our breath!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 12:45 PM

My advice would be to stop thinking about it then! Go about your life in peace. Muttering will not do anything, no more than shouting will, because I actually think the majority of sorted straight men don't give a monkey's about gay blokes. Why would they?

All you men have far more in common with each other than the things you don't. Why let sexuality be such a major trouble when you consider all the other things a man is and can be? Man has achieved so much by co-operating with his fellows than he has by fighting them. Don't stress the differences. Embrace the similarities and let them grow.

Or would that not be being a 'true man' ;-)

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 12:46 PM

Don that was excellent...and I DID understand it.
I have taken note.....Ake

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 12:49 PM

Paco:

Do not presume, sir. You do NOT speak for all heteros; some of us, without any desire to turn homosexual, are willing to stand up for civil rights and human decency under the law instead of giving way to your kind of puerile puking.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 01:22 PM

MP....You are being a very silly girl.

From Unaid.
More than half a million people are living with HIV in Western Europe, and that
number continues to grow amid signs in several countries of a resurgence of risky
sexual behaviour. The biggest change in Western Europe has been the
emergence of heterosexual contact as the dominant cause of new HIV infections in
several countries. Of the more than 20,000 newly diagnosed HIV infections in 2004,
more than one third were in women. A large proportion of new diagnoses are in
people originating from countries with serious epidemics, principally countries in
sub-Saharan Africa.
�� There are several reasons for the doubling of new diagnoses of HIV in the United
Kingdom since 2000 (from 3,499 in that year to 7,258 in 2004). Increased testing is
one of them but most of the increase is due to a steep rise in the number of
heterosexually-acquired HIV infections, approximately 80% of which were
contracted in high-prevalence countries.
�� Once the primary mode of transmission, unsafe sex between men still accounts for
roughly one quarter of new HIV diagnoses in the UK (1,900 in 2004) amid signs
that high-risk sexual behaviour has not decreased.
�� Sex between men remains an important factor in the epidemics in France and the
Netherlands, and in Belgium, Denmark, Portugal and Switzerland there has
been a slight, and in Germany a significant, rise in the number of annual new HIV
infections attributed to sex between men. In Germany, new HIV infections in men
who have sex with men almost doubled from 2001 to 2004 (from 530 to 982) and
unsafe sex between men is the main cause of the steady increase overall in new
HIV diagnosis in Germany, which tallied 2,058 in 2004 (44% more than the 1,425
cases diagnosed in 2001).
�� In Spain HIV cases among drug injectors dropped steeply in the 1990s after
methadone treatment and needle-exchange projects had been introduced. New
HIV infections among drug injectors have also dropped sharply in Portugal (1,000
in 2004, compared with 2,400 in 2000), and they comprised just over one third of
new HIV diagnoses in 2004 (compared with almost one half as recently as 2002).
�� Among HIV infections attributed to heterosexual contact in France during 2003,
69% were migrants, almost two thirds (65%) of who were women. All in all, in the
18 western European countries with HIV data for 2004, women comprised 35% of
all new diagnoses, up from 29% in 2000.
�� Overall in Central Europe, the epidemics have remained contained and small.
About half the cases in which a mode of transmission was identified in 2004 were
due to unprotected heterosexual intercourse, but in a handful of countries—
including the Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovenia, and the Slovak Republic—
sex between men appears to be the main mode of HIV transmission.
��
These figures do NOT correlate the percentage difference between homosexual male population and heterosexual population.

Thus, they can say that heterosexual contact has emerged as the dominant cause of new hiv infections, but in percentage terms far more homosexuals run the risk of contracting Hiv/aids than heterosexuals......therefore, homosexual practice must be more dangerous in relation to hiv/aids than heterosexual practice....Oui?....seemples!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 01:39 PM

Royston, do YOU not understand that "risky behaviour" and homosexuality are in most cases, synonymous?

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Homosexuality and "risky behaviour" are not synonymous. Buy a dictionary. For crying out loud it's a category error. People aren't behaviour. What you mean is that homosexuals engage in risky behaviour. If you think that most homosexuals engage in risky behaviour, you are mistaken. If you think that most cases of risky behaviour involve homosexuals, you are mad. Some homosexuals engage in risky behaviour. Alas, far too many. But then any is too many.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 01:42 PM

Keith,

You are right, Ake is deliberately ignoring the full picture and focussing on specific segments of humanity.

He is doing this as it is his purpose to show that Homosexuality is a dangerous disease ridden perversion.

If he were right, this would be reflected consistently in all demographics.

If it isn't reflected overall, then that means it isn't true overall.

My kitchen table has a red spotty table cloth on it.

In the context of Tables in My kitchen, it can be said that kitchen tables have red spotty table cloths on them.

But in general, Kitchen tables have lots of types of cloths, and some have none.

So a selective analysis gives us a misleading picture of reality.

Ake says that in the UK Gay men are 50 times more likely to contract AIDS.

He concludes that homosexuality is unhealthy.

He deliberately ignores the rest of the evidence as it contradicts his view.

He even posts "evidence" which contradicts his view concerning whether discrimination is a help or a hindrance.

So far you have provided some nteresting links.

I'd love to know your reaction to Ake's opinion as that has become the central discussion on this thread.

Is Ake right that homosexuality is the problem.

And why the fuck is everyone humouring this bitter shock-fetishist.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 01:42 PM

Be fair Amos, Paco was not referring to homosexual "rights", but homosexual practice (sex between men), which I am sure, the vast majority of heterosexual males find disgusting(if they are being honest)

I think nature determines how we think on these matters.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 01:59 PM

Oh we ARE getting picky!

Homosexual practice and risky behaviour, are synonymous...Better?

and by the way I've never used that word before...anywhere!

I just found it and quite like it.....lovely ring to it...don't you think? :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 02:05 PM

You people have to learn to accept that for the majority of heterosexual males like me, the thought of homosexuality turns our stomachs!

I don't doubt that's true, however we can't base legislation and people's freedoms upon gastronomic reactions. Truth be told, a guy kissing a guy kinda makes me a little queasy. But that's neither here nor there. I'd still argue till my throat was dry that they need to be treated just like everybody else, and have the same civil rights as anybody else. Because that's what's right and fair.

The current onslaught by the left wing media has left ME in a minority!

So? We're all in the majority on some things (I like vanilla ice cream), and in the minority on others (I like the DH). You have no basic right to be in the majority on any given thing. Get over it.

But believe me, us hetero's still mutter under our breath!!!!

You're allowed to do that. Just don't use your muttering as a basis for determining the civil rights of others.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 02:24 PM

Negative, Ake. Homosexual practices can be safe or they can be dangerous, depending on how they are carried out, I sauppose. I have no firsthand data. Hetero sexual practices can likewise be risky or safe depending on how they are carried out. It would seem obvious that, for example, anal penetration on either kind of pairing would be more risky than oral sex or vaginal penetration, would it not? But there is no more inherent risk in one kind of pairing than the other. The risk in dangerous sexual practices is not defined by the sexuality pairing.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 02:32 PM

"MP....You are being a very silly girl.

... seemples!"

I really don't give a meerkat!

Whether being gay is more risky or not is NOT the issue. The FACT is that this disease affects all sexualities and can be caught by ALL humans. It's not being gay that is risky, nor being promiscuous as such: it's having unsafe sex that is the risk and that is a a risk for everyone not just gay men. Whether they have a greater chance of being infected does not make me any more secure from the disease disease. The only thing that will make me, them and you secure is safe sex. Even people within 'stable' relationships get cheated on enough to be put at risk if one of them has unprotected sex with someone else. It really matters not a jot who has the most infections if I am one of the people having unsafe sex. I then take the same risk as all of them.

HIV/AIDS has the potential to be more of a biological death threat than any other non atomic weapon on the planet. It is a threat to us ALL, if we have unprotected sex, because we are all human NOT because more gay men or less straight people or how so many bisexuals contract it.

I'll add silly to the long list of other names I have been called. I'll settle for being who and how I am. If that is silly then so be it...

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 02:36 PM

No Amos...I'm sorry I was referring to Pacos contention that most heteros find homosexual practice disgusting.

I dont think Paco was making any sort of statement on the rights issue, or even the health issues?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 02:55 PM

Hey MP...glad you like the meercats......more fun than all this boring old stuff!

Anyways back to the grind....again!

Homosexuality is being presented as a safe and healthy lifestyle.
The health statistics say homosexuals die sooner, are much more likely to contract hiv, are much more promiscuous, are more susceptible to a whole range of psychiatric problems than heteros

Safe and healthy lifestyle.....I dont think so!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 03:09 PM

Who is saying it's a safe and healthy lifestyle? I never said it was a lifestyle ever (as that suggest choice).

Living is dangerous and can be unhealthy in all sorts of ways. Some are down to actual lifestyle choices but being gay is not one of them

Why do you obsess about the gay men? What about the straight people too that play their part? They also suffer mental health problems as well. I worked in psychiatry for 20 years and I came across many many more straight folks with mental health problems than I did gay. Those gay people I did come across were not depressed because of being gay. They were depressed over the treatment society was dishing out and how that affected them mostly. Lots of gay men die because of suicide... but so many are driven to it because of some of the drivel we have seen on this thread. Why can you not just let them be without constantly throwing up all the negatives that can happen to some of them? You think a straight person would not be depressed if they found they had HIV/AIDS? Have you ever seen any straights folks celebarting having any STI?

So you have no solution to the problem.

Try this. Instead of constantly bringing up all the negatives, just try thinking of all the good things that can happen for a gay man or woman. They are the same things that may bring you and I happiness for gawd's sake! They are the same as you and I. Flesh and blood. They just do sex a different way than you maybe, if they have sex at all, but is that such a wrong thing? if so, why? Get away from the disease hype. Try and think positive things.

Have you seen there are different ways to play an F chord on a guitar? They sound the same but are done differently...

mp

You telling me that

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 03:16 PM

Oops... that reply got cut when my line dropped... apologies

Gay sex is safer than straight sex... at least you cannot get pregnant! Have you any idea how many women die each year from childbirth? The figures are terrible... shall we try and get that banned? What would happen to the human race then? Of course, such a suggestion is ludicrous, so we educate women about planning for baby and how to try and get through pregnancy safely. They still die!

Some of the arguments are totally fallacious against gay men. That's the silly thing that is going on.

I have no wish to take any further part in this particular thread. All I can say is thank heavens the majority of people seem fine about homosexuality. You see, agreeing that it exists will not make you one. Sticking up for their rights, for them to be treated like everyone else, will not make you one. Being seen to side and even like gay men will not make you one. Once the fear goes it's easy...

seemples!

;-)

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 03:16 PM

95% of gay men have no HIV.

For this overhelming majority, sex is as healthy as it is for anyone else.

In fact, for the overwhelming majority of people, sex is healthy.
This is probably because most people use condoms.

Straight Women and Gay men who are on the receiving end of penetrative sex are most at risk for obvious reasons.

For this reason, women make up 50% of HIV/AIDS cases worldwide.

It follows, as clear as the homophobia that enbitters Ake, that unprotected sex for women and for Gay men puts them at risk.

It does not follow that homosexuality is an unhealthy lifestyle.

Unless you already hold that view and will see proof in any evidence, even articles which say that discrimination against homosexuals hinders attempts to address the global issue of HIV/AIDS.

Ake, you would make an excellent mouthpiece for the BNP.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 03:17 PM

Oh alright!.....tra---la la------la la la laaaa   See! I can do it!

But it doesn't last....   :0(

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 03:19 PM

Ake:

I know, I know. My point was that when an issue of civil rights is concerned, upright folks will put aside their dislike of personalities or individual idiosyncracies instead of acting them out in a hateful voice. Some issues transcend these petty little nauseas. And no-one has told Paco he has to think about homosexual practices OR heterosexual practices either. But if he is like most hetero men, he spends LOTS of time doing the latter anyway. THe kind of hetero practices he probably daydreams about as the great desiderata are in fact those which, in another age, were condemned as disgusting and forced into the closet. Yet they are perfectly normal heterosexual couplings of various sorts. Mrs. Grundy has aimed her oppressive righteous indignation at plenty of innocent folks over the centuries, hasn't she? EIghty years ago miscegenation between different hues was thought of as just unthinkably disgusting by some folks.

But you will notice as we matured, some of us outgrew those petty hatreds when it came to granting human beings equal rights.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 03:29 PM

""Because homos are at least 50 times more likely to get aids than heteros...why? Because homosexual promiscuity figures...no of sexual partners etc, are much higher than among heterosexuals(if you deny that, please give your reason for the high hiv figure). Why are homosexuals in general so much more promiscuous?...I believe it has to do with the exclusively male hedonistic lifestyle.""

You really need some lessons in logical analysis Ake.

This is your old, and oft repeated circular argument, and it's really getting irritating.

Homos (to use your preferred pejorative terminology....a la Josef Goebbels) are fifty times more likely to get HIV..Why?. Because they're promiscuous. How do we know they're promiscuous?...Because more of them get HIV. Why are they more promiscuous?....It's the exclusively male hedonistic lifestyle.

What exclusively male hedonistic lifestyle, for Christ's sake?

Go to your nearest town centre at 10pm, and see the queues for the local nightclubs. Come back again about 2.00am, when said clubs are disgorging their clientele.

Tell me Ake, do you think that those dozens of drunken straight men and straight women have been setting up meetings at the local vicarage, or is it conceivable that they are in the main looking for sexual encounters?

The crap you spout about promiscuity being the domain of the gay population, merely serves to highlight your total ignorance, and bigotry.

Gay relationships are no different than straight insofar as they are no more and no less sex oriented.

With your lack of empathy, lack of insight, and lack of tolerance, you cannot possibly have an unbiased attitude toward the actions of others.

Where they do not conform to your cosmic perception, your only possible response is disgust and disdain, because your inability to understand another's point of view is total.

This is abundantly evidenced by the fact that those who oppose your view are named as prats, blinkered fools, liberal fascists, and unworthy to hold a point of view.

You are The Compleat Ass, and thank God Almighty that you have no authority.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 03:47 PM

""You people have to learn to accept that for the majority of heterosexual males like me, the thought of homosexuality turns our stomachs! The current onslaught by the left wing media has left ME in a minority! But believe me, us hetero's still mutter under our breath!!!!""

You may feel as you wish "Paco with the multiple surnames", but don't presume to know what "most" Straights, or "most" Gays, or "most Butchers", or "most Undertakers" think.

You only know what you think, so express your thoughts by all means, but don't claim support unless you can produce those supporters, and thus far you seem to have three.

Hardly "most" is it?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 03:52 PM

Nice post Amos, thoughtful and kind. Its a shame that most of the insults and recriminations haven't been avoided.

Ach yer a guid man...so ye are!    :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 04:02 PM

The fact that Ake still insists that homosexual activity per se is "risky behavior" convinces me that he persists in clinging to his medieval belief that HIV is created by spontaneous generation.

Homosexual activity is no more risky than heterosexual activity. What is risky is unprotected, promiscuous sex. And that is risky for anyone, regardless of the gender of their sexual partner(s).

It all zeroes in on Ake's baseless antipathy toward homosexuals. Pure and simple. And that particular quirk is something he doesn't care to deal with, he just wants to justify it, not only to others, but to himself.

--------

And Paco:    Most heterosexual men may find homosexual activity not to their taste, but when it comes right down to it, the vast majority are simply indifferent to it. I don't go rock-climbing and I don't play golf. I could if I wanted to, but I just don't want to. I don't spend a great deal of time brooding over the matter.

If the thought of homosexual activity turns your stomach, stop thinking about it.

As to the argument that homosexuality is "unnatural," this is bogus on two counts. First, as MP points out, it is not "unnatural," it is indeed rife among the animal kingdom. Once this is pointed out to those of the "homosexuality is unnatural" types, they tend to respond with something like, "Well, aren't we supposed to be better than animals!??" It becomes an argument that eats its own tail. [How's that for kinky!??]

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 11:27 PM

Can't post much, yet..haven't read a lot of the 'newer' posts'...some of the ones I did read weren't worth replying to, being as it is much ado about nothing...but I did see this......"My point was that when an issue of civil rights is concerned.......(blah blah blah)"
The Constitution protects rights based on Race, Creed or Color.....umm what does homosexuality fall under??
We have sufficiently found that it is not genetic, it's not a religion, and can't decided what color is involved....
Unlike the Ugandans who are a struggling nation, trying to bring themselves UP, even though they have a tribal heritage and culture, which you have to take into account, before slapping a controversial edict upon them, based on a misinterpretation of 'civil rights', from a foreign country(ourselves), we are a nation in decline, decay...when they can easily see our 'acceptable mores' as decadent. It is understandable (though I don't condone it),why they would consider having a death penalty, to defend themselves from a 'threat', based on something they view as weakening the societal structure, based on tribes, made up from the familial nucleus. When 'political activists' for homosexuality(read: subversive agitators to exploit), come in to impose their 'views' into THEIR nation, and society, what did you expect? When the Christian 'moralists' come in, and reinforce their views, which is consistent with their tribal roots, its no wonder the 'activists' blame the Christians for instigating this!

That being said, I still don't believe that the death penalty, is justified here, but for some there, they do. Before you start your stupid arguing, consider for just a teeny moment, that we are NOT talking about OUR culture, OUR country, OUR nature, nor OUR society, and try to at least consider another point of view, THEIR point of view....in your 'all knowing', all dogmatic, all liberal understanding!!! THEY DON'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT ANYONE'S ELSE'S POINT OF VIEW!!!! Wrap your emotional 'do-gooder's' pea brains around that one!..then whip out your tissues, and pretend that you even give a shit, at all. YOU DON"T!
So Sincerely,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 11:36 PM

Cancel my appointment, Counselor, please. :)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 21 Jan 10 - 11:40 PM

BEING AS I don't give a shit about race or creed or country or color,
and BEING AS, I don't give a flying fuck about grammar,
and BEING AS, the discussion is about basic HUMAN RIGHTS regardless of creed or culture or skin color or fucking un-selfaware illiteracy, you are full to the eyeballs of shit.
BEING AS I am sorry, did I say that out loud?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 12:34 AM

Well put, Tia.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 01:10 AM

Well said TIA....but it had nothing to do with anything!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 02:30 AM

GfS:

You been sippin' the cooking sherry again? 'Fess up. You have, right?

A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 02:37 AM

Amos!...Just posted to you on another thread. Nope, no sherry. Just that there are some certain morons who can't seem to understand that people from other cultures and traditions, and mindsets, don't give a rat's ass about America's liberal idiot's, interpretation of 'civil rights'. They have their own cultures......and are not too interested in our lame shit!....and do not welcome it in their country.

Then the morons blame me??..as if I think that way!?!?!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 03:20 AM

I hope that MtheGM is here to see this tirade of vicious hate and bile from GfS.

Care to review your opinion of it and your opinion of those who always saw it for what it truly is?

Keith: "Globally HIV / AIDS is overwhelmingly a disease of heterosexual people both in absolute number and in terms of the percentage of sufferers"
Yes, I do agree.
We are perhaps at cross purposes.
I assumed Ake had been considering the Western/developed countries in which almost all Mudcat members live.
In these Western/developed countries HIV / AIDS is overwhelmingly a disease of homosexual men both in absolute number and in terms of the percentage of sufferers, if you discount infection acquired abroad.

Thanks for getting the "Global" picture into the "agreed" bin.

But as to the latter part of your message, this is the nub of most of my arguments with a lot of people.

If you take *the truth* and then twist it this way, turn it another way, remove a part of it, trim another bit off at that edge...then you can probably prove that up is down and black is white. It doesn't make it true.

Ake was trying to prove that *controlling* or *dealing with* homosexuality would *solve* HIV/AIDS.

Which is just ridiculous given that it is overwhelmingly in absolute numbers and as a percentage of populations, a heterosexual affliction.

I posted earlier the 2009 UK diagnosis numbers that showed Heterosexual diagnoses outnumbering homosexual diagnosis in absolute number in the UK. Doesn't matter where it was acquired: those folks are here, they have it and they are/were shagging here and spreading it here. Heterosexually.

I have explained why/how a disease (any disease) rips through a closed and segregated community to produce high percentage infections. Basically society (possibly aided and abetted by gay men and businesses themselves) built gay ghettos in our major cities. It ain't rocket science - look at what happens with disease in other ghettos / refugee camps / cruise ships / hospital infections etc. Demogoraphic / sociological bad luck.

GfS is a disgusting hate-filled creature, 'nuff said. If anyone still takes it seriously then I will reply properly but otherwise, I just can't bear to dignify it.

GfS is also a liar. Most of its recent spleen and hate has been dressed up in a whole crock of mother-earth, child-bearing, nurturing bosom bullshit, in which it claimed to be an uber-fertile woman. Check its other posts on Mudcat where it talks about being a man and refers to its wife. Can't take seriously a word that it types.

Ake can't or won't accept the truth. You know, Ake, instead of ignoring the truth, why can't you just grow the balls to say that you simply don't like homosexuals and you would like to see them 'dealt with' or whatever it is you actually want to see.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 04:11 AM

I am not twisting truth Royston, I am sharing the evidence that I have found.
It seemed quite logical that HIV will spread in the straight community here as in Africa.
That was the prevailing view in the 80s, and I used to teach that to my students in health classes and Science.
But it did not happen, and is not happening.
AIDS is arriving in our straight communiy by train, plane and auto, not by infection.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 05:21 AM

"The Constitution protects rights based on Race, Creed or Color.....umm what does homosexuality fall under??"

Time to read the constitution, and also to go and look up "civiil rights"


"We have sufficiently found that it is not genetic"

No evidence has been provided to cast doubt on the idea of a homosexual gene.

The evidence which exists shows that it is very likely that there is one.

As is usually the case with research, it is only a matter of time before they find what they are looking for.



Keith,

Ake states that the evidence provided shows homosexuality to be an unsafe "lifestyle", but that it has no bearing on whether or not heterosexuality is and unsafe "lifestyle"?

On this basis he has argued that homosexuals civil liberties should be curtailed - for their own good.

Do you agree?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 06:11 AM

Reasonable question Lox, but I prefer not to be drawn in to that debate. I just felt I had something to contribute on the epidemiology.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 06:32 AM

Keith.

Reasonable response, but it is important to be clear about what the topic of conversation is, and what stats are going to be useful.

The questions currently under discussion are:

"Is homosexuality an unhealthy lifestyle?"

And

"Should we therefore curtail the civil rights of homosexuals"

So the stats needed are those which paint a clear and accurate picture of the risks of homosexuality as compared with heterosexuality.


I cold post the results of a survey done in a mosque, and the results of a survey done in a HIV clinic and they would say different things.

To get an accurate overall picture, I need to provide a wider range of stats.

Do you agree that focussing on stats from one country and ignoring stats from another, whilst also ignoring the global picture, creates a misleading picture?

Do you think that the stats provided show homosexuality to be different from other "lifestyles" in that it is unhealthy and risky where they are not?

Or do you just see, as I do, that concentrations vary depending on where you go and that it is impossible to derive any hard and fast rules connecting homosexuality to HIV that cannot also be applied to heterosexuals?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 06:44 AM

The epidemiology of AIDS is very different across the world.
It is not useful to take some global average.
If we are discussing the countries we live in, then you have to be clear that heterosexual transmission is a very rare occurrence indeed.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 06:47 AM

Globally, malnourishment is a serious issue, but not a reason for Westerners to consume more.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 06:58 AM

"The epidemiology of AIDS is very different across the world."

So by the same token, relying on the available AIDS statistics would be insufficient grounds to support the view that homosexuality is an unhealthy lifestyle.

Or, if that were a fair concluson to draw, then the same rationale applied in other countries would lead to a conclusion that heterosexuality is an unhealthy lifestyle.

Do you agree?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 07:19 AM

"Globally, malnourishment is a serious issue, but not a reason for Westerners to consume more."

I'm trying to understand this analogy.

You are clearly drawing a parallel between malnourishment with AIDS.

What isn't so clear is what westerners consuming more is a parallel for.


Here is how I have broken it down.

1. "Globally, Aids is a serious issue, but not a reason for Westerners to practice safe sex."

but that would be more similar to

"Globally, malnourishment is a serious issue, and is a reason for Westerners to eat a healthy balanced diet."

so consuming more must be a parallel for irresponsible overindulgence.

If I, along with my fellow westreners, overindulge in food and available resources, then I could contribute to malnourishment in the third world.

But if any homosexual overindulges sexually, this will not deprive anyone in the third world of anything.

So the emphasis must be on irresponsibility.

Unsafe sex.

That is how your analogy can work.

"Globally, AIDS is a serious issue, but not a reason for Westerners to practice unsafe sex."



Your analogy says nothing about homosexuals that it doesn't also say about everyone else.

It certainly doesn't support any view that homosexuality is an unhealthy lifestyle.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 07:27 AM

The other alternative is:

"Globally, AIDS is a serious issue, but not a reason for Westerners to become homosexual."

But that is clearly nonsense, as people do not become homosexual because AIDS is a global issue.

Some just are gay.

And they are gay all over the world.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 07:33 AM

Sorry about flurry of posts,

but the main flaw in the analogy is this.

Overconsumption of resources and food in the west can lead to malnourishment being a Global problem.

Being Gay in the west does not lead to AIDS being a global problem.

Unsafe sex is the reason that AIDS is a global problem.

So once again Keith you have shown that Akes assertions about homosexuals are groundless.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 07:40 AM

I was not making an analogy, just showing that local conditions can mean that the global situation is irrelevant.
Most HIV cases are in countries where the virus is indiscriminate.
In the Western world, unfairly, and for various reasons, it is unable to infect many heterosexuals.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 07:44 AM

"Most HIV cases are in countries where the virus is indiscriminate."

And if the virus doesn't discriminate, should we?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 07:53 AM

"In the Western world, unfairly, and for various reasons, it is unable to infect many heterosexuals."

This has been shown above not to be true in all western countries.



"I was not making an analogy, just showing that local conditions can mean that the global situation is irrelevant."

two key words:

"can mean"

So sometimes it is relevant and sometimes it isn't. Mostly, it is to varying degrees, as that enourmous philosophical red herring contains many shades of grey.


It may not be an analogy, but unless it draws some kind of parallel it is a meaningless comment to make.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 08:15 AM

Which Western countries?
I missed that bit.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 08:23 AM

Boy, does this thread ever move fast! just been out for a couple of hours & ···

So, Hi, Royston - yes, here I am. & I will admit I am much concerned with GfS's constant sex-changes, which seem to be a sort of 'pepper·in·the·eyes' evasion; ·+· ITS continued evasion of my above, several-times repeated question about my respectably & lovingly CivilPartnered friends — to which Ake has at least had the courtesy to offer a rational reply: not one I agree with, as I replied to him; but at least he courteously took my question on board - which is more than GfS has done.

So, indeed, Royston, I am much beginning to question whether GfS's motivations [or manners] are such as IT would wish to make it appear. GfS - do you hear me talkin' 2U; give me a reasonable reply soon, or you will have blown it as far as I am concerned, just as u seem 2 have done with practically everybody else on this thread — & nobody to blame but your own obstinate, evasive self, ya hear?...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 08:34 AM

Tell you what,

You give me a straight answer as to whether we can deduce from the AIDS figures that homosexuality, unqualified, is by its nature an unhealthy practice, and I'll make the effort to find the post to which I have referred.

Your apparent avoidance of the question is puzzling.

I'm not asking you if you think it is unhealthy, I'm asking you whether you think the stats support a view that it is unhealthy.

If so how.

The intent of my question by now is pretty clear so I wouldd appreciate a straight answer.

By the way, heres another parallel tobe going along with.

Reading a book on a cliff face is dangerous. But this does not mean that literacy is unhealthy.

Reading a book on a cliff face whilst using the appropriate safety precautions is much safer.

Likewise, unprotected sex between homosexuals in the UK is risky, but this does not mean that homosexuality is unhealthy.

Sex between homosexuals who use appropriate safety precautions is much safer.

Interestingly,

unprotected sex between heterosexuals in the UK is risky, but this does not mean that heterosexuality is unhealthy.

Sex between heterosexuals who use appropriate safety precautions is much safer.

The common factor in all three unsafe examples is a lack of concern for safety.

The common factor in AIDS sufferers is also a lack of concern for safety.

Not homosexuality.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 08:47 AM

All I can infer from the evidence is that anal sex with a carrier of HIV is high risk behaviour.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 08:51 AM

Would that be with or without a condom?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 09:03 AM

Obviously a condom reduces the risk, but it is still high risk behaviour.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 09:04 AM

Oh - and does that mean that vaginal sex between a woman and a man who is a carrier of HIV is not high risk behaviour?

Perhaps it would be more accurate to infer that being on the receiving end of unprotected penetrative sex of any sort is high risk behaviour.


I thik it would be grossly irresponsible to imply that women who have sex with HIV carrying men are not engaging in high risk behaviour.

Don't you agree?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 09:19 AM

Keith,

You said:

"All I can infer from the evidence is that anal sex with a carrier of HIV is high risk behaviour."

Two straight questions looking for two straight answers.

1, are you suggesting that the overwheming majority of women who contract aids only do so anally?

and if not,

2, Are you suggesting that women who have vaginal sex with HIV positive men are engaging in low risk behaviour?


Come on - stop avoiding it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 09:21 AM

- Transmission 33.8 times more likely with penile-anal sex than penile-vaginal sex.http://www.natap.org/2008/Trans/Trans_03.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 09:31 AM

You are still avoiding the question.

Is it high risk or not?

Your link says it is.

Here's the conclusion.

"The investigators encouraged researchers to consider such cofactors in future infectivity estimates, and they advised public health officials and clinicians to emphasize that heterosexual sex can be a remarkably efficient way to transmit HIV."

So anal sex is higher risk.

But vaginal sex is still very high risk, being "remarkably efficient".

Don't you agree?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 09:47 AM

I thought it self evident.
Any penetrative sex with a carrier is high risk. Anal sex is a far higher risk than other forms, but only partially explains the difference in transmission rates.
Number of partners is going to be an important factor too.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 09:48 AM

By the way, the article is talking about unprotected sex.

If you use a condom and don't rip it, you are 100% protected against HIV.


one of many many links.


"For the STDs transmitted primarily though genital secretions -- semen and cervical, vaginal or anal fluids -- condoms are 100% effective, if the condom is properly used (in place for the entire exposure) and does not rupture. These STDs include gonorrhea, chlamydia, HIV, and hepatitis B. in other words, the "biological" effectiveness of condoms is 100% against these STDs."


Also,
From here


"Italian researchers followed more than 300 healthy women in stable, monogamous relationships with HIV-positive men, questioning the women closely about condom use and testing them periodically for HIV. In the Italian study, among women whose partners never or inconsistently used condoms, 12% eventually were infected with HIV. But fewer than 2% of the women whose partners always used condoms became infected. The second report, from the European Study Group, showed even better results for some 250 uninfected men and women with HIV-positive partners. Among the half who used condoms inconsistently, 10% of the previously uninfected partners acquired HIV. When condoms were used all the time, HIV was never passed on to the healthy partner, even though the average couple had sex about 120 times over the course of the study."

Which refutes your view that "Obviously a condom reduces the risk, but it is still high risk behaviour."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 09:52 AM

"I thought it self evident."


Thank you.


I just wished to clarify for Ake that there remain no grounds for him to argue that the civil liberties of homosexuals need to be curtailed.


Getting a straight answer fom you is like getting blood from a stone!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 09:56 AM

""If we are discussing the countries we live in, then you have to be clear that heterosexual transmission is a very rare occurrence indeed.""

You were the one, I believe, who produced "evidence" that 80% of new UK infections were imported.

So it is your contention that the 20% of new UK infections which are transmitted here can be classified as a very rare occurence?

Summat not quite credible in that argument.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 09:57 AM

Respondents were 671 gay men participating in the Amsterdam Cohort Study. In datawave 10 (October 1990-May 1991), questions were asked about condom use in the previous six months. Attitudes and social norms with respect to condom use were also assessed. RESULTS: Anogenital sex was practiced by 277 participants of whom 242 men had used condoms. Valid data on condom use were obtained from 239 men. In sum, the use of 2447 condoms was reported, of which 51 tore and 40 slipped off. The observed failure rate was 3.7%. Vaginal condoms failed more often than anal condoms (4.6% vs 3.1%). With water-based lubricants, the failure rate was lower than with oil-based lubricants (1.7% vs 10.3%). When no lubricant was used the failure rate was 6.1%. Vaginal condoms were at least once used by 41 participants (17.1%). Oil-based lubricants were used at least once by 26 participants (10.8%) and 59 men (24.7%) did not use lubricants or used saliva. Condom failure was experienced by 47 users (19.7%). http://gateway.nlm.nih.gov/MeetingAbstracts/ma?f=102200396.html

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 09:59 AM

Now all Ake has to do is find evidence that promiscuity is being promoted in our schools.

Of course no evidence exists, as this is only true in Akes imagination.

So until such evidence is produced, i think this case is closed.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 10:01 AM

Don, in terme of the group size I would guess that lightening strike is a higher risk.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 10:12 AM

Key phrases in your link.

"of 2447 condoms ... 51 tore and 40 slipped off."

But how many of those were improperly used.

Who took unnecessary risks, thus increasing chances of condom failure? and who was improperly educated about the risks?

Risk #1

"Vaginal condoms failed more often than anal condoms (4.6% vs 3.1%)"

Risk #2

"the failure rate was lower than with oil-based lubricants (1.7% vs 10.3%). When no lubricant was used the failure rate was 6.1%."

"Data suggest that adequate use of lubricants might even be a more important factor in preventing condom failure than type of condoms used."

And you skillfully neglected the conclusion of the link you provided.

"Although the results indicate that improving the use of condoms among gay men is important, it was also noted that condom failure in this cohort decreased from 8% in 1986 to 4% in 1991."

Which of course also brings to light that this research is 18 years old, the report having been published in 1992.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 10:17 AM

Condoms have not changed much since the study.
One in 5 experienced a condom failure in the 6 month period.
I would regard that as an unacceptable risk, but assessing acceptable risk is subjective .

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 10:22 AM

Some took unacceptable risks.

The figures with Straight condom failure are comparable.

Those who use condoms safely and responsibly tend to be fine.

That is a matter of education.

That is something that must happen in schools or our kids will be left unarmed in a dangerous world.


There is nothing to link any of it with a view to limit homosexual civil rights.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 10:29 AM

""Don, in terme of the group size I would guess that lightening strike is a higher risk.""


With respect, that is arrant nonsense. There is in this country a large number of HIV positives of both sexes, and an even larger number who have died since the first instances of the virus.

The fact that the incidence of new cases has been reduced since the eighties is an indication, nay a proof, that it is unsafe sex that is the problem, not, as Ake and GfS would have it, homosexuality, or for that matter heterosexuality.

Your comparison with the lightning strike probability is fatally flawed by the fact that the HIV positive hetero group in the UK is growing rapidly, and heading toward overtaking the gay component.

If 80% of the increase is imported, then 20% is native, and also growing. The probability of lightning strike is a constant (which may admittedly change with climate change, but that is not now predictable).

What does seem very predictable, is that HIV will tend more and more toward an equal opportunities position.

It has been pointed out several times that over 95% of homosexuals are HIV free.

To misquote the words of the old song..... "It ain't who you do, it's the way that you do 'em, that's what gets results.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 11:21 AM

don, Lightning is a lower risk that hetero infection, but Huntingdon's is reckoned a rare disease and is comparable.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 11:34 AM

From Here

"An estimated 83,000 people were living with HIV in the UK at the end of 2008, of whom more than a quarter (27%) were unaware of their infection.

In 2008, there were 7,298 new diagnoses of HIV, contributing to a cumulative total of 105,625 cases reported by the end of June 2009.

There have been 25,470 diagnoses of AIDS in the UK, and 18,787 people diagnosed with HIV have died."

From Here

"Currently, about 30-60 people are struck by lightning each year in Britain of whom, on average, three may be killed."


I don't see much in common here ...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 11:56 AM

Lox, I accepted that my "guess" was a bit out.
60 strikes compared to a few hundred UK acquired hetero infections.
I originally said, before Don challenged, that it was very rare, and it does compare to rates for rare diseases like Huntingdon's.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 12:23 PM

The last 22 posts have been a trialogue between Lox, Keith & Don, consisting entirely of the bandying back & forth of incomprehensible statistics.

Is anybody else getting as FUCKING BORED with all this as me?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 12:55 PM

Keith,

You said "60 strikes compared to a few hundred UK acquired hetero infections."

But you seem to have misread the data.

"In 2008, there were 7,298 new diagnoses of HIV"

That isn't a few hundred.



MtheGM,

Hers a little story you might ennjoy.


A merchant was in a restaurant having a meal, when he overheard 3 men having a conversation.

He though it seemed boring and didn't understand what they were talking about, so he went over and told them.

He then asked loudly if anyone else was as FUCKING BORED with their conversation as he was.

Thankfully they didn't ask the waiter to have him ejected.

Instead they each made one point as follows:

1. that going out of your way to point out that someone elses conversation is Boring, shows only that you have nothing more interesting to do or say than criticize things that you find boring and must therefore be pretty boring yourself.

2. that not being able to understand somebody is not something to boast about.

3. that the approach "I don't understand therefore you're boring/an idiot" is not generally a very successful argument.

They then suggested that if he didn't like their conversation, he should go and get a life of his own.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 01:06 PM

"Is anybody else getting as FUCKING BORED with all this as me?"

Great Heavens, Michael. I thought that in the UK no one would point a gun at your head.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 01:17 PM

MtheGM: "The last 22 posts have been a trialogue between Lox, Keith & Don, consisting entirely of the bandying back & forth of incomprehensible statistics."

They come in waves, and congratulate themselves for bullshitting themselves.

Royston: "GfS is also a liar. Most of its recent spleen and hate has been dressed up in a whole crock of mother-earth, child-bearing, nurturing bosom bullshit, in which it claimed to be an uber-fertile woman. Check its other posts on Mudcat where it talks about being a man and refers to its wife. Can't take seriously a word that it types."

More bullshit! I've never alluded to what gender I've am! But I'm sure you can convince somebody else with a bullshit post! They love it! Most of them have their heads up their asses anyways...probably looking for their friends that got lost!

Lox(of cream cheese fame): "No evidence has been provided to cast doubt on the idea of a homosexual gene."

You must have been asleep at the wheel. NO evidence have ever been found that it is a gene!..Even Firth's post, concluded that! Perhaps you can find one!

I'm only replying to the hostile 'liberal' bias, which promotes 'causes' they adopt. The information they use to support some sort of righteousness of those causes is usually a hoax. Liberals have pretty much been discredited, and are now whining about everything they can. That being said, I'm not a Republican, either...nor am I a full blown 'conservative'. I can think for myself, based on ACCURATE information, unlike our resident ideologues!

Sorry to hurt your 'witto feewings'!
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 01:26 PM

Thank u Lox - it's becoz I have a life of my own that I am so bored with you 3 wankers — & boy do I ever choose that word advisedly!

But you must admit that my post made you think of something other than your fucking %·ages for a minute or two, didn't it?

Someone else answer, please — tell Mr Smoked-Salmon how fucking bored YOU were by him & his two wanki-partners!!!

In case you hadn't noticed, this isn't a restaurant where you 3 are sitting at a PRIVATE table. It is called a "forum" — look it up, why don't you?, as you appear to have mistaken it for some sort of private bailiwick.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 01:28 PM

"More bullshit! I've never alluded to what gender I've am!"

Not true, and there are those on here (unlike me) who give enough of a shit about what you think, to go off and find posts in which you have implied exactly what Royston claims.


You have zero credibility here now.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 01:44 PM

MtheGM

"In case you hadn't noticed, this isn't a restaurant where you 3 are sitting at a PRIVATE table. It is called a "forum" "

Thats what makes you all the more pathetic.

You have hundreds of topics to choose from, and you choose to wade through one that you don't understand and find boring.

Then when you get there, all you have to offer is to march around shouting that you find it all too hard to understand, that you are bored and atart calling people wankers.

very odd behaviour.

Which would be equally strange in a pub, football match, or chat forum.

You've just made a tit of yourself.

I hope it was worth it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 01:53 PM

"But you must admit that my post made you think of something other than your fucking %·ages for a minute or two, didn't it?"

Oh I see ... you aren't getting enough attention and you wanted to have a tantrum.

Perhaps you should visit this thread.

It might make you feel better.


Me me me ...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 02:09 PM

Keith: It seemed quite logical that HIV will spread in the straight community here as in Africa.
That was the prevailing view in the 80s, and I used to teach that to my students in health classes and Science.
But it did not happen, and is not happening.
AIDS is arriving in our straight communiy by train, plane and auto, not by infection.

But don't you think that all that education and training, effort, outreach, free condoms etc etc etc is the very reason that we haven't had the explosion here that occurred in Africa?

Although most new diagnoses in the UK heterosexual population are thought to have been acquired outside the country, the numbers of domestic heterosexual infections are also rising and as the pool of carrier grows so the rate of infecton amongst those being unsafe will increase. Exponential rise on the horizon.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 02:37 PM

The lying GoofuS wittering on about its wife

http://mudcat.org/detail.cfm?messages__Message_ID=2392740

End of discussion with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 03:08 PM

MtheGM, although your recent posts are strikingly untypical of you inasmuch as they depart from your usual measured tone, I have to echo the sentiments.

Being one of the few Real-Life Actual Homos on this thread (or at least one who is unconcerned about stating their sexuality), all this statistical pushmi-pullyu stuff, even though I recognise & appreciate the motivations behind some of it, is starting to make me feel a bit like a Christmas cracker being fought over by irate partygoers.

The original impetus behing this thread is long-gone, and if folks want to argue over the mathematics of HIV, it might be better placed in another thread. It is an important topic, but needs a new home.

The initial discussion over the Ugandan legislation is long gone, and its spin-offs into wider skirmishes about homosexuality and homophobia have (to my mind) also become exhausted. The leading players (which may even include me) have said their piece several times and the chances of persuading each other to rethink are slender to the point of anorexia.

Still, don't let me stop you if you've still got the energy...........

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 03:39 PM

Et tu smedley?

As long as the assertion is made that that any demographic deserves to have their civil rights curtailed I will counter it.

If someone posts figures in relation to that debate I will examine them and interpret them or contest them as appropriate, lest they be misunderstood and misapplied.

You may not feel any further need to participate. Noone has to if they don't want to.

But I do not wish to allow scapegoating to go unchecked.

I know I can't convince Ake or GfS of my view, but I can give them a robust response when they try to scapegoat others.

So far, their positions have been pretty comprehensively demolished.

Keiths figures seemed to have been posted in an attempt add credence to the homophobic argument, and he seemed unwilling to agree that they did not in fact serve that purpose unless deliberately and selectively interpreted.

In the end, he had to admit that they did not support a homophobic view.

I'm sick of this argument too, but I'm not going to let the scapegoaters go unchecked.

if people don't enjoy it they don't have to read it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 03:47 PM

Lox,
"You said "60 strikes compared to a few hundred UK acquired hetero infections.""
I did say that Lox.
There are only a few hundred home acquired hetero HIV infections per year in UK.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Paco O'Barmy
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 04:01 PM

Is it possible for any of you to accept the fact that you WILL NOT persuade everyone that homosexuality is to be regarded as 'normal'?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 04:05 PM

Smedley - thank you

Lox - How do you imagine yourself entitled to address me in that tone, you impertinent little jackanapes!?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 04:09 PM

Keiths figures seemed to have been posted in an attempt add credence to the homophobic argument, and he seemed unwilling to agree that they did not in fact serve that purpose unless deliberately and selectively interpreted.

Keith's figures were posted because he thought false assertions were being made.
They were not to add credence to any one side, but to ground the debate on facts.
There was no "interpretation" selctive or otherwise.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 04:09 PM

I'm with Smedley on this one.

Job done.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 04:24 PM

Paco barmy,

Nobody is trying to persuade anything of anyone other than that there is no *justification* for being actively, wilfully nasty and discriminatory towards other people.

You don't like Gays, Blacks, Asians, Muslims, Eastern Europeans, Immigrants etc etc etc.

I don't like you.

I've never heard you try to justify your prejudices. So, good luck to you. At least you're honest.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 04:42 PM

Royston, you are a couple of decades behind the time with your statement "But don't you think that all that education and training, effort, outreach, free condoms etc etc etc is the very reason that we haven't had the explosion here that occurred in Africa?

Although most new diagnoses in the UK heterosexual population are thought to have been acquired outside the country, the numbers of domestic heterosexual infections are also rising and as the pool of carrier grows so the rate of infecton amongst those being unsafe will increase. Exponential rise on the horizon. "

Kevin de Cock, the head of the WHO's department of HIV/Aids said there will be no generalised epidemic of Aids in the heterosexual population outside Africa.

Dr De Cock, an epidemiologist who has spent much of his career leading the battle against the disease, said understanding of the threat posed by the virus had changed. Whereas once it was seen as a risk to populations everywhere, it was now recognised that, outside sub-Saharan Africa, it was confined to high-risk groups including men who have sex with men, injecting drug users, and sex workers and their clients.

Dr De Cock said: "It is very unlikely there will be a heterosexual epidemic in other countries.
vast sums are being spent educating people about the disease who are not at risk, when a far bigger impact could be achieved by targeting high-risk groups and focusing on interventions known to work, such as circumcision, which cuts the risk of infection by 60 per cent, and reducing the number of sexual partners.

There were "elements of truth" in the criticism, Dr De Cock said. "You will not do much about Aids in London by spending the funds in schools. You need to go where transmission is occurring. It is true that countries have not always been good at that."
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/threat-of-world-aids-pandemic-among-heterosexuals-is-ove

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 04:42 PM

"Is it possible for any of you to accept the fact that you WILL NOT persuade everyone that homosexuality is to be regarded as 'normal'? "

I would happily take that stance is anyone could actually tell me what is NORMAL in animals? I know it is impossible to persaude everyone. The sad thing is that it should not be neceassary to persuade anyone.

Anything that is consensual and between adult human beings I consider quite normal

What is not possible is to accept the arguments put forward by some as to why homosexuality is not normal. That should never be acceptable. It is normal for gay folks! That's the crux of it. No need to beat them up for it. Each to their own

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Paco O'Barmy
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 04:44 PM

Royston,
       They aren't 'prejudices.' They are beliefs based on experience.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 04:45 PM

The link does not work.
Please google "independent de cock WHO"

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Paco O'Barmy
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 04:45 PM

Oh, post 1199 by the way....

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 04:59 PM

Well MtheGM,

I understand that your memory may be as unreliable as your ability to comprehend numbers, but as long as you are entitled to use the word wanker unprovoked, you can expect to get a short sharp response.

The suddenness of your amusing little tantrum is only explained by your chivalrous loyalty to another mudcatter who also recently made a tit of themselves.

And as you have nothing either clever or interesting to say, you have decided transparently and ineffectually to bombard me with your own boring toothless tirade.


Keith.

"There was no "interpretation" selctive or otherwise. "

Not true.

You stated that the only thing to be inferred was that anal sex was high risk.

This was selective as you later admitted when you agreed that it went without saying that we could also infer from the available stats that vaginal sex is also high risk.

This was an admission you were only prepared to make under pressure.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 05:11 PM

Keith,

Two paragraphs from your article:

"Sexual behaviour is obviously important but it doesn't seem to explain [all] the differences between populations. Even if the total number of sexual partners [in sub-Saharan Africa] is no greater than in the UK, there seems to be a higher frequency of overlapping sexual partnerships creating sexual networks that, from an epidemiological point of view, are more efficient at spreading infection."

But the factors driving HIV were still not fully understood, he said. "The impact of HIV is so heterogeneous. In the US , the rate of infection among men in Washington DC is well over 100 times higher than in North Dakota, the region with the lowest rate. That is in one country. How do you explain such differences?"

So, de Cock says that nobody fully understands HIV transmission factors but that sexual behaviour *certainly* doesn't explain it alone. So no point wagging fingers at people.

Sexual networks are more important - which is exactly what I have been repeatedly saying about ghetto-ised minority communities.

Doesn't matter which way you go with this, my statements are very well supported.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 05:13 PM

Keith, you take issue with Royston's suggestion: "But don't you think that all that education and training, effort, outreach, free condoms etc etc etc is the very reason that we haven't had the explosion here that occurred in Africa? but the link you provided says the same blessed thing: "Dr De Cock said: "It is very unlikely there will be a heterosexual epidemic in other countries.(because) vast sums are being spent educating people about the disease who are not at risk, when a far bigger impact could be achieved by targeting high-risk groups and focusing on interventions known to work, such as circumcision, which cuts the risk of infection by 60 per cent, and reducing the number of sexual partners."

Doesn't anybody read for comprehension anymore?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 05:22 PM

If my name was De Cock, I think I would choose another area in which to specialise.........

Lox - I said I appreciated the intentions behing some of the posts, but I am concerned that it was all getting a bit stalemate-y.

Paco, you are the kind of stunted goon who makes me luxuriate in my utter lack of normality. Homosex is even more fun than it would be already if it still winds up peabrains like you.

Happily, there are straight folks like MtheGM to remind me than idiocy and heterosexuality are not inevitably interconnected.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 05:41 PM

Lox, I was not being selective when I said I inferred anal sex was high risk.
I did not think it worth saying that vaginal sex was risky too, but not as risky.
I also gave a comparison of the two risks.

Royston, de Cock refutes your assertion that a heterosexual pandemic is imminent here or anywhere else outside Africa.

Lox, you were going to tell me about a Western country where heterosexuals are equally at risk.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 05:53 PM

"Lox - I said I appreciated the intentions behing some of the posts, but I am concerned that it was all getting a bit stalemate-y."

"Happily, there are straight folks like MtheGM to remind me than idiocy and heterosexuality are not inevitably interconnected."


Well thanks for the appreciation - I think - but if you reread the post from MtheGM that you so heartily endorsed, you will note that a large proportion of it, and his subsequent posts are specifically aimed at unprovoked abuse.

So you can probably understand my reaction.

PS, while I have noted your appreciation, I would like to point out that I do not see myself as representing you or any other homosexual.

I represent myself and my principles.

Amongst the most important principles I represent is that which says that scapegoating of any sort by anyone is a dangerous game that should be stopped wherever it rears its ugly distorted hateful head.

Ake was spouting his crap about "liberals" long before I ever locked horns with him.

Since then, I have seen him blame "immigrants", "moslems", "tinkers" and "Gays" for the ills of the world, and pigeon hole those who disagree, or have a more thoughtful view, as "liberal fascists"

After giving him the benefit of the doubt time after time after time, and seeing him grow precisely nowhere, I began to realize that despite his mealy mouthed attempts to intellectualize his distrust of people different to himself, he was actually, in practice, saying the same thing as organizations like the BNP. He was just doing a better job of dressing it up as 'reasonable'.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 06:05 PM

Keith,

de Cock asserts that sexual behaviour (in the sense of sexual acts or particular sexualities) is not the driving force behind HIV transmission. So it is absurd to "blame" or "judge" any of the unfortunate people that acquire the disease.

So that supports my assertions.

He says that sexual networks [ghetto situations which concentrate the the carriers and transmission vectors together] are more important.

Which supports my assertions.

If the rich, educated, empowered West had not educated its rich, educated, empowered citizens to *choose* barrier contraceptives or other methods of mitigating transmission, then HIV would be more prevalent than it is. To deny that is just too stupid for words.

That the heterosexual UK acquired infection numbers are rising steadily, suggests that our advantage - as described by me and de Cock - may be a tenuous one.

http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1237970242135

Table A, top of page 6

Which supports my assertions.

Don't forget - this discussion is about the FACT that there is no justification (as Ake and GoofuS claimed) for denying the civil liberties of sections of populations in order to rid the world of HIV.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 06:07 PM

GfS, if you could answer the questions I posed about 3 or 4 pages ago, I'd greatly appreciate it.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 06:46 PM

Once again, GoofuS is trying to claim that I said something that I did not say at all.

Regarding its statement about the non-existence of a gender-orientation determining gene, it says, "Even Firth's post, concluded that!" I did not conclude that at all!

I said that there was a general belief among geneticists and others that gender-orientation is genetic, even though the specific gene (or genes) has not YET been found.

Research continues, and one line of research is looking at the female side of the family with the idea that the crucial gene is carried by the woman. The gene would determine if the appropriated hormones are released at the appropriate time and in the appropriate amounts during the development of the fetus.

Another line of research has to do with "triggers." We all carry many more genes than are actually activated. Researchers have found what were hitherto unexplained segments of DNA, recently determined to be "triggers" that either activate certain genes or allow them to lie dormant. Not every gene has been identified as to what it does. Far from it!! Nor has it yet been determined which genes may have triggers to activate them, and which may not.

So trying to claim that gender-orientation is not determined genetically is equivalent to trying to claim that there is absolutely no life on Mars. Scientists are looking for it. There is every reason to believe that it is there. But because it has not YET been found does not mean that it will NOT be!

That's a whole lot different from saying that "even Firth's post concluded that!"

Since GfS's father "decided" he was gay, left GfS's mother and a brood of siblings behind, and went off with a male lover, GfS has been absolutely terrified of what his/her genes might do someday. S/he has a vested interest in refusing to believe that gender-orientation is determined by genetics.

Rest assured, GfS. If it hasn't kicked in by now, it probably won't.

Unless, of course, you are being bothered by strange urges that you find quite disturbing. . . .

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 06:51 PM

""In the Western world, unfairly, and for various reasons, it is unable to infect many heterosexuals."

This has been shown above not to be true in all western countries."
____

Let me rephrase.

It hasn't been shown anywhere to be "unable" to infect any homosexuals.

It has been shown to have a 1 in 10 chance of infecting heterosexuals.

Bear in mind that this includes men and women, and the chance of a woman being infected is higher than that of a man during heterosexual sex.

Which makes the chances of a woman contrating HIV during heterosexual sex much higher.


As for what you agreed, it was specifically that "vaginal sex is still very high risk, being "remarkably efficient"."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 06:57 PM

Typo

"It hasn't been shown anywhere to be "unable" to infect any homosexuals."

should have read:

"It hasn't been shown anywhere to be "unable" to infect any heterosexuals."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 07:12 PM

:0(   'As it gorn?? )0:

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 03:30 AM

Royston, from your link, page 6 table A
Heterosexual infection in UK annually up to 2009 (2009 figure expected to increase)

Adjusted*** 240 330 490 600 740 830 870 1000 1130 490
       Observed 228 314 380 467 569 646 648 655 635 217
It shows a very low number of heterosexual infections and an increase of only a hundred or so per year.
A very rare disease among British heterosexuals and no sign of it approaching problem in the gay community.

I am not blaming or judging.

Thank you for reminding me what this discussion is about, but i am not part of it.
I came in when you said things that I believed to be false or misleading, and a couple of googles confirmed it.

A quarter of a century ago everyone assumed that AIDS would be indiscriminate here as in Africa.
You still think that but the WHO now thinks that is not likely.

There is uncertainty about why.
You and the WHO both suggest what the factors are, but theirs list is quite different to yours.
I give WHO more credence than you.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 05:44 AM

No Keith,

25 years ago it was feared that HIV would be a problem that affected the world. It wasn't, at that time, a problem for us or for Africans on a huge scale.

Western governments decided to head it off at the pass by an enormous education drive and promotion of condom-use as a protection against infection.

African (poor) governments couldn't do this.

Result: Pretty good for us, Pretty bad for Africa.

The factors that have crippled Africa are:$

*Poverty / Lack of education, intimately associated with...
*Prostitution, leading to...
*High levels of ulcerative (tissue-damaging) STI's, which facilitate infection.
*Western Christian missionaries and local Catholic Church preaching against use of condoms.
*Closed, infection and risk-concentrating sexual social groups.

All of those (except the religion bit) are quoted by de Cock.

I have been making these points for the last couple of weeks before you unhelpfully interjected.

http://mudcat.org/detail.cfm?messages__Message_ID=2816996
http://mudcat.org/detail.cfm?messages__Message_ID=2815342
http://mudcat.org/detail.cfm?messages__Message_ID=2809209
http://mudcat.org/detail.cfm?messages__Message_ID=2809193

So while I appreciate that you went out to prove my poinst with expert commentary from the WHO, it was a bit of a diversion from the business of this discussion.

It is de Cock's opinion - not that of the WHO - that there was little point educating rich westerners about HIV. He is in a minority of health workers.

With UK-acquired heterosexual infection rates now 5 times each year what they were in 2000 and a tidal wave of teeanage pregnancies and STI's which indicate poor condom-use as well as being the known risk multiplier for HIV transmission, You and I are easily intelligent enough to form an opinion that might be different to de Cock's, aren't we?

Or maybe you are not. You do seem to just find stuff on the internet and then believe it and know it rather indiscriminately.

Anyway, seriously, if we are going to debate whether or not there is a straight HIV time-bomb in The West, we should start a new thread.

This discussion was about refuting the claim that gay men are uniquely prone to, and responsible for, HIV. We all agree (except Ake and GoofuS) that this is untrue. Whatever the European experience is, it is (as in Africa) a product of local sociological and epidemiological chance or misfortune. That's what I say, that's what Keith and the WHO say.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 06:22 AM

Sorry Royston, but you have got it all wrong again.
You say,"25 years ago it was feared that HIV would be a problem that affected the world. It wasn't, at that time, a problem for us or for Africans on a huge scale.
Western governments decided to head it off at the pass by an enormous education drive and promotion of condom-use as a protection against infection."

Well, Asia, China and Russia did not do that, and it did not happen there either.
Then again, you seem to be claiming that the programmes worked for straights only. As de Cock says, in the industrialised world transmission of HIV among men who have sex with men is not declining and in some places has increased.
"It is astonishing how badly we have done with men who have sex with men. It is something that is going to have to be discussed much more rigorously."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 09:35 AM

For god''s sake, Keith, it''s like banging the head against a brick wall with you. OK, so nowhere has had an HIV pandemic like Afrca has, but a lot of the countries who have been in denial about the risks are starting to reap the whirlwind.

http://www.avert.org/aidschina.htm

The situation in China is not as simple as you believe. There are reasons why, epidemiologically, China USED TO BE thought fairly free of HIV and there are reasons why that is changing.

Migrant workers, changing sexual networks, coupled with lack of education and poverty. China is belatedly embarking on large scale education and prevention measures.

http://www.avert.org/aids-asia.htm

Well bugger me - Keith''s wrong about Asia as well, where the disease is being fought off with some incredibly succesful and sophisticated education programs.

http://www.avert.org/aids-russia.htm

Well blow me sideways if Keith isn''t also totally wrong about Russia, which is now home to "The world''s fastest growing HIV epidemic"

And where the homosexual infection rate is 1% of the total - most of the cases being injecting drug users and heterosexual sex workers and their partners.

As I have been saying consistently, HIV affects people. Like all epidemics it hits and thrives in groups. In Africa it spreads through the straight population - for scientific reasons. In Russia it mainly afflicts straight sex workers and their punters and drug users - for scientific reasons. In the UK it is more prevalent among gay men - for scientific reasons. Globally, it is most prevalent among varieties of straight people - for scientific reasons.

It is largely about the accident of membership of the sexual or other - transmission network in which the disease breaks out. not some sort of qualitative or moralistic judgement about people themselves.

Education and prevention is the key to beating it. Oviously straight people in this country need more education because the rate at which they are contracting HIV - here or elsewhere - is outstripping all other groups. And Keith wants to stop educating about the dangers, and thinks that all the education that has been done was of no use? Really?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Lox
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 10:10 AM

To add to my last post, the common view on various websites that I have visited since I last added to this thread is that women are more than twice as susceptible to HIV transmission as men during unprotected heterosexual sex.

So for an average of 1 chance in 10 to be achieved, it follows that women have somewhere between a 1 in 7 and a 1 in 6 chance, ccompared to around a 1 in 14 to 1 in 16 chance in men.

This means that gay men, who have a 1 in 3 chance of being infected during unprotected sex, are not anything like 50 times more likely to catch Aids from unprotected sex than women, but in fact just over twice as likely.

So not only are the arguments against the "homosexual lifestyle" flawed, but on analyisis, the statistical assertions about the risks faced by homosexuals are incorrect too.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Donuel
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 10:16 AM

so whats up in Uganda? Are the gay prisons filling up?
Are they going with lethal injection or hanging?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 10:21 AM

They're letting GfS decide when s/he lands in Kampala.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 11:04 AM

LOL @ Smedley. Yes, like some avenging angel in a gingham pinafore and bonnet with a brace of heavily-armed babies hanging off each breast, waving a rolling pin in one hand and a cattle-prod in the other.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 12:04 PM

And if GfS is indeed male, that's an even more compelling image.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 01:44 PM

Royston, you are pretending to believe that I meant AIDS did not reach Asia, China and Russia.
You know that I meant it did not spread into the straight community as it did in Africa, even without the government programmes that you claim is all that spared straights in the West.
You selected the statistic of only 1% of infections being gay in Russia. Read a little further and you find,

Official figures show that men who have sex with men (MSM) are a relatively small proportion of total HIV cases in the region in comparison to Western European and North American nations. Unprotected male-to-male sex accounted for less than 1% of newly registered cases in Russia in 2006,

However, it is believed that the epidemic is thriving among this group but is being kept hidden and underreported due to a reluctance by MSM to reveal the cause of their infection for fear of stigmatisation|

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 01:46 PM

Dr De Cock said: "It is very unlikely there will be a heterosexual epidemic in other countries. Ten years ago a lot of people were saying there would be a generalised epidemic in Asia – China was the big worry with its huge population. That doesn't look likely.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 01:52 PM

Dr De Cock said: "I think it is unlikely there will be extensive heterosexual spread in Russia

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 01:56 PM

The problem of HIV in China is difficult to ascertain because of government censorship there. A documentary film-maker was jailed after making a film which highlighted a particularly awful case in one city where HIV-infected blood was given to transfusion patients in hospital.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 02:10 PM

yes Keith, and while you fantasises about fellating de Cock and all the other so called experts you worship because the say what you like to hear, remember that in spite of what he and you say, Russia for instance is having the fastest growing heterosexual HIV epidemic of anywhere earth and the only reason gay cases are under-reported is because of stigma and bigotry.

So do you still think the great Cock is right not to advocate education and intervention in ,say, Russia. What, should they wait until it reaches african proportions?

And I take it then that you do regard yourself as having insufficient intellect as to to be able to apply independent thought and discrimination to these debates.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 02:35 PM

the only reason gay cases are under-reported is because of stigma and bigotry

We know this how?

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 02:56 PM

Mousethief,

I only mentioned it because Avert believe it to be true and so does Keith. It is one point of contention fewer.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 03:06 PM

Wouldn't it become obvious when they turn up in hospital with Kaposi's Sarcoma or PCP? Or I guess they could brave it out there and say they got it from heterosexual exposure. I can see the theoretical danger that men wouldn't admit, even on the steps of the hospital with an AIDS diagnosis in hand (no pun intended) (okay pun intended), what their orientation was. But at that point, in a third-world country (well, 2.7th world country), you're down for the count anyway, so what would concealing it get you?

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 03:17 PM

You are an arrogant, egotistical, fool Royston
I do not believe that I have innate wisdom and knowledge.
I do not have fixed, dogmatic ideologies locked in my head.
I go seeking for knowledge and truth.
De Cock was not speaking for himself.
He was speaking, on the record, for and on behalf of The World Health Organisation, in his position as its Head of the Department for HIV/AIDS.
And he contradicts some of your mantras.
Most people would modify their position and take a fresh view.
You just bad mouth the leading expert in the whole world on the subject we are discussing, and shout even louder.
Look.
Even the pieces you link to do not support you.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 03:26 PM

Mousethief, you asked how we know about the under reporting of gay infection in Russia.
I first learned of it on the site if the international AIDS charity that Royston linked us to.
The source they give is
UNAIDS (2009, January), 'Hidden HIV epidemic amongst MSM in Eastern Europe and Central Asia'

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 03:30 PM

Royston,
So do you still think the great Cock is right not to advocate education and intervention in ,say, Russia. What, should they wait until it reaches african proportions?

He advocates intervention with the groups at risk rather than wasting limited resources on people not at risk.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 04:39 PM

Yes Keith, that is exactly what happened in Cuba, and they have one of the very lowest infection rates in the world.

Everyone here should be in agreement that money and resources should be concentrated on "high risk" groups (introvenous drug abusers, male homosexuals, sex workers, immigrants from Africa and Eastern Europe.

THAT IS, IF WE REALLY CARE FOR THEIR WELLBEING!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 04:45 PM

ake, you have taken so many sides on the issue of homosexuality that you make my head spin.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 04:50 PM

Of course the "liberals" want neither Male Homosexuals or Immigrants designated as "At risk" or "Special cases" due to the political problems it would cause them, vis a vis "gay marriage" and immigration control.....fucking hypocrits!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 04:53 PM

I just knew I could make your head (((spin))) Ebbs!   :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 06:02 PM

My head and stomach would feel better, ake, if you went back and stuck to your original reasoning. Not that I expect it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 06:12 PM

Ebbie,

Ake has had every argument he has advanced demolished, with the result that the only thing left for him to do is pretend that all he ever wanted really was to ensure that greater resources were allocated to high risk groups.

I suppose it does indicate a change of sorts, but I wouldn't get over confident.

He has yet to retract any of his previous homophobic bile.

Besides, his comment concerning "fucking hypocrits!" indicates a deeply ironic sense of denial.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 06:14 PM

Ake, you have a totally bass-ackwards and upside-down idea of what liberals are all about regarding this issue.

And once again, you advocate against one of the major things that would mitigate against promiscuity among gays and reduce the spread of HIV.

"Fucking hypocrite" yourself!!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 06:45 PM

Smeddum Ebbie!   Smeddum!

What you see as different stances are all linked by reason.
"Know your adversary and always keep one move ahead"


Don.....How many times? The figures say Male homosexuals are un interested in marriage other than for legal or insurance reasons.
(very poor take up rate).

They also see sexual faithfulness as unimportant, talking of "emotional committment" in one of the links above.
Whether you like to admit it of not sexual promiscuity is a very large part of homosexual behaviour....with of course a few suburban exceptions.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 08:00 PM

Perhaps that holds true in your little hamlet out on the moors, Ake, but it's not the way it is here in the United States. Most of the gay men I know—and know of—are in monogamous, stable relationships, whether the law recognizes them or not. And those who are working hardest for legal recognition of gay marriage are gays themselves, not just a bunch of "liberals" trying to tell them how they should live.

You are the one who wants to deny them that option. And who in the hell are you to tell them how they can and can't live?

How do you account for the fact that some 18,000 gay couples got married in California during the very short period between the enactment of the law that made gay marriage legal and the passage of the out-of-state religious fundamentalist funded Proposition 8, rescinding the law?

Your information is totally bogus, Ake.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 08:47 PM

The story so far.

We know that 95% of homosexual men do not suffer HIV.

We know that the risk of contracting HIV via unprotected anal sex is around twice as high as that of a woman contracting HIV through unprotected vaginal sex.

We know that 50% of AIDS sufferers worldwide are women.


To conclude from this information that homosexuality is unhealthy whilst other sexual behaviours are somehow safe by comparison is nonsense.


Ake has pointed out that proportionately, there are more gay sufferers of HIV in europe than there are straight sufferers of HIV.

This is an interesting phenomenon, but it does not lead to any conclusion that homosexuality is unhealthy.

If we must have that view, then to be consistent we must also conclude that heterosexual sex for women is unhealthy as the risk of contracting HIV is only half that of Gay men, and half of HIV sufferers globally are women.

In fact, it remains true that sex without responsibly taken precautions is a health risk, regardless of ones sexual orientation.


The notion that homosexuals are 50 times more likely to be infected is a fallacy based on misunderstanding of what the stats show.


The likelihood of catching HIV via unprotected anal sex with someone who is HIV positive is 1 in 3.

The likelihood of women catching HIV via unprotected vaginal sex with someone who is HIV positive is between 1 in 6 and 1 in 7.

i.e. approximately 2 times more likely - a long way from 50!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Wesley S
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 08:59 PM

Jeez - Are you guys still going at this??? Anyone changed their mind about the issues yet?

I thought not. So y'all just like flappin' your gums?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 09:31 PM

Ake - sorry, but I must reiterate that, exceptional from the norm as you may think them, many of my dearest friends are NOT 'a few suburban exceptions'. They strike me as more & more typical of an important segment of the homosexual community. Looking back, so many of the gays I have known thruout my life have been in stable quasi-marriage relationships, even before the post-1960s post-Wolfenden decriminalisation, let alone the present 'Civil Partnership' arrangements which so many have embraced enthusiastically — more, perhaps, than the present lot of young straights seem to embrace marriage rather than 'partnership' these days: which has led, note, to all sorts of complications in legal situations re rights of property and inheritance, leading in turn to the present agonisings of Cameron et al, & the revival of the non-concept of 'commom-law' marriage in a different form so that many have no idea where they are legally at all:··· an unfortunate complication which, paradoxically & adventitiously, more & more gays seem to be avoiding here in UK.

& this is not entirely drift from the main point, because this increasing number of monogamous gay relationships (I have, as you will have gathered, many gay acquaintance in long-term relationships & can think of not one such couple who have not chosen to get Civil Partnered since they could — & not only, I am sure, for preperty/inheritance convenience, but for emotional & confirmatory motives) is going to militate against the tradition of promiscuity which seems to worry you so much in the context of this discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 23 Jan 10 - 11:13 PM

Jeez - Are you guys still going at this??? Anyone changed their mind about the issues yet?

I thought not. So y'all just like flappin' your gums?

I've learned quite a bit. What is your complaint here, if not flappin' yer gums?

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 12:32 AM

Here's the short version: Pregnant mother's resentment towards dad, or men, sets up male child's receptors. Child born, has predisposition to 'make dad happy', and or get his approval, which mom couldn't, or can't. Dad doesn't see it..child is frustrated in his efforts. Resents dad..carries it on for years, while emotionally stuck. Time goes on, child approaches puberty, also finds other male 'heroes' to look up to, other than dad. Child experiments with others of same sex..likes it, does not feel need to reach across the genders to the other sex...thinks he was this way since birth...and unfortunately, because of his resentments the gene pool is 'robbed' of the sensitive traits, artistic, creative, and other valued attributes, within him. He does not develop his 'pair-bonding' abilities with women, does not pro-create, yet is promiscuous, because it is, after all, about sex. Anyone can develop close relationships with others of the opposite or same sex, without having to have sex, with that person.

Also, they can't understand why developing pair-bonding skills, for the purpose of procreation even matters, and even resents those who do!

Don't believe me??? Go hug your fathers, tell him you love him, and thank him, for not having you aborted!

Also, go back and read the thread over, and look at the remarks made by the homosexuals, in regards to this, and it is self proving!!!

Go ahead, love dad...
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 02:16 AM

Lox, your logic is flawed.
Globally, 50% victims are women, but most of those are in Africa where special conditions apply. The figure is completely irrelevant in the developed world.
Even if your figures for female risk from vaginal sex were correct, unless she is having sex with a bisexual or an african she is at extremely low risk of infection.
There is no need to calculate risk from transmissability statistics.
There is ample empirical evidence to calculate risk from actual successful infections.
That is what Aids campaigner Ford Hickson has done in this BBC article.http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3856963.stm

This means gay men are about 90 times more likely to be living with HIV than other people.

Similarly, although African people account for about 1% of the population in Britain, 33% of the people living with HIV are African.

This means African people in Britain are about 50 times more likely to be living with HIV than other ethnic groups.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 04:42 AM

GfS, thanks for the crisp and purposeful summary.

If anyone has to do a college essay on the topic of 'Prevailing Psychiatric Assumptions Towards Homosexuality in the Early 1960s', you now have an excellent source.

I loved my Dad, by the way, he loved me and he couldn't have been kinder & more supportive to myself and my partner.

Sorry that real life, in all its infuriating messy comlexity, still keeps getting the way of your attempts to build rigis theories.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 06:50 AM

Well done, Keith. You've just brought the whole thing back to where it was a few days ago, but that was probably what you intended.

The point about the 50 times, 90 time, 100 times is...what is your bloody point? It was being advanced by others as a reason to remove the civil or human rights of groups of people because of what was argued to be their *natural* susceptibility to - if not blame for - HIV. In the context of this discussion, what is your point? State it.

Don't keep coming here and throwing in more or less true or untrue *facts* without having a point relevant to the topic.

The UK does not have yet, thank goodness - and let's hope it stays that way - an epidemic on th scale of Africa. It does not even have an epidemic amongst at risk groups (MSM, IV drugs-users, prostitutes). From 1985 onwards, all UK citizens were educated about the risks of HIV.

Keith, do you seriously imagine that the universal HIV education program had NO EFFECT AT ALL? You really, really can't be that stupid. The point about universal education is that you reach most everyone - the at risk and the not at risk - at some level. It really helps.

In Russia there was no universal education about HIV and they have the fastest growing HIV epidemic of anywhere in the world, Africa included. And you really, really see no link whatever?

Even if an expert suspected that there were other reasons, it would still be the work of a complete fool to stop universal education of the risks...

...Particularly in Britain where the fastest growing group of HIV carriers (doesn't matter where they got it or what colour they are) are heterosexual people. They're here, they're having sex, maybe with one of your kids one day soon.

Keith, I know that you are not that stupid.

Now on the subject of targeting resources at the at risk groups, I explained days ago that there are literally hundreds of specialist outreach groups working with sex workers, in gay venues and communities, in ethnic and religious minorities. They are funded by government and charitably. Most are initiatives led by the very ethnic or other communities affected.

To mention but a few:

www.gmfa.org.uk (gay men fighting AIDS)

www.tht.org.uk (Terence Higgins Trust)

www.naz.org.uk (NAZ Project - outreach to black and minority ethnic groups)

Needle exchange for drug-users - so simple it never needed a website

So you see in countries that do (like us) throw resources at the at risk groups as well as some universal education, we do very well at controlling the disease.

de Cock is right to argue for more focused targeting of at risk groups. More power to his elbow.

But to say - as you appear to Keith - that the universal education pograms were/are pointless and unhelpful is just absurd, Utterly absurd. When I read again de Cock's comments it doesn't even seem that he really advocates that.

So Ake, no *liberal* ever wanted to deny proper support and care-services to minorities - that was your position, one which you have thankfully reversed.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 07:20 AM

"The point about the 50 times, 90 time, 100 times is?"

Ask Lox. I was replying to his post on that issue.


"Keith, do you seriously imagine that the universal HIV education program had NO EFFECT AT ALL?"

I am sure it did ,but is quite reasonable to suppose that a more focussed programme might have done more good.
(At one point you claimed it responsible for the epidemic not hitting the straight community but did not explain why it did not save gay men.)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 08:06 AM

Being 50 times more likely to be living with AIDS and being 50 times more likely to catch it are not the same thing.

Remember the question currently being adddressed?

Is homosexuality per se more risky.

You are presumably providing statistics that help in establishing the answer one way or the other.

If not then why don't you post the premiership league tables?

The answer is that for each individual on the receiving end of unprotected anal sex with a HIV positive partner, the chances of contracting HIV are 1 in 3.

For each Heterosexual woman having unprotected sex with a HIV positive partner, the chances range from 1 in 3, if she has anal sex, to 1 in 6 or 7 if she is having vaginal sex.

So being on the receiving end of unprotected penetrative sex with a HIV positive partner for a woman, is somewhere between the same risk and half as risky as unprotected penetrative sex for a gay man.

This disproves your assertion that some women in the west are "unable" to contract HIV.

What do your stats show then?

The statistics that you keep referring to demonstrate that circumstances are diferent in Africa and in Europe. They do not offer an explanation why that iis the case as you seem to be suggesting.


All we can deduce from the stats you provided is that due to circumstances in Africa, heterosexuals are disproportionately infected with HIV, whilst in Europe, Heterosexuals are disproportionately infected with HIV.

We cannot draw any conclusions about how healthy or unhealthy homosexuality is from your stats.

I remiind you again that that was the question being considered.

So Ake needs to admit that he was wrong, or we can take his refusal to do so as further evidence of his homophobia.

(bearing in mind that there is already lots regardless of the outcome of this discussion)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 08:21 AM

Correction



"All we can deduce from the stats you provided is that due to circumstances in Africa, heterosexuals are disproportionately infected with HIV, whilst in Europe, HETEROSEXUALS are disproportionately infected with HIV."


    should be


"All we can deduce from the stats you provided is that due to circumstances in Africa, heterosexuals there are disproportionately infected with HIV, whilst due to circumstances in Europe, HOMOSEXUALS here are disproportionately infected with HIV."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 08:25 AM

All that remains now is for someone to discover what the differences in circumstance are between Europe and Africa.

Oh ... Hello Royston ...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 08:27 AM

Keith: I am sure it did ,but is quite reasonable to suppose that a more focussed programme might have done more good.
(At one point you claimed it responsible for the epidemic not hitting the straight community but did not explain why it did not save gay men.)

Well that's not really correct, Keith. I asserted that the universal education programs have kept the incidence of HIV low in this country. I did not make any differentiation between the effect universal education programs had on different groups, but I say that if those programs had not existed then we would have had a far greater heterosexual HIV problem than we do. You should infer from that my view that the male-to-male incidence would be higher also.

The incidence of HIV in this country is incredibly low - whether you are gay or straight - compared to countries where little or no education programs were in place at the time the disease emerged.

So it is reasonable to assert that, whatever group you look at, universal education programs play an important role. Targeted education/intervention is even more important and we are actually very good at it in this country.

What is scary about the current position is that an awful lot of resouces are being directed, rightly, at the at-risk groups. It is working. Maybe more could be done, I don't know for sure.

But the pool of heterosexual carriers in this country is fairly rocketing, at the same time the numbers of teenage pregnancies, abortions and other STI's are climbing, suggesting a tendency (maybe even a growing tendency) for straight people not to use condoms, while contracting risk-multiplying STI's in a community with an ever-increasing number of HIV carriers. A problem in the making, isn't it?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 08:32 AM

Ake,

You will, I'm sure, appreciate this "liberal" arguing for more resources and effort to be directed at the heterosexual majority, whereas you have been arguing they don't need it and the problem rests with "the others"

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 09:28 AM

"But the pool of heterosexual carriers in this country is fairly rocketing, "

It is, but only because of the influx of infected people from Africa.
That gives you a target group for highly effective, focussed intervention.
Why waste limited resources on the whole heterosexual community who are at very low risk when it can make a real difference if targetted on gay men and Africans?
You will save more lives per buck.
Isn't that what matters?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 10:22 AM

""Why waste limited resources on the whole heterosexual community who are at very low risk when it can make a real difference if targetted on gay men and Africans?""

And on what basis do you make this unwarranted and dangerous assumption that heterosexual African immigrants will not have sex with indiginous heterosexuals?

My God, it would be bloody hilarious, if it weren't for the cost in lives of that kind of sloppy thinking.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 10:38 AM

Silly fellow! Of course Keith meant homo and hetero immigrants(from Africa and Eastern Europe) Try to concentrate!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 10:46 AM

No, Ake, Keith didn't mean that and Don's comment is quite correct.

The rapidly rising figures are for heterosexual (not homosexual) people living in this country who acquired HIV outside the country.

And Keith, Don is right. As I have been ~whispering~ for weeks, black and white / immigrant and indigenous people have sex together. When will this penny drop?

Regardless of colour or origin, there are rocketing numbers of straight people with HIV in this country, increasing daily the chances of any staight person contracting HIV.

Is that clear yet?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 10:59 AM

Royston,

"Why waste limited resources on the whole heterosexual community who are at very low risk when it can make a real difference if targetted on gay men and Africans"

Cant you read?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 11:21 AM

FFS Ake,

Keith wrote "gay men and Africans" Because gay men are at greater risk and because of the rocketing number of heterosexual HIV carriers in this country, who acquired the disease in Africa.

You wrote "Keith meant homo and hetero immigrants(from Africa and Eastern Europe)"

Which is neither what he meant nor what he wrote.

And you have the nerve to ask other people to concentrate!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 02:16 PM

I think what GoofuS described above is either a reverse Elektra complex or a reverse Oedipus complex, which is really getting pretty--complex!.

Anyway, s/he is writhing like a snake, trying to avoid the idea that same-sex orientation might be genetic.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 02:29 PM

Perhaps I need to post longer explanations.
Infected incomers do not need advice on how to avoid infection!
They do need to be warned that it is a serious crime to knowingly put someone at risk.
Also, we have to be be honest that sex with an African carries a higher risk. This information is never provided from official sources. I would probably get into trouble if I included that fact in health lessons.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 03:10 PM

Thats right Keith, and homosexual health figures are not widely available.....I knew nothing about homosexual life expectancy being so much less than hetero, or the homo infection rates compared to hetro before searching the net for the prop 8 thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 03:16 PM

Youse are truly fucked up.

Gee... that's a "troll" type post.

Sorry.

It's that kinda day.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 03:28 PM

Look...this is getting silly.

Can we agree that in the Western countries there are three main hiv/aids "at risk groups"
            1 African immigrants.
            2 Homosexual men.
            3 Introvenus drug users

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 03:34 PM

Ake,

None of those three assertions were ever disputed; just all the judgements that you piled on top of them.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 03:44 PM

Keith: Also, we have to be be honest that sex with an African carries a higher risk. This information is never provided from official sources. I would probably get into trouble if I included that fact in health lessons

You would be failing in your duty if you caused your students to harbour a belief that the way not to contract HIV (or other STI's) is just not to screw Africans. Until all sexually active people not in a totally monogamous relationship learn to use a condom each and every time, the numbers of victims of HIV and various other diseases will continue to rise. That is, essentially, the only lesson that must be taught and learned.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 03:49 PM

They all get told all that basic stuff. That message has got home.
There is also a widespread understanding that MSM is higher risk.
Do you think information about certain higher risks should be kept from them?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 04:39 PM

Keith: They all get told all that basic stuff. That message has got home

The rising rate of HIV (UK acquired), other STI's and teenage pregnancy suggests that the message has not got home nearly far enough. In an earlier thread you said that you had helped girls to seek abortions. It is therefore only a matter of luck that those same girls did not contract HIV or another STI, isn't it? So in your own claimed experience you know that British kids are practicing unsafe sex.

Keith: Do you think information about certain higher risks should be kept from them?

There can never be any harm in telling people about relative risks so long as they are not led to believe that lower relative risk equates to no risk at all.

If you use the right condom properly every time you have sex then you risk of contracting HIV is almost incalculably low. That has to be the best message to drive home. Anything else is just academic.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 04:45 PM

"I would probably get into trouble if I included that fact in health lessons."

Why do you think that is Keith?

I'll tell you.

Because if you make a statement from which people can infer, correctly or incorrectly. that unprotected sex with non African heterosexuals is somehow safe, then you are being extremely irresponsible.

The responsuble attitude is to make sure that everyone takes HIV seriously, and uses condoms responsibly.

Education is the issue, and you would be amazed at how many people are ignorant about the birds and bees much less the risks of HIV and other STI's.

This is why adolescent girls and young women are the highest demographic to suffer Ghonnorhea, Syphilis, HPV and chlamydia.

Young, ignorant, impressionable, vulnerable, and at risk.

The enemy isn't Africans or Gays, it is HIV.

By the way, I've noticed that you've stopped providing neutral information and you've started aguing a position contrary to royston.

Should I deduce that you hold the views he seems to think you do?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 05:14 PM

Royston... these assertions have been disputed right from the start of this thread and every other thread on this issue, by three or four regulars.

You tried to assert only a few posts ago that hetero sex was as much a risk as homo sex.....until confronted by the facts, which it now appears you knew all along.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 05:15 PM

Certainly the proper lesson is not "don't fuck Africans" but rather "practice safe sex"? This protects everybody (who will heed it) and prevents stigmatization of (and possible resulting violence against) a single people-group. More responsible two ways. Everybody wins.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 05:21 PM

Yes...but what are you going to do about the continually rising infection rates among male homosexuals?

Do you not think that the message has been out there for the last eight years?

With absolutely no effect.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 05:25 PM

If the figures continue to rise would you consider compulsory testing for male homosexuals and African immigrants?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 05:30 PM

Nah. We'll just shoot them. Right?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 05:38 PM

Yes...but what are you going to do about the continually rising infection rates among male homosexuals?

Do you not think that the message has been out there for the last eight years?

With absolutely no effect.

What do you suggest? Shall we shoot them? Give us your precise remedies. Who will implement them? Who will pay for it? Don't be shy. Surely you must have some ideas, right, you're not just being obstreperous, right? Put up or shut up.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 05:44 PM

Ake,

The answer, you fuckwit, for everybody is use a condom when you screw!

It is that bloody simple.

The rising figures show that too many white, straight, black and gay people are not getting the message. The numbers for EVERY GROUP are rising.

What would YOU do about all groups?

You and Keith can lash out at the people you don't like, but it won't solve anything. You could test the people you don't like and then ... what? If people are still not being safe they will get HIV. They will get it from the straight and white carriers, they will get it from people with clean results because it can take 3-6 months for viral load to be detectalbe in testing.

There is no way out of this other than for everyone to practice safe sex. Blaming is not going to help anyone.

If you made testing compulsory for the entire population, it would save lives because people would get the treatment and care they need. It can't / won't stop the spread or kill the disease because of the latency issue. Just testing "at risk" groups would be fucking ridiculous and pointless.

Ake, you are pointless. The only people left in this thread that don't understand reality are you and good old reliable Keith. You are both racist and homophobic bigots and this issue is closed.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 05:50 PM

Ake: You tried to assert only a few posts ago that hetero sex was as much a risk as homo sex

Show us that post, shit for brains. I have never asserted any such thing.

You and Keith and GfS claimed HIV was just a gay disease. It isn't. In Africa - and globally - it is overwhelmingly a straight disease. That is my point, it has never changed, even Keith agrees it is true.

Tell the hundreds of white British that get infected every year through heterosexual vaginal sex that "there is no risk of straight HIV" and see what their opinion is.

Go to Africa and tell it to the millions upon millions - 40% of the total population of some countries. Idiot.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 07:24 PM

Some interesting stuff.


Sexual ignorance UK


"Around 11% of people think standing up during sex prevents a woman from becoming pregnant"


Shall I bother with any more? or shall we asume that the same people may not know about pregnancy, but know loads about HIV?


How is the message "hitting home?"

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 24 Jan 10 - 07:51 PM

Whom are you addressing, Lox?

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 08:14 AM

Why can't you exchange points of view without calling people fuckwit, shitforbrains, etc.?
(I know, Don, I have used the word fool too often in the past, and used it here recently, but I took on board what you said to me a while back.)
You call me and others liar, but I have not lied.
On 10th Jan you stated as fact something false.
I do not think that it was ignorance. I think that you knowingly lied to bolster your argument. Why do that?

In the dark, bad old days, for an unmarried girl to get pregnant was such a disgrace that suicide was a preferred option for many.
But girls still got pregnant.
Kids take risks. It is what they do.
With STIs, drugs, motorbikes, internet, etc., we will not be with the kids when they are taking their risks.
All we can do is equip them with as much knowledge of the risks as possible.
I can tell them that all drugs are dangerous, but some are a greater risk than others. I can tell them that crack has a higher risk without implying that ecstacy is safe.
I am encouraged to be as "frank" as possible.
Not so with AIDS risks. Maybe there are sound political and social reasons to withold some information, but I am unconvinced.
This is not a huge issue for me, just a mild irritation.
I regret now raising it. This thread did not need extra controversies.

Lox, you will find similar ignorance about most things supposedly taught in schools.
Royston, yes anyone can get AIDS, but it is much more of a risk for gay men except in Africa.
Do you have evidence for the globally bit of "In Africa - and globally - it is overwhelmingly a straight disease."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 08:47 AM

In the first official admission that the universal prevention strategy promoted by the major Aids organisations may have been misdirected, Kevin de Cock, the head of the WHO's department of HIV/Aids said there will be no generalised epidemic of Aids in the heterosexual population outside Africa.

Dr De Cock, an epidemiologist who has spent much of his career leading the battle against the disease, said understanding of the threat posed by the virus had changed. Whereas once it was seen as a risk to populations everywhere, it was now recognised that, outside sub-Saharan Africa, it was confined to high-risk groups including men who have sex with men, injecting drug users, and sex workers and their clients.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 10:13 AM

Royston re
"Tell the hundreds of white British that get infected every year through heterosexual vaginal sex that "there is no risk of straight HIV" and see what their opinion is"

Reports indicate that 21 115 adults (aged 15 or older) diagnosed with HIV in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland between 1985 and 2003 were infected through heterosexual intercourse (figure). Of these, 1901 (9.0%) were probably infected in the United Kingdom:

That from the BMJ piece discussed earlier.
That is an average of 158.4 per year.
About two and a half times the number struck by lightning!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 11:10 AM

Keith: Reports indicate that 21 115 adults (aged 15 or older) diagnosed with HIV in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland between 1985 and 2003 were infected through heterosexual intercourse (figure). Of these, 1901 (9.0%) were probably infected in the United Kingdom:

That from the BMJ piece discussed earlier.
That is an average of 158.4 per year

You are so unscrupulous Keith. I used to call you a liar for clouding and misleading a discussion with old data. OK, so technically what you say WAS true. It IS NOT true NOW. At best you are unscrupulous, at worst a liar.

Why have you come here with data 1985-2003?

Why Keith? Tell us.

When the most recent data for a full year of observation (2008) was for over 1,100 cases acquired in the UK by heterosexual sex. That was from the HPA figures that you and I both quoted the other day.

There are now 5 times the number of heterosexual UK-acquired diagnoses than there were in 2000.

But apparently that should not concern anyone because as Keith and Ake both know, HIV only affects blacks and gays.

As for "proving" that, globally, HIV is a disease predominantly of straight people, all you need to know is that in Africa there are about 22 million sufferers, from 33 million cases worldwide. Most of those African sufferers live in countries where the prevalence rate is in excess of 25% of the population. As you believe that only 1% of populations are gay, then just on those figures alone my assertion is proven.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 11:49 AM

Royston,
Uk infected not UK diagnosed.
Most heteros diagnosed here were infected in africa.
Can you come up with more recent figures than that?
The British Medical Journal figures I provided are only 6 years old.
They are still relevant.

Globally means over the globe, not just africa which by now we all know is a unique case.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 12:39 PM

But why is Africa considered a unique case? Surely if one area, one continent, one people, one city is impacted by anything, it follows that other areas, other continents, other peoples, other cities will also eventually be impacted? Extraordinary measures would make a difference, possibly even canceling, the inevitable spread of whatever it is, but until that is true and clearly shown, surely, surely, what goes around comes around?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 01:27 PM

Ebbie, AIDS has been observed to be different in Africa.
WHO gives likely reasons. Royston gave basically the same reasons a few posts back.
Also remember what this thread was originally about.
It is a very dangerous place to admit to being gay.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 01:30 PM

"It is the question we are asked most often – why is the situation so bad in sub-Saharan Africa? It is a combination of factors – more commercial sex workers, more ulcerative sexually transmitted diseases, a young population and concurrent sexual partnerships."

"Sexual behaviour is obviously important but it doesn't seem to explain [all] the differences between populations. Even if the total number of sexual partners [in sub-Saharan Africa] is no greater than in the UK, there seems to be a higher frequency of overlapping sexual partnerships creating sexual networks that, from an epidemiological point of view, are more efficient at spreading infection."

Low rates of circumcision, which is protective, and high rates of genital herpes, which causes ulcers on the genitals through which the virus can enter the body, also contributed to Africa's heterosexual epidemic.

But the factors driving HIV were still not fully understood, he said.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 01:36 PM

No, Keith,

The 1,130 figure is of UK-Acquired UK-diagnosed heterosexually contracted HIV cases.

There were a FURTHER 3,090 heterosexual diagnoses of HIV that were contracted outside the UK.

Try to keep up Keith, or are you telling lies? It's just so hard to tell.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Amos
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 01:40 PM

Africa is also intensely hot and moist. I suspect it makes for better viral survival.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 01:43 PM

Keith: It is a very dangerous place to admit to being gay

Stop ignoring what is being told to you in favour of your silly lies.

If, as you say, gay men make up only 1-2% of populations then in Africa - which has HIV prevalence of 25-40% of populations, it is by any measure a disease that overwhelmingly affects heterosexuals.

The assertion would still be true at Kinsey esimates of 10%

Because Africa accounts for over two thirds of all global HIV cases, it is perfectly obvious that globally HIV is a disease predominantly of straight people. We already established that 50% of all HIV positive peoople are women (globally) and they didn't catch it from gay men, did they?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 01:44 PM

""Uk infected not UK diagnosed.
Most heteros diagnosed here were infected in africa.""

The figures Royston gave were clearly stated to be UK acquired infections of HIV.

To quote your fellow naysayer,.....Do keep up.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 02:01 PM

Keith,

Assuming that your figure of 9% of total heterosexual infections of HIV were UK acquired, rather than African imports, it follows that the 2008 figures show a UK acquired infection rate of 36.6% of the total.

That is a fourfold increase since 2003.

Seems a pretty significant rise for what you insist is a low risk group, wouldn't you agree?

It really doesn't inspire confidence in the claim that we will see no explosion in hetero HIV/AIDS cases, especially as the rate of pregnancies and STD infections proves that young women particularly are not taking the necessary safe sex precautions.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 02:38 PM

Don, Royston may have clearly stated them to be UK acquired, but he has got it wrong.
Here is the site again.
http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1237970242135
Here is the explanation given about the tables incuding table A on page 6
Definitions used
HIV infected individual: an individual for whom HIV diagnosis and/or AIDS, and/or death with HIV
infection has been reported.
AIDS case: The European AIDS case definition is used for AIDS surveillance in the UK. It is based on
that developed in USA as modified in 1987 and 1993, but does not include a CD4 count of less than
200 in an HIV infected person as AIDS defining.
Death in an HIV infected individual: these include AIDS and non AIDS related deaths.
Date of HIV diagnosis: This is taken to be the date of the first HIV defining event for an individual in
the UK, for example, a laboratory report of HIV infection or a diagnosis of AIDS. Tables summarising
events over time are produced using the date of HIV diagnosis (and not the date of report). This
means that numbers, particularly for recent years, will rise as a result of receiving further reports.

I expect you will both want to apologize and retract.
Most of those heteros diagnosed here were infected in Africa.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 02:44 PM

no, I got it wrong!
I do apologize and I do retract.
keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 03:06 PM

Handsomely said.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 03:09 PM

Mousethief....You take a very belligerent tone, but in the hope that you are serious about this "discussion", I have linked to an article(containing up to date figures), on the treatment of high risk cases in Cuba.

Despite being in a high risk area geographically and having a high number of holiday visitors, the hiv/aids infection rate in cuba is the lowest in the Carribean area, and one of the lowest in the entire world.

While the Cuban infection rate has risen between 2005 and 2008, the highest rises have been among the male homosexual community.

I would suggest that we look seriously at the Cuban model of compulsory testing for high risk groups, a strict regime of contact tracing, and a concerted treatment and education programme

Link to article
hiv/aids infections in Cuba for 2008

Total   10454... All males 8363 ....homo/bi males 7119(63%)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 03:32 PM

The only thing, Ake, is that the article does not say that Cuba had
, or has, compulsory testing. It says that testing is urged or actively promoted for 'at risk' groups (the same as it is here). What is different is contact tracing and urging those contacts to get tested. It says that all blood tests require patient consent. That seems totally sensible to me.

It also praises the universal education program:

"Much of the Cuban health promotion material seen in 2005 was aimed at the general population, with some material aimed more directly at homosexual men or addressing the male responsibility for condom use. Another national pamphlet addressed cultural attitudes, urging readers to "judge your friends by their qualities, not by their sexual preferences" and stressing acceptance of "sexual diversity" to counter "prejudices and stigmas." It noted that "homosexual, bisexual, or transvestite . . . are simply forms of sexual expression, as is heterosexuality," and that understanding and accepting people as they are, will make you grow into a better person." Local music stars have been enlisted to help promote safe sex, for example in the national HIV magazine."

Which is the sort of universal, caring education and social tone that us "liberals" campaign for and which you hate so much.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 03:38 PM

On the whole experts are positive about the Cuban health figures and treatment regime, but find the high numbers of homosexual/bisexual infections and their annual rise "worrying".

Cuban health authorities depend very much on "contact tracing" in their fight against the disease; and the promiscuity and large number of "casual" sexual partners which seems to accompany homosexual practice works against an effective treatment...IMO.

Thus, I see homosexual practice as unsafe and unhealthy.
There may need to be an element of compulsion in any attempt to arrest the disease in US/UK.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 03:42 PM

OK, those figures.
The difference between gay and straight new infections is not as great as it was in the earlier BMJ survey, but is still dramatic.
New UK acquired infections are increasing by a hundred or so every year, but the increase is NOT exponential as Royston has claimed.
There is no evidence at all for an epidemic in the straight community.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 03:45 PM

Royston ...These figures were designed to be read and digested by persons who have retained a degree of sanity.....now put out the light and get back into bed.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 03:56 PM

Shit for brains (Ake)

Retreating back to your old comforts, having produced even more evidence that contradicts your view.

96% of homosexuals don't have HIV

On the whole, homosexual practice is therefore safe.

The Cuban model you love so much is praised for its care and compassion and its aggressive campaigning for social tolerance and acceptance.

Job done.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 03:59 PM

Keith,

I did not say there was an epidemic in the straight population. I said that the numbers were rising steadily year on year, which has to be worrying.

I speculated that as the number of carriers rises, it could lead to an exponential rise, an epidemic. As a scientist you will know that this is possible. It remains, however, a speculation.

"Although most new diagnoses in the UK heterosexual population are thought to have been acquired outside the country, the numbers of domestic heterosexual infections are also rising and as the pool of carrier grows so the rate of infecton amongst those being unsafe will increase. Exponential rise on the horizon.

Were my exact words.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 04:12 PM

"no, I got it wrong!
I do apologize and I do retract.
keith. "


Keith you are an honourable man, I was 100% right to engage you with an open mind, despite what I feared might have been a partisan desire to support Ake's position.

I would like to continue if I may.

You said,

"Lox, you will find similar ignorance about most things supposedly taught in schools."

You agree then that there are many in the UK with a por education and that this is the case across the board, not just in relation to sexual health.

The UK has its problems and could improve its education system, but generally, there is significantly better access to education in the UK than there is in much of Africa.

Poverty and ignorance are vicious conspiring bedfellows, and in Africa they have spawned an epedemic between them.



Ake,


you are on your own now.


Keith has acknowledged that the risks of vaginal sex are only just less than half those of anal sex.

He has also acknowledged that domestic infection rates amongst heterosexuals are in fact significant after all, and rising exponentially.


Your position has been stripped down to your original position - that homosexuals are a scourge and what they do is revolting.


I expect you to carry on repeating the same old crap though, its what you always do, because you are more loyal to your prejudice than you are to the truth.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 04:26 PM

Royston....I dont agree with everything that is contained in my link, but I do agree with the main thrust, which is when applied to the UK that high risk groups like homosexuals and African immigrants cant just be handed a few condoms and left to get on with it as you "liberals" suggest.

In the UK today we have two minority groups male homosexuals and African immigrants, who between them compose perhaps 3/4% of the population, contracting between them over 60% of new hiv/aids infections........job done?....back to bed sonny, Ive phoned the doc!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 04:27 PM

Keith,

if the increase in locally acquired HIV in the UK hhad been from 9% to 15% over 5 years, you might be able to say that it was just a reasonable fluctuation.

However, for it to increase 5 fold in so few years is dramatic in the extreme, and evidence of a sea change.

As more are infected, so more run the risk of being infected etc, with the result that the Gap will continue to close ever faster.

The fact that Gay men have been proportionately more likely to be HIV positive has been a phenomenon.

It won't be long before that phenomenon is past tense.

And anyone who agues that resources should diverted away from heterosexual HIV education into HIV education for Gays and Africans would have to be wilful, obstinate and deeply irresponsible in the extreme.

In fact, the ony reason to continue supporting a view like that would be a deliberate clinging on to untenable views of homosexuals and Africans.

We already know that Ake is racist as he has ignored stats in the past to press home his idea that foreigners are responsible for the credit crunch, and he has slandered Moslems and Tinkers, and he has also described Gays as a scourge with a natural propensity to abuse children, and described in detail just how his imagination gets all steamed up at the thought of Gay men having sex.

So it shold be no surprise that he has an agenda when it comes to "caring" for homosexuals health.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 04:33 PM

Thanks Lox, but I had little choice!
I can not let your statements pass without comment.

Anal sex is much more than twice as risky. Remeber I found some research that calculated the risk to one decimal place. it was several times I think.( I must be careful now)

Domestic hetero infection rates are compararable with rare diseases like Huntingdons, and are definately NOT increasing exponentially.
It is a slow, linear increase.
MSM rates are dramatically higher, of the order of 50 times higher.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 04:45 PM

Another view of de Cock's admissions.

Much of the media has treated Dr De Cock's admission as a startling revelation. In truth, experts have known for many years that in the vast majority of the world, Aids has little impact on the "general population". In her new book The Wisdom of Whores, Elizabeth Pisani – who worked for 10 years in what she refers to as "the Aids bureaucracy" – admits that by 1998 it was clear that "HIV wasn't going to rage through the billions in the 'general population', and we knew it".

Some people knew it earlier. In 1987, my friend and colleague Dr Michael Fitzpatrick wrote a fiery pamphlet titled The Truth About the Aids Panic. At the height of the Conservative government's scary tombstone campaign ("Don't die of ignorance"), he wrote: "There is no good evidence that Aids is likely to spread rapidly in the West among heterosexuals." In Britain, most of the small-scale spread of "heterosexual Aids" has been a result of infected individuals arriving from Africa. In the UK in the whole of the 1980s – the decade of the Great Aids Panic – there were 20 cases of HIV acquired through heterosexual contact with an individual infected in Europe.

And it isn't the case that the heterosexual pandemic failed to materialise because officialdom's omnipresent pro-condom propaganda was a success. According to James Chin, a clinical professor of epidemiology at the University of California at Berkeley and author of the new book The Aids Pandemic, it was always a "glorious myth" that there would be an "HIV epidemic in general populations". That myth was the product of "misunderstanding or deliberate distortions of HIV epidemiology" by Unaids and other Aids activists, says Chin.

It is time to recognise that the Aids scare was one of the most distorted, duplicitous and cynical public health panics of the past 30 years. Instead of being treated as a sexually transmitted disease that affected certain high-risk communities, and which should be vociferously tackled by the medical authorities, the "war against Aids" was turned into moral crusade.

Both Conservative and New Labour governments exploited the disease to create a new moral framework for society. Through baseless fearmongering, officials sought to police and regulate the behaviour of the public. No longer able to appeal to outdated Victorian ideals of chastity or restraint, the powers-that-be used the spectre of an Aids calamity to terrify us into behaving "responsibly" in sexual and social matters.

They were aided and abetted by the rump of the radical left. Gay rights campaigners, feminists and left-leaning health and social workers stood shoulder-to-shoulder, first with the Tories and later with Labour, in spreading the "glorious myth" of a possible future Aids pandemic. An unholy alliance of old-style, prudish conservatives and post-radical, lifestyle-obsessed leftists latched on to Aids as a disease that might provide them with a sense of moral purpose.

And they ruthlessly sought to silence anyone who questioned them.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jun/12/aids.health

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 04:59 PM

I remember the research you posted.

It stated that the chances of catching HIV from a HIV positive partner via unprotected anal sex was 1 in 3

It stated that the chances of catching HIV from a HIV positive partner via unprotected vaginal sex was 1 in 10


Howver, this second figure was the average figure for men and women, as we know from mention of the differences with or without a foreskin etc.

Figures which compare men and women, show that women are just over twice as likely to catch HIV from a HIV positive partner via unprotected vaginal sex, as are their male counterparts.

This changes the 1 in 10 figure to about 1 in 14-16 in men and 1 in 6-7 in women.

So vaginal sex is nearer to being half as risky as anal sex.


But wait - there is more ...

... another factor in Africa, other than ignorance of sexual health, that makes women more vulnerable, is the issue of being infected by other STI's.

And as we know, adolescent girls and young women are the highest demographic to suffer from these in the UK.

As they get older, this figure will become the case for middle aged and older women, and without a change of some sort, will continue to be the case for the next generation of young women too.

With 60% of teens interviewed saying they don't use a condom with a new partner, we can see trouble on the horizon for the human petri dish that is our young female demographic.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 05:12 PM

How did my name get dragged into a tangent about Cuba? Is it because I once said something unfavourable about Hemingway? Or favourable about their ability to provide health care to a greater percentage of their population than the United Shame of America? Ake, no matter how you slice it, you've got the wrong end of the stick here. And trying to drag me into a side-argument about Cuba is just bizarre.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 05:12 PM

Very good link Keith!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 05:20 PM

Lox, here is that risk comparison again.
Transmission 33.8 times more likely with penile-anal sex than penile-vaginal sex.
http://www.natap.org/2008/Trans/Trans_03.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 05:22 PM

I seee you have found an article by Brendan O'Neill.

Who he?

The Guardians own Devils Advocate.

click here for a list of his other articles.


Among them some wild claims about Tienanmen Square in 1989, and a lot of "global warming is a myth" stuff.


I am not prepared to go into some of the issues he has ranted about, but one I remember as if it was yesterday was the Tienanmen Square Massacre.

I was in Hong Kong throughout the whole period, and myself and my Dad, who was a senior civil servant in the HK government, paid very close attention to the whole thing as it unfolded from the moment that the students started to pitch their tents, right through seeing Wu Er Kai Shi's unrestrained public admonitions of Deng and Li Peng, and finally the live news describing the carnage being inflicted.


Brendan O'Neills agenda is simple. Find an issue and slag off the "trendy" stereotyped romantic politics associated with it.


I suspect that such an approach is not that far from yours Keith ...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 05:27 PM

Come on mousethief, you asked me what I would do about the already high and rising homosexual hiv rates, I cited the action taken by Cuba and suggested that we adopt similar measures....how is that "trying to drag you into an argument about Cuba"?

I am an admirer of Castro and what he attempted in social,educational and health programmes.

Do I sense a "liberal" cop out?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 05:28 PM

"Lox, here is that risk comparison again."

Yes Keith, thats the one I'm talking about too.

The figure 33.8% includes men as well as women.

It is based on approx 1 in 10 chance during vaginal sex as an average.

which works out at about 1 in 6-7 for women and 1 in 14-16 in men.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 05:40 PM

correction - it was not 33.8%

Apologies.


The factor 33.8% does not refer to the efficiency of vaginal or anal sex as ways of contracting HIV, it refers to the comparative likelihood of being infected via those means in conjunction with numerous other factors, such as the likelihood that your partner is infected.

So as the proportion of heterosexual HIV infections increases, that factor will decrease proportionately.

The efficiency of vaginal as compared to anal sex in transmitting HIV is represented by the figures I have quoted.

So being Gay and having anal sex are not what make HIV a risk, but circumstances are what matters.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 05:46 PM

Did it again - Not 33.8%,

I meant "The factor 33.8 does not refer to the efficiency of vaginal or anal sex as ways of contracting HIV, it refers to the comparative likelihood of being infected via those means in conjunction with numerous other factors, such as the likelihood that your partner is infected, and the realities of your life, their life and your circumstances which affect that likelihood."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 06:17 PM

In the interest of accuracy in the use of political science terminology, whenever Ake uses the word "liberal," his understanding of the word is, essentially, as follows:

Wibble Wibble.

Glad to clarify these details. No need to thank me.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 07:23 PM

Well that makes a bit more sense, Ake -- although a few words by way of introduction as to why we were going to Cuba would have been ..... rational.

The difference between Cuba and here (whether "here" means the US&A or the UK) is that they are a dictatorship, and we are not. This means two things: (1) we cannot impose the kind of quarrantine on chunks of our society that you would like to see. Which I think is the whole of what you want to say think and do about homosexuals. (2) we don't have the kind of closed borders that could keep further infected people from coming in.

So in short we cannot do what Cuba has been able to do -- it doesn't need to worry about civil rights because it's a dictatorship. We're not, so we do. That and it's the right thing to do but what does that matter to you?

What it all boils down to is that you want to place all homosexuals behind bars "for their own safety" (of course). Because of course we know there is no anal sex in prison.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 07:56 PM

I see your discourse is little better than that of the other three regulars.
"democracy".....the last refuge of a "liberal"? :0)

Would you care to address seriously the measures the Cuban govt have adopted?
Behind bars? Did you even bother to read the link?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 08:04 PM

I see your discourse is little better than that of the other three regulars.

If you can't meet a person's actual logic, insult them. They will never notice what you have done, and will think their arguments have been rebutted.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 08:12 PM

I see no logic in your last post.
Someone above said you were "bloody brilliant"...I thought you were having a laugh.

It appears THEY were.

It was actually you who insulted me, by your remarks on my motivation.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 09:20 PM

I just read what you post. Homosexuality is inherently risky. Homosexuals should be cured. The best model for dealing with homosexuals with AIDS is quarantine.

Honey that's insulting right there, if I were to say it about anybody of whom it wasn't true.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 10:08 PM

ake, when my daughter was 9 or so, she came home, disgruntled. She said, Sharon said I am bossy. And all my friends agreed with her.

I said, Well. Are you?

If you don't understand that little analogy, who was it said something to the effect that if one person calls you an ass, shrug and forget him. If everybody/em>s says you are an ass, give up and order a saddle.

Or something like that.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 25 Jan 10 - 11:22 PM

Excellent point, Ebbie.

The problem with Ake is that if everyone here disagrees with him, he decides that they're all "liberals" and simply dismisses anything they say, no matter how solidly it's backed up.

And with callous disregard for what liberals actually stand for.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 26 Jan 10 - 10:27 AM

The times, they are a changin'.... and not before time!

Happy to be a liberal :-)

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 26 Jan 10 - 12:27 PM

"I just read what you post. Homosexuality is inherently risky. Homosexuals should be cured. The best model for dealing with homosexuals with AIDS is quarantine"

"Homosexual practice is very risky"....no argument, the figures speak for themselves
"Homosexuals could or should be cured"....Where did I say that?
"Homosexuals should be quarantined".....For a small period of time, combined with a full treatment regime, comprising full contact tracing, treatment with anti virals and the other components in the Cuban model.
This should apply to all who test positive for hiv aids

There should be compulsory testing of at "risk groups".(male homosexals, introvenus drug abusers, sex workers, African/East European immigrants)

Nothing else appears to work, as infection rates among homosexuals and African immigrants are still very high (comparitively) and rising steadily.

How high are you prepared to see infection rates go, before considering an element of compulsion?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 26 Jan 10 - 01:28 PM

But Ake, no country has ever had compulsory testing of any group, because how do yo know who to test?

The cuban model is for education, so that at risk people understand their risk and see the benefit of getting tested. The cuban model aggressively campaigns for social acceptance of at risk groups and social tolerance of HIV status, to remove the stigma and fear of testing and diagnosis.

In short, the cuban model deals with vile people like you and Keith and the vile prejudices ad harm that you preach.

I think the cuban model is a very good one indeed.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Jan 10 - 01:41 PM

You may think me vile Royston. You are entitled to have that opinion and to express it.
You also say I preach vile prejudice and harm.
I believe that can not be justified.
I invite you, please, to justify or withdraw that nasty accusation.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 26 Jan 10 - 04:56 PM

Keith, you have laboured tirelessly but pointlessly to try to "prove" that HIV is a gay disease and a disease of black people. This was in the context of a discussion where bigots were arguing that society needed to "blame" these groups and curtail their civil rights so that HIV/AIDS would be "solved"

You did this in the context of a discussion in which your efforts at distortion served (and were intended) only to try to bolster the arguments of Ake and GfS - whom I think you will agree are self-professed (even if at times in denial) homophobic and racist bigots.

When all your attempts at obfuscation dressed up as the neutral reporting of what you claimed were "facts" failed, you began to argue a moral position in which you complained that the majority population were being unnecessarily and wastefully "bothered" by HIV/AIDS education programs (flying in the face the rising figures for hetero HIV acquisitions in the UK)

You opined that maybe your effort as a teacher had been wasted educating "normal" (my word, your meaning) people about the dangers of HIV and you expressed resentment that you weren't able to tell stidents not to have sex with black people - as if that would keep them safe.

Views like that are harmful - to the vulnerable people you dislike and to the very people that you claim to protect. If you genuinely believe some of the things that you say, I question whether or not you are fit to teach on those subjects.

Keith, most people here suspect you (from your posting history in general) to hold a number of rather right wing prejudices; that you are a right wing bigot. You need to consider, if you believe us all to be mistaken, just what is it that you say and do that leads people to hold that suspicion of you.

If it walks like one and talks like one...

If the cap fits...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Jan 10 - 06:16 PM

I restricted myself to providing factual and statistical information, and attempting to make honest interpretation of it all.

"you have laboured tirelessly but pointlessly to try to "prove" that HIV is a gay disease and a disease of black people"

I can clear that up right now. It is not. You must have misunderstood me.
I would only go so far as to say that outside Africa it is predominantly a disease of gay men, and inside Africa is where most of its victims are found.

"your efforts at distortion" I am not aware of any.
I only joined this latter part of the thread because you were making misleading statements (Jan 10th and 11th)which I made efforts to clarify.

"you complained that the majority population were being unnecessarily and wastefully "bothered" by HIV/AIDS education programs "

The WHO, who know more about this than all of us put together, say that more lives could be saved if programmes were focused on high risk groups. Why would I contradict WHO? Why do you?

"You opined that maybe your effort as a teacher had been wasted educating "normal" (my word, your meaning) people about the dangers of HIV"

I teach classes. I teach them all the same thing. The gay lads have mostly not even come out at school age. Where do you get these ideas?
Is it voices?

"you expressed resentment that you weren't able to tell stidents not to have sex with black people - as if that would keep them safe."

Only abstinance is safe. Everything else is a risk.That is what I tell them.Why do you say I do otherwise?
As with drugs, where I can talk about one drug carrying more risk than another, I do think knowledge is better than ignorance. That BBC link I think said that someone born in Africa is about 30 times more likely to be infected. I am uncomfortable about witholding significant information. I said it was not a big issue for me, and suggested there might be social or political justification for witholding it.

Now, you neglected to point out where I preached vile prejudice and harm. A quote would be helpful.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 01:44 AM

In making and expressing false assumptions about me without any evidence except that I dare to question your dogma, you are preaching vile prejudice and harm against me.

In the immigration thread, as I said all along, I was only passing on the views of and data provided by Balanced Migration, a group of mainstream politicians from all parties and ethnic minorities.
I reopened the thread when the Communty Secratary of this government, and Brown himself, expressed identical views to mine.
See that post here.thread.cfm?threadid=124011&messages=405&page=1&desc=yes#2778277

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 02:23 AM

A quick observation on Cuba. Throughout the 1970s & 80s, the Castro regime routinely imprisoned homosexual men (adopting the Soviet model, no doubt). This was always a point of contention between those on the Left who wanted to support Cuba come what may, and those involved in gay politics who pointed out that the persecution of homos somewhat dented Cuba's progressive status.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 02:50 AM

Personally, I think if you find your spouse, who was not promiscuous, and you valued that in your partner, enough to be that way, for the person you were to love, enough to feel as if passing it to your kids, and being as you love one another, there wouldn't be the controversy about who has more cases of AIDS/HIV!..would there? but we always make allowances, for the lowest of intelligence!..You don't think so????...ok, ......its like arguing about having one bullet, or two, because playing Russian Roulette, feels good!.........

....but then half of an attribute of life, of all healthy living things is missing anyway...do you ever wonder how that impacts the other 'half' that's left????

Here Smedley for you.... wow!...just love the words

Don Firth, Great double meaning!

Ake, Something in there for you, too!

Regards,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 07:07 AM

Keith, the overall summation of your contrubtion is prejudicial and harmful, however much you initially tried to dress it as neutral academic interest and however quickly you try to back away from it now.

You still say that you came into this out of academic, factual interest because you say I was misleading on Jan 10 and 11. You say you wanted to to correct that.

Your opening attempt was with data from virusmyth.org - I know you retracted it, but the fact you even attempted to use it tells us a lot about you.

Rather than just accept you were wrong, you persisted in trying to support the bigots.

Time after time you tried to support them, you had more ideas that you had to drop when they were proven to false or just wrong, and you still didn't give up trying.

All your attempts failed, you're still trying.

And you claim the status of a neutral academic? Don't make me laugh.

All you've got left is the opinion of Dr. de Cock who is in a minority of experts in his field. In this country alone, 1,130 people straigh, white people caught HIV through straight sex in this country. Presumably because they were ingorant of the risk of whatever they were doing? And education is pointless, you say? Really? And even more than 1,130 will (on trend) contract the disease in 2009 and more than that in 2010. No point educating? Educate thyself, teacher!

Gay people, drug users, prostitutes-to-be; they all go to school. Mass education programs are useless? Really, Keith? Are you so sure?

Your prejudices are clear, you are desperate to find support for them, you fail. You try to support the overt and honest bigots, you fail. You're still at it, you're failing.

These are the grounds for my opinion of you. Yes, it is just an opinion. Yes, I may be wrong. But the grounds for holding that opinion are clear. I think you hold some deep right wing prejudices, your commnents and behaviours are harmful.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 08:09 AM

Now you say that I oppose education in schools.
Did the voices tell you that too.
In schools we teach ALL students as much as we can about risks to equip them to make informed choices.
That is what I do.

You dismiss the knowledge and experience of the WHO.
You can provide better informed opinion? Why don't you?

"Rather than just accept you were wrong, you persisted in trying to support the bigots"
I am fallible. It is not always possible to spend enough time getting my head around all the stuff in these sites, but what have I actually been wrong about?
The later figures still supported my statements of fact. They only differed in degree from the earlier ones which were only 6 years old.
I retracted the virusmyth data because of its source, but did you find any fault in the data I extracted?

Now please, what have I said that was "prejudicial and harmful"?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 01:55 PM

Keith, I have explained why what you say is regarded by me, and I suspect by others, as prejudicial and harmful. It is an opinion, my opinion, the grounds are mine. Take it or leave it.

de Cock did not say that mass education programs were of no benefit and he did not say they should be abandoned, those are things that you choose to infer and I say you are wrong, for the grounds I have given. It is my opinion. Take it or leave it.

If you say that your position is a "fact" then you are a liar. Yours is an opinion, I choose to leave it.

My point is that your "facts" rarely support your "opinions". You select and twist the truth to try to match your opinions. Your opinions and the way you express them are prejudicial and harmful because they give false succour to bigots, whether or not you yourself are one; and I believe that you are one. Take it or leave it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 02:48 PM

How can you say you think someone a bigot, but not be able to cite one bit of bigotry?
That is, er, bigotry.
looking back over the last couple of pages, you actually said that focused interventions were going on and were valuable, alongside basic health education including AIDS awarenes for all.
How do we disagree?
You also said you would be happy for students to be told about ALL the relevant risks as long as it was not implied that lower risk meant no risk.
No argument from me.
I think that the only serious difference between us is that you believe a heterosexual epidemic is starting that may be comparable to the situation for MSMs. I have found no evidence for that, and I note that de Cock thinks it unlikely, which I take as strong evidence to the contrary.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 02:56 PM

Keith: "You dismiss the knowledge and experience of the WHO.
You can provide better informed opinion? Why don't you?

"Rather than just accept you were wrong, you persisted in trying to support the bigots"
I am fallible. It is not always possible to spend enough time getting my head around all the stuff in these sites, but what have I actually been wrong about?
The later figures still supported my statements of fact. They only differed in degree from the earlier ones which were only 6 years old.
I retracted the virus myth data because of its source, but did you find any fault in the data I extracted?

Now please, what have I said that was"

Keith, It should be obvious, by now, that the homosexuals in here, do not care about any information that even remotely 'suggests' that their lifestyle, is not exactly the award winning paradise they'd like us to believe, nor do they like to be REMINDED that CHOICE has a lot more to do with their 'cop outs' than merely being 'victims' of some sort of 'lucky' draw of the deal!

The only thing they want to hear is, I want to do, what I want to do, I have the right to impose that on the rest of society, and they want the rest of society to think that it is as normal as rain....just as normal as men and women reaching to the other gender, having babies, and raising them to be productive human beings, who produce other human beings. Nor should we tolerate being accused of being 'bigoted' because we don't want our offspring being tolerant of their families, finding HIV, STD's and the sort, an 'acceptable' dilemma!!...nor those who do, a healthy part of our society!!! Most people who live 'normal and productive' lives, don't go around worrying about those topics, anyway!!! Do you?? We are just are sick and tired of having our noses rubbed in it, and we, have our rights too!

So, run along, go play your little games, convince yourselves that its about 'love', and not sex, adopt children, so you can 'play house' and don't forget to teach them that there is a difference between the digestive system, and the reproductive system, and that when either one is not used for the intended purpose of what they were suppose to be for, you may find yourselves a little bit sick....maybe a little more than your thresh hold for pain is willing to admit.

Perhaps you should stop bullshitting us, with the lies you bullshit yourselves with!...and yet, do what you want..as long as it doesn't hurt another.

This stuff really pisses them off, because they know its true. It's the truth they wish that would just go away....but unless you're a practicing homosexual, BOTH of one's attributes of being living, are far deeper ingrained that a stupid political 'persuasion' being tried to ennoble a bad habit!!!

With Regards, to all living things,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 03:02 PM

Correction: Last paragraph should read..."are far deeper ingrained than that, of a stupid political 'persuasion' being tried to ennoble a bad habit!!!"

Not: "...are far deeper ingrained that a stupid political 'persuasion' being tried to ennoble a bad habit!!!"

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 03:23 PM

That is not what I am saying GFS.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 03:39 PM

I know...It's what I'm saying, and I'm not intimidated to say it, either!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 03:40 PM

Oh, Keith, I know you were posting another's quote...if that's what you meant...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 04:07 PM

I think Keith meant exactly what he said and nothing more or less than that as is consistent with his modus operandum.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 04:16 PM

Lox: "I think ...."

How does it feel?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 04:36 PM

You can't even imagine, GfS.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 05:41 PM

Thank you Good for Shit,

You've neatly proven:

(a) Your true malignant nature

(b) The sort of harmful support and succour that Keith's slanted, bigoted manipulation of truth dressed up as impartial reason gives to horrors like you - the sort of people that have "kill a queer for Christ" fender-stickers.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 05:45 PM

You're getting silly again girls!

Getting back to Roystons post about the impossibility of compulsary testing. As far as immigrants are concerned, surely it would not be too difficult to include compulsory testing in the requirments for UK citizenship?

To deal with male homosexuals and introvenus drug users, these people would be required to present themselves for testing, in their own interests and in the interests of their respective communities.
Failing to present for the test would have to be viewed as dangerous behaviour and carry some sort of legal penalty.

Just as a final point, homosexuals with hiv in Cuba were not "locked up in prison, where they were likely to be sodomised", but confined in sanitoria, descriptions of which and the very excellent treatment afforded to them there, can be found in my link above

Before you start screaming about unfair treatment, universal hiv testing in UK/USA would be a complete waste of money, money which could be better spent on hiv/aids treatment for all sufferers.

Compulsory testing should only be used when infection rates in any group rises above a certain percentage level

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 05:58 PM

Royston you are incorrigible.
My my such vireolic rhetoric!You must be having a right laugh!

It should be obvious to everyone here that Keith and Sanity are commenting from two completely different points of view, both valid in their own way, but both different in concept

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 07:01 PM

Well, I think I have Freedom From Sanity (conveniently "FFS") figured out. He's terrified he might by mistake catch something. Now why he's scared of that would be anyone's guess.   Maybe it's because his clear cut distinction between the reproductive system and the digestive system would discriminate against the time-honoured courtship ritual of the kiss, and also against oral sex.

But I cannot see what Keith is trying to achieve or why, if it isn't (as he says it isn't) a desire to increase prejudice against gay men (funny how it isn't gay women too) and Africans in general (although not, he says, because they are black, or shouldn't be here in the first place, in that in the immigration thread he sought to assure us that his views opposing immigration were in no way based on colour).

Ake appears to be adding to the prejudice displayed elsewhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 07:38 PM

""The only thing they want to hear is, I want to do, what I want to do, I have the right to impose that on the rest of society,""

Care to explain just what it is that you think is being "imposed" on society by gays. As far as I can see the imposition is in the other direction, with bigots and homophobes trying their hardest to impose second class citizenship on gays.

What part do you not understand of the statement that "95 percent of male homosexuals are HIV negative?

Does this gel with claims of mass promiscuity?.....NO!
Does it suggest that they are a danger to society?.....NO!

Do You, Keith, and Ake have a personal axe to grind?.....HELL YES!

You don't like gays, you want them controlled, criminalised, and what YOU call "cured", not as stated for their good, but for your satisfaction.

You are all three bigots! "By their actions shall ye know them".

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 07:52 PM

Fuck sake Richard....I've worked out that you're a radical and too much of a revolutionary to be side tracked

I can't understand why you of all people can't see the hypocricy in the "liberal" mindset

Keith and I are at opposite ends of the spectrum politically, but I'm not going to put on a blindfold because he doesn't share my political views.
As far as I am concerned all these threads, and the ones on race are about not sexual behaviour, but the use of sexual and racial politics to serve the "liberal agenda"

Its not people like Keith who hold back the political change we both want to see, but the the slimy hypocritical dumbed down centre!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 07:59 PM

This from Keith on another thread.

"Lox re me not seeing AIDS as gay or African, my post on 21st Jan
"Globally HIV / AIDS is overwhelmingly a disease of heterosexual people both in absolute number and in terms of the percentage of sufferers"
Yes, I do agree."

This in conjunction with Keiths earlier dissociation from GfS, not to mention the speed with which he was prepared to retract and apologize over the new infections rates, very clearly evidence that he may be treading a path close to Ake's, but they are heading for entirely different destinations.


Talking of Ake,

He posted as follows:

"It should be obvious to everyone here that Keith and Sanity are commenting from two completely different points of view, both valid in their own way, but both different in concept"

hmmm ...

I wonder if he worked that out when he read Keiths post as follows:

"That is not what I am saying GFS."


Tune in next week to hear Ake explain his hypotheses that at some level the pope may be involved with the catholic church, and that bears squatting behind trees may have something to do with high concentrations of methane in woodland areas.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 08:22 PM

Ake, you're like the boring unfunny answer to Rab C Nesbitts acricature.

I can see you now in some pub somewhere, leaning over the tabel to whoever is there, unaware of whether its the same person that was there a minute ago, slurring your words:

"The problem .. (slip) ... the problem is the "liberal agenda" ... (slip) ... its all these bastards in the middle classes ... (slip) ... bloody hypocrites ..."

... and slowly but surely people learn to avoid you cos all you have to offer is bile and bad breath.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 11:23 PM

I would like to see Ake describe exactly what he means by "liberal agenda" and the political and ethical philosophy that lies behind liberalism.

I think he's using "liberal" as some kind of buzz-word that he picked out of the air and really doesn't know diddly-squat about liberals or liberalism.

What is abundantly clear, and convinces me that Ake is clueless about liberalism, is that it is not the liberals who are trying to ghettoize and restrict any minority group, it is Ake! And, for that matter, GfS.

Don Firth



Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 02:21 AM

Richard, Lesbians have not figured much here because they are effectively at zero risk.
Royston, more accusations. You can not be stopped, but can you not see that it is wrong to accuse me in public but refuse to justify, explain or back up the accusation.
No bigotry from me.
No example given of me twisting the truth, unlike you.
On Jan 10th and 11th you came on here, using my name as a term of abuse, and claiming that high hetero diagnoses figures proved infection was rapidly increasing here.
You did not mention that most of those diagnosed were not infected here at all.
That is twisting the truth.
Has anyone, ever, seen me do such a thing?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 03:03 AM

Well if this thread has done nothing else it has finally got GfS to reveal, unequivocally, the true depths of his fear and hatred.

The giveaway is not the physical revulsion against anal intercourse (some gay men, for better or worse, flinch similarly from the thought of the female genitals) but the point where he puts inverted oommas around the word 'love' when it comes to same-sex relationships.

I've found this before in extreme and incurable cases of homophobia. Gay sex they can kind of cope with, oddly enough, because they can easily maintain their phobic levels of horror. What really bugs them is the thought that same-sex couples can show long-term and in-depth feelings for each other.

The hard-core homophobe like GfS is terrified & threatened by this, because it challenges their core belief that only hetero couples can participate in that level of loving commitment. So the likes of GfS resort to abuse, ridicule and insult, all of which say so much more about the homophobe than about the object of their loathing.

GfS, you may think that I don't love my partner, I only 'love' him. How on earth (admittedly, not a planet you seem to inhabit) can you know that ? What evidence could you possibly, possibly have ? You don't know us, you know nothing about us, so I expect all you wil have to say in return is to trot out another slab of cod-Freudian sermonising.

And, by the way, I think I am still the only person in this thread to identify themselves as gay, so when you splutteringly fume about 'the homosexuals' who have written here, sorry dear but your paranoia is showing.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 06:40 AM

Keith: On Jan 10th and 11th you came on here, using my name as a term of abuse, and claiming that high hetero diagnoses figures proved infection was rapidly increasing here.
You did not mention that most of those diagnosed were not infected here at all.
That is twisting the truth

You make my point for me. Rising heterosexual diagnosis does indeed prove that HIV prevalence is rising in the heterosexual community. That is more HIV+ heterosexuals in the UK shagging and spreading the disease.

You are the one that wanted to strip from the figures black people, immigrants, people who happened to acquire the disease on holiday or "back home", blah blah blah, twisting and manipulating, just to prove that there are still, (after all that subterfuge) five times the number of straight, white, caught-it-here people in 2008 than there were in 2000.

So even on your mendacious terms, I was right. Straight HIV acquisitions are increasing here, for some groups more than others. All are increasing. And you are still trying to twist the truth. This post stands as another piece of evidence of my grounds for my opinion of you.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 06:54 AM

And moreover, Keith, when I took a pot-shot at you on 10 January, I said...

Sorry Ake, you are too thick to get into an argument with me.

HPA figures.

http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1237970242135

Page 8, table 2. New HIV infections in the UK to end of June 2009. Not even the full-year figures.

I doubt you can do the math, so here we go.

Total number for H1 2009 - 2,896

Male to male vector - 887 cases = 30.63% of total

Straight sex vector - 1,256 cases = 43.37% of total

Oh dear Ake, aren't you a proper shit for brains. I clearly stated I was using the most recent (Aug 2009) figures. You are from the Keith school of evidence aren't you? Just find some out of date stuff that suits your prejudices? Hmm?

And as this argument is about HIV incidence, it hardly matters whether it is African HIV, Peruvian HIV or whatever. Oh, unless you are also racist about disease as well as homophobic.

Fact - in the UK, new HIV infections are predominantly a heterosexual problem.

So I acknowledged the different sources of infection - not you - and stated them before you ever pitched in. I continued to state them. So you did not enter this discussion to "correct me", you did it for an entirely different reason. I pressed you repeatedly to tell us what your point was, you refused. You just kept on trying to support the overt bigots while adding nothing new and having to retract some of your "facts" when you got caught out.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 07:10 AM

Oh goody. More percentages. I really must stop contributing to this thread, as I tend to keep forgetting that it's no longer about people.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 07:35 AM

No Royston.
Your case was "new UK infection rate by heterosexual transfer has been approaching and exceeding the homosexual transfer rate for a long time now - as at August 2009 the male/male new infections were only at 44% "
That is not true is it. They are still less.
You tried to mislead us.
Most of the hetero infections were in people infected in Africa where the epidemiology is totally different.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 07:47 AM

Wrong, Keith. Stop diggging.

In the context - whether HIV was a disease that affected only gay people - it is true to say that the vast majority of newly diagnosed people living and shagging here in this country, are heterosexual . My point was that it doesn't matter - in context - where they caught it. In the post that you clipped those words out of, I was discussing the horrendous African statistics as further evidence that HIV was not - as was being claimed - a "gay" disease. That was the point, that was the context.

I was freely referencing the African or foreign acquired straight diagnoses in this country well before you arrived.

So, again, what is/was your bloody point? How often does this question have to be asked and by how many people before we get an answer from you?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 08:01 AM

You could have just claimed it as an honest mistake.
That you were unaware that most of the "UK" hetersexual infections you were counting did not happen in UK at all.

Or that you forgot to tell us.

That really is twisting the truth.
Not something I have ever knowingly done.
Have I Royston?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 08:09 AM

You see, Keith, the irony here is that I accused Ake of being like you because he took the truth - that more straight people are diagnosed here each year than gay people - and tried to trim a bit off here, remove a bit there, disregard another piece of that truth, to make a sort of truth-based lie that supported his view of HIV being a "gay thing".

To which you jumped in and did...what?...exactly! You tried to twist the truth a bit, trim it a bit, your first effort came from the flat-earth branch of HIV debate (virusmyth.org). All in an effort to support the bigots.

Now you tell lies - that you came in to "correct me" with news about where straight people diagnosed in this country acquired HIV. That must be a lie because the black and white posts show that information was already accepted as true - but pointless in context. That was the argument.

Why does it matter to you that most straight UK HIV+ people acquired the disease somehere else? You seem to be saying that so long as the blacks and gays are doing worse, then you're happy with the 5 times increase in UK-acquired straight cases? Is that it Keith? That what you're all about. You're sick!

Keep going mate, your fingers are typing for the prosecution.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 08:12 AM

Keith @ 08:01

Liar.

I reposted my comments of Jan 10 before you arrived on the scene, acknowledging the origin of infection and arguing it to be irrelevant in context.

You're a liar.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 08:29 AM

Virusmyth.org.
That was an "and also" after I had posted solid gold BMJ evidence to support my claim.
Worryingly, it was one of the top Google hits after BMJ.
I did not read the whole site, just went to the bit about infectivity.
My mistake.
Sorry.
But still my case stood solid on the BMJ evidence.

You grossly exagerated the rise in heterosexual infection in UK.

I do not understand your last post. (I know. I am shitforbrains.)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 08:29 AM

Here's what I said to you on Jan 11 (reprinted in full!)

my god, you are all barking mad. Good AIDS, bad AIDS, worthy sufferers or not. You're all sick! Why aren't you ashamed of yourselves?

Black, white, gay or straight, HIV will get you if you're not safe, celibate or monogamous. Where it enters hetero communities like in Africa it is a hetero disease. Where it enters gay communities it can be for a while, a gay thing. The numbers show it is on the way to being a mostly heterosexual problem in this country. Your racist fantasies notwithstanding.

Where is the evidence for this 2-3 or even 1 percent gay thing? I thought 10pc was the accepted estimate. It's not relevant to this discussion, it's just the first time I heard it.

So don't tell lies now to make your intervention look like something different.

The African-origin "fact" was a settled fact before you arrived. It was an irrelevant fact in the context of the discussion - a fact being used, wrongly, to support overt bigots and haters. Something, Keith, at which you excel.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 08:50 AM

Thank you.
Yes, it was shit for brains Ake who first spotted and exposed your ruse.
He called you a cheat for it.
Even when the trick was exposed you went on trying to bluff it out.
You wanted to show that in UK,heterosexual infection had overtaken MSM infection.
It had not.
Only if you counted infections that happened in subsaharan Africa.
You know that Heterosexual infection is many many times more prevalent there.
That is twisting the truth.
That is what you accuse others of doing.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 09:21 AM

In your place, I would have said;
Heterosexual infection may be rare in UK now, but there is, and has been, a slow but steady increase in cases.
No exageration. No vital information witheld.
And above all, no hysterical abuse and name calling.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 10:03 AM

And it's a tense point in the final of the World Statistical Ping-Pong Championship. The crowd is holding its breath waiting for the next salvo of percentages to be smashed across the net............

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 10:10 AM

Ho! Ho! ;-)

I can't believe this mess is still rolling on remorselessly. Horrifying.

So, I wonder when someone will propose a death penalty for gross stupidity?

I'll stop in in another 6 months or so if this thread is still inflicting itself upon the Universe, okay?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 10:15 AM

74.89% of contributors are in favour of more percentages.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 10:26 AM

Not true, Keith, but good to see you have a sense of humour lurking behind that methematical propensity.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 11:32 AM

What I said, Keith, is that there are more heterosexual HIV cases in the UK every year than there are homosexual. I acknowledged CLEARLY the different origins and I said that was irrelevant - it could only be relevant if a person was racist about disease as well as homophobic. You think it is relevant, what does that say about you?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 11:55 AM

You are right Royston.
If you combine UK and Africa together, AIDS overwhelming effects heterosexuals.
Most people would find it more useful to know what is going on with infections here.
Most people would have though that that was what you were telling us.
But they would be wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 12:11 PM

What did you think of my suggested post?
Was it not more informative than anything you have put up on the subject?
And only 2 lines.
And no one insulted.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 02:33 PM

Your suggested post is a good one, Keith. It is a shame that you chose not to make until after all of other attempts to support the bigots had been knocked down.

Now we know the answer to that question "Keith, what is your point?". The answer appears to be that you may have no point whatever; save for a desire to support bigoted and harmful people and opinions. You may not even believe the things that you say, or the positions you support. As I said, Keith, I can have more respect for Ake than for you at times.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 02:47 PM

Glad you liked the post.
I would have accepted that from the start and I believe that has been my case all along.
We could so easily have been in agreement.
I already had a shrewd idea how much respect you have for me.
I can read between the lines.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 02:58 PM

Royston, I dont really think I want your "respect" after all the nasty names you have been calling me and others here whom I KNOW to be honourable a fair minded.

When I called you a cheat, it was partially because you failed to mention that a large percentage of the hetero hiv figures you quoted were aquired in Africa, but more importantly you were citing real numbers which were absolutely meaningless in the context we were discussing.....the ratio of homo/ hetero new infections.

The fact that homos are more than 50 times more likely to become infected, points to a serious problem for homosexuality and a serious problem for those who wish to present homosexual practice as safe and healthy.
All the statistics I have presented show MsM as the most risky demographic.....and I refuse to believe that heteros will ever reach the percentage rates of infection that are occuring among the homosexual community

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 03:33 PM

Ake: and I refuse to believe that heteros will ever reach the percentage rates of infection that are occuring among the homosexual community

Go to Africa. Africa proves that heterosexual practice can be lethal where HIV is concerned. More dangerous than for gay men.

The bad-luck reasons for the relatively high - historically - incidence rate amongst gay ment in "the west" have been explained patiently to you many times.

96% of gay men do not and will not contract HIV, so homosexual practice is overwhelmingly HIV-safe.

Regardless of where they caught it, more straight people are diagnosed with HIV in this country than are gay men.

You see, Keith. Next time you pitch in, ask yourself "what is the point?" If all you ever do is reinforce people like Ake and GfS in their dangerous and ignorant prejudices.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 03:35 PM

""Oh goody. More percentages. I really must stop contributing to this thread, as I tend to keep forgetting that it's no longer about people.""

We're not using figures to dehumanise people Smedley. We are pointing out trends which the other side don't seem capable of grasping, in the vain hope that they might realise that they are indeed barking up the wrong bloody tree, and increasing the risk to people, by focussing on gay males and ignoring the rising threat to the rest.

If Ake had his way, and locked up all the male gays tomorrow, would HIV die out in the UK?.....NO! It bloody well would not.

It might empty the prisons in time though, which those three would probably consider a result.

Don T

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 03:48 PM

""You wanted to show that in UK,heterosexual infection had overtaken MSM infection.
It had not.
Only if you counted infections that happened in subsaharan Africa.""

No! He didn't, and it's a bit bloody stupid to claim he did when he has just copy/pasted his original post (28th Jan 2010 0829hrs), which does not contain any such statement.

What Royston said was that HIV was on its way to becoming a hetero problem in the UK.

In view of the fivefold increase in UK ACQUIRED NEW INFECTIONS between 2000 and 2009, what is your basis for disagreeing with that?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 04:25 PM

As you know Don, I dont usually respond to your abusive nonesense, but this is beyond suffering

"We're not using figures to dehumanise people Smedley. We are pointing out trends which the other side don't seem capable of grasping, in the vain hope that they might realise that they are indeed barking up the wrong bloody tree, and increasing the risk to people, by focussing on gay males and ignoring the rising threat to the rest."

You Lox and Royston(Smedley must have seen the light), are the ones who seem unable to grasp what the figures show.
I repeat how high must the homosexual infection figure,or African immigrant figures go before we are compelled to take some action?

Or do we just sit on our arses handing out condoms that nobody seems to want?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 04:26 PM

Don Wyz, I do not disagree with it.
It is just that a five fold increase only takes the rate from infinitesimal to miniscule.
Meanwhile, from the latest evidence, the rate for MSMs, especially the young, already very high, is taking off again.

I have taken on board your comment about sources in the other thread.
"A so-called fact from a source or origin with a serious axe to grind, a fixed political bias, or a somewhat iffy mental capacity"

I will not rely on the British Medical Journal again!
This is from Pink News.http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2009/11/24/new-hiv-infections-down-globally-but-rising-for-gay-men-in-the-uk/

The UNAIDS 2009 AIDS Epidemic Update, released today, shows that new HIV infections are down by 17 per cent over the last eight years around the world.

However, the number of new diagnoses of gay men in Europe has risen with gay men in the UK being particularly affected.

In the last eight years, there has been a 74 per cent rise in diagnoses of infections of gay men in the UK. This is the percentage of new diagnoses, rather than the rate of new infections.

In Europe, the figure rose by 39 per cent between 2003 and 2006.

The report said: "A re-emergence of the epidemic among men who have sex with men is now clearly apparent in many high-income countries."

It added that this rise was "tied to an increase in sexual risk behaviours".

The report also warned that there had been "sharp increases" of the number of gay men in high-income European countries becoming infected with other sexually transmitted infections.

Despite the rise in new HIV diagnoses in Europe and North America, rates of infection decreased globally.

Since 2001, when the United Nations Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS was signed, the number of new infections in sub-Saharan Africa is approximately 15 per cent lower. In East Asia new HIV infections declined by nearly 25 per cent and in South and South East Asia by 10 per cent in the same time period.

"Worryingly, the global decrease in new infections is not being seen in the UK. Here new diagnoses have trebled in the past ten years. HIV diagnoses among men who have sex with men in the UK rose by 74 per cent between 2000 and 2007. The UK needs to re-prioritise HIV prevention among gay men, otherwise we risk falling further behind."
The UNAIDS 2009 AIDS Epidemic Update, released today, shows that new HIV infections are down by 17 per cent over the last eight years around the world.

However, the number of new diagnoses of gay men in Europe has risen with gay men in the UK being particularly affected.

In the last eight years, there has been a 74 per cent rise in diagnoses of infections of gay men in the UK. This is the percentage of new diagnoses, rather than the rate of new infections.

In Europe, the figure rose by 39 per cent between 2003 and 2006.

The report said: "A re-emergence of the epidemic among men who have sex with men is now clearly apparent in many high-income countries."

It added that this rise was "tied to an increase in sexual risk behaviours".

The report also warned that there had been "sharp increases" of the number of gay men in high-income European countries becoming infected with other sexually transmitted infections.

Despite the rise in new HIV diagnoses in Europe and North America, rates of infection decreased globally.

Since 2001, when the United Nations Declaration of Commitment on HIV/AIDS was signed, the number of new infections in sub-Saharan Africa is approximately 15 per cent lower. In East Asia new HIV infections declined by nearly 25 per cent and in South and South East Asia by 10 per cent in the same time period.

"Worryingly, the global decrease in new infections is not being seen in the UK. Here new diagnoses have trebled in the past ten years. HIV diagnoses among men who have sex with men in the UK rose by 74 per cent between 2000 and 2007. The UK needs to re-prioritise HIV prevention among gay men, otherwise we risk falling further behind."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 05:33 PM

Those damn facts just keep getting in the way, don't they???

Russian Roulette anyone??..Two bullets or one?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 05:52 PM

Smedley, I was going to 'copy and paste' as segment from your stupidly childish post:From: Smedley Date: 28 Jan 10 - 03:03 AM ..but it was ALL so stupid and immature, I just posted the date so you could review it yourself,(and anyone else), just to PROVE what I've been saying about how immature, and ridiculous you sound! Was your Dad one of those 'homophobe' heterosexuals you alluded to?

In the meantime, here for your enjoyment of irritation,(whatever)!
Listen to the lyrics!!!

Don, you might enjoy this too, though you might find a deeper meaning to it!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZRFjddiNoo

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 05:59 PM

""Worryingly, the global decrease in new infections is not being seen in the UK. Here new diagnoses have trebled in the past ten years. HIV diagnoses among men who have sex with men in the UK rose by 74 per cent between 2000 and 2007. The UK needs to re-prioritise HIV prevention among gay men, otherwise we risk falling further behind.""

So what do we get from this?

Gay men with new HIV infections........Increase between 2000 and 2007 of 74 percent.

Heterosexuals with new UK ACQUIRED HIV infections...Increase between 2000 and 2009 of 500 percent.

N.B. The figures for gay men are total numbers of new diagnoses, without any allowance for infections NOT UK ACQUIRED.

Removing those new infections acquired abroad would obviously reduce the figure, but it doesn't suit the gay bashing tenor of these surveys to bother finding out by how much.

Ake and Co will of course dive in and claim that there are no gay African, Carribean, or other non EU, males in this country.

The comment about the rise in UK acquired heterosexual infections (from infinitessimal to miniscule) is disingenuous in the extreme, since a 74 percent increase has resulted in the current infection of just 4 percent of gay men with HIV.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 06:01 PM

Here, Smeds, and Don Firth...just in case electric instruments offend you......you can hear the lyrics better, too!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFwMvlPu4Qw&feature=related

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 06:01 PM

What's up Grit for Brains?

Can't manage a proper link? Then I can't be bothered to give any credence to your posts.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 06:02 PM

Keith, you're straight back at it again.

When did anyone ever claim that HIV was NOT a disease that affected predominantly gay men in the West? Hmm? When did anyone ever deny that? Hmm? Show us!

Ake and GfS and others argue that it is the *fault* of gay men, that it is only a problem for gay men, that gay men need to be in some way controlled or punished - not helped or supported. They argue that homosexuality is uniquely harmful.

The point others have been making is that in the wider scheme of things, it is a much bigger problem for heterosexual people. You make a big deal of how HIV is increasing again amongst gay people - you talk about a 74 percent increase over 8 years. You say this to support the bigots. You say increase is important but not the heterosexual increase of 500% over the same period. Absurd double standards. If you're going to support a position in which you don't believe, you could at least be consistent about it.

Ake, it is ALL about education and condom-use. Dr. de Cock said that, and you like his views. All the people who get HIV through sex - the gay ones, the straight ones, the black ones - they all got it because they didn't use a condom and/or didn't use it properly.

Ake, GfS, you want to exact some sort of social control or punishment or enforcement on gay people. Tell us what you mean. Take a room of 1,000 gay people - 960 of whom are not and will never be HIV+. What is your plan for all these people. what should their punishment or peculiar treatment be? Hmm?

I posted links to just a few of the outreach groups working tirelessly within gay communities and to find the hidden closet-cases. If any of you really cared about this issue, you would get your credit cards out and make a donation. Write to your MP to demand more funding. Will you? I doubt it.

Keith, still haven't found a point yet? I never thought you would. Just neutral statistics, eh?

Well, if this debate is now down the rump of Ake, Keith and GfS, then I think the case is closed. We are just going around in circles now.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 06:16 PM

Sorry, Don....try:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFwMvlPu4Qw

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 06:18 PM

Royston: "Ake and GfS and others argue that it is the *fault* of gay men, that it is only a problem for gay men, that gay men need to be in some way controlled or punished - not helped or supported. They argue that homosexuality is uniquely harmful."

Both parts of that asinine statement are bold faced lies!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 06:43 PM

GfS, I really would appreciate knowing which parts of my post are stupid, childish, immature and ridiculous. It would not only help me but would enable others to ascertain the detailed core of your viewpoint.

In the absence of such specifics we might have no alternative to conclude that you are only resorting to abuse because you have nothing else to offer.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 06:48 PM

""that gay men need to be in some way controlled or punished - not helped or supported. They argue that homosexuality is uniquely harmful."

Both parts of that asinine statement are bold faced lies!""

Perhaps you would like to give your interpretation of the following from Ake, whom you have been supporting for months past.



""You Lox and Royston(Smedley must have seen the light), are the ones who seem unable to grasp what the figures show.
I repeat how high must the homosexual infection figure,or African immigrant figures go before we are compelled to take some action?""


Your comments GfS?

BTW, your link still isn't a blue clicky.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 06:48 PM

Ake uses the word "liberal" rather—well--liberally as a pejorative term. Obviously, he is opposed to liberalism.

So what is liberalism all about?

Liberalism (from the Latin liberalis, "of freedom; worthy of a free man, gentlemanlike, courteous, generous") is the belief in the importance of individual freedom. This belief is widely accepted today throughout the world, and was recognized as an important value by many philosophers throughout history. The Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius wrote praising "the idea of a polity administered with regard to equal rights and equal freedom of speech, and the idea of a kingly government which respects, most of all, the freedom of the governed".

Liberalism was an important idea in the Age of Enlightenment, rejecting many foundational assumptions that dominated most earlier theories of government, such as the Divine Right of Kings, hereditary status, and established religion. John Locke is often credited with laying the philosophical foundations of liberalism arguing strongly for limited government. He wrote "no one ought to harm another in his life, liberty, or possessions."

In the 17th Century, liberal ideas began to influence governments in Europe, in nations such as The Netherlands, Switzerland, England and Poland, but they were strongly opposed, often by armed might, by those who favored absolute monarchy and established religion. In the 18th Century, in America, the first modern liberal state was founded, without a monarch or a hereditary aristocracy. The American Declaration of Independence includes the words (which echo Locke) "all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to insure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

According to John N. Gray, the essence of liberalism is toleration of different beliefs and of different ideas as to what constitutes a good life.

I would say that Ake knows as much about liberals, liberalism, and "the liberal agenda" as he knows about most of the things he talks about.

Zero. Zip. Zilch. Nada!

Ake and GfS have no solutions to the problems they allege are caused by homosexuals that they are willing to express frankly and openly. The truth is that all of Ake's flogging of HIV/AIDs figures and GfS's claims about same-sex orientation being a psychological abberation that needs to be "cured" are just a couple of weak excuses. They want all gays herded into a ghetto, then lock them in, and throw away the key.

As a liberal, I protest!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 06:49 PM

My last sentence needs an "other than" added after "alternative".

Sorry if that didn't need pointing out.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 06:50 PM

My answer to that asinine comment from Ake would be.....The figures would need to be much higher than 4 percent.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 07:03 PM

Don Perhaps you would like to give your interpretation of the following from Ake, whom you have been supporting for months past.

""You Lox and Royston(Smedley must have seen the light), are the ones who seem unable to grasp what the figures show.
I repeat how high must the homosexual infection figure,or African immigrant figures go before we are compelled to take some action?""T. "

He is quoting from Ake, not me....my post about HIV/Aids was:

From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 27 Jan 10 - 02:50 AM

Personally, I think if you find your spouse, who was not promiscuous, and you valued that in your partner, enough to be that way, for the person you were to love, enough to feel as if passing it to your kids, and being as you love one another, there wouldn't be the controversy about who has more cases of AIDS/HIV!..would there? but we always make allowances, for the lowest of intelligence!..You don't think so????...ok, ......its like arguing about having one bullet, or two, because playing Russian Roulette, feels good!.........

Promiscuity!!!!!

Don T: "BTW, your link still isn't a blue clicky."

My 'blue clicky' doesn't work for some reason. Right click over the link, and an option comes up to 'search the web'..when it comes up, click on it.(it may open a new tab for you, click that.

Don Firth, Your definitions of 'liberal' that you used are misleading. 'Liberal' in political context, means a liberal interpretation of the Constitution, as opposed to a Conservative interpretation.

You knew that...I think!
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity 1400???
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 07:04 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 07:10 PM

Your silence (in response to my request( speaks volumes, GfS.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 07:12 PM

Well Keith, I guess you must have got these statistics from crazy Christian fundamentalist websit as Don says.......Oh! UNAID! but that means they're agreeing with what I've been saying for years about the dangers of homosexual practice?.......that can't be right cause Don, Lox n' Royston say I'm a "vile, perverted, shit for brains, homophobic bigot"......and they're never wrong??

The up to date statistic from UNAID completely demolish al of the oppositions arguments in one fell swoop.

hiv infections globally down 17%
infections in SS Africa down 15%
new diagnoses for MSM....in UK up 74%.....in Europe up 39% in 3yrs

"The re-emergence of the epidemic among MSM is now clearly apparent"

"The UK needs to re-prioritise hiv prevention among homosexual men otherwise we risk falling further behind"

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 07:22 PM

GfS, both you and Ake rattle on constantly about homosexual promiscuity.

Just four in every hundred gay men are HIV positive. This simply does not support the claims of rampant promiscuity. Rather the opposite.

You have repeatedly stated that the highest risk factor is anal sex between males.

Please explain how 96% of gay men could possibly beat the odds so comprehensively.

Could it be that your cherished perception of gay men as promiscuous risk takers is wrong?

Could it be, that, in common with heterosexuals, their pairings are about other things than sex, perhaps even the "L" word, which you always place in inverted commas.

You have all signally failed to address the above questions, and unless you can do so in a logical manner, your whole argument is in tatters.

Your comments please.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 07:25 PM

Ake, you really should make an effort to keep up.

Both Royston and I have already dealt with the poiints you have just raised.

Try reading all the posts, otherwise you will get even more confused.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 07:28 PM

Smeds: "Your silence (in response to my request( speaks volumes, GfS."

I think I answered that, already...." medley, I was going to 'copy and paste' as segment from your stupidly childish post:From: Smedley Date: 28 Jan 10 - 03:03 AM ..but it was ALL so stupid and immature,.."

What part of 'ALL' don't you understand??

'All' means 'all', and that's 'all' all means!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 07:33 PM

DonT: You keep saying 'homosexual promiscuity'...I said.......
'Promiscuity!!!!!'

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 07:35 PM

Don.... go and read the UNAID figures, I take no pleasure from the fact that homosexual infection rates are continuing to rise so steeply.....it will ultimately mean more illness and death....unless more effective measures are taken to combat it.

Royston seemed to be happily waiting for the day when hetero infection rates reached parity with homo rates.....that is sad in itself, but these figures prove that he will never get his longed for wish.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 07:38 PM

Hi, Ake. Can you believe this angst against the obvious??....Jeez!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 07:39 PM

""DonT: You keep saying 'homosexual promiscuity'...I said.......
'Promiscuity!!!!!'""

Come off it.

Your contention all through has been the same as Ake's, that homosexuals are the problem.

And not just on this thread.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 07:44 PM

OK, thanks for that,dearest darling GfS.

I hope the other readers of thread have now noted that GfS thinks love between non-heterosexuals is stupid, immature, childish and ridiculous.

Might I suggest that others henceforth cease asking him for his arguments. He has none. All he has is embittered, scared, petty, venomous, cretinous prejudice.

Oh and about 1735 children, each one sired with his mighty and majestic tool. I expect we'll see a statue of it erected before too long, a veritable Mount Rushmore of pulsatingly fecund manhood. I expect it's visible from space, like some throb-heavy Great Wall of China. Maybe Mel Gibson will direct a film about it, though it would have to be wide-screen.

GfS: truly America's most crucial cock.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 07:46 PM

Hi Sanity. Dont worry, I think they'll pull through......after an all night hand job!!   :0)

I think they call it "comfort beating"

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 07:49 PM

Smeds;"OK, thanks for that,dearest darling GfS.

You're welcome!

I hope the other readers of thread have now noted that GfS thinks love between non-heterosexuals is stupid, immature, childish and ridiculous."

No, just your post. Funny how you omitted what I said about your Dad, being a homophobe, because he was heterosexual, as your post alluded to.

Never mind, don't reply. You just keep getting sillier.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 07:51 PM

If you can't read, that's hardly my problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 07:56 PM

""Don.... go and read the UNAID figures, I take no pleasure from the fact that homosexual infection rates are continuing to rise so steeply.....it will ultimately mean more illness and death....unless more effective measures are taken to combat it.

Royston seemed to be happily waiting for the day when hetero infection rates reached parity with homo rates.....that is sad in itself, but these figures prove that he will never get his longed for wish.""

Ake, you are the one who set so much store by percentages, yet you ignore them when they prove you wrong.

Between 2000 and 2007, the total number of new gay male infections diagnosed in the UK, irrespective of country of origin, rose by 74%.

Between 2000 and 2009, the total number of hetero UK acquired infections rose by 500%.

Yet, you insist that the way forward is to concentrate on homosexual males, and ignore the heterosexual situation.

Not once in this whole discussion have you responded to the fact that 96% of gay males are HIV negative.

You are so blinded by your own agenda, which is, apparently, to isolate and disenfranchise homosexuals, to deprive them of civil rights, and force them into accepting curtailment of both choice and liberty, that you can't even discuss the ninety six out of every hundred who don't fit your stereotype.

So you simply ignore all reference to them.

Not good enough pal.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 07:56 PM

This is what I said about my father:



"I loved my Dad, by the way, he loved me and he couldn't have been kinder & more supportive to myself and my partner."


And that makes him homophobic.....how ?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 08:24 PM

Obviously, by what they've been posting for some time now, both Ake and GfS are dancing in rage and peeing their pants.

Any powers of rational argument they ever might have had (if, indeed, any at all) have totally escaped them.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 08:34 PM

Que?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 28 Jan 10 - 09:49 PM

Si!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 02:02 AM

"Not once in this whole discussion have you responded to the fact that 96% of gay males are HIV negative."

Much has been made of the fact that "only" 4% have HIV.
(The corresponding figure for straight men would be about 0.0007%)

One, tragic reason the figure is so low is that it has killed so many already.
How much bigger would the figure be if the 18 000 gay dead could be restored to their natural lifespan?
If there was a land where an incurable, fatal disease had already killed a large chunk of the population, and 4% of the survivors had it, there would be official warnings not to got there.
The international community would probably impose a quarantine.
Even the great flu pandemic of 1918 only killed 3% of the population.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 02:16 AM

Ake: The up to date statistic from UNAID completely demolish al of the oppositions arguments in one fell swoop.

hiv infections globally down 17%
infections in SS Africa down 15%
new diagnoses for MSM....in UK up 74%.....in Europe up 39% in 3yrs


And straight british white people up 500% in the same period.

Straight, white, British people rather seem to be at the top of global league table for increasing rates of infection. What's your solution for their peculiarly dangerous lifestyle?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 02:19 AM

Ake: Royston seemed to be happily waiting for the day when hetero infection rates reached parity with homo rates.....that is sad in itself, but these figures prove that he will never get his longed for wish.

You lying shit for brains. I have been advocating education and outreach programmes - unversal education - while you and Keith have been saying the exact opposite - that there is no point helping straight people. Idiot.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 02:28 AM

Keith still not found a point yet.

Full of figures and facts, no idea how to use them. Typical teacher. You're like some spotty lower-6th debating captain.

So what are your proposals for reducing the burden of HIV on all affected groups, Keith?

As you know, I advocate outreach, education. There is an awful lot of going on and there needs to be more. There needs to more general education to instill the information as widely and as early as possible.

Anyone made a donation to an HIV charity yet?

What do you propose, Keith? What is your point?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 03:07 AM

All I have done is to correct your misleading and exagerated claims and bring some objectivity into the debate.
Now the 500% increase.
It is mathematically correct.
It would be equally mathematically correct, and equally meaningless to state,
"Since 1975, the rise in heterosexual HIV infection is over a billion, trillion percent!"

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 03:19 AM

Don: 'Obviously, by what they've been posting for some time now, both Ake and GfS are dancing in rage and peeing their pants.'

Dream on!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 03:43 AM

"It would be equally mathematically correct, and equally meaningless to state,
"Since 1975, the rise in heterosexual HIV infection is over a billion, trillion percent!" "


No it wouldn't.


The 500% stat tells us about a significant change in heterosexuals which is going on NOW - TODAY.

This is directly relevant to this dicsussion and completely undermines the assertion that heterosexaual education is unnecessary and wasteful.

When you bear in mind that 10% think you can't get pregnant if you have sex standing up, you get a snapshot of some very vulnerable and at risk young straight people in our society.


The billion trillion % stat tells us that in 1975 we discovered a disease called AIDS.

So the 500% stat is relevant and meaningful.

And the comparison you have made is a bad one.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 03:52 AM

The 500% figure is so high because it is a rise from a tiny initial number.
My description of it as an increase from infinitesimal to miniscule conveys more clearly the true situation.
That is not to say that the rise is not worrying and should not be addressed.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 06:23 AM

In USA, and probably here too, most heterosexual infections are from high risk group, i.e. where the partner is an intravenous drug user or bisexual.
Such people would benefit from the targeted intervention we have been discussing.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 06:42 AM

To be honest I think that intravenous drug users, bisexuals and homosexuals, are probably more aware than most of the risks they take with dangerous practices. Their various communities and support networks have spent lots of money on education projects and the likes.

Where the great damger lies is in the percentage of straight folks who still see HIV/AIDS as a gay disease or a disease of intravenous drugs users. So many think it cannot happen to them because they are straight. So many discount any chance of acquiring HIV/AIDS because they are not in a high risk group. In fact, they are! Anyone having unprotected sex is risking all sorts of things and until ALL people recognises that no-one is immune to this threat then the figures will continue to rise.

The sooner the myth of it being a gay disease is got rid of, and people who are not gay start thinking they are just as easily a target for the disease, then we may have a start in seeing a reduction in new infections.

HIV/AIDS could not give a monkey's curse what sexuality or colour or religious persuasion the person is whose body it gets into. It does not read books and does not know statistical analysis. The thread has now become al about statistics, but that undertow of current is still dragging some folks under that this disease would go away if gay folks stopped having sex. It won't. This is NOT a gay issue and, even if at first it had been here in the western world, it most certainly is not now. Stop blaming gay folks. Take off the straight blinkers, because they will kill you, as the basic premise on which you are basing straight sex as being fine is very flawed. ALL unsafe sex is risky, dangerous sex. Some types may be a little more risky than others but it matters not. This is everyone's problem if they do not have safe sex.

Statistical arguments aside... Why are we still scapegoating gay men on this? The FACTS about the disease as it is NOW is what is important. As was said much earlier in the thread by someone with sense...

The disease does not discriminate: why should we?

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 07:30 AM

Sorry Keith,

Lets concentrate on what the 500% increase actually shows.

The figures for low domestic heterosexual transmission go back a long way, with a recent and comparatively sudden increase of 500% in the last few years.

That clearly shows a significant change of circumstances.

In addition,

The numbers of domestically infected heterosexuals may have been low, but to describe it as having been infinitesimally low is grossly inaccurate.

On both those bases, your parallel is wrong.


Furthermore, just as your figures have been posted to illustrate that homosexuals proportionately suffer more from HIV, the 500% figure is important as it shows that proportionately, non drug-abusing non African heterosexuals are the fastest rising demographic.


There's cool unbiased statistical analysis for you.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 07:46 AM

At the start of the period, the risk of heterosexual infection was comparable to being struck by lightning.
An infinitesimal risk.
A couple of hundred out of a population of 60 million could reasonably be described as an infintesimal proportion.
It has risen rapidly but is still a tiny proportion.
Also, in America, this group are not you average heterosexuals.
Their partners are overwhelmingly drug injectors or some other high risk category.
I can not find the breakdown for UK, but why would it be different?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 07:50 AM

250 out of 60 million is 0.00000003 %

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 07:52 AM

Sorry, 3 should be a 4.
Don't want to mislead anybody.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 08:07 AM

It has been a long week.
You will have all spotted that it should be 0.0004%

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 08:41 AM

"Don't want to mislead anybody."

Yet your percentage is nevertheless misleading.

Not because there is a 3 or a 4 at the end, but because 250 people being infected with HIV a year is still a significant number.

It is a small enough number that the networking that royston speaks of has not come into play yet.

And if the population of England were infinite then we could probably predict a consistent rise of 250 per year for ever for that reason.

However, this is not the case.

The pool has gradually become more polluted, and inevitably, the numbers have started to rise, and the rate of that rise has been comparatively pretty dramatic.

If it increases by another 500% then we will have in excess of 6,000 UK acquired heterosexual infections a year.

As long as 60% of teenagers continue to have unprotected sex, and as long as the public remains ignorant about sexual health, there is no reason to believe that there will be any decrease or reversal of this recent trend.

Finally, it is misleading to compare homosexuals to the entire population of Britain.

They are a single demographic WITHIN society, so should be compared to other demographics within society.

A good place to start would be adolescent girls and young women, who make up about 3 and a half millon each.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 08:58 AM

Fair comment Lox.
Also, I found the breakdown for hetero infection UK and it does not follow US pattern of mostly high risk types.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 09:46 AM

thank you, Lox, for explaining that. As I said weeks ago, as Kevin de Cock says, it is all about sexual networks and how tight they are. That is the only reason gay men in the west are disproportionately represented. It appeared in that group, it can't readily break out and in such a tight and closed network, the infection and disease is hot-housed.

That straight, white people have managed a 500pc increase from such a ow starting pool of carriers in a big and wide open transmission network is appalling. Something caring needs to be done about it. Like a general education program.

It also shows that there must, on the terms of Ake, GfS et al, be something quite appalling about contemporary heterosexual practice. If of course they are consistent and not just homophobic bigots.

Keith, I am glad that you are finally coming to the realisation that the 'liberal' argument here is proven to be justified. It does nothing to reduce the utter contempt in which I hold you for your wrong-minded and malicious efforts to prove something entirely different.

Please tell me why you do this, if you are not a bigot? What is your point in all this?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 10:54 AM

Royston, how can you make a statement like "That is the only reason gay men in the west are disproportionately represented."
How do you know that?
I have learned a lot ovet the last few days, but I have seen nothing to support that. Please put up some evidence or withdraw.

I find it hard to believe because AIDS has been in the West for over 30 years.
De Cock says he is not expecting a comparable heterosexual epidemic.
None of the experts I have come across do.
Only you Royston.
What do you know that they do not?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 11:26 AM

Lox, re. what is a signicant number.
1200 infections a year is only 0.002%

That is three thousand, five hundred percent less than the 0.07% limit for classifying as a rare disease.

Increasing by 300 a year it will be a rare disease for another 140 years.
Then we should start to get worried.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 12:52 PM

From UNAIDS.

"Independently of human rights, there is a clear and strong public health rationale for effective
prevention among men who have sex with men and transgender people. If we want to prevent
HIV infections, it is essential that more effective prevention efforts (which are inextricably linked
with treatment and care) among groups with higher prevalences be undertaken."

Please read, digest and try to comprehend what this means...thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 12:59 PM

keith, your WHO expert says that AIDS prevalence rates are, most importantly of all the factors, driven by sexual networks. Like prostitutes and their punters, like migratory labour displacement, like sexual minorities. That is to say like gay communities.

I explained this ages ago, gave a numeric example of a theoretical situation, challenged you to correct me. You ran away then, you are still running away.

It is basic epidemiology; are you actually saying, with all your scientific knowledge, that you think I am wrong in asserting what I do on this issue? If you are, say so and say why.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 01:04 PM

Ake, most people here have at least a double digit IQ and understand exactly what that means.

More outreach, more education, more condoms, more care.

It,s now isn't that what the liberals have been saying all along?

Have you made a cash donation to those organisations I pointed out yet?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 01:10 PM

mauvepink; "To be honest I think that intravenous drug users, bisexuals and homosexuals, are probably more aware than most of the risks they take with dangerous practices."

THANK YOU, mp!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's beyond belief that the ones in here don't agree with you!
Don't believe me??......just scroll back!

As far as I'm concerned, ALL promiscuity is also a 'dangerous practice', and a foolish, destructive one, at that!..Just ask the children of a home broken because of it. Just ask yourselves, of the time wasted in your lives, over coming it, or the 'No-Where Land' you ended up, pursuing it!!!

THANK YOU< ONCE AGAIN, MP!!!
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 01:26 PM

" "Independently of human rights, there is a clear and strong public health rationale for effective
prevention among men who have sex with men and transgender people. If we want to prevent
HIV infections, it is essential that more effective prevention efforts (which are inextricably linked
with treatment and care) among groups with higher prevalences be undertaken."

Please read, digest and try to comprehend what this means...thank you. "


Ok, I did.

I see no recommendation that Gay human rights be curtailed.

I see no recommendation that Gays should be quarantined or subjected to compulsory testing.

I do read that there is concern that prevention efforsts so far are not as effective as they need to be.

I also read that treatment and care need to involve a higher emphasis on prevention than is currently the case.


Finally, I also note that you have provided a quote without providing a link, so we can have no iidea of what came before or after.

Consequently we can have no clue what the context is or what was meant in relation to the phrase "independently of human rights".

Depending on what came before, this could mean many things.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 01:34 PM

No, GfS, another case of you hearing what you want to hear.

MP said that "at risk" groups were more aware of the risks of risky practices. Nobody here disputes that. Unprotected penetrative sex is what spreads HIV. Gay men are probably more aware of that truth than are some other groups. Unprotected penetrative sex is risky for everyone - gay or straight. For some reason that I can't fathom a lot of people - gay or straight - have unprotected penetrative sex.

You wish that MP had said "Gay men are inherently risky", but that is not what she said.

96% of gay men are perfectly safe and healthy.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 01:40 PM

Wrong Royston..It means that they have come to the conclusion that the policies you advocate are failing and that "more effective preventive measures(which are inextricably linked with treatment and care) be taken among groups with higher prevalences"


"Independently of human rights"

I notice your attitude and language are not quite so vicious when your back is to the wall.......Typical of a bully!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 01:41 PM

"Increasing by 300 a year it will be a rare disease for another 140 years."

As more people become infected, more people will be at risk, so the rate of increase will also increase.

You will not see a steady 300 per year, but a similar percentage each year, itself increasing slightly as the pool of vulnerable young girls gets having unprotected sexgets proportionately smaller.

10% of young women have chlamydia.

thats around 300,000.

around the same number as think you can't get pregnant standing up.

And I would argue, probably the same number of women that could eventually be infected with HIV if nothing is done to change young peoples habits.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 01:44 PM

Ake,

Link please.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 01:45 PM

Royston, re your post to me.
My only problem with your first paragraph is the expression "your WHO expert."
It should of course be "the WHO expert" i.e. the Head of WHO Aids Department.
All the rest I knew already and is not at all contentious to me or anyone else here I am sure.
You then talk about what I am saying "with all my scientific knowledge"
That is where we differ.
I have no specialist knowledge of this. That is why I rely so heavily on the opinions of genuine experts in the field.(How you ridiculed me for quoting experts!) And guess what Royston.
None of them agree with you.
And that is why I am certain that you are wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 01:47 PM

Royston...To what does your 96 % relate?

I have been reading the Unaids African homosexual infection rates and they range from 15%---40% of the entire homosexual population.

In fact the infection rates everywhere seem much higher in percentage terms among homosexuals than heteros?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 01:56 PM

Lox, re your "As more people become infected, more people will be at risk, so the rate of increase will also increase."
If this were happening we would be seeing an exponential increase.
That is not what the figures show.
We see a slow, linear increase of around 200 per year.

That makes hetero acquired HIV an incredibly rare disease and likely to remain a rare disease for at least a century.
That accords well with WHO appraisal I provided yesterday.

It is only contradicted by that multi-polymath expert on everything Royston.
I doubt WHO and UNAIDS are tearing up their reports on his account though.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 01:57 PM

Keith, sorry the second part of your earlier message. The first was about epidemiology in sexual minorities, which I answered.

The second part, about the rising number just of british-acquired heterosexual diagnoses;

We have 1,130 cases in 2008. A 500% increase from 2000.

In 2016, if that continues and all other factors are equal, we have about 6,000 cases every year.

In 2024, if that continues and all other factors are equal, we have over 30,000 cases each year.

But, Keith, you damn well know that in epidemioloy, the rate of new infection is not linear. As the pool of carriers grows, so the rate of transmission increases and the line bends towards exponentiality.

Add in the African-acquired cases now part of the UK pool of carriers and it is reasonable to assert the possibility of a much bigger future hazard than the figure above suggest.

I think that it is a credible assertion of a real potential future outcome based on simple science. Do you dispute that? If you do then say so and say why.

Note, also, that the WHO does not say there cannot or will not be a serious problem for straight people in the developed world, they just say it is unlikely to be on the same scale as in Africa.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 02:04 PM

Royston, Did you leave out her..."....are probably more aware than most of the risks they take with dangerous practices."

Dangerous practices, Sherlock! Now re-read my earlier reply. It may all come to you(I doubt it, though).
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 02:08 PM

Shit for brains Ake - happy with my language now.

I have been reading the Unaids African homosexual infection rates and they range from 15%---40% of the entire homosexual population.

Jesus you are one thick son of a bitch

Arican HIV prevalence is at 15-40% of TOTAL ADULT POPULATIONS.

So if only 15-40% of gay populations are affected then you have successfully proven that there is no difference in risk or exposure between gay men and straight people.

Well done, all your arguments demolished, now piss off.

Keith:

I, and others, have set out our clear and lucid grounds for assertions.

It is not good enough for you to sit there saying "la la la la, not listening..."

If you think my assertions or my gounds are wrong then say so, and say why. Otherwise you have no credibility whatever.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 02:14 PM

No GfS, you really are every bit as stupid as you sound.

They are more aware than most of the risk they take with dangerous practices.

Penetrative sex with a condom is safe.

Penetrative sex without a condom is dangerous.

It is dangerous whether or not you are gay or straight.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 02:18 PM

Ake

96% refers to the number of homosexual men in the UK who do not have HIV.

I provided the link earlier in this thread.


You may have miissed it as you had your fingers in your ears.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 02:22 PM

In fact, Keith, when Lox made the same assertion about potential growth in the straight population at 08:41, you said "fair point"

Do you agree or not?

If not then say so and say why.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 02:36 PM

Lox was making thoughtful, intelligent points.
I acknowledged that by saying "Fair point" and spent some time considering them and looking at the evidence.
I made considered replies.
I really enjoy debating with someone like Lox.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 02:36 PM

Royston...I thought you were trying to say that 96% of homosexuals worldwide were hiv negative and therefore heterosexuals in Africa were more affected by hiv/ aids than homosexuals.

I dont suppose I need to re-state that this is most definately not the case.

In percentage terms, the homosexual/hetero ratios in Africa are worse for homosexuals than the UK ratios.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 02:40 PM

Royston, re. your "If you think my assertions or my gounds are wrong then say so, and say why."

I think they are wrong only because they are diametrically opposed to the opinions of the world's leading authorities on HIV/AIDS.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 02:43 PM

Royston: "Penetrative sex with a condom is safe."

Unless they have a jealous boyfriend!

BTW, condoms don't feel as good either. Better to have sex with a lifelong spouse, wouldn't you say??.....never mind, you can't speak from experience!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 02:44 PM

Royston, re. your "But, Keith, you damn well know that in epidemioloy, the rate of new infection is not linear. As the pool of carriers grows, so the rate of transmission increases and the line bends towards exponentiality."

That is exactly the point Royston. If this were going to be an epidemic it would be exponential.
It is not exponential because it is not the start of an epidemic.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 02:48 PM

No, Keith, my assretions are not at odds with the WHO. I am not saying there will be a straight epidemic in the west to rival Africa. I am saying something quite different. You are running away.

On the causes of the incidence rate amongst gay men in the west, my assertions match de Cock - it's all about sexual networks. I am adding further detail to the discussion. You are running away

You never had any credibility with me, any that you have with others appears to be diminishing, I think.

At some point you have to put up, or shut up.

I have stated my grounds, they are cogent and logical. If you disagree then say so and say why.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 02:55 PM

Don't be ridiculous, Keith

It is not exponential because it is not the start of an epidemic.

There is every chance it is the beginning of an accelerating trend.

Add in the Africans in the UK carrier pool and new straight infections outnumber gay ones by a factor of up to 5:1

Do you deny these fundamental risks and these facts of basic epidemiology? Say so and say why.

Am I to take it that you do now accept the ways in which HIV might be hot-housed in minority sexual networks? If not, say so and say why.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 02:57 PM

GfS, what leads you to think I am not enojoying a life-long relationship?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 02:59 PM

Oh aye......and ye think yer Napoleon as well.....:0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 03:04 PM

Lox - a rare compliment from me. How nice to see a correct use of "may" in place of the almost ubiquitous misuse of it for "might".

I have been puzzling over the insistence of the unholy alliance here that the prevalence of AIDS is statistically significantly linked, both as to incidence and as to growth rates to male homosexual behaviour and/or to being African.

In the case of Keith, he has indicated that his concern is solely correct statistical analysis. I find that hard to swallow (sorry if the imagery disturbs) in that the only places I have seen his pedagogic statistical bent exhibited are on this thread and on the thread about UK immigration.

It seems more plausible that the stated insistence is linked to hostility as such to male homosexuals and to Africans. In some cases (this is not a specific reference to Keith, but that in turn is not to waive the possibility of the reference including him) that that hostility is pretty baldly expressed as "Keep 'em out or lock 'em up" but it may be that it runs even deeper (and in less acceptable channels) than that.

Reverting now to statistics, Keith, you hypothesise, I think, that the rate of growth of AIDS (probably more correctly detected and reported AIDS) is linear.   I cannot be bothered to do the analysis, but if you take your figures over your number of years and then do a typical 2-tail Tukey test (or a Tukey-Neave test) on them, what is your degree of confidence found? If you took instead, the null hypothesis that the rate of growth was exponential, what degree of confidence would you find for that? I can't be bothered to dig my old copy of Ya-Lun Chou (or Sokolnikoff & Redheffer) out and do the sums (and anyway I haven't got the raw data) but given the shortness of the period of available data I would expect the two to be much the same. Tell me, O! statistical devotee, what does the statistical analysis show?   Depending on your answer, I may want to check your calculations and sources.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 03:31 PM

"Better to have sex with a lifelong spouse, wouldn't you say??"

Well actually, according to the reading I have been doing today, this does not apply for young wives from numerous countries worldwide.

Young women become infected by older husbands with a long andcomplicated sexual history, and then they don't bother getting tested because the social stigma and actual physical consequences of bein found out simply going for a test are not worth the risk.

Being married in many countries world wide can, in terms of HIV, be a death sentence.

I'll provide links tomorrow evening or sunday as I have to go now.

have fun.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 03:54 PM

Richard, you tried this trick on me once before, remember?
The clever lawyer trying to bamboozle a gullible magistrate or jury and appear to know more than they do.
I am a physicist Richard, and there is nothing you can tell me about an exponential increase.
For a start, there should be a constant doubling time.
These figures doubled in the first 2 years, and took another 5 years to double again!
There is not even an increase on differences!
They go 90,160,110,140,90,40,130,130.
Not impressed Richard.
A shoddy attempt to deceive.
Some of us are trying to have an honest debate.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 04:01 PM

Royston, re. your
"There is every chance it is the beginning of an accelerating trend.
Add in the Africans in the UK carrier pool and new straight infections outnumber gay ones by a factor of up to 5:12

Add them in and it is even further from an exponential progression.
Those figures doubled in the first 2 years, and eight years later have still not doubled again!
Some years they even go down!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 05:00 PM

Oh come on Keith, I think you should let Royston have his hetero epidemic.....he was so looking forward to it! :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 05:19 PM

Don't be silly, Keith and don't tell lies or try to deflect the discussion.

What I said, about "the Africans", is that adding their number into the number of white UK HIV carriers in the "straight" pool, multiplies further the risk of any one straight person, who practices unsafe sex, contracting HIV if all other factors are constant

Your friends Ake and GfS, whom you are labouring to support, say that gay men are "unhygienic" in a way that straight people are not and that to stop the spread of HIV you have to "control" or "punish" gay people. Yet 2000-2008 the number of white straight people contracting HIV each year in an enormous pool with only a small starting number of carriers, grew 5 times. Whereas gay men, allegedly unhygienic and certainly more exposed to HIV in purely logical, accidental, epidemiological terms, less than doubled.

Now any increase in disease and illness is a terrible thing but, remembering the context of this discussion, straight people must be behaving in dangerous ways that make gay men look like nuns; for straight HIV+ numbers to have increased so dramatically. It's bleeding obvious that if their behaviour stays the same, and the numbers of HIV+ straight carriers keep growing, there is very big problem coming.

In fact the fastest growing group of HIV+ people (straight people) could quite possinly learn something useful from gay men about protecting themselves and arresting their growing numbers.

Now have you anything of substance to add or are you going to keep running away from this?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 05:40 PM

Royston...you are not making sense...you say "In fact the fastest growing group of HIV+ people (straight people)"....while UNAIDS says "HIV infections are falling world wide, but homosexual infections are rising".

Are you up to your old trick of mixing real numbers with percentages?

Of course heterosexual infections are the fastest growing,(for the moment) but that point is meaningless on its own, because the hetero population is so massively larger than the homosexual population.

The only figures which bear any relevance to this discussion, are the respective percentage of infection statistics.

As the total hiv infection figures are falling worldwide and the homosexual figures rising, even in real numbers the gap will be narrowing, not widening

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 05:46 PM

The only numbers that matter are the ones I think are important.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 06:13 PM

Bean counters!!

Okay, all you statistics wonks, just what do all of these numbers you keep slapping each other with amount to?

Based on each of your interpretations of the numbers you are flogging, can any of you suggest a course of action!??

What should anybody do about all this?

(Be careful, now! Be damned careful!)

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 06:40 PM

Whats it name: "Your friends Ake and GfS, whom you are labouring to support, say that gay men are "unhygienic" in a way that straight people are not and that to stop the spread of HIV you have to "control" or "punish" gay people. Yet 2000-2008 the number of white straight people contracting HIV each year in an enormous pool with only a small starting number of carriers, grew 5 times."

Like I've been saying, promiscuity is like playing Russian Roullete, you're fighting over using one bullet, or two......and those same individuals seem to have a 'bug up their ass', about monogamous, heterosexual pair bonding, that produces families....and then think I don't get it. I think you're pandering to the lowest common denominator of human LIFE, you know, Life...instincts of preservation and reproduction...lower, being of course, something that shorts out either one of those circuits! I'll give you this...in the child bearing years!
Now I'm sure you'll want to 're-define' the known and accepted scientific definition of living things...to suit your enthusiasm for satisfying your personal horniness. Its okay, I don't care what you do, or who you do it with.....its just that homosexuals spend an inordinate amount of time and energy, trying to palm it off as a normal and a civil rights issue....as if homosexuality is an essential part of building a society. It's a dead end!
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 06:46 PM

Keith - think about confidence limits in statistical analysis. You say the statistics show that the increase is not exponential but linear. I'm not sure so what, but why not check your assumption?

You are the man who professes such devotion to statistics that he comes to this thread and one other simply to ensure that statistics are not abused.

Well, tithe your God.

Or is there another purpose you serve?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 07:21 PM

GfS, here is a partial list of notables who lived "as if homosexuality is an essential part of building a society. It's a dead end!"

You are right, of course. Every single one of these men is dead...

Zeno, Greek philosopher (500 B.C.)

Sophocles, Greek playwright (496?-406 B.C.)

Socrates, Greek philosopher (470?-399 B.C.)

Aristotle, Greek philosopher (384-322 B.C.)

Alexander the Great, Macedonian ruler (356-323 B.C.)

Emperor Hadrian, Roman ruler (76-138 A.D.)

Richard the Lion-Hearted, British ruler (1157-1199)

Richard II, British ruler (1367-1400)

Leonardo da Vinci, painter-scientist (1452-1519)

Benvenuto Cellini, Italian goldsmith (1500-1571)

Christopher Marlowe, British playwright (1564-1593)

King James I, British ruler (1566-1625)

John Milton, British poet (1608-1674)

Jean Baptiste Lully, French composer (1632-1687)

Frederick the Great, Prussian ruler (1712-1786)

King Gustav III, Swedish ruler (1746-1792)

Baron Alexander von Humboldt, German naturalist (1769-1859)

Lord Byron, British poet (1788-1824)

Hans Christian Andersen, Danish author (1805-1875)

Walt Whitman, American poet (1819-1892)

Samuel Butler, British author (1835-1902)

Algernon Swinburne, British poet (1837-1909)

Petr Ilich Tchaikovsky, Russian composer (1840-1893)

Paul Verlaine, French poet (1844-1896)

Oscar Wilde, Irish playwright (1854-1900)

Frederick Rolfe (Baron Corvo), British author (1860-1913)

Andre Gide, French author (1869-1951)

Marcel Proust, French author (1871-1922)

E. M. Forster, British author (1879-1970)

John Maynard Keynes, British economist (1883-1946)

Sir Harold Nicholson, British author-diplomat (1886-1968)

Capt. Ernst Roehm, German Nazi leader (1887-1934)

T. E. Lawrence, British soldier-author (1888-1935)

Jean Cocteau, French author (1889-1963)

Christopher Isherwood, British author (1904- )

Dag Hammarskjold, Swedish secretary-general U.N. (1905-1961)

W. H. Auden, British-American poet (1907- )

Jean Genet, French playwright (1909- )

Tennessee Williams, American playwright (1911- )

Brendan Behan, Irish author (1923-1964)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 07:31 PM

Don F

I have been advocating greater universal education programs so that all people are reminded of the nature and risk of unsafe behaviour. I have advocated even greater targeted outreach and education amongst "at risk" groups and I have suggested that anyone who cares about alleviating this sphere of suffering ought to donate to an AIDS charity and/or lobby their MP for adequate public funding and effort.

Isn't that a start?

Trouble is that some folks are still trying to prove that one group has nothing whatever to worry about and another group are to blame for it all.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 07:32 PM

I think society might have struggled on without several of that lot!

Rather over many media celebrities ancient and modern....dont you think   :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 07:51 PM

Trouble is Royston UNAIDS seems to be saying the policies you are advocating, tho well meant, dont appear to be working for homosexuals.
In fact they are saying these policies have failed and we need to try something different

"If we want to prevent
HIV infections, it is essential that more effective prevention efforts (which are inextricably linked
with treatment and care) among groups with higher prevalences be undertaken."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 11:13 PM

Ebbie, Do you think that society would have benefited, or not, if those people's genes were passed down?

Would you care?
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 11:53 PM

mauvepink; "To be honest I think that intravenous drug users, bisexuals and homosexuals, are probably more aware than most of the risks they take with dangerous practices."
THANK YOU, mp!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's beyond belief that the ones in here don't agree with you!
Don't believe me??......just scroll back!
As far as I'm concerned, ALL promiscuity is also a 'dangerous practice', and a foolish, destructive one, at that!..Just ask the children of a home broken because of it. Just ask yourselves, of the time wasted in your lives, over coming it, or the 'No-Where Land' you ended up, pursuing it!!! ... THANK YOU< ONCE AGAIN, MP!!!

GfS post closed up togtehr by me and not how it was initially below...

BUT GfS... I have not seen anyone on here not going along with that. I think all have agreed that unsafe sex is dangerous and unwise. It is not being promiscuous per se. It is having unprotected sex. And no matter what sexuality you are it makes no difference.

Yes, of course, being in a stable monogamous relationship is safer (including gay monogamous relationships) but no-one can ever take the moral high ground as so many people get cheated on. So what I wrote cannot be taken in it's sole cpnext without the rest of what I posted... namely

Where the great damger lies is in the percentage of straight folks who still see HIV/AIDS as a gay disease or a disease of intravenous drugs users. So many think it cannot happen to them because they are straight. So many discount any chance of acquiring HIV/AIDS because they are not in a high risk group. In fact, they are! Anyone having unprotected sex is risking all sorts of things and until ALL people recognises that no-one is immune to this threat then the figures will continue to rise.

The sooner the myth of it being a gay disease is got rid of, and people who are not gay start thinking they are just as easily a target for the disease, then we may have a start in seeing a reduction in new infections.


We need to get away from the moral, holier than thou, blame culture. We need a concentrated effort from people of all sexualities and religious persuasions to try and end this threat. Blaming each other and arguments will get nowhere. Look at this thread? Name calling and people getting hurt. some almost having to win at all costs. Why? With HIV/AIDS there are no winners. We all lose. The sooner we stop getting at gay people because of HIV/AIDS the better.

Personally, my wish would be for all on this thread to kiss and make up. Get respect back for each other and put the bad bits behind us all. I know it's a dream because some would not and will not do that.]

There have been some hateful and hurtful things said. Shake hands, kiss, hug... do as you will. But can we end the arguments on what is a serious issue that potentially affects us all?

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,mauvepink
Date: 29 Jan 10 - 11:56 PM

Sorry... that last one was from me :)

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Uncle Rumpo
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 01:23 AM

ok.. as I said in a previous thread.
I dont know at my age how long i got left so no more time left to pussyfoot with stupid peoples oversensive feelings and irrational reactions.

iI'm not gay or ever least bit bicuriuos, i dont like the idea of the mechanics of gay sex.
I think its unhygenic and not to my taste.

but i'll be buggered if I put up with nasty evil homophobic
stupidity.

if you dont like or you are afraid of queers
then you are shit stupid no brain cretins.

simple as that.

I dont like a lot of the preening ego overcompensating crap
of camp culture and I have no interest in what those gay blokes do in bed. [ and no respect for them taking over public toilets and parks after dark]

But i will stand beside them to fight evil stupid no brain homophobes.


if all us straight blokes are so afraid of being bummed..

how come anal is the most popular porn download ???

why do you fanticize sticking your cock
up a womens arse but so afraid of geting one up your own


what the fuck is wrong with modern culture. ??

as I sid I'm not particularly gay friendly,
but I am in no way homophobe.
I dont understand my gay friends desires or sex pracices.
But no f@ckin way will I stand aside to see them bullied by
half wit fuckin boot boy cretins.


I'm not making my best coherrent point herre
but I dont care , one of my old gay mates is like a brother
and even at my age if some dimwit thug picks on him
he gets a ferocious fight from me and all of our mates.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 01:41 AM

Royston, re. your"What I said, about "the Africans", is that adding their number into the number of white UK HIV carriers in the "straight" pool, multiplies further the risk of any one straight person, who practices unsafe sex, contracting HIV if all other factors are constant"

You might well expect that, but the figures show that it is not happening.

re. "Yet 2000-2008 the number of white straight people contracting HIV each year in an enormous pool with only a small starting number of carriers, grew 5 times."

Yes, a steady rise. Choose an earlier year and you would get 10 times, a thousand times and so on. After all these years it remains an incredlby rare disease in this population

re "Whereas gay men, allegedly unhygienic and certainly more exposed to HIV in purely logical, accidental, epidemiological terms, less than doubled."

This population experienced exponential infection in the early years.
In any population you reach a limit on that kind of growth. Now it just picks off new members.

re. "for straight HIV+ numbers to have increased so dramatically. It's bleeding obvious that if their behaviour stays the same, and the numbers of HIV+ straight carriers keep growing, there is very big problem coming."

In about 140 years it will cease to be classified as a rare disease.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 01:46 AM

Richard, re your "Keith - think about confidence limits in statistical analysis. You say the statistics show that the increase is not exponential but linear. I'm not sure so what, but why not check your assumption?"

Not going to pose as an expert any more then. Good.
It is so simple for you Richard. Plot them.
Does it curl up?
No.
Is it a fairly steady rise. Yes
It is linear, not exponential.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Uncle Rumpo
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 02:03 AM

boiling a very over complex social phenomina scare crisis
down to basics..

I've never knowingly taken a cock up my arse
or sucked one off.

Don't like the idea of it

I did an MA in social scinces/humanities about nearly 30 years ago.
So I'm not unaware of diverse human sexual expression.

so, efven if I dont like what gays do,
as long as they dont try it on me they can do what they like
to each other as far as i'm concerned.

god created us all in his own image
so seems like God in all his infintisimal glory
might have been a bit that way inclined.

dont bother me, each to their own
if they dont scare the morris dancers.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 02:08 AM

Yes, Royston, I would say that's a good start. And I have said all through this thread (and the other) that those who try to claim that HIV/AIDs is exclusively a "gay disease" or a "gay problem" should certainly know better, but blind themselves with a personal agenda based on homophobia and bigotry.

What they can't accept is the idea that homosexual relations per se is not dangerous. It's promiscuity. And contrary to what some here claim, there is no inherent connection between the two.

####

"I think society might have struggled on without several of that lot!

Rather over many media celebrities ancient and modern....dont you think   :0)"

Not hardly, Ake. Some of the most important ideas in our culture came from the early Greeks. And with the exception of a monarch or an emperor or two and a Nazi big-wig, the world would be a much poorer place if any one of the folks that Ebbie listed had not existed. Only a philistine would think that they were "over many." Would that there were more, no matter what their sexual orientation might be or have been. That is totally irrelevant to the magnitude of the contributions the majority of them have made to the sciences, the arts, and the humanities.

####

GfS still seems to be hung up on the idea that the best life has to offer is breeding. Hell's bells, rabbits must have the best lives of all!

But they don't produce a helluva lot of art, music, philosophy, literature. . . .   In fact, most of the chronic, full-time skirt-chasers I have known were dumber than a sack of doorknobs. The only skill they had was for rumpy-pumpy, and some of the women they scored with said that they really weren't very good at that, either!

And the sort of talent and ability that produces the life work of the kind of people Ebbie listed comes less from genes than it does from early interest in a particular subject or activity. Genes can give one a good pair of hands, but only a passionate interest in music will turn them into the hands of a brilliant pianist; a pianist who goes on to become a composer of great music.

And no, GfS, this doesn't mean that I'm saying that sexual-orientation is a matter of early interest (which you would undoubtedly try to translate into "choice"). There is a great deal of evidence to show that sexual orientation IS a matter of genes (no matter how much the thought disturbs you personally).

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Uncle Rumpo
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 02:27 AM

I dont care what folk care to take up their orrifices,
I dont care what they enjoy or how they define their own sense of self and identity existence being.


I really stopped caring back in the 1980's


I've probably in all optimism got no more than 30 years left breathing
on this planet,
and fuck knows where I go after this if at all anywhere when I'm dead.

So ok I dont understand why gays prefere cock to cunt.
its a complete mystery to me.

BUT thinking hard and difficult about all this immense brain burning philosiphising stuff'
the biggest and best mystery is what happens after we all individuals
depart this sad and brutal life we call

well .. errm. life.


fuck it and all the evil shiteheads on this planet,
lets pull up our trousers and see what happens next...

who in all intellignt reason cares..

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 03:04 AM

Mauvepink, I am trying very hard to picture the scene if, as I suggested, I puckered up and offered Ake a big old smackeroo. I do find Scottish accents very sexy......

A hug & a kiss for GfS is even less likely. I suspect he's the type that keeps guns in the basement, so I'd probably be shot as I waded across the front lawn through the heaving multitudes of his progeny.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 04:01 AM

Don't I even get a look in?
Blatant prejudice!
Anyway, Ake always posts with a cockney accent.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 04:03 AM

Ake,

You quote UNAIDS - "If we want to prevent
HIV infections, it is essential that more effective prevention efforts (which are inextricably linked
with treatment and care) among groups with higher prevalences be undertaken."

I said "I have been advocating greater universal education programs so that all people are reminded of the nature and risk of unsafe behaviour. I have advocated even greater targeted outreach and education amongst "at risk" groups and I have suggested that anyone who cares about alleviating this sphere of suffering ought to donate to an AIDS charity and/or lobby their MP for adequate public funding and effort.

I also said "More outreach, more education, more condoms, more care"

So I think I am on the same page as UNAIDS. Have you made your donation yet?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 04:16 AM

Sorry Keith. Maybe you could give me the statistical variant ratio quotient of how kissable you are.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 04:41 AM

Hmm Keith.....I suspect it may be the wellies, cords, pipe and trilby, that puts them off in your case   :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 04:41 AM

Before I am accused of running away from this one, you will find what you need to know here, page 19 table W.
boring and complicated statistcs on keith's lips.org

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 04:44 AM

You're a fraud Keith....we all know that's chongo!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 04:47 AM

Keith, this the last attempt to get you to make a relevant point. Any more prevarication and I really, really, think I am entitled to consider these points as taken for granted.

By the way, your comment "This population experienced exponential infection in the early years.
In any population you reach a limit on that kind of growth. Now it just picks off new members

Show such a breathtaking level of stupidiy that it must not be allowed to pass. Keith, I don't believe you have a qualification in a scientific discipline if you can say such a thing.

A disease, unchecked, will spread until it either infects such a proportion of the population that its transmission vectors are disrupted (that so many die as to prevent further transmission) or until a resistance to the disease develops, or until the behaviour of the pool-members is modified to limit the spread of the disease.

96% of gay men do not have HIV - so the disease has a lot of people to get to, left to its own devices. So the disease has not reached a self-limiting point. There certainly isn't any resistance and there is no cure to infection - only drugs to alleviate symptoms. The fact is that gay men are doing better at limiting the transmission of the disease in their communities than are straight people at the moment.

Now to try to get you to make some points. Can you agree to the following statements. Say "yes" or say "no". If "no", then tell us why.

If you run away from this, people will be entitled to draw the obvious and reasonable conclusions.

1) HIV is a disease that can affect anyone who practices unprotected penetrative sex. In Africa it is an epidemic of terrifying proportions amongst the heterosexual majority of the population (up to 40% of the total adult population of some countries.) There are scientific reasons for that and the most important factor driving the spread is sexual networks and a lack of education about effective prevention measures where a lot of effort has been wasted promoting abstinence when condom-use is the only widely effective intervention.

2) In the UK, there is a very low prevalenece of HIV compared to most other countries. Historically the largest single group of people diagnosed each year was gay men, but the disease only affects a tiny minority of gay men (about 4%) and is nowhere near the prevalence level in some heterosexual populations.

3) Now, most diagnoses are of straight people but most of those contracted the disease outside the country. Nonetheless, there has been a disturbing rise amongst straight UK-acquired cases in recent years - a 500% increase.

4) As the number of carriers in any group increases, so the risk of other group-members contracting the infection increases: all other factors and behaviours remaining unchanged. Any increase in any affected group is a cause for serious worry.

4) Ideally, people would abstain from sex until married and then enjoy a lifelong, monagamous relationship. Reality, being different, dictates that the best way to prevent the disease is to educate everyone; because everyone is at some risk, but the greatest effort should be directed at the groups exposed to the greatest statistical risk of infection.

5) A key part of effective prevention is the active removal of stigma and prejudice surrounding HIV and the people affected by it. Ignorance of and about the disease, together with societal stigma and prejudice, hinder outreach and direct intervention efforts directed by at risk groups and minorities. Ignorance, prejudice and stigma deters members of at risk groups and minorities from coming forward and seeking testing and treatment.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 05:05 AM

The prefect has called us in from play.

re your, "A disease, unchecked, will spread until it either infects such a proportion of the population that its transmission vectors are disrupted (that so many die as to prevent further transmission) or until a resistance to the disease develops, or until the behaviour of the pool-members is modified to limit the spread of the disease."

It did start off exponential. Deny that?
As you keep telling us, not all gay men put themselves at high risk.
It did indeed infect such a proportion of the (at risk) population that....      and a large number did modify their behaviour.

your number 1. Yes to all (AGAIN! how often must I tell you?!) except "the most important factor" may not be that one.

Your number 2 (No sniggering at the back!) Yes except replace "in some heterosexual populations" with "in Africa"

3. Yes. I have explained why 500% increase does not make it a very worrying amount. EXTREMELY rare and low risk for the next hundred years.

4 Yes.

5 Honestly, I don't know. Maybe.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 05:29 AM

"The fact is that gay men are doing better at limiting the transmission of the disease in their communities than are straight people at the moment."

Please explain/justify.
The rate of transmission in proportion to group size shows the opposite is true.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 05:39 AM

Thanks, Keith.

It did start off exponential. Deny that?

No, never denied it, never denied that gay men are disproportionately affected. When the disease emerged, medical science didn't recognise it and a lot of people died before anyone worked out a) that it was caused by HIV and b) how it was being spread.

As you keep telling us, not all gay men put themselves at high risk

It's important to point out that "not all gay men" is different from the more accurate statement "the vast majority of gay men, 96%" appear not to practice dangerous behaviour.

What I am trying to do is underscore the areas of agreement.

Keith, please go back to point 5 and give it some thought. Go back to UNAIDS, WHO, AVERT, THT, HPA and read what all the experts say about social attitudes and the devastating effect of stigma and prejudice. Think about it logically, please, and see if your view changes. Because, you see, it is point 5 that started all this off. The bigots started by advocating more prejudice and more stigma against minority groups and nothing to help or to bother the "normal" majority because they don't think HIV should matter at all to "normal" people. Is that the view you support? Or on balance do you think point 5 probably stands a better chance of curtailing this disease than driving people underground?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 05:47 AM

1501.

Good grief.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 05:57 AM

Keith: "The fact is that gay men are doing better at limiting the transmission of the disease in their communities than are straight people at the moment."

Please explain/justify.
The rate of transmission in proportion to group size shows the opposite is true

OK, the words "rate of transmission" make the statement wrong.

The correct assertion would be "The fact is that gay men are doing better at limiting the the growth of HIV prevalence in their communities than are straight people, at the moment

Please look again at point 5, this is the important issue that kicked all this off.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 06:23 AM

""Even the great flu pandemic of 1918 only killed 3% of the population.""

Now I know you've lost the plot Keith.

You take a figure of 4% of the small percentage of the population who are gay, and male, and compare it with the 3% of the TOTAL population who died in the pandemic.

As a mathematician, you would undoubtedly make a very good greengrocer.

It si a total waste of time talking to one who would suspend the laws mathematics in a vain attempt to justify discrimination.

Don T

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 06:36 AM

""Lox, re. what is a signicant number.
1200 infections a year is only 0.002%

That is three thousand, five hundred percent less than the 0.07% limit for classifying as a rare disease.

Increasing by 300 a year it will be a rare disease for another 140 years.
Then we should start to get worried.""

Are you really that dim Keith, or are you deliberately glossing over the fact that the rise you are predicting is linear, whereas, in all previous cases, infection has increased exponentially within a population.

We really will see gay/hetero percentages approach parity, and you won't be dismissing that as miniscule, given the ratio of gays to straights.

Don T

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 06:48 AM

Don, 3% of the total population died of that flu.
So 3% of gay people will have died of it.
So a bigger proportion of the gay population are dying of AIDS than died of the great flu.
And that is not counting the 18 000 who are already lost.

Now, I have some nice sprout's in today.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 06:50 AM

Don, re your "whereas, in all previous cases, infection has increased exponentially within a population."

In no previous cases outside Africa has AIDS increased exponentially within a straight population.
Or do you know of one?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 06:53 AM

Royston, re. your "The correct assertion would be "The fact is that gay men are doing better at limiting the the growth of HIV prevalence in their communities than are straight people, at the moment""

Please justify this by referring to the HIV prevalence in those communities.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 06:59 AM

Royston, your point 5 again.
5) A key part of effective prevention is the active removal of stigma and prejudice surrounding HIV and the people affected by it. Ignorance of and about the disease, together with societal stigma and prejudice, hinder outreach and direct intervention efforts directed by at risk groups and minorities. Ignorance, prejudice and stigma deters members of at risk groups and minorities from coming forward and seeking testing and treatment.

I gave my honest answer, I do not know.
The first sentence could well be true.
The next sentence. I do not approve of ignorance, stigmatisation or prejudice. I do not know if they significantly hinder ....
They might.
I doubt they deter people coming forward. They need not admit to whatever they are ashamed of. But I do not know.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 08:10 AM

Thanks Keith, I can see that we agree on pretty much all of the issues, with a margin for disagreement that is normal and healthy.

For what it's worth - the statistics are not nearly so important as the ethical isses - my other point was about controlling the growth of HIV prevalence.

If HIV prevalence has grown 74% amongst gay men in 8 years but has grown 500% for straight people then straight people are doing very badly - almost 3 times as badly - as gay men at controlling the growth of HIV in their communities.

My assumption here is the use of the word "prevalence". If there are more than 5 times as many of something as there once was, is it not correct to say it is 5 times more prevalent? That's a genuine question, Keith, if I've used the wrong word - but you know what I mean - then let's just get the right word out please?

About prevalence, I just can't seem to find figures for people living with HIV by infection route. However, surely you accept the logic that if gay communities have a prevalence of 4%, the chances of a gay man contracting HIV - and therefore the growth in cases - is a lot higher than should be the chance of a straight person (did you say 0.0004% prevalence?) and therefore the growth in straight cases should be a lot lower - 10,000 times lower?.

But somehow straight HIV+ people have grown their UK-acquired rate of increase 3 times faster than have gay men in the last 8 years. With all the epidemiological and statistical cards stacked so strongly in their favour, that outome is shocking, isn't it? This is a critical observation in the discussion about needing to understand that HIV is a deadly issue for everyone who is not educated about the risks and prevention methods and/or chooses not to apply that knowledge - gay or straight.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,keith A
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 09:15 AM

We should not argue about this when so close to agreement on the rest.
The statement is true, but misleading because the two cases are so far apart.
Suppose 2 people set off London to Brighton, one in a Ferrari at a steady 70mph, and the other strolling at a leisurely 1 mph.
The walker gets bored and breaks into a jog.
He is now doing 5mph. A 500% increase in his rate of progress.
The driver has managed a 0% increase.
What does that tell you about the two journeys?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 03:24 PM

""Don, re your "whereas, in all previous cases, infection has increased exponentially within a population."

In no previous cases outside Africa has AIDS increased exponentially within a straight population.
Or do you know of one?""

All right, since you aren't smart enough.......

Did I say previous cases of AIDS?......NO! I didn't.

In all previous cases of Diseases spreading through a population, prior to the arrival on the scene of HIV/AIDS, the infections have shown an exponential increase, not a linear one.

Why would HIV/AIDS not do the same, as Royston stated, until it kills enough victims to inhibit transmission.

The fact that it appears linear may well be due to the small number of cases, but, as the pool of victims increases in size, the differences will become significant, and the exponential nature will be much more apparent.

The anomalies of having the number of new infections actually decrease in some years could easily (and if you are a scientist, you should know this) be a result of the small numbers involved, and should not be assumed to be a statistically significant feature, at least until the total number of victims reaches a point where those changes become a trend.

Bad math doesn't strengthen your case, and a head in the sand attitude to what you call a miniscule problem doesn't either.

Would you rather deal with hundreds now, or millions later?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 04:30 PM

Don, an exponential spread of infection results in an epidemic.
Most do not. They may become endemic.
Think streptococcus, rabies, salmonella, etc.
AIDS has resulted in epidemics in some communities where transmission is high, but outside Africa that has not happened among heterosexuals. And it has had ample opportunity. It is no longer a new disease.
Don, there is no heterosexual epidemic here.
Never mind what Royston or I say. Look it up.
I have put up enough evidence now.
If you do not have anything new, please shut up and go away.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 04:51 PM

You've put up quite a lot of opinion in support of your argument, some of which is definitely, and some which on the face of it should be reliable.

It might be wise when expressing such confidence in the veracity and wisdom of your sources, to remember that, in the main, they are the same experts who so completely failed to correctly predict the course and outcome of the recent swine flu outbreak.

Finally, I will leave this discussion when I'm damn good and ready, not when you order me too, so wind your neck in pal. You're not laying down the law to a student who has to listen to you now.

You have no more right to an opinion than anyone else here, and if you can't handle that, perhaps it's you that needs to leave.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 05:11 PM

The course of the swine flu epidemic was predicted rather well.
It was thought to be more dangerous than it was because many mild cases in Mexico went unreported giving rise to concern that mortality was higher than it proved to be.
There was, and is, the concern that it could become more dangerous by mutation or exchange of genetic material with, for instance, the more lethal but less infectious bird flu.
But, that was a new disease. We know all about AIDS now.
Now Don, since you are not leaving, what do you have to contribute?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 05:27 PM

Keith,

You describe the rates of UK acquired infection as increasing linearly.

This is not true.

It may not be explainable as exponential for now either, but it is far from linear.

A better description of the graph would be, it was trundling along on the runway for ages and suddenly, a few years back, it lifted sharply off the ground.

It then continued to rise, demonstrating that a dramatic turn of events was also a sustained change of circumstances.

If there was anything linear about heterosexual infection rates, we would still be seeing the graph trundling along consistently on the x axis.

This hasn't happened.

And as we know, the pool is finite.

It is more likely that it will change again that it will remain linear.

The fact that the change was sustained shows that it is not a matter of "if" there is another durge, but "when".

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 05:30 PM

typo:

durge -> surge

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Donuel
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 05:45 PM

"I have it on good authority that the retro virus does not know or even care if its victims are straight or gay.
Why should anyone else?
Wash DC has some SE neighborhoods with a current infection rate near 20%. Some are only 10%. AIDS favors the poor and uneducated?
No it only lives with all the biological inertia inherent in life itself."

Dr. O.B. Vious.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Pierre Le Chapeau
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 05:58 PM

Regarding the thread in issue
The worlds going bad"again" The human race is only happy when its killing each other? If we aint got enough troubles in creation ,Uganda jumps on the band wagon harping on about stuff that been around and penalized in the past since time began and Im a fanny and tit man. For all sakes are the African states going back in time .

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 07:06 PM

""The course of the swine flu epidemic was predicted rather well.
It was thought to be more dangerous than it was because many mild cases in Mexico went unreported giving rise to concern that mortality was higher than it proved to be.
There was, and is, the concern that it could become more dangerous by mutation or exchange of genetic material with, for instance, the more lethal but less infectious bird flu.
But, that was a new disease. We know all about AIDS now.
Now Don, since you are not leaving, what do you have to contribute? ""

And yet you see no possibility of any similar occurence with HIV.

What a very strange "scientist" you are.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 08:03 PM

Don't you guys know when the game is up?

The UNAIDS statistics and conclusions regarding infection rates in homosexuals posted by Keith, effectively concluded the debate.

All your arguments demolished by one document, and the stance which I have been defending for over a year vindicated.
All you have left is the "why dont your mind you own business" syndrome

Well, defending freedom of thought and speech and exposing hypocricy is my business, business which on this occasion has come to a very satisfactory conclusion.....Ake

Thanks for support Sanity and Paco.....For information and fair play...thank you Keith.

FIN.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 30 Jan 10 - 08:15 PM

Keith, I know that nobody takes Ake seriously, but are you going to let his co-opting of you stand unchallenged? I kind of hope you don't.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 12:08 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 12:11 AM

Take him on yourself, if you can..and if you can do it without the childish snipes. We could all learn something from a mature dialogue, void of defensive insults, but rather one of finding FACTS..not trying to win or prove a point. Fair enough?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 12:50 AM

Good lord. You mean that you've finally figured that OUt?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 12:51 AM

What an interesting turn that would be.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 02:09 AM

You will note that Ake does not thank GfS for either information or fair play. Way to go, Akie baby.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 02:24 AM

Lox, a linear progression does not mean no rise.
A mathematically perfect one (y=mx+c) would give an identical increase for each time period.
Real life situations are never exactly perfect, but it is remarkable how good this one is.
The points are closely packed around a line of best fit with an annual increase of about 120.

I am open to challenge on everything I say, but I would be surprised if anyone can shoot me down on this one.
That is a linear rise.
Of course it could change, become exponential or reverse.
We can only look at the evidence and speculate.
WHO and UNAIDS have done that and we have seen their conclusions.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 02:32 AM

DON T "And yet you see no possibility of any similar occurence with HIV.
What a very strange "scientist" you are."

WE do see a lot of genetic variability in HIV. There are many groups within HIV 1 and there is HIV 2.
If the virus changes dratically, things might change and we could have another discussion.
It is pointless speculating about a possible, completely unknown future. That would be Science Fiction. Scientists are working in the real world. That is what I have been posting about.

Remember, they have been wrong about this already. For a long time it seemed obvious (O.B.Vious !)that a heterosexual epidemic would happen in the West. That lesson has now been learned.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 02:36 AM

Donuel, those DC stats are frightening.
Is there a lot of injecting going on their?
The US stats are very interesting. If you separate out high risk heterosexuals, (partners who inject or are bisexual) heterosexuals disappear from the AIDS stats altogether!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 02:41 AM

Royston, if you thanked me for information and playing fair too, that would cancel out AKE's endorsement.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 04:57 AM

GfS, every argument you answer shit for brains have put up for your nasty and harmful desires to be vile toward people have been demolished.

It's not about 'the figures', it's about people and how you treat them. I can see now that Keith's argument is just about the academic value of 'the figures' and I can respect that for its own worth.

The only people who agree with your opinions towards gay people and towards HIV are, well, you and Ake.

Keith, I can see that you and I might be agree on a lot of things. I would hold you in higher regard if, when you joined a debate like this one, you would say something like 'my opinion on the subject is......but I disagree with......and am insure about.......but I don't think figures x, y and z are being used properly.

I would thank you for that honesty and fairness on any day of the week.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 05:42 AM

""It is pointless speculating about a possible, completely unknown future. That would be Science Fiction. Scientists are working in the real world. That is what I have been posting about.

Remember, they have been wrong about this already. For a long time it seemed obvious (O.B.Vious !)that a heterosexual epidemic would happen in the West. That lesson has now been learned.""

You are making my point for me Keith, and I am duly grateful.

WHO, and UNAID are speculating about the future, and it is science fiction.

If they are no more inaccurate than were their predictions on swine flu, it could be disastrous. These organisations do have a past record of under, and over, estimating the effect of diseases.

You support, on the basis of their predictions, the view that nothing will change. That is the triumph of hope over experience.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 07:55 AM

Don, you have chosen a bad example with swine flu.
It spread from Mexico to every country on Earth in a couple of weeks!
There was not time to properly establish its mortality. It was not incompetence.
It was known to be a particular threat to young, healthy people and a wrong decision could have been a catastrophe for humanity.

You are obviously right that the future can not yet be predicted.
In any one field, however, some people have a better idea what is going on than others. People with access to all the knowledge that exists and with a lifetime of professional experience working at the highest level in that field.

If you need to know if it will rain tomorow, do you look at the weather forecast or PM Royston?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 08:18 AM

If you PMd me, I would look up the met. office 24 hour forecast for your area, and tell you it was the most likely outcome based on the evidence available and expert opinion.
Royston would tell you that rain was not coming, and anyone who said it was, was a rainphobe bigot and a liar.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 03:04 PM

Keith

If you divide the graph in two you see that up until a few years ago, the graph was pretty much horizontal for at least a decade.

Then in about 2003 or thereabouts it changed direction and started climbing.

Since it changed direction, it can be said that the new direction has been pretty linear so far.

However, if you look at the graph as a whole you see that it is a dog leg, with a significant change of direction happening that has caused the 500% increase.

The whole graph in its entirety going back over the last couple of decades is NOT linear.

You are a physicist and you will therefore be aware that the more variables there are in a given situation, the more unlikely it is that smooth graphs will be derived from observations of reality.

There are so many factors to consider in this issue that we can only comment on general trends.

In this case, the general trend was flat, and then it changed recently to one of sustained growth.

What does that change signify, why did it happen and can it happen again?

If we had made predictions in 2003 about what was going to happen next based on what had happened before, we would have said that hetero infection would carry on on a horizontal trajectory.

We would have been wrong.

It follows that we can't predict a consitent linearity to the growth in hetero infections based on a limited sample from 2003 onwards.

We have to acknowledge that if the graph has radically changed in nature before, then iit could do it again.

The whole graph has not been linear, and we cannot say with any confidence whether there wiill be an epidemic in 140 years or 14.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 03:38 PM

I think that is an artefact Lox.
If you extrapolate the line of best fit back you would reach a zero point aound 1998.
AIDS did exist before that but in that period the numbers were so tiny that trends can not be identified.
If you throw a dice 600 times, you would get very close to 100 sixes.
Throw it 6 times and you could get anything between 0 and 6 hits.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 04:16 PM

Keith

nonetheless my observation still stands.

The current line of growth, for whatever reason you may like to give, is a deviation from the previous reality which is represented by a flat line running along the x axis.

That represents a fundamental change.

From no growth to growth is a matter irrespective of the exact nature of the previous trend.

It was not the same as the trend which exists now.

And the trend which exists now could also change, and given the circumstances previously considered in this thread, for example in relation to sexual health risks among young women, and in relation to the steadily rising overall number of infections, this seems pretty likely.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 04:23 PM

Keith: "Royston would tell you that rain was not coming, and anyone who said it was, was a rainphobe bigot and a liar."

Hehe, actually I would argue for greater understanding of the rain and for a general education program on the effective use of umbrellas to prevent a dangerous epidemic of dampness. ;-p

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 04:57 PM

Smeds: "You will note that Ake does not thank GfS for either information or fair play. Way to go, Akie baby."

I don't require any thank-yous for telling the truth. When I posted to Royston: "Keith, I know that nobody takes Ake seriously, but are you going to let his co-opting of you stand unchallenged? I kind of hope you don't."

Here's a quote from one of our Presidents..it is so apropos:

'The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so.'

Hat's off to the truth!
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 05:20 PM

GfS,

Neither Keith nor I are "the last word" in anything.

The things on which we agree are in black and white a day or so ago. As are the things on which we disagree or that we agree to disagree on.

You and Ake are still in a minority of two on the social and ethical questions that this discussion is actually about.

Moreover, you are both self-confessed homophobes, Ake is as thick as two short planks (just the other day he "proved" that HIV affects gay and straight Africans in equal measure - demolishing all your argumemts, both of you) and you have been busted as a liar. Not just accused, or suspected of lying, but exposed as an out and out liar. Exposed as a liar on matters as fundamental as your gender and the life experiences you claim to have and that you put forward as support for and validation of your opinions.

You are nothing more than a hate-filled liar. You have no credibility here. Do you still profess yourself a Christian? How does your behaviour here sit with your conscience?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 06:14 PM

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."
                                                                                                                                    —Ronald Reagan

He also said: "No, no! On the PAPER, Bonzo!"

(I'm so impressed!)

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 06:44 PM

Didn't Reagan also think that trees cause acid rain?

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 07:02 PM

Yup. He said,

"Approximately 80 percent of our air pollution stems from hydrocarbons released by vegetation, so let's not go overboard in setting and enforcing tough emission standards from man-made sources."

In high school biology classes, I always heard that vegetation takes up carbon dioxide and releases oxygen. (I always thought that was a good thing. . . .)

He also said,

"The state of California has no business subsidizing intellectual curiosity." This in response to student protests on college campuses during his tenure as California governor.

Could there be a connection?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 09:34 PM

Royston: "You are nothing more than a hate-filled liar. You have no credibility here. Do you still profess yourself a Christian? How does your behaviour here sit with your conscience?"

Liar?? ..That's a convenient, but false accusation. That's what you do, when you can't carry on a mature discussion, to possibly discover something about yourself, ..that should at least be of interest to you!

Christian?? I don't believe I 'professed' to be one, on here. Besides, what do you have against Christians?? There law hinges on "Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you."..I'm not getting a hint of 'bigotry' in there, am I?

I have no problem with my conscience, at all. Funny, you should project that!

The weak accuse others of their own motives!
                                          Me...(Its quotable, too)

Don: "The state of California has no business subsidizing intellectual curiosity." This in response to student protests on college campuses during his tenure as California governor."

You know, Back when he was Governor of California, we were having a three day folk and rock festival, in a park, in L.A., he was staying at a hotel across the street from the park, and was on the roof, of the hotel, listening and watching the concert below. When we(two of us) were on. I had a moment on the mic, where I went into a 'little talk'. During that talk, I addressed him, because I knew he was there(reliable source in the hotel), and spoke to him about his policies, and priorities, and their effect on us 'peons'. To tell you the absolute truth, I was stellar, even you would have been proud!! No shit! I was not a defiant jerk off, like most 'protesters', but addressed him wonderfully. I thought he was wrong, about a few things, and a few things he stood for.......but nonetheless, even a broken clock is right...twice a day!!!.............therefore:

"The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so."

Royston:(again), "You and Ake are still in a minority of two on the social and ethical questions that this discussion is actually about."

Minority, on here?...Yes, but only on here. You are a huge minority, in the real world!.. It's only because the homosexuals, on here, have a need to justify their position.......and it takes all of you to do that, and still fail!!........(Now watch some Bozo start posting stats, which are slanted, as per there source)! ...Save you the trouble, people who think homosexuality is wonderful are in the minority!.....Gosh, ever wonder why?...Hint: It's not just to pick on you!

Oh, and by the way, don't hate you....grow up!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 31 Jan 10 - 10:28 PM

Nice you got a chance to bend Reagan's ear, GfS, but let's face it, he's not exactly an authority on political science, and he has a very warped idea of what liberalism amounts to, as is the case with most conservatives--which apparently includes you, or at least in a lot of your beliefs. But president or not, Ronald Reagan was never the sharpest knife in the drawer. Smarter than Bush, but still not quite up to the level of the average Yorkshire terrier.

I wouldn't quote him if I were you. Bad for your image!

By the way, GfS, in your last post, you seem to be trying to imply that those who disagree with you must, of necessity, be homosexual. That would come as a helluva surprise to my wife!! Very disingenuous of you, GfS!

Just for the novelty of it, you might try that "grow up" prescription yourself.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 01:30 AM

Don: "......and he has a very warped idea of what liberalism amounts to, as is the case with most conservatives--which apparently includes you,....."

No Don, I'm not a flaming conservative, but a little more to the center, or where ever I can find truth in common sense and common sense in the truth! To you, and understandably so, it must seem to the right...umm...maybe super far right, but its not really...actually, when I think about it, I think some of your dogmatic political mindset, is way out in left field,..so far out, that it's not even in the ballpark....but somewhere out there where you still catch flies.   <<<<(hey, that was a good line..just made it up..just for you.) Shit! You're an inspiration!!!

As long as we're at it,..". By the way, GfS, in your last post, you seem to be trying to imply that those who disagree with you must, of necessity, be homosexual. That would come as a helluva surprise to my wife!! Very disingenuous of you, GfS!"


GfS: "Got any other nasty little secrets???", he grins a mischievous grin, looks slightly upwards, rolling then locking his eyes at about a 10 o'clock position, scuffs the floor, with the sole of the shoe, crossing legs, at the shins, and stabbing the floor with his foot as he comes to rest, and plunges his hands deep into his pocket, purses his lips, then grins.

Oh my Gosh, I'm getting carried away!..Jeez, I told you that you were an inspiration!

Oh, and true to tell, I was told, by someone on the roof, that he WAS listening. I doubt if it made much difference..maybe till he died, and met God, who must have said, "Ronnie Babie, at least you can't say, you weren't told!"

Kiss the Wife,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 03:16 AM

Lox, I can not tell you why the rate of new hetero cases went up.
Looking at the table for partner exposure, the increase was in heterosexual exposur for them.
Maybe the new dangerous partners were the newly arrived cases.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 04:52 AM

If there were such things as Heaven and Hell, I should imagine Reagan headed in the *other* direction to the one where he might 'meet God'.

As for 'the homosexuals', as I've noted before I think I'm the only one who has identified as such in here. I might be overweight, but I'm not plural. GfS needs the scary (to him) image of a multitudinous phalanx of homos to stoke the flames of his paranoia. (I keep thinking The Homosexuals would be a great name for a band, although in the back of my mind I think that idea was already taken.)

And is it a 'minority' who think "homosexuality" is wonderful ? Globally, yes. But then you should never use 'sales figures' as an indicator of anything truly meaningful, as that would mean 'Avatar' was the best film ever made and Taylor Swift is the major musical talent of our era.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 04:53 AM

Oh, and I would also like to welcome this thread to its fourth month on earth.

(Well, *mostly* on earth.)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 01:55 PM

Keith,

I wasn't looking for an explanation, I was simply pointing out that the graph, taken over a 20-30 year peiod, is not linear.

The anomaly in the original line turned out not to be a flash in the pan, but a sustained change of circumstances.

On that basis, we cannot make a claim, based on past experience, that the growth rates among hetero's will continue to grow in a consistently linear fashion.

It may happen that way, but it could also be the case, based on past form, that as overall numbers increase, that growth rates also increase.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 01:59 PM

Nothing dogmatic or far-out about my political position, GfS. I believe I am pretty much in the same position as Benjamin Disraeli, who said, "I am a fiscal conservative, but a social liberal." And unlike a few others I could point out around here, I am perfectly willing to revise my positions on various issues if I encounter new and valid information, and/or if someone can give me a good and sufficient reason why I should do so.

It's called "having an open mind." You really ought to try it sometime.

I am not a member of any political party, although I tend to vote Democrat, all too often because the Dems represent the lesser of two evils. The one person I would vote for for president with no qualms in Dennis Kucinich, but he, of course, has been systematically excluded from candidacy by the Democratic Party because he has proven during his political career that he is a man of integrity. Also, I agree with the platform that he enunciated.

No, to the goose-stepping arch-conservative, I may be so far out that I'm no longer in the ball park, but I'm right in there shoulder to shoulder with most Americans who were born with a brain, are in the habit of using it, and feel that the benefits of living in a democratic society should be shared by everyone, not just those who are wealthy enough or influential enough to afford it.

I pay my taxes because I feel that that is one of the prices of living in a civilized society. But along with a lot of other people, I don't see that I'm getting my money's worth.

And one of the uncivilized parts of this society is that it denies freedoms and benefits to certain specific members of society because they don't conform to what the self-appointed arbiters of personal behavior feel is proper—even though what they do has no effect whatsoever on the lives of others.

I do not believe that anyone should be allowed to go into other peoples' bedrooms and try to tell them what they can and cannot do. This, of course, in the case of consenting adults.

If that makes me some sort of far-out, raving "liberal" in your mind, then—so be it! I can definitely live with that!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 04:21 PM

The one person I would vote for for president with no qualms in Dennis Kucinich, but he, of course, has been systematically excluded from candidacy by the Democratic Party because he has proven during his political career that he is a man of integrity.

Maybe. I'd say he's proven --or at least given very good reason to believe -- he's so far left he can't win in the generals. At least can't win the center and right-of center center, which are necessary to win 1600 PA.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 04:53 PM

Don: "Nothing dogmatic or far-out about my political position, GfS. I believe I am pretty much in the same position as Benjamin Disraeli, who said, "I am a fiscal conservative, but a social liberal."

Fiscal conservative..hmmm.....what do you think of Obama?

As so far as, "I do not believe that anyone should be allowed to go into other peoples' bedrooms and try to tell them what they can and cannot do. This, of course, in the case of consenting adults."

And while in agreement with you on that one too, I don't want the homosexual agenda, teaching our kids. Nor even the heterosexuals, bringing in their agenda, in the early primary grades. Fair enough?

Smeds had nothing to say of any substance, so we'll let that slide.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 05:15 PM

What pray tell is the homosexual agenda? Answers on a postcard.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 06:36 PM

""If you PMd me, I would look up the met. office 24 hour forecast for your area, and tell you it was the most likely outcome based on the evidence available and expert opinion.
Royston would tell you that rain was not coming, and anyone who said it was, was a rainphobe bigot and a liar.""

Your bad example, mate, because on this thread Royston says the rain is coming, and you are the one ignoring past experience, in favour of predictions of the future which are at best educated guesses.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 06:47 PM

""You know, Back when he was Governor of California, we were having a three day folk and rock festival, in a park, in L.A., he was staying at a hotel across the street from the park, and was on the roof, of the hotel, listening and watching the concert below. When we(two of us) were on. I had a moment on the mic, where I went into a 'little talk'. During that talk, I addressed him, because I knew he was there(reliable source in the hotel), and spoke to him about his policies, and priorities, and their effect on us 'peons'. To tell you the absolute truth, I was stellar, even you would have been proud!! No shit! I was not a defiant jerk off, like most 'protesters', but addressed him wonderfully. I thought he was wrong, about a few things, and a few things he stood for.......but nonetheless, even a broken clock is right...twice a day!!!.............therefore:""

Homophobia, a belief that homosexuality can be cured, bigotry, a dichotomy of identity which prevents it from being sure of its own gender, and now megalomania and delusions of grandeur. And it really believes Ronny Raygun was listening.

BOY OH BOY Does it need help!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 07:02 PM

""It's only because the homosexuals, on here, have a need to justify their position""

If it were only the homosexuals on here that opposed you, it would, I believe, be a pretty even contest.

And in case you have any deep insight into my mental state, or gender orientation, let me save you from making an even bigger fool of yourself (as if THAT were possible).

I have been married for forty five years, to the love of my life, who has presented me with two fine upright children, who have, between them, further enriched me with five healthy, vigorous, grandchildren, who absolutely love their kind old grandad (their words, not mine).

So, unlike yourself, I have no personal axe to grind, when I say that I want to see gay couples have exactly the same opportunities for a loving, caring, relationship, with which I have been blessed.

Sex was never a huge part of my marriage, especially with advancing age and medical issues, and I don't believe that it plays any greater part in loving gay relationships.

I could never understand this preoccupation of homophobes with the sexual activities of gays, which they erroneously see as the basis for all gay relationships (absolute bunk, of course).

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 07:39 PM

". . . I don't want the homosexual agenda, teaching our kids. Nor even the heterosexuals, bringing in their agenda, in the early primary grades."

And your verifiable evidence, GfS, that anyone is actually attempting to do this?

And, no, a link to some conservative/religious "protect the family" web site will not do.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 10:34 PM

Don T: "And it really believes Ronny Raygun was listening.

BOY OH BOY Does it need help!"

One of my parents, who was a department heads, at that hotel, was on the roof with him. Sit on it Ralphie!

You just can't bring yourself around, that everyone is not as much as a loser, as you..therefore, everybody else is bullshitting. Get a life!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 12:58 AM

Due to someone's importuning I have watched a dozen Bill O'Reilly YouTube videos tonight. Interestingly, GfS is sounding more and more like O'Reilly. Fascinating.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 01:05 AM

.......lookin' out for you!

Naw, I watch him occasionally. Oberman, I used to watch, but he was getting ridiculous. Mathews is a lunatic...but in fairness, I watch both sides, and am impartial to both, to a large degree. I more often than not, watch them to check out the bullshit their feeding the American public...but, if I want actual news, I have other sources.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 04:08 AM

On the vexed question of teaching, the 'homosexual agenda' and young people, a few thoughts.....

In British schools today, there are some teachers in some schools who discuss sexuality within an 'equal rights' framework that GfS would contest. Plenty of other schools (especially though that operate within a religious framework - which in the UK are called 'faith schools') do not do this.
   
The peer-group culture in schools (of all types) is often viciously anti-gay - lots of bullying that ranges from name-calling to physical attacks; plenty of young gay people in the UK still commit suicide while at school.

Children do not just learn at schools, of course. A child might get the equal rights agenda from a liberal teacher then go home to a very conservative household. (Or vice versa.) Teachers are not all-powerful (although some of them think they are!).

I shouldn't say 'they', really, I should say 'we', as I myself work in education, though at university level, not in schools. So I teach adults (albeit mostly young ones). Depending on the theme or topic of the class, if issues relating to homosexuality are relevant, I make no secret of my identity and the views that I hold. To me, it is honest to do so, as it allows students to filter what I say through the context of who I am. Among other things, I see this as important and supportive for my gay students and instructive for my non-gay students.

I admire the fortitude and bravery of teachers (whether ther are gay, straight or whatever) who discuss these things at school with students younger than university age. The culture of anti-gay prejudice in schools is such that their task is unenviably difficult - I couldn't do it myself.

Am I delivering a 'homosexual agenda' ? Quite possibly.
Are there other educators delivering a 'homophobic agenda' ? Quite possibly.
Is there a range of more or less 'neutral' positions that lie between the two ? Definitely.
Should I aim to adopt one of those 'neutral' stances ? Well that's a political and personal choice, and I've made mine.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 04:15 AM

GfS

I owe you an apology: I am sorry for calling you a liar on the issue of your gender and the descriptions you gave us of your family life.

I can see now that the belief a few of us came to have, that you were claiming to be a woman, came from a misreading of some of your posts around 11 Jan 04:32pm. Your response to the suggestion didn't scotch the rumour, but that's still my fault.

As I went back and read all that stuff again, I was still of the view that for someone with such an apparently happy life, you have some serious hate-issues, a superiority complex and a really nasty judgmental side.

I don't understand how all that emerges from such contented happiness but I don't believe you lie, to us.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 04:24 AM

In case misinterpretation ensues, the 'though' in the brackets in my second para should read 'those'.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 02:08 PM

I don't see speaking up for equality of treatment as a "gay agenda". It seems a perverse way to use the word "agenda".

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 02:37 PM

The opposition have marched on to the next battle.

Just lie down a play "dead"....when it gets dark, you can all go home.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 03:07 PM

Ake,

If you were paying attention you would have noted that the debate has moved on significantly.

I don't think you'll be needing to play dead at this rate as brain death has very clearly set in.

We know that HIV is overwhemingly a heterosexual disease.

We know that in the UK it is proportionately the fastest growing disease (500%)

We know that the increase in the rate of growth is not linear.

We know that anal sex is only about twice as efficient in transmitting HIV as vagingal sex

We know that 95% of homosexual men have no HIV

The evidence does not support your assertion that Homosexuality is a more unhelthy lifestyle.

There is evidence that homosexuals currently suffer disproportionately, but this is not the same thing as saying that homosexuality is unhealthy.

If by your reckoning, high numbers of STI infections are evidence of unhealthy sexuality, then we must also conclude that heterosexual sex is an unhealthy lifestyle for young women, as 10% suffer from chlamydia, and they are also the worst infected by ghonnorhea, syphilis and HPV.

HPV kills women indirectly just as HIV kills everyone indirectly.


Lets not forget what you have been asserting.

1. Homosexsuals are a scourge
2. homosexuals are closet paedophiles
3. homosexuality is unhealthy.


There is only one unhealthy thing on here and it remains your obsession.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 03:42 PM

I don't see speaking up for equality of treatment as a "gay agenda". It seems a perverse way to use the word "agenda".

said mousethief.

----------------------------------

Not sure I do, really, but we both know somebody who will.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 06:34 PM

Shhhh!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 07:55 PM

Lox, you forgot:

4. Rounding homosexuals up (for their own good) against their will and sequestering them in quarantine (for their own good).

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 07:59 PM

""You just can't bring yourself around, that everyone is not as much as a loser, as you..therefore, everybody else is bullshitting. Get a life!""

Got one thanks, and a bloody good one too!

And this loser doesn't need to find someone to despise, denigrate, and deprive of humanity, and human rights, in order to be able to live with himself.

I despise only those who can't feel whole unless they are kicking somebody they classify as inferior.

I wouldn't want your idea of a life, if it came with green stamps, so crawl back under your stone, and wait for a cockroach to get too near.

That'll be much more your mark.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Feb 10 - 09:52 AM

Lox, I do not agree with all your statements.

"We know that HIV is overwhemingly a heterosexual disease."
Yes, but only in Africa

"We know that in the UK it is proportionately the fastest growing disease (500%)"
Not meaningful in view of the fact that 500% only takes it from infinitesimal to miniscule.

"We know that the increase in the rate of growth is not linear."
It is linear. The rate of new cases has gone from around zero to a steady value (hence linear) that is still in the very rare disease category.

"We know that anal sex is only about twice as efficient in transmitting HIV as vagingal sex"
I do not accept your interpretation of those research results.

"We know that 95% of homosexual men have no HIV"
True.

"The evidence does not support your assertion that Homosexuality is a more unhelthy lifestyle."
Debateable

"There is evidence that homosexuals currently suffer disproportionately, but this is not the same thing as saying that homosexuality is unhealthy."
Agree

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 Feb 10 - 01:31 PM

Royston, and Smedley,, Thank you. You'll also find that I posted, 'If you shove me, I'll shove back'..perhaps some of the perceived 'hostilities' toward homosexuals, was somehow misinterpreted by some, when actually it was a rebuttal toward being attacked. Thank you for going back over my posts, and pointing that out.

Respectful Regards,.....(but keeping one eye open, one eye closed, and one eyes...just to see with!)
GfS

Here, just for fun:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-_W18CWypE&feature=related

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 02:08 AM

A new perspective on the increasing numbers of heterosexuals infected in UK.
For the last decade we have seen a steady rise in those numbers.
But, the population, and therefore the at risk population, has itself not been static.
Due mainly to current and recent immigration the population has been growing at a very much faster rate.
Thus the proportion of heterosexuals who are infected has actually been, and is, in steep decline.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 02:51 AM

Oh, Keith. You can't have that last post. You already removed the migrant HIV from the statistics. The fastest growing group is that of the "locals", and that demographic, overall, is decreasing - as you have pointed out elswhere. I'm not arguing stats about HIV with you, but even you'll agree that one might not have long legs.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 03:04 AM

UK acquired infections only.
The pool of infected heterosexuals is growing by well under 200 per year.
The pool of sexually active heterosexuals is growing by over 200 000 per year.

The proporton of infected heterosexuals could multiply 35 times and still be a rare disease, but is actually decreasing.
It is an extremely rare disease of heterosexuals in UK, and is getting steadily rarer.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 07:04 AM

""The pool of sexually active heterosexuals is growing by over 200 000 per year.""

Some credible support for that bald assumption?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 07:21 AM

Keith: UK acquired infections only.
The pool of infected heterosexuals is growing by well under 200 per year.

Now Keith, we can't take you seriously if you say things like that. It shows you never understood the numbers to begin with.

Without prejudice to all the things on which we do agree, you must understand that you are wrong on this statistical issue that YOU claim is so important.

The pool - the number of straight people living with HIV in this country - is not increasing by 200 a year. It increased by over 4,000 in 2008, if I remember the earlier statistics properly. Of those, about 1,300 contracted the disease in this country, the balance contracted it elsewhere.

The number of straight people contracting the disease in this country every year is rising by about 200 each year. So 2008 = 1,300, 2007 = 1,100, 2006 = 900 etc etc etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 07:58 AM

UK acquired infection Royston.
Remember your link, page 6 table A
240 330 490 600 740 830 870 1000 1130 490
These are the number of new infections from 2000, the last one being incomplete.
The number is increasing by well under 200 per year.
As a proportion of the population, the total number of infections are decreasing because the population is growing so much faster.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 08:08 AM

Just over 1 thousand new cases a year, minus deaths, compared to a poulation increase of over 200 000.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 09:00 AM

Yes, Keith, but you said

"The pool of infected heterosexuals is growing by well under 200 per year

And that is wrong.

It increased by well over 4,000 people in 2008 alone. Of that number, 1,300 were UK-acquired infections.

The only thing increasing at 200 per year is the additional number of NEW, UK-ACQUIRED heterosexual infections. That is 200 more, each year than in the previous year. As in the figures you helpfully reprinted today. All those new infections add to the existing pool.

You are confusing these numbers of new UK-acquired infections EACH YEAR, with the size of the total pool. Do you not see that?

There is no support for your 200,000 figure. Whatever increase in population, it will be comprised of gay and straight in the same proportions. So both demographics rise at the same rate; at least that is the only assumption one could possibly draw. But if you want to tie your immigration judgements to your disease judgments then you will also have to accept the 3,000 or more non-UK acquired infections into your comparison. Because they also add to your "...pool of infected heterosexuals..." And then it all falls apart for you.

I was beginning to have some respect for you. Sadly, I was wrong. You are just DESPERATE to twist things around so that HIV appears to be the the responsibility and fault of blacks and gays. When we agreed on stuff - and you agreed the same things with Lox - was that just a provisional agreement while you carried on trying to distort numbers? or do you actually agree those points?

If you agree them, why not just shut up now? What point are you trying to make?

Or you could carry on making a fool of yourself. Either way is fine by me.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 09:09 AM

I found the HPA figure I was looking for again.

The correct figure for Keith's stated increase in the "pool of infected heterosexuals<"/b> was 4,200 in 2008 alone. The lowest increase in the "pool of infected heterosexuals" was in 2000 when it increased by 2,100.

http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1237970242135

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 10:32 AM

There was a typo Royston
200 a year is the increase in new cases.
I had clarified that already when I said, "just over a thousand new cases per year"
In proportion to the straight population that is about 0.002%
The rise in population is about 0.5%. (250 times higher)
Do not confuse the issue with infections acquired in Subsaharan Africa where things are very different to UK.

the figures I last posted were from your table A that you have just linked to again, UK acquired heterosexual infections.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 11:01 AM

OK, Keith. So no point then. Just numbers. Just so long as we know.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 11:25 AM

Keith: The rise in population is about 0.5%. (250 times higher)

But you attribute that rise - with no evidential support - to immigration. You can't count the immigrants in when it suits you and then count them out again when it doesn't. If you count the immigrants in then you have to accept a 4,200 increase in HIV+ straight people.

If populations split 90/10 gay straight, then 10% of any mass immigration will be gay as well. So Immigration increases gay/straight populations at the same rate. So the assertion is doubly meaningless.

If you count immigrants out then - because you have claimed previously that 'indigenous' populations are falling - you have to accept a 500% increase increase in UK-acquired infections against the backdrop of a falling indigenous straight population.

Either way, your assertion was wrong, wrong-minded, racist and a classic example of what I accused you of - trimming a bit, ignoring a bit, bending a bit, lying a bit...to prove that bollocks ain't bollocks.

And it is even more irritating, and supportive of the dim opinion that I and others hold of you, that you continue this nonsense in light of the otherwise quite progressive opinions that you "confessed" to.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 12:08 PM

We thrashed out the population figures on another thread. it is all there.
I am surprised you want to exclude immigrants from our population.
They are here now. Accept it.
I exclude no one, but we are discussing transmission of HIV here.
Not in subsaharan Africa.
I was leaving you to do the sums for the gay population.
I worked on a figure of 2% being gay
I came up with a rise of about o.2% which you see is also below pop increase.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 01:12 PM

ok, to cut short a potentially long story, today's discussion represents a zero sum game, nothing new has been added to the debate. Just some more doubt as to motivations. ok.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 02:36 PM

I offered it as a new perspective.
In all our discussion we ignored the signifcant fact that the population is increasing at a greater rate than the rates we were discussing.
Much greater in the case of heterosexual infection.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 02:38 PM

If populations split 90/10 gay straight, then 10% of any mass immigration will be gay as well.

That's like saying any time you roll a die 6 times, you will get exactly one "three". We need to know a lot more about the immigration to know if the general population ratio holds for the immigrant population as well. Are gays being selected for? selected against? What counts as a "gay"? If somebody has the "gay gene" (assuming there is such a thing) but doesn't self-identify as gay in Africa, and isn't a MSM, how does that affect our numbers? We don't know any of this stuff so it's more than a little glib to say it must be 90/10.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 02:47 PM

MT, in my 09:00 post I said that an equal distribution of gay/straight in migratory populations was the only reasonable assumption to make in the absence of data. I don't think gay people are selected in or out of migratory communities so that supports the reasonableness of the assumption without making it any less of an assumption.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 03:36 PM

Royston: "OK, Keith. So no point then. Just numbers. Just so long as we know."

Just numbers?? Isn't just one more case a tragedy?? I've lost two close friends to AIDS, as I posted a while ago, in the Prop 8 thread. Please, NO number is 'acceptable' or 'wins' a discussion. In every 'number' is a person, with loved ones, family and friends. If there should be a point to all of this, let it NOT be to prove a point...but to save lives!! Discourage ANYTHING that spreads this fatal disease!! Any form of promiscuity is NOT 'hip'!!!!
Regards,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 03:44 PM

Agree with every word of your last post, GfS. A lot of effort has been spent getting us to that consensus. I'm determined to see Keith join us.

Keith, had enough numbers yet? Are you finally going to accept the various points that were agreed on and stop trying to prove that some HIV suffering is meaningless while others are to blame for the problem?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 03:47 PM

Therefore, the intelligent thing to do is to do everything possible to encourage stable, monogamous relationships.

Obvious!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 03:54 PM

Don: "Therefore, the intelligent thing to do is to do everything possible to encourage stable, monogamous relationships."

YES!!!!!!!!! MY EXACT POINT FROM THE BEGINNING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thanks!   (until your next post)..wink!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 04:07 PM

The contention all along has been over the relative risks of infection between the different groups.
You can only discuss that quantitatively.
I have just shown that the tiny proportion of straight people being infected is becoming a yet smaller proportion.
There are estimated to be about 500 000 MSMs in UK.
That is less than 1%
That means that their rise in infection matches the rise in population, while for straight people it is about 250 times lower.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 05:30 PM

Keith, where do your ever-decreasing estimates of the number of gay men come from?

It is an increasingly surprising claim that I think you should back up with some sources.

It's irrelevant to the discussion, but I'm interested to understand it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Paul Burke
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 05:38 PM

It's also been contended that most men are gay. I'm not as far as I'm aware, but I think it's probably closer to the truth.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 05:51 PM

Look, I'm so sick of wasting my time on Keith's contorted and fantastical half-truths. I just googled 'size uk gay population' and learned enough to know what I suspected - that this 1 percent thing is yet another of Keith's more pernicious concoctions. There are a range of estimates, the page on the subject from avert.org.uk seems quite balanced.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 06:19 PM

Keith is nearly being a clever clogs, but not quite.

200/60,000,000 is not a higher proportion than 1200/60,250,000

So the proportion is still increasing.

But it was just a frivolous diversion anyway.

The Criteria Keith sets out in his position is to do with the proportion of new diagnoses per demographic.

It is also to do with the rate of increase of the growth in numbers of HIV infections in each demographic.

And in Heteros that has been growing at a linear rate for under ten years, and at a contrasting very low rate for the previous twenty odd years.

In all, the rate of growth can be seen to increase dramatically less than a decade ago.

Overall, the rate of growth has changed, resulting in a dog leg shaped graph

Any golfer knows that a dog leg is not linear, and is certanly very unpredictable.

The rate of Growth could change again.



As for the transmisssion efficiency stats, Keith has to admit that they are not as clear as he makes out.

33.8 times riskier does not make sense as a base rate, only as a subsequent rate once other factors have been included.

otherwise the 1 in 10 versus 1 in 3 figures would be unattainable.

If you took 33.8 as your base risk factor, it would increase with the inclusion other risk factors.

So with the addition of the risk associated with being more likely to encounter a HIV positive partner, the factor of 33.8 would increase several fold.

1 in 10 versus 1 in 3 indicates a factor of just over 3.

If you take 1 in 10 as your base factor, then with the addition of other factors you could arrive at an overall factor of 33.8

Someone else can do the actual donkey work.

It is also possible that there is a mistake on the page that these figures come from.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 06:27 PM

By The Way ....



    We have a distinguished contributor to our thread here today ...




          He might be troll though ....

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 06:34 PM

Royston, It may be hard, at first, to think I'm not going to be 'on your side', when I post to you, however, I'm on all our sides here; re-read some of my recently posted comments about numbers, and playing Russian Roulette, in our sex lives; the numbers aren't important, as to justify or attack homosexuality vs. heterosexuality. Promiscuity in either, IS STUPID!!!

In homosexuality, though to some, it might not seem that way to all, in the current moment..so to them, it isn't; To some, it is a 'phase', and as time goes on, some re-think their position, as witnessed by a flurry of posts, that said, this or that person knew one, to several, who may have changed...that's their business; but it seems rather unfair to those, to whom that may happen, to lock the doors, to that option. Fair enough???

As to those persons, who are miserable during a transition, no matter what the outcome....well, whom wouldn't be?????...even heteros, who found that getting laid had to take an abrupt change,..well, to ANYTHING else. I would think as a person, who cares about the human condition, would be supportive, at least to keeping doors open, doors to the options open, the options open, and the options within the options open!!

There is should be no reason, for anyone feeling hostility, for anyone exercising that freedom, and taking that option....and let's not 'hate' anyone, or assume that 'hate' is coming from the one side to the other, and then act, as if that person threatens us.

My position is that a political view, in regards to this issue,(others too), should NOT start with a political agenda, to dictate to science, and fit the appropriate doctrine, about what CAN'T be. Hasn't that way of thinking from BOTH sides, done enough to chip away at our personal freedoms????...any more????

Regards,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 08:39 PM

Don: "Therefore, the intelligent thing to do is to do everything possible to encourage stable, monogamous relationships."

YES!!!!!!!!! MY EXACT POINT FROM THE BEGINNING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thanks!   (until your next post)..wink!

Well, Jeez, GfS! why didn't you say so in the first place, instead of saying (for what seems like a couple thousand posts now) "they need to be cured."

????????

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Feb 10 - 07:39 AM

Royston, re your "Look, I'm so sick of wasting my time on Keith's contorted and fantastical half-truths. I just googled 'size uk gay population' and learned enough to know what I suspected - that this 1 percent thing is yet another of Keith's more pernicious concoctions. There are a range of estimates, the page on the subject from avert.org.uk seems quite balanced."

This is from the Gay Men's Sex Survey, funded by the Terence Higgins Trust and the Department of Health
The Census tells us how many males there are in the
UK and this is our starting point to describe the age
profile of all men that have sex with men (MSM). The
National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles
(NSSAL) tells us the proportion of all men that are
homosexually active. We estimate that right now in
the UK, there are 500,000 men who will have sex with
another man in the next five years
http://www.sigmaresearch.co.uk/files/GMSS-BS1-age.pdf
(500 000 is less than 1% of the population.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Feb 10 - 07:49 AM

Lox re your
"200/60,000,000 is not a higher proportion than 1200/60,250,000
So the proportion is still increasing."

Rise of infected heteros 1200, out of 60m = 0.002% rise
Rise of population    250 000 out of 60m =0.4% (200 times bigger)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Feb 10 - 07:52 AM

I only counted immigrants for the population rise, not births.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Feb 10 - 10:24 AM

Don; "Well, Jeez, GfS! why didn't you say so in the first place, instead of saying (for what seems like a couple thousand posts now) "they need to be cured."

Why did you repeatedly misquote, re-interpret, change them meaning of what I was saying, to get the other 'catters pissed off at me?? Often you steered the thread into a politically based bias, which got everyone fighting and sounding more hostile than we were. Little Hawk, Joe Offer, and myself had remarked to you, about that.

Personally, I was not off base, though I'm aware my rhetoric can be, rather inflammatory, in the satire. When that is turned into being ill spirited, less gets accomplished.

That being said, Don, I have to thank you, in an odd sort of way! A LOT of great information got out, that would have not gotten there, had we not 'sparred'. We made music, together!!...even though it took a while to get tuned, in the middle of the piece, and to get the groove going, a lot of people got entertained, danced, and got turned on to the 'message' of the song!!...Wink!!

Hope your Day looks up!,

Regards!,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 05 Feb 10 - 12:35 PM

Keith,

I'm in transit again and won't be able to read the site you link to until tomorrow probably.

On what I read from your post, do you want to use the time to retract your assertion that there are only about half a million gay men in this country?

I did read the sexual attitudes surveys and other official data when I called you out on this point and you ARE wrong.

I suspect the THT report concludes something quite different from your claim.

Think about It, confession is good for the soul.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 05 Feb 10 - 12:51 PM

Just a couple of simple questions for you, GfS:

Are you schizophrenic?
Or a victim of multiple personality disorder?
Or are there several people using the GfS moniker?

YOU have lied through your teeth about ME all through two threads now, and made up libelous stories about me, obviously because you didn't like the data I was posting that refuted your contention that homosexuality can be cured by the right counsellor, and you couldn't argue the points, so you attacked me personally.

And now you are trying to say that it's me who's been trying to do that to you!

Which boils down to the fact that you are still at it.

Truth is something you are not capable of.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 05 Feb 10 - 01:51 PM

Keith,

Your response is sleight of hand I'm afraid.

Your comparison is false.

Its like comparing the number of Runs scored by Botham to the number of Goals scored by Beckham and saying that Botham is better cos he got more.

How is it like that?

Because the numbers being compared represent completely different things.

The comparison you need to make to decide whether the proportion of infected hetero's is rising or not, is between the Percentage of infected heteros before and percentage of infected heteros after.

both percentages are found using the formula "number of infected hetero's divided by number of heterosexuals".

You will find that todays percentage is higher than that from 8 years ago.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Feb 10 - 02:04 PM

Don, No I've always been truthful to you...of course, I only had to go with what you gave me!.....However you proved a worthy fiddle!

Counseling, was not my primary 'occupation' in life. However, I got real good at it. what a lot of people don't understand is that a good counselor has to be able to draw, the person out!! The rest, gives an opportunity to get one to think, rather than TELL them WHAT to think. Also, a well placed QUESTION, can change a life!!...However, you proved a worthy fiddle! (wink!)

Speaking of that very thing........(Oh 'Blue Clicky' magician?????? Need help)..From dearest friends!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qYNwAaduFg      

AND:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nDrVQ6C5so

Enjoy!!!
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 05 Feb 10 - 06:22 PM

So. A couple of clips from the "Celtic Woman" show, with an accompanying on-line "I.Q. test." What's that supposed to prove?

In high school I had an I.Q. test (Stanford-Binet), and a similar but different test in my college entrance exams. And for certain jobs, I have had to take similar tests. I can say that I am quite pleased and gratified with the results. But I'm not going to broadcast those results because I have noted that it is characteristic of sessions in which people get to comparing I.Q.s, as it goes around the table, everyone's I.Q. gets higher. No one will fess up that they have a lower I.Q. than any of those who precede them.

Besides, whenever I've played with one of those on-line quizzes, it always turns out that someone is trying to sell me something, and I wind up with about a dozen tracking cookies from their web site.

You've always been truthful to (about) me? Not bloody likely! With the meager information I mentioned about my private life on the Prop 8 thread, you shuffled the events, interpreted them in your own manner, putting the worst possible spin on them, then blew them all out of proportion and wrote a whole new scenario trying to make me look like a self-centered clod and an irresponsible father. Those who know me and know what the real situation was (is) would be tempted to slap you silly for that attempt to libel me.

And THEN—on the basis of your fictions, you have the unmitigated temerity to try to offer me counseling in an open internet forum!

GfS, If you actually are a psychological counselor, you would be aware that sort of thing is a gross violation of professional ethics.

####

So am I to assume from what you've said in your most recent posts that you now favor same-sex marriages (if only as the best way to reduce promiscuity by encouraging stable, monogamous relationships) and that you no longer maintain that same-sex orientation is a psychopathic condition that can be cured through counseling (despite all the evidence to the contrary), and that you now repudiate Richard Cohen, the self-proclaimed "ex-gay" who, without training or credentials, maintains that he can "cure" homosexuals—by lying on a sofa with them, fondling and caressing them, and assuring them that they are loved?

By the way, I would suggest that any Mudcatter who has the stomach for it can go back over what you have posted and what I have posted on both this thread and the "Prop 8" thread and read who actually said what.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 05 Feb 10 - 07:04 PM

Don Firth's statements are accurate to the last degree. If GfS is truly of the opinion that he espoused in his last post, he is delusional. Either that or he hopes others' memories are real, real short.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 05 Feb 10 - 07:40 PM

OK Keith,

Sigma Research. An university of Portsmouth unofficial sex quiz with clipboards at Gay Pride in London. The Gay Men's Sex Survey - an online self-selecting sex quiz with no validation of the participants or academic rigour. Now dropped by Sigma because they worked out that it was meaningless and they admit to it all on their own website

Follow Keith's link and browse about.

The figure of 500,000 is not their assertion of the number of gay men, it is a big assumption about the number of men who think they will have sex with another man in the next 5 years. The idea comes from the national survey of sexual attitudes and lifestyles, which is only a survey of 11,000 people.

It found 8.6% of male respondents reported having had sex with another man.

Keith, you are a devious and untrustworthy piece of work. You rarely tell bald les, but you hardly ever tell the truth either, do you?

For what it's worth (which is not a lot) look at the discussion of the sexual attitudes and lifestlye survey

http://www.avert.org/gay-people.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Feb 10 - 09:57 PM

I don't know about the 'IQ' Test..that's not why I posted the links..other than that.....there you two go again!!

Grinning,
GfS

P.S. I don't know how you construed me being 'in favor' of same sex marriages....just another one of your twisting of stuff, I suppose, but I guess I'm used to it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 05 Feb 10 - 10:26 PM

P.S. I don't know how you construed me being 'in favor' of same sex marriages....just another one of your twisting of stuff, I suppose, but I guess I'm used to it." GfS

Construed from this, possibly:

"Don: "Therefore, the intelligent thing to do is to do everything possible to encourage stable, monogamous relationships."

"YES!!!!!!!!! MY EXACT POINT FROM THE BEGINNING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!'

It seems that you didn't mean it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Feb 10 - 10:33 PM

Ebbie, what word in the posts, did you construe as meaning 'homosexual marriage'?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 05 Feb 10 - 10:51 PM

Let me add a little emphasis for your enlightenment and edification, GfS (also, you might try putting your glasses on).

Don:
"Therefore, the intelligent thing to do is to do everything possible to encourage stable, MONOGAMOUS relationships."

GfS;
"YES!!!!!!!!! MY EXACT POINT FROM THE BEGINNING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!'

So what words am I putting in your mouth? What, in this context IS a "stable, monogamous relationship" other than same-sex marriage?

Do you own a good dictionary, GfS? Do you ever use it?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 05 Feb 10 - 11:56 PM

Let me assist.

mo•nog•a•my
Etymology: French monogamie, from Late Latin monogamia, from Greek, from monogamos monogamous, from mon- + gamos marriage, from gamein to marry
Date: 1612
1 archaic : the practice of marrying only once during a lifetime
2 : the state or custom of being married to one person at a time
3 : the condition or practice of having a single mate during a period of time
— mo•nog•a•mous \mə-ˈnä-gə-məs\ also mono•gam•ic \ˌmä-nə-ˈga-mik\ adjective
— mo•nog•a•mous•ly adverb

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,keith devious and untrustworthy A
Date: 06 Feb 10 - 11:21 AM

Lox, in your calculation a few posts back, you factored in 10 years rise in infection but only one year's population rise.
Try it again and you will see that the proporton infected is falling.

The AVERT site Royston recommends, suggest 4.6% of men are MSMs.
That means 2.3% of population instead of the 1% I was using.
That does not negate a single one of my points.
The debate is not advanced one iota.
Just empty point scoring.
Was it worth it?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Feb 10 - 01:00 PM

I see it is 4.3% and that is for 16 - 24 year olds which is maybe young.
The figure for all men who have ever had genital contact sex with men is about 6%, so 3% of population.
I am happy to work with that.
It still does not change anything i have said.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Feb 10 - 01:06 PM

6.3% in 2000
The earlier survey, which was a bigger sample, only got 3.7% (1.9% of pop)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 06 Feb 10 - 04:01 PM

Jeez, Don, Do you have the attention span of a mayfly?? Read my earlier post, and the CONTEXT of my statement. I was talking about giving homosexuals the CHOICE,(which you seem to object to), for those who were possibly 'going through a 'phase', and may want to have children of their own(with their own female wife). Read the post again. I was not 'bagging' on homosexuals, I was merely saying that SOME, may, (that is if your political doctrines), would PERMIT them!! I also said, that to some, that may not be the case. Not only that, earlier in this thread, it was well covered, though not that much by me, that homosexual partnerships tend to have a higher promiscuity, rate than married heteros. That being said, I'm not in any way excusing heteros from being promiscuous, nor minimizing their roles in doing that either. To me, Promiscuity, in either, is not only dangerous, hurtful, but stupid!!..especially when there is families and/or children involved, in being hurt by it....

Can't you, agree with that?????
Allow others to make their choice, for themselves....and not lock that up from them by what you read into a 'political decree'!
Fair enough????........or does fairness interfere with your screwed up rigid, misinterpretation of a misconception of 'civil rights'??

Allow people to grow, mature, change their 'orientations', IF THEY WANT!!...and should they want to have their own children, of their own genes, with a woman they have grown to love...LET THEM DO IT!!
It happens, has happened, and will continue to happen, whether you like it or not! ...and you describe yourself as a liberal?????????????

Just for you:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1MHEJT6sjk
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Paco O'Barmy
Date: 06 Feb 10 - 04:09 PM

You left wing hippy liberals can batter us all you like. In England, thanks to 12 years of Socialism you've actually managed to change our dictionary in your favour.... BUT you will NEVER convince me or mine that homosexuality is anything other than repugnant and deviant.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 06 Feb 10 - 04:27 PM

Keith.

You are missing my point entirely.

My point is that your maths is fundamentally flawed.

In every fraction there are two numbers - the one on top and the one on the bottom.

For the fraction/ratio/percentage to remain the same, the numbers above and below the line have to grow or shrink by the same factor.

In this case the number above the line has grown by a a factor of more than one, while the number below the line has grown by a factor of much less than one.

Consequently, the fraction has increased in size - the percentage has risen.

for the overall percentage to decrease, the number below the line (number of heterosexuals) would have to increase by a larger factor than the number above the line.

In other words, for the overall ratio of infected hetero's to all heteros to decrease, the population would have to grow by a higher factor than the number of infected heteros.

You would have to have an increase of millions every year.

Its elementary I'm afraid.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,keith
Date: 06 Feb 10 - 06:12 PM

Yes Lox.
And if it hadn't been for your intelligence, I would have gotten away with it.
Why couldn't you leave it to Royston and Don T?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 06 Feb 10 - 07:19 PM

""You left wing hippy liberals can batter us all you like. In England, thanks to 12 years of Socialism you've actually managed to change our dictionary in your favour.... BUT you will NEVER convince me or mine that homosexuality is anything other than repugnant and deviant.""

Thank the Lord that, in these more enlightened times, for every one who shares your bigotry, there are hundreds who find YOU infinitely more disgusting and repugnant than any homosexual.

Do you know why it is difficult for women to find a kind, sensitive, man?

Well, most of the kind, sensitive, men already have boyfriends.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 06 Feb 10 - 07:25 PM

""Yes Lox.
And if it hadn't been for your intelligence, I would have gotten away with it.
Why couldn't you leave it to Royston and Don T?""

ATTA BOY! That's the way to give credence to your argument.

When you're proved wanting, just insult somebody.

Royston and I may not have expressed it quite so well as Lox, but we have been making exactly the same point.

Now you have shown that you cocked up the figures, you have a nerve talking about us.

You now come over as rather stupid, as well as malicious.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 06 Feb 10 - 07:35 PM

""Yes Lox.
And if it hadn't been for your intelligence, I would have gotten away with it."


I don't believe the Mudcat member "Keith A of Hertford" posted the above.

I don't believe he would have used the word "Gotten"

And I don't believe he would have called me "intelligent".

Any more than I believe he would have come far enough out of his shell to insult anyone either.

I await Keith A's logged in response.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 06 Feb 10 - 07:57 PM

Keith: The debate is not advanced one iota.
Just empty point scoring.
Was it worth it?

Yes it was. Because you are still twisting and turning - took you three posts in two hours to even report accurately one of the figures from the avert site. And you are still trying to divide the numbers by two. Idiot.

It was worth it, Keith, because it proves that you cannot be trusted. Not at all. Not even a little bit. It proves your agenda. It proves that you don't really care about the sacred truth of your statistics.

In future, Keith, don't lie and bullshit people with your statistics. Try some points of principle; it's clear that you have some, don't be so ashamed of them.

I told you a few posts back that the NATSAL survey was not a great one - only 11,000 people, but you bloody well introduced it while lying about what its conclusions were. But the results stand and as a comparison (2000 against 1990) it shows either that homosexual activity has increased enormously - which you will agree is rubbish - or that stigmatisation has reduced and more people are willing to come forward and be open.

So that rather proves the likely benefit that reducing stigma has on health - if there's no social shame about being gay and people can be more open then they are more likely to access healthcare and advice for gay men, protect themeselves and get tested if needs be.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 06 Feb 10 - 08:15 PM

". . . already have boyfriends."
HAH!! Good one, Don T.

####

GfS, I really have a hard time believing that anyone can be as abysmally thick as you seem to be!

I don't really think you actually are that thick. I think you are just being disingenuous. And quite probably to yourself as well.

Nowhere do I say that I object to a same-sex oriented person who feels he or she wants to be "cured" from giving it a try. But I do object to blatant charlatans like Richard Cohen. And YOU, I'm beginning to suspect.

And in a percentage of marriages, whether same-sex or heterosexual, unfortunately, infidelity does occur. This, however, is not gender-specific! It is just a fact of life. And I do not believe that there are enough legally recognized same-sex marriages on the books yet to have any kind of meaningful statistics on the comparative rates of infidelity between same-sex and heterosexual marriages. Just because you want to think so doesn't make it true.

As to my "political doctrines:    you, sir, are the one who is into insisting that same-sex orientation is a psychological condition that needs to be cured and who, all along, has been foaming-at-the-mouth opposed to the idea same-sex orientation at all, let alone legalizing same-sex marriage. You have said repeatedly that, instead of being allowed to marry, they should be compelled to seek counseling.

Yes, my "political agenda" says that people should be allowed to make their own choices and determine the courses of their own lives.

THAT is what I have been arguing for in both of these threads. It is YOU who have been trying to shove your agenda down other people's throats.

YOU are the "brain police," mister. And you have been through at least two threads that I know of now.

Do you have the foggiest clue as to how downright limp and silly you are beginning to sound with your claim that "this is what I've been saying all along," and that I'm the one who wants to deny people the freedom to live their lives as they see fit?

People can read, you know (even if you can't), and they're not as stupid as you seem to think. And it's all there—your words and my words—for them to verify for themselves.

Don Firth

P. S. Now, GfS, I can understand that since your father sired a batch of kids, including you, then "decided" he was gay and left your mother and you kids to go off with a male lover, that you would be very bitter about the whole thing. But—you've let your bitterness color your whole outlook on the matter of same-sex orientation—not to mention your abhorrence (and denial) of the strong probability that sexual orientation is not a matter of simple choice, but is dictated by genetics and/or hormonal factors.

Get over it! Let people make their own choices, including the choice to follow what they consider to be their own nature. Even if the choices they make irritated some of your sore spots.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Feb 10 - 09:24 AM

re my last guest post, I was not able to compose a reply then, but I wanted to concede straight away that Lox's criticism was correct.
I added the little Scooby Doo attempted joke. sorry.
A foolish mistake, but I am comforted that no one else spotted the flaw in my argument either.
Not even arch statistical poseur Richard!
Only Lox.
The pool of heterosexuals is growing by an amount 200 times greater than the pool of infected heterosexuals, but it is false to infer that the proportion must fall.
And it is not.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Feb 10 - 09:35 AM

"In future, Keith, don't lie and bullshit people with your statistics"
I do not. I do make mistakes, but no lies or bullshit
You posted this yesterday "It found 8.6% of male respondents reported having had sex with another man."
Justify that please.

Re dividing by 2, if that is wrong I am sorry, but those percentages are of men in the survey. How should you adjust that to give a percentage of the whole population who are MSMs?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 07 Feb 10 - 11:26 AM

Keith:

"I do not. I do make mistakes, but no lies or bullshit"

Bollocks, given how easy it was to google the NATSAL survey, you must have worked quite hard to find your low-grade, self-cancelling, wrongly-asserted claim of the size of the gay community - because you desperately wanted to find the lowest possible estimate, regardless of its rigour - and even then you misrepresented it to us.

You can't be trusted.

"You posted this yesterday "It found 8.6% of male respondents reported having had sex with another man."
Justify that please."

Follow the link to the avert website. 8.6% "Ever had a sexual experience, not necessarily including genital contact, with a partner of the same sex?

"Re dividing by 2, if that is wrong I am sorry, but those percentages are of men in the survey. How should you adjust that to give a percentage of the whole population who are MSMs?"

Straight people (men and women) have sex with each other, so you can measure the risk for any one straight man or woman against the entire population.

As gay men tend to have sex only with other men, there is little point calculating their percentage of the whole population.

You still fail to realise, the very fact that HIV is so statistically rare in the straight population is what makes the 500% increase in new diagnoses of UK-acquired infections so terrifying. The chances of any one straight person shagging another who is HIV+ should be pretty slim. That so many people manage it, can only be an indication of gravely risky behaviour and lethal ignorance.

It is even more shocking when you consider that new homosexually acquired cases are growing at a fraction of the heterosexual rate when the odds of any one gay man meeting another who is HIV+, are so very much greater than for straight people.

Lox has been far too patient with you, but I called you out on this point a couple of weeks ago. I am glad that you now realise that everything you have said here has been wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Feb 10 - 12:11 PM

Royston, the data on BOTH sites used the SAME NATSAL survey, so you should take back that criticism.

It was 8.4% not 8.6%. the trivial kind of error that you were so scathing of me about.
At least I corrected my mistake.

And those 8.4% were not all "having sex" because there was often no genital contact. They were not all MSMs.
The relevant figure was right below.
3.7% on the first survey and 6.3% on the survey you dismiss because it was a smaller sample.
Lie, bullshit, or honest mistake?

We have been discussing MSMs as an at risk group compared to non MSMs
We need to know their percentage of the population, not just of the male population because that is what we do with heterosexuals.

The 500% increase has taken the level to that of an extremely rare disease. The current level of growth means it will still be a rare disease in a hundred years time.
That is why WHO is so sure that an epidemic is not going to happen.

The disease is endemic in the MSM population. The fact that it is increasing suggests the risk is increasing.
That was the conclusion of UNAIDS in that Pink News piece.

If you are going to dismiss expert opinion, you should find an expert who takes your view or tell us why we should take your opinion above everyone who actually know something about this.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 07 Feb 10 - 01:09 PM

It's alright, Keith. Got your number. People know what you are now.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 07 Feb 10 - 01:26 PM

Keith:"Royston, the data on BOTH sites used the SAME NATSAL survey, so you should take back that criticism."

No, Keith. That IS the criticism. You could have referenced accurately the NATSAL survey. It was the easiest one to find. But you worked away and found some shitty little site (Sigma) that published a silly number that suited your prejudices. Even so, you still had to misreport it to us.

"It was 8.4% not 8.6%. the trivial kind of error that you were so scathing of me about.
At least I corrected my mistake.

Well done old chap. 8.4 / 8.6. A typing error representing 0.2%, that must make you really happy. I am calling you out for a liar and deliberate cheat. And I've justified those accusations amply.

"And those 8.4% were not all "having sex" because there was often no genital contact. They were not all MSMs.

Not content with your lies and distortions to date, you actually need to go further. We are talking about gay men and the attacks that are made on them by you and the other bigots for their "unhygienic" behaviour.

Now Keith has tried every possible screwing of the figures to support the bigots and as a final resort he wants to remove from the numbers, those gay men practicing the ultimate safe sex - sex that doesn't involved genital contact.

Look everybody - guys who kiss guys, guys who sleep together and derive intimate comfort from that, guys who just "cuddle". They're not gay in Hertford, apparently.

You are an idiot. So, to prove your "point", you ask us to remove the majority of straight HIV+ people from their risk analysis, and exclude most gay men - particularly the ones practicing the safest forms of sexual contact, from their risk analysis. Well done, this is exactly what I mean about your mendacious, devious, bullshitting mentality.

You are finished.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Feb 10 - 01:45 PM

General Royston....dont you know the war is over?

As Keith says, the dambing statistics and conclusions from UNAID were printed in the "Pink News" website....a lesbian and "gay" website.
You are arguing against the interests of the people you pretend to support.

UNIADS and "Pink News" want some "new and effective" action taken to combat the continuing rise the homosexual hiv new infection rates....the highest by far in UK and US demographics.

Just beat the retreat and do EVERYBODY a favour.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 07 Feb 10 - 01:47 PM

No Pasaran!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 07 Feb 10 - 01:58 PM

Keith could have stopped at the points of principle that we agreed on last week. But he didn't. He just had to keep going with the lies rolled up as "statistics" with which to beat people with.

We all agree on the numbers of gay men that have HIV, we all agree that more has to be done to reach out to all at risk people and make sure that they get whatever help, support and education they need to protect themselves and others.

That is what I argued for from day one, it is what I continue to argue for. An essential part of that process is removing prejudice and stigma from HIV and from the people affected by it.

So you, Ake, are a part of the problem. Keith is a part of the the problem for trying to support your prejudices.

People like you two are the 2nd front on which this HIV fight must - unfortunately - be fought.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Keith A
Date: 07 Feb 10 - 02:34 PM

Royston, I had never heard of that survey.
I just wanted to establish an acceptable number for how many MSMs there are.
Lack of a figure caused disagreement, and you had not produced one, and still have not.
The Sigma site is endorsed by the Terence Higgins Trust.
Good enough for me.
Avert is a highly reputable site that you have used.
So what is your problem?
Liar? Cheat? Attacking gay men? Where do you get this from?
You come across as being emotionally out of control.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Feb 10 - 03:50 PM

The policies you propose Royston are neither "new" nor "effective"

Thet have not worked in the homosexual community for ten years and if left as they are, will continue not to work.

How high must the homosexual infection figures go before you see that it is in the interests of homosexuals to take the sort of action that I have been suggesting?

I believe that you know very well that a new and effective policy must be brought in, as male homosexuals appear unable or unwilling to ammend their promiscuous behaviour.
The problem for you hypocrits is that admitting homosexual practice is unsafe and requires special risk treatment torpedos your "just another lifestyle" ideology. You will cry "no pasaran" till their last breath.

So you basically don't give a fuck about homosexuals....let them die in their hundreds,leave them with low life expectancy, who cares if they compose the highest hiv infection demographic.....so long your cosy little "liberal" Disneyland is secure!

Thats your stance in a nutshell

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 07 Feb 10 - 04:04 PM

Tell us again about your proposals, ake. If I remember correctly it involves segregation, indoctrination and possibly, injection?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 07 Feb 10 - 04:21 PM

Ebbie,

Please don't waste your fingertips.

Ake is an unapologetic bigot.

GfS is racing to join the rest of us in the 21st Century.

Keith is a busted flush.

Case closed.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Feb 10 - 04:27 PM

Ebbie...the old memory is letting you down again, just paddle up the thread a little and you can read my suggestions for youself.
They are loosely based on the Cuban model.
Royston agreed with them until the latest Unaids figures meant that he would have to bite the bullet!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Feb 10 - 04:31 PM

Ah Roston....is that the bugle sounding the retreat at last?

Wise tactics General!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 07 Feb 10 - 04:41 PM

Except to take you up on the "Cuban" cure, shit for brains.

If you read (if you CAN read) the report on the Cuban model then you will know that caring isolation and treatment of infected people was done at the start of the epidemic.

Isolation works at the start of epidemics. It was deployed at the start of H1N1 flu, amongst others.

Once a disease is generally prevalent. Once it is "out there", isolation is pointless.

The Cuban approach was praised for promoting voluntary testing amongst at-risk groups, active contact tracing and counseling and education of the newly diagnosed.

In particular, the Cuban model was praised for campaigns to de-stigmatise HIV and those most affected by it - so that people would access the prevention resources and testing and treatment and counseling. In particular it was praised for campaigns to deal with and reduce homophobia. That is to say it was praised for dealing with and preventing people like you, Ake.

That is what I have advocated at all times - that sort of caring and proven-to-work outreach and social activism. I have advocated dealing with people like you and the harm that you cause.

Your ideas are loosely based on your fear and your ignorance and your prejudice.

Your ideas are not loosely based on any system that cares for or helps people or that combats the spread of this disease.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 07 Feb 10 - 04:51 PM

And now for the coup de grace to Keith's poison, and Ake's proposals.

I am glad that Keith totally and unequivocally supports the UNAIDS / Pink News position on HIV prevention. I am very glad that Ake thinks Keith is so spot on.

The position in full, from Pink News.

The United Nations agency responsible for coordinating global efforts to combat HIV and AIDS has called for "enhanced action to promote and protect the human rights of men who have sex with men, transgender people, lesbians, gays and bisexuals."

Last Thursday the UN General Assembly heard a statement on the universal human rights of LGBT people, and at the same time UNAIDS and the United Nations Development Programme issued their own joint statement:

"The unanimous commitments of Member States to achieve universal access to HIV prevention, treatment, care and support by 2010 and Millennium Development Goal 6 – to halt and reverse the spread of HIV by 2015 – include commitments to further the realisation of human rights for all, including for all those vulnerable to HIV infection and to the impact of AIDS.

"Such commitments confirm the fact that the realisation of human rights for all is not only right but also leads to the most effective response to HIV and generates broader health and development benefits.

"However, many people at risk of HIV infection, including men who have sex with men, transgender people, lesbians, gays and bisexuals cannot protect themselves from such infection or live successfully if infected due to the discrimination, violence, marginalisation and other violations of human rights that they face.

"Many governments either deny the existence of men who have sex with men, transgender people, lesbians, gays and bisexuals in their societies, and/or have not adequately invested in their health and human rights.

"This has a pernicious impact in terms of hampering their access to HIV and health services and making them even more vulnerable to HIV.

"For example, recent evidence shows that, in some regions, as few as 12% of men who have sex with men have access to HIV services.

"Furthermore, where these groups are marginalised or criminalised, many fear to take up the HIV, health and other services that are available, because of the likelihood of facing discrimination, and in some places, violence or criminal prosecution.

"Resources allocated to appropriate HIV programming for men who have sex with men, transgender people, lesbians, gays and bisexuals falls far short of what is required to realise Member States' commitments to achieve universal access to HIV prevention, treatment, care and support.

"Urgent and enhanced action is required to scale up effective and rights-based responses for men who have sex with men, transgender people, lesbians, gays and bisexuals in the context of the HIV epidemic.

"Like all people, men who have sex with men, transgender people, lesbians, gays and bisexuals enjoy all human rights, in particular the rights to be free from murder, torture, violence, arbitrary arrest, vilification, discrimination, and violations of privacy.

"They also enjoy the right to the highest attainable standard of health. The realization of their human rights is essential for their dignity, their protection in a world with HIV, and for an effective response to the HIV epidemic.

"There is no more time for 'business as usual.'"

On Thursday 66 nations supported the statement at a session of the United Nations General Assembly in New York.

It was read out by Argentina's Ambassador the UN.

It does not create new rights and is not legally binding but instead builds on similar past initiatives.

It affirms the principle of universality: that all human beings, irrespective of their sexual orientation or gender identity, are entitled to equal dignity and respect.

No-one should be subject to violence, harassment, discrimination or abuse, solely because of their sexual orientation or gender identity.

The UNAIDS/UNDP statement ended with a quote from Secretary General Ban Ki-moon's speech in August 2008:

"In countries without laws to protect…. men who have sex with men, only a fraction of the population has access to prevention.

"Conversely, in countries with legal protection and the protection of human rights for these people, many more have access to services.

"As a result, there are fewer infections, less demand for antiretroviral treatment and fewer deaths. Not only is it unethical not to protect these groups; it makes no sense from a health perspective.

"It hurts all of us."

According to calculations by the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex Association and other organisations, more than six dozen countries still have laws against consensual sex between adults of the same sex.

The UN Human Rights Committee, which interprets the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), a core UN treaty, held in a historic 1994 decision that such laws are rights violations – and that human rights law forbids discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Case very, very closed.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 07 Feb 10 - 04:55 PM

When I read GfS's stuff (except for his recent tendency to run toward the horizon with his ass on fire), I can't help but think that he's recommending that gays be locked in mental institutions.

When I read Ake's stuff, what pops to mind are concentration camps and leper colonies.

Let the personal abuse begin!!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 07 Feb 10 - 05:18 PM

Ake,

You are soooo last month.

But we already knew that you are a dated, bitter reactionary.

What a sad pathetic shambolic ignoramus.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Feb 10 - 05:36 PM

Coup de Grace to Keith's poison.....
But I have never expressed an opinion about any of that Royston.
What is the connection?
All I have said, and am saying, is that there is no heterosexual AIDS epidemic here, and no evidence of one starting.
Expert opinion entirely agrees that point, unless you have found something new.
Have you?
Also, that AIDS is about 90 times more prevalent in the MSM community than the non MSM community.
Also, that there is growing evidence that MSM infection may be rising again to even higher levels.
Again, that is not my opinion but that of experts.
You have not provided any evidence to the contrary.
I came in to this part of the debate because you came on denying all these truths and dragging my name in the dirt from your first post.
A little humility Royston?
Take back those things?
I will not hold my breath.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 07 Feb 10 - 05:39 PM

"I will not hold my breath."

If only, Keith, if only...

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 07 Feb 10 - 05:45 PM

So, Keith, last chance.

Do you now (since you laud the sensible wisdom of the UN and its expert divisions - UNAIDS and WHO) totally reject the positions adopted by Ake and by GfS (at the start of this debate)

Do you unequivocally support the expert opinions that make clear the essential need to promote tolerance and acceptance of gay men and other minorities most at risk of HIV. Do you unequivocally support my calls for campaigns to reduce Ake-style bigotry and prejudice against gay men and to encourage them to access care and support and testing and counseling where necessary?

As you say, it is stupid to argue against the expertise of UNAIDS and WHO. I just want to be sure that we are on the same page here?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 07 Feb 10 - 06:31 PM

""I believe that you know very well that a new and effective policy must be brought in, as male homosexuals appear unable or unwilling to ammend their promiscuous behaviour.""

So promiscuous that 96% of them never contract the disease that you are pretending to be worried about, and which you claim, is predominantly a homosexual problem.


""The problem for you hypocrits is that admitting homosexual practice is unsafe and requires special risk treatment torpedos your "just another lifestyle" ideology. You will cry "no pasaran" till their last breath.""

The only two people on this forum who are consistently claiming that homosexuality is "just another lifestyle" are you and GfS. Those with more than four brain cells are aware that it is what they are, not what they choose to be.


""So you basically don't give a fuck about homosexuals....let them die in their hundreds,leave them with low life expectancy, who cares if they compose the highest hiv infection demographic.....so long your cosy little "liberal" Disneyland is secure!""

Come off it, Rob Roy!

We don't give a fuck?

This from the man who wants to refuse them the right to a stable relationship, which would reduce the incidence of HIV.

A man who, further, wants to confine them, "for their own good".

Hitler truly would have approved of you, BIG TIME!

You would be continuing the job he started back in 1933.

I'll say one thing for you mate. You have one of the finest and most incisive minds of the twelfth century.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Feb 10 - 07:54 AM

Royston, my contribution, such as it is, has only been about the epidemiology.
I am not even slightly tempted to enter a broader discussion with you.
You are incapable of carrying on an intelligent discussion without frequent resort to vile, hysterical abuse.

Lox, your dogleg represents the establishment, mostly in London, of communities of people of African origin.
The rise in heterosexual infections is almost wholly confined to that single high risk group.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Feb 10 - 08:17 AM

Royston, re your "Straight, white, British people rather seem to be at the top of global league table for increasing rates of infection. What's your solution for their peculiarly dangerous lifestyle?"
(29th.Jan)
All wrong again Royston.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 08 Feb 10 - 08:49 AM

Forgive me Keith, I just can't keep up with all your racist obsessions. If you're now banging on about "It's black AIDS" then first off I will say "fuck you"

Then I will point out that you and Ake introduced those figures as being "indigenous" HIV infections. I know, of course, that I should never trust anything you say and must check everthing first.

That is a limited, qualified apology.

So the correct statement would have been to reference "Straight, British..." rather than "Straight, white, British..."

You are a nasty piece of work, Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Feb 10 - 09:04 AM

I expected you to call me racist, but I am just the messenger.
I was investigating Lox's dog leg and I found the answer.
Should I have concealed it?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Feb 10 - 09:12 AM

Re So the correct statement would have been to reference "Straight, British..." rather than "Straight, white, British..."

This would still be a very misleading statement.
We have seen that the "500% increase" is itself highly misleading.
It also conceals the significant fact that only one high risk group within "straigh, British" is actually effected.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Feb 10 - 09:54 AM

Re "Then I will point out that you and Ake introduced those figures as being "indigenous" HIV infections"

I do not think we did.
Your "straight, white, British" post was the introduction.

We have not previously discussed UK infection within the African communities settled here.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Feb 10 - 01:48 AM

Royston, I expected the knee jerk abuse, as vile and hysterical as ever, but I also expected you to demand that I justify my assertion that the rise in heterosexual infection here is almost wholly confined to the new African communities.
I thought that you did not trust me.
I suppose that you already knew. Am I right?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 09 Feb 10 - 02:42 AM

Don Facade: "You have said repeatedly that, instead of being allowed to marry, they should be compelled to seek counseling."

Again you're lying intentionally, to mislead others into a hostility,..to hide the FACT that you, argued for two threads, quite a few posts, that homosexuals could not opt out. That is a blatant lie..being as later you admitted to knowing of two. Sounds like you have a 'hidden agenda'...hmm...wonder what that can be....


P. S. Now, GfS, I can understand that since your father sired a batch of kids, including you, then "decided" he was gay and left your mother and you kids to go off with a male lover, ..blah blah blah, more lies!

My Father died at 60, due to a stroke. He was married once, to my mother, who is still alive, and she never re-married.
You just make shit up..as you have all through these threads. You've twisted quotes, and responded to the twists that you make up....now just what is it, that you are trying to hide???

In an Francisco, a city government employee can get a trans gender operation, at taxpayer expense, which happens to come with a considerable amount of counseling..and BTW, without that counseling, you cannot get that operation.....HOWEVER, you seem to object, for a homosexual receiving counseling, to be straight, IF they want to...sorta' funny reckoning of equality, wouldn't you say??..just what is it that you're hiding?????

Both Smedley and Royston, had the balls to make a correction, when they discovered that they made a mistake..but you can't, even when your own posts are contradicted by, none other, than you!..Now just what is it, you're trying to hide??...maybe even hide from yourself?
By the way, I respected both of them for that...even in light of the stirring up of hostilities, that you've managed to try to whoop up.

What is it that you're trying to keep people distracted from??

Let me see, you are all for homosexuals raising children, by adoption, but get greatly distressed when natural heterosexuals, point out some of the joys of having and raising their own children, and wanting to protect them from bullshit political left wing crap...Am I seeing a pattern here??

Oh..oh yes, then you wish to insult me, by taking your best shot(?), by making up that my Father was a homosexual who left my mother...PURE BULLSHIT!

I think what is closer to the truth, is the reason you think that should 'get my goat'(which it doesn't, because is so left field), is that you're the one who has issues with homosexuals! To you, your 'insult' was a wild shot, at likening my Dad, to something YOU find less or it wouldn't be an 'insult', would it????

It appears that you 'approve' of homosexuals raising kids, but don't approve of homosexuals, leaving homosexuality, to have heterosexual relationships, and children of their own.

It is now becoming pretty obvious why.
Given your past, of having a child, and NOT staying around to raise him, for whatever bullshit reason you rationalize away, you don't want a homosexual to be able to do that...because that would make him, a better man than you!...and after all, YOU'RE the one who looks down on homosexuals...or why would you have thrown such a stupid accusation at me, using homosexuality as the object of lowness?? You, yourself said, in an earlier post, that 'civil rights' were aimed at helping the 'weakest' people. I think you're tipping your view, just to launder the FACT, that, as a 'father' you were nothing more than a self absorbed, ego gratifying, womanizing ball less opportunist. I mean, to say...that's exactly how you described yourself, and how you conduct yourself on here....not to mention, that you've lied through your teeth....REPEATEDLY....and play the piper, to those who you consider 'weak'(your words).

If I were one of the homosexuals on here, I'd hop aboard the 'clue train' and see you for what you are. Not only that, I'd be pissed, that your try to DENY them counseling, for whatever reason they'd wish to seek it!

I guess it's how you get your sense of self importance..I mean to say, if a person goes to a church, as you've said, and doesn't even believe it, then the only reason you're going is to placate your wife, and being as your track record is that of a ball-less meep, who can't stand up to, or assume a responsibility to a woman that you've impregnated...God only knows what other sorts of insecurities you have!...Oh, 'Mister 'Civil Rights' agitator!

Most Sincerely,
GfS

P.S. Don't even respond!..You've got a lot of self reflecting to do, before you start a new thread of lying to your audience!...to gain a sense of power.....Ball-less meeps do that! Save what dignity you fantasize that you have.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 09 Feb 10 - 03:33 AM

You might be right, Keith, I didn't check to begin with and I don't intend to start indulging your racist ideas now. I told you from the start exactly what I thought of you and your racist and homophobic agenda.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Feb 10 - 04:09 AM

Not everyone is driven by their ideological agendas Royston.
I am just trying to establish the facts.
I am sorry if the facts are not to your liking.

This may help your research.
Africans in the UK are diagnosed with HIV at a far higher rate than other ethnic groups, having comparable number of diagnoses to white people, despite being a far smaller percentage of the overall population.http://www.avert.org/uk-statistics.htm

Black African men and women accounted for 70% of the total diagnosed
infections in heterosexuals and 51% of the undiagnosed infections.
3.6 HIV prevalence among African-born women giving birth in 2002 was 2.47%, up from 1.5% in 1997.
By contrast, the prevalence in UK-born women was 0.03% in 2002 and was unchanged from 1997.
3.7 Between 1997 and 2003, there was a 351% increase in patients seen for care in England, Wales and
Northern Ireland who had been infected heterosexually. Within this sub-group, the largest increase has
been in Black African patients. Of the 15,726 heterosexual men and women seen for care in England,
Wales and Northern Ireland in 2003 for whom ethnicity was reported, 70% (11068) were Black African,
19% (3009) were white and 4% (657) Black Caribbean. Africans feature in all the main transmission
routes for HIV, but most cases of HIV diagnosed in the UK were reported as heterosexually acquired.
http://www.dh.gov.uk/dr_consum_dh/groups/dh_digitalassets/@dh/@en/documents/digitalasset/dh_4099052.pdf

Overall, three quarters of all respondents were sexually active in the last year. More than half had a
regular sexual partner, which was more common in men than in women. One-in-four of the people
with regular partners said they had other sexual relationships outside the regular relationship, again
more common in men than women.
In addition, one-in-ten who said they had sex in the last year reported definitely or probably having
sexual intercourse without a condom with someone of a different HIV status to themselves (sdUI).
The risk of sdUI increased with larger numbers of sexual partners. Individuals who reported having
sex with both men and women were more likely to have multiple sexual partners than those who
reported sex with opposite sex or same sex partners only.
• Interventions to reduce potentially sero-discordant unprotected intercourse should target
those in multiple sexual relationships, particularly men.
A quarter of all respondents who said they had sex in the last year never used condoms. Those with
fewer sexual partners, and in a regular sexual relationship (especially a monogamous relationship)
were less likely to use condoms. Condom use was more common in men than in women, and mostly
reported by those aged between twenty and thirty nine years. Among those who used condoms, a
third experienced condom failure.
• Current levels of condom failure seem very high and may be detracting from their use.
Interventions to increase the use of condoms should always include elements to ensure
minimum condom failure.
http://www.nahip.org.uk/downloads/477.pdf

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 09 Feb 10 - 05:18 AM

fascinating, Keith. Now what does tell you? What does it lead you to think should be done to prevent HIV spread amongst the general population, or any part thereof? Given that the virus doesn't discriminate on grounds of skin colour, What is your point?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 09 Feb 10 - 05:49 AM

And to prove the futility of debating statistics alone, you still can't even get your sacred facts straight.

We were talking about UK-acquired infections.

The figures you quote are for all diagnoses.

Now just take your numbers and shove 'em somewhere.

What is your point?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Feb 10 - 05:55 AM

I am still talking about UK acquired infections.
Within their communities, the high infection rates found in Africa are happening here. As the Health Department piece I linked to says,

HIV and AIDS have disproportionately affected African communities in England. After gay men they
are the largest group affected by HIV and since 1999 new diagnoses in Africans have overtaken new
diagnoses in other groups.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 09 Feb 10 - 09:17 AM

Keith,

You really need to read what you post.

What you posted does not talk about UK-acquired infections. It talks only about UK diganoses it includes all the overseas (mainly Africa) acquired cases.

Now, when it suited you, we were told to remove African HIV cases and concentrate on British HIV cases. That was when you were telling us that HIV was a gay problem. Or a black problem. Not a British problem. But now we have to add the African cases back in...to prove what? What is your point?

And you still expect to be treated with respect? Or taken seriously?

Come off it!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Feb 10 - 09:38 AM

Not true Royston.

evidence from service providers and surveillance indicates that new adult infections are occurring
as a result of exposure in the UK.
A number of studies point to the widespread unmet need for basic information regarding HIV
transmission, testing and treatment. In particular, cultural practices that place some Africans at particular
risk of transmitting or acquiring HIV requires specific, culturally competent attention. Examples
include: perceptions of condoms, polygamy, meanings attached to sexual behaviours, reproduction,
breast-feeding and secrecy and taboos regarding sex and relationships.
The overall goal of HIV prevention for African communities is to:
• reduce the acquisition and transmission of HIV infection in African people living in England.
• The specific prevention aims are to:
– reduce the sexual transmission of HIV infection among Africans and their partners;
– reduce the vertical transmission of HIV from a mother to her baby;
– reduce the prevalence of undiagnosed HIV in Africans living in England;
– reduce the stigma associated with HIV;

Chapter 4 describes sexual risk and precaution
behaviours. Overall, three quarters of all
respondents were sexually active in the last year.
More than half had a regular sexual partner, which
was more common among men than in women.
One-in-four of those with regular partners said they
had other sexual relationships outside the regular
relationship, again more common in men than
women.
One-in-ten who said they had sex in the last year
reported definitely or probably having sexual
intercourse without a condom with someone of a
different HIV status to themselves (sdUI). The risk
of sdUI increased with larger numbers of sexual
partners.
• Interventions to reduce potentially serodiscordant
unprotected intercourse should
target those in multiple sexual relationships,
particularly men.
Individuals who reported having sex with both
men and women were more likely to have multiple
sexual partners than those who reported sex with
opposite sex or same sex partners only.
A quarter of respondents who had sex in the last
year had not used condoms at all in that time.
Those with fewer sexual partners, and those in a
regular sexual relationship were less likely to use
condoms. Condom use was more common in men
than in women, and mostly reported by those
aged between 20-39 years. Among those who used
condoms, a third had experienced condom failure
in the last year.
• High levels of condom failure may be detracting
from their use. Interventions to increase the use
of condoms should include elements to ensure
minimum condom failure.
Chapter 5 considers HIV prevention need and
demonstrates that general knowledge about the
basics of HIV was fairly high, although many people
perceived the need to know more.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 09 Feb 10 - 09:57 AM

""Lox, your dogleg represents the establishment, mostly in London, of communities of people of African origin.
The rise in heterosexual infections is almost wholly confined to that single high risk group.""

Really Keith, are you naturally dim, or did you have to train.

UK acquired infections have risen by 500%.

Whether the recipients are of British or African descent is a red herring.

The operative phrase here, is "UK acquired infections".

It matters not one jot if they be black, white, or pink with purple spots. The important thing is that they became infected in the UK, and that means the pool is widening and deepening, which knocks the linear argument into a cocked hat.

Even that is not the important point here.

The bottom line is that, unless we stop thinking of HIV/AIDS as a homosexual problem, and recognise that it is not a matter of gender orientation, but rather of unsafe sexual practises, then the heterosexual aspect will eventually assume African proportions.

This would be a catastrophe of unprecedented magnitude.

Just consider the close proximity of life in our towns and cities, and compare it to the much more thinly spread population of the African continent. Any serious increase in the UK transmission pool would vastly increase the potential for epidemic.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Feb 10 - 10:03 AM

No Don, it does not mean that the pool is widening and deepening.
The terms "Gay Plague" and "Black Plague" are not helpful and I would never use them.
Royston is the only person who has.
But, it is true to say, without apportioning any blame, that AIDS is a disease that after 40 years has not significantly affected any group except men who have sex with men, people born in Africa, and a few needle sharers.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 09 Feb 10 - 10:09 AM

Keith: Not true Royston.

Piss off, what you posted at 04:09 DID NOT talk about UK-acquired infections.

What you posted at 09:38 did.

And isn't it amazing how, when you are forced to tell the truth, or something approacing the truth, it all ends up agreeing with the important issues as I framed them and as I argued them

Namely that if you stop dismssing this demogpraphic, and that demographic, and another demographic, it all comes down to education and socially progressive campaigns and attitudes.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: frogprince
Date: 09 Feb 10 - 10:22 AM

Guest-from-pious-judgementalism: You are absolutely right about Don Firth's irresponsibility as a parent. When his former girlfriend announced that she was pregnant, but did not intend to marry him, he should have locked her in a closet to be certain she did not escape with the child. After the birth, he would have had at least two alternatives: he could have kept her in the closet, or murdered her and concealed the body, to be sure she didn't remove the child from under his caring wing.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Feb 10 - 11:39 AM

OK Royston, now I have posted about both.
I thought I had already, in linking to the sites.
I only provided a few extracts.

Your assertion all along that AIDS was spreading in the general population, was false.
It is still confined almost entirely to MSMs and African people.

You have been calling honest contributors liars and cheats for daring to disagree with you, and all the time they were right and you were wrong.

I expect you would now like to say something to the forum.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 09 Feb 10 - 12:44 PM

No, Keith, the 500% increase in heterosexually, UK-acquired cases stands as a cause for concern. That the infections were contracted by straight people living and shagging in this country makes the colour of their skin pointless. They are members of our general population and only a mad racist fantasist would think that this is of no significance to all members of the general population.

But this, and many other observations, have been to make ethical points. That we can't and shouldn't throw blame at any one or any group and that we need to educate all our citizens - particularly the at risk groups - about the dangers of HIV and how to prevent its transmission. The other ethical point is that stigmatisation of HIV status, and of people at risk, hampers efforts to combat the spread of the disease, so society needs to be more open, embracing of diversity and progressive.

You have been denying, or refusing to accept, those ethical points and the fact that you feel it so essential, while not engaging on the issues, to keep twisting and turning the truth so as to appear to remove support for those points, is the reason that I - and many others - suspect and accuse you of being a racist and homophobic and generally right wing sort.

I though that once Ake disproved his own arguments, and then you provided evidence that assuaged your doubts about my assertions (My point 5 of a week or so ago), that you would both stop this nonsense. But you're still at it and Ake has, I suspect, only gone quiet temporarily.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 09 Feb 10 - 12:52 PM

Do you still deny, all other factors being equal, that the larger the number of infected people in a sexual network - wherever and however they became infected - the greater is the risk of any one uninfected person becoming infected.?

This is why HIV affects gay men, prostitutes and junkies - small sexual networks. It only takes a small number, or one, infected person to spark an epidemic.

People who were infected in Africa and moved here and then were diagnosed have been the factor increasing dramatically the number of straight people living with HIV in this country. That has increased the risk for the straight population - more carriers in their pool.

Then you have a 500% increase in UK-acquired infections. It is reasonable to hypothesise that the former could be responsible for the latter. If true, the problem will get steadily worse. It is a real risk that must be confronted, not dismissed so that "normal white folk" are falsely reassured.

It's what I said when I came into this debate in early January, it's what your de Cock said - but not explicitly - when he quoted sexual networks as the most significant factor driving the spread of the disease.

Do you really not get it?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Feb 10 - 06:12 PM

We both know that we are all equally prone to the infection.
The difference between general population UK, effectively zero prevalence, and the MSMs and African born, is to do with their practices.
Are you saying that because we have established a community of people from Subsaharan Africa, that the locals are going to take up their customs??
I see no signs of that.
Experience suggests that the reverse will happen as they slowly integrate.
That is why I am sure that it is not going to break out of those communities now, for the same reasons it has never done before.
That is why I am not at all surprised that all the experts in the world hold the same opinion as me, and you can not find a single one that agrees with you.
Because you are wrong.
There is no disgrace in arguing a point that proves to be wrong.
It could even happen to me one day.
What is unforgivable is that you have spewed out with your false arguments the most hurtful, offensive abuse.
This is not some come all blog.
This is a forum of friends in folk. You could easily find yourself standing next to me at the bar in some venue singing the same chorus.
If you can not express differing views with others in a tolerant and acceptable way, you should take your filthy insults somewhere else.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 09 Feb 10 - 07:21 PM

Yes, GfS, I met two homosexuals who insisted that they had been "cured." But it was plainly obvious to those who knew them much better than I did that the form their "cure" had taken was that they were completely abstaining from sexual activity of any kind, and that they were showing signs of anxiety, depression, and hostility. I was told that they had been reasonably happy individuals until they were intimidated by the conservative, fundamentalist church they attended to "take the cure." Which, incidentally, consisted primarily of being told repeatedly that homosexuality is a mortal sin for which they would burn in Hell forever, along with aversion therapy (being presented with provocative material, then given electric shocks).

Two extremely screwed-up, unhappy, and hostile people. Cured? I think not!!

I explained all this before—but, of course, you either didn't read it or simply refused to retain it in that highly selective memory of yours.

As to your father, I was simply playing back the story you told in the Prop 8 thread, as an example of how you "knew for a fact" that homosexuality is a matter of choice. The story was YOURS!

And your comments about my relationship with my son and his mother have nothing to do with reality. I don't think you have the capability to understand the actual situation or the reasons for the decisions that were made—for the benefit of all concerned, not just my son and his mother. I made a substantial sacrifice for the benefit of others. And, no, I'm not going to explain it to you because, first, it's none of your business, and second, you simply have neither the brains nor the heart—nor the understanding of common decency—to understand anything like that.

As to the rest of your most recent post, once again I invite people here who have the stomach for it to go back over our posts in both threads and see for themselves who said what.

There is enough bovine fecal matter in your last post alone to fertilize the roses in a three state area.

By the way, the kind of hostility you are displaying toward me, I have seen before. From the two self-proclaimed "cured" homosexuals I talk about in the first paragraph. What's your excuse?

And also by the way, venting your bile by screwing around with someone's name is really childish.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 10 Feb 10 - 09:42 AM

Keith: This is not some come all blog.
This is a forum of friends in folk. You could easily find yourself standing next to me at the bar in some venue singing the same chorus.
If you can not express differing views with others in a tolerant and acceptable way, you should take your filthy insults somewhere else.

Now you really are dragging the bottom of the barrel.

This isn't Freemasonry, we don't owe each other anything just because we happen to like folk music. I have friends on here who are friends in the real world. There are people here that I wouldn't care to spend any time with, people that wouldn't care to spend time with me and I am quite certain that they are the same people...and then some more. C'est la vie.

Keith, if you actually go and read your posting history (as I just did, to make sure that I wasn't getting you wrong) then even you would have to concede that people would be justified - on the evidence of your posting - to suspect you of the things that I accuse you of being.

Without exception, you post in a supportive manner against homosexuals, Muslims, immigrants, progressive social ideas, settled ethnic minorities, human rights legislation, multiculturalism, Islam. Or alternatively your contributions give support to those who rail against those people, groups or concepts.

That you do so in a rather weasel-like way; never actually saying what you believe, just twisting the discussion in a very particular way with what are, at times, downright dodgy statistics from scandalous sources, doesn't let you off the hook as far as I am concerned.

So, if you and Ake and a few other right wing reactionaries or suckers for all the lies that the media feed you, get the hump and get annoyed by me, then good. That is my intention.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 10 Feb 10 - 09:47 AM

Keith: This is not some come all blog.
This is a forum of friends in folk. You could easily find yourself standing next to me at the bar in some venue singing the same chorus.
If you can not express differing views with others in a tolerant and acceptable way, you should take your filthy insults somewhere else."

Now you really are dragging the bottom of the barrel.

This isn't Freemasonry, we don't owe each other anything just because we happen to like folk music. I have friends on here who are friends in the real world. There are people here that I wouldn't care to spend any time with, people that wouldn't care to spend time with me and I am quite certain that they are the same people...and then some more. C'est la vie.

Keith, if you actually go and read your posting history (as I just did, to make sure that I wasn't getting you wrong) then even you would have to concede that people would be justified - on the evidence of your posting - to suspect you of the things that I accuse you of being.

Without exception, you post in a supportive manner against homosexuals, Muslims, immigrants, progressive social ideas, settled ethnic minorities, human rights legislation, multiculturalism, Islam. Or alternatively your contributions give support to those who rail against those people, groups or concepts.

That you do so in a rather weasel-like way; never actually saying what you believe, just twisting the discussion in a very particular way with what are, at times, downright dodgy statistics from scandalous sources, doesn't let you off the hook as far as I am concerned.

So, if you and Ake and a few other right wing reactionaries or suckers for all the lies that the media feed you, get the hump and get annoyed by me, then good. That is my intention.

--------------------------------------------------

PS - I am not going to repost the examples of the positions you support or lend credence to. I have just been back over your posting history. Other people can do likewise. If anyone other than you or Ake or one of the usual suspects, thinks that you have not posted in the way I suggest, then I will take the time to provide them with some choice examples of each of the issues I listed.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Feb 10 - 10:08 AM

I have never, ever posted in a supportive or any other manner against any group except paramiltaries.
Here I have posted objective, factual and verifiable evidence and statistics.
You can not find any other can you.

We know that we are all equally prone to the infection.
The difference between general population UK, effectively zero prevalence, and the MSMs and African born, is to do with their practices.
Are you saying that because we have established a community of people from Subsaharan Africa, that the locals are going to take up their customs??
I see no signs of that.
Experience suggests that the reverse will happen as they slowly integrate.
That is why I am sure that it is not going to break out of those communities now, for the same reasons it has never done before.
That is why I am not at all surprised that all the experts in the world hold the same opinion as me, and you can not find a single one that agrees with you.
Because you are wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Feb 10 - 02:10 PM

"So, if you and Ake and a few other right wing reactionaries or suckers for all the lies that the media feed you, get the hump and get annoyed by me, then good. That is my intention."

Thats a fuckin' laugh......You obviously haven't been reading my posting history!.....As far as radicalism goes, I would leave you in the long grass.

You're no radical Royston, you're just another small minded busybody who thinks it's cool to join the "liberal gang".

Keith and I seem to be at opposite ends of the political spectrum, but I know he's an honourable guy with an independent mind who can think for himself......I prefer to debate with people who hold original ideas (regardless of the labels you like to stick on them).....not the knee jerk, PC crap parroted by you and your mates.


You have been proved wrong here Royston....and I'm sorry to say, a bullying numbskull.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 10 Feb 10 - 02:25 PM

Akenaton: The sound of one hand clapping.

Keith: We all knew that you would come back and whine "I only post facts that I find, it's not my fault..."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 10 Feb 10 - 02:34 PM

And both of you, we have all been wrong on various occasions with our statistical analyses. That is the whole bloody point. The statistics are to a very large extent silly. These discussions should always be about the issues.

Ake, I can't believe that you have the nerve to come back here since every "soltution" to the HIV problem that you advocated - in any group of people - has been thrashed by your own evidence (from UNAIDS) and from your Cuban report.

Basically, Ake, you are the cause of a degree of HIV misery and you are a hindrance to tackling the spread of the disease amongst at-risk minorities.

The experts whose advice you say you value, all assert that prejudice and bigotry are factors acting against HIV prevention in at-risk groups.

So that is why nobody takes you seriously.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 10 Feb 10 - 02:49 PM

"The difference between general population UK, effectively zero prevalence, and the MSMs and African born, is to do with their practices."

This is evidentially untrue as young women and adolescent girls make up the highest demographic to suffer from ALL other STI's.

Chlamydia affects 10% of young women, while HPV affects a much higher number than that.

If it were down to practice, the levels of other STI's would be as low comparably as the levels of HIV.

In light of this information, it seems that Young Women and adolescent girls are lucky they have remained HIV free for so long.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Feb 10 - 02:52 PM

Keith: We all knew that you would come back and whine "I only post facts that I find, it's not my fault..."

A safe bet Royston, because it is true! It is not my fault that the facts I find demolish your argument.

"The statistics are to a very large extent silly. "
They were OK when you thought that they supported you. Page 6 Table A remember?
Now that they have all been shown to demolish your argument, they are silly!

You say to Ake "you are a hindrance to tackling the spread of the disease amongst at-risk minorities."
The only at risk groups are MSMs, African born, and needle sharers.
Have I missed any? Who is hindering and how?

"The experts whose advice you say you value, all assert that prejudice and bigotry are factors acting against HIV prevention in at-risk groups"

I agree with them on that and on the fact that AIDS is not breaking out of the high risk groups.
You disagree with them on issues that they are world authorities on, and you expect anyone to take you seriously?

I bet you have been frantically googling for days to find anyone who holds your utterly discredited opinions.
No luck so far then.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Feb 10 - 02:55 PM

Lox, maybe luck but probably not.
How can a fact be evidentially untrue?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 10 Feb 10 - 04:10 PM

Keith:

Ake supports stigma and prejudice towards at-risk minorities. In his own small way, he is part of the problem and a hindrance to effective prevention of the spread of the disease.

I did not say that HIV was breaking out the high risk groups. I said - repeatedly - that there has been a 500% rise in heterosexual UK-acquired infections in recent years, that is a rise about 3 times greater than in gay men (regardless of place of acquisition) and that should be a cause for concern, not swept under the carpet.

That figure was introduced because others claimed that HIV prevalence was some sort of punishment reserved for sexual minorities who didn't behave like "normal folk". That figure stands as proof that such comparisons are stupid and futile - that straight people can manage such growth in the rate of new infections from such a low-risk starting point, is quite extraordinary.

The figure was a demonstration that everyone is at risk of this disease.You have accepted the truth of this, what the hell are you arguing now?

So when you sailed in and - totally neutrally - tried to disprove the comparisons supporting the common-sense position, what were you doing other than to add support to the bigoted views of others. When eventually you had to concede the point - to Lox even if it you couldn't bear to admit that to anyone else. That is your right wing, bigoted dogma.

This is why these bloody numbers are so silly. You have been right, you have been spectacularly wrong. You have had to retract much of what you said and you have had to disown your sources. I have misinterpreted some data and placed undue emphasis on others. So we keep bashing each other the head with them. Great. But silly. It's as silly for you as it is for me. But, Keith, it's all you've got!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 10 Feb 10 - 04:30 PM

Anyway, at this stage of the game you have accepted my 5 assertions of substance on these issues.

It's clear that you and I are never going to agree on anything else and we are just going around in circles.

It's on the grounds of that circuity alone that I am going to call it a day here; others are just going to have to read this if they care enough and form a view - probably that we're both bleedin' idiots. They'd probably be right.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Feb 10 - 04:44 PM

All you've got Royston, is more of the same.

Unaids conclusions say we need "New and Effective" measures to tackle the new hiv infections among homosexuals.

We all want to see health education, condom use, etc....but the truth is that in general terms homosexuals have not been listening.

As I said before, hedonism and risky sexual behaviour appears part and parcel of a large part of the homosexual community.

If a group, in the face of very bad health statistics, continue to behave in a manner dangerous to themselves and possibly the rest of society, then measures other than the current ones need to be taken.

Ignoring the problem as you seem to be advocating is not a "new or effective" measure.
If homosexual infection rates continue to grow, at some point we have to consider compulsory testing and extensive contact tracing.
All immigrants from at risk areas should be tested before and after entry for a period of one year.
If they refuse the test they should be refused admittance.

This is not bigotry, this is simple common sense.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Feb 10 - 06:25 PM

""We all want to see health education, condom use, etc....but the truth is that in general terms homosexuals have not been listening."" Quote from Ake's personal opinion.


""This is evidentially untrue as young women and adolescent girls make up the highest demographic to suffer from ALL other STI's.

Chlamydia affects 10% of young women, while HPV affects a much higher number than that."" Quote by Lox from official figures.


Four percent of gays are infected with HIV

Ten percent of young women and adolescent girls are infected with Chlamydia and even more with HPV.

Yet Ake wants special measures for gay men only.

What does this tell us about gay men?

What does it tell us about young womens' likely future exposure to the risk of HIV infection?

Most importantly, what does it tell us about the hypocrisy (correct spelling) of people like Ake, who are prepared to stand by and watch young women take risks, but will twist the truth into a pretzel, trying to rid the world of gay men, under the guise of protecting them?

Don T

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 10 Feb 10 - 06:50 PM

"How can a fact be evidentially untrue?"

What fact?

That "The difference between general population UK, effectively zero prevalence, and the MSMs and African born, is to do with their practices."?

That isn't a fact, that is a judgement call.

One which I questioned on the basis of evidence concernng other STI's.

These were not contracted as a result of safe sex.

5% of Gay men have HIV.

10% of young hetero women and adolescent girls have chlamydia.

In both cases, the practice which resulted in infection was unsafe sex.

So why are Chlamydia, Ghonnorhea, Syphilis, HPV etc more prevalent in young women, and why is HIV more prevalent in gay men?

It is an intriguing paradox for someone trying to apply a simple formula of "different sexual practices = different risk factor"

I call it bad luck.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 10 Feb 10 - 06:52 PM

I just couldn't let this pass as an example of Keith's racist and homophobic fantasies.

He said Here I have posted objective, factual and verifiable evidence and statistics.

And then one sentence later The difference between general population UK, effectively zero prevalence, and the MSMs and African born, is to do with their practices.

The latter is not a fact, it is a very telling example of Keith's prejudices and his real agenda. Where is the support for statement of fact number 2 above.

As Lox pointed out, as I pointed out weeks ago, the rate of STI's amongst straight people demonstrates that they must be practicing horrific levels of unprotected promiscuous sex and are simply bloody lucky that HIV has not, thus far, been prevalent in their sexual network.

As the WHO pointed out, thanks Keith, it is mostly about sexual networks.

But this clearly demonstrates Keith's desire to prove his belief that gays and blacks are dirty and "bring it on themselves". But you're just a facts man, of course, Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 01:43 AM

The difference between general population UK, effectively zero prevalence, and the MSMs and African born, is to do with their practices.
The second part is not racist. It acknowledges that the virus does not discriminate between racial groups. The difference is what people do. That includes Royston's precious networks, but the networks established in Africa would take time to become established here.
In my links you will find details of the high risk practices that were found to be prevalent in the African communities here.

When considering epidemiology in a population of 60 million Royston, "luck" can not regarded as a serious factor!

Lox, I have been pointing out that the infection levels in heterosexuals are far lowere that the rare disease criteria.
Now we see that most of those are accounted for by a newly arrived high risk group.
They caused your dogleg up turn.
Before that upturn the incidence was, and still is, comparable with lightning strike. no one is campaigning for intervention on the risk of that!

I do not have any specialist knowledge and merely report the work and considered opinions of the experts in the field.
Royston and Lox, from what position of authority do you challenge these groups who all endorse the information I have provided?
Avert, Terence Higgins trust, Department of Health, National Aids Trust, Afrivan HIV Policy Network • Action For Men • Addington Afro-Ethnic Health Promotion Group (AAEGRO) • Africa Advocacy Foundation • African Caribbean Resource Centre • The African Child • African Communities Team at Camden PCT • African Community Involvement Association • African Community Development Association • African Community Partnership • African Culture Promotions (ACP) • African Development Network • African Families Support Service (AFSS) • African Health Care and Counselling Service • African Health for Empowerment and Development (AHEAD) • African HIV Policy Network (AHPN) • African Institute for Social Development • African Refugee Community Health and Research Organisation (ARCHRO) • African Support & Project Centre (ASPC) • African Youth Organisation • Barnet African Health Organisation • Begin & Our Project • Black Gay Men's Advisory Group • Black Health Agency • Body Positive Luton • Body Positive North West • Bromley PCT • The Brunswick Centre • The Cara Trust • Catholic HIV / AIDS Ministry – Westminster Archdiocese (CATHAM) • Central Liverpool PCT • Centre for All Families Positive Health (CAFPH) • Centre for HIV and Sexual Health Sheffield • Che Jama at NHS Norfolk • Community Health Action Trust (CHAT) • Community of Congolese Refugees in Great Britain (CORECOG) • Congolese Community Council • Congolese Youth Association • Crescent Support Group • Derbyshire Friend • DHIVERSE • Embrace Community Support Centre (Embrace UK) • French African Welfare Association (FAWA)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 03:21 AM

No Keith, you are still twisting and turning.

Nobody denies that behaviour is the SOLE factor in THE ACT of HIV transmission between two individuals. You idiot.

The point - all along, the whole reason for this discussion - is that the behaviour of people, whether gay or straight or black or white or African or European, is pretty much as fallable, as compromising, as human as anyone else's behaviour. You can't cast blame in epidemiology, you have to care for and protect everyone in equal measure.

Africans have two principal misfortunes - that HIV emerged there first when it crossed the species barrier and that it emerged in the straight population. There are secondary issues - the effect on sexual networking of mass labour-migration and a higher rate of ulcerative STI's.

In "The West", straight people demonstrate appalling sexual hygiene as demonstrated by the prevalence of other STI's transmitted by promiscuous unprotected sex. It is a matter of good fortune that HIC is not prevalent in that sexual network, yet and hopfeully for ever.

This debate was always about refuting the homophobic and racist assertions that gays and blacks were "dirty" and brought the problem of HIV on themselves.

Those are the views that you have been supporting.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 03:40 AM

You might think that there is appalling behaviour among straight people, and I might agree with you, but "good fortune" is not a factor in epidemiology.
Non African heterosexuals are not getting AIDS.
However unfair, that is the fact.
You are more Canute than Canute, floundering on the sea bed and still denying that the tide is coming in.
You are wrong.
There is no significant AIDS in the Non African, non MSM, non needle sharing population.
This is what the Terence Higgins Trust says.

However, the numbers of heterosexual HIV infections that were probably acquired here in the UK have been rising steadily in recent years. Over a quarter of heterosexual HIV infections that were diagnosed in 2008 were probably acquired in the UK. The majority of these diagnoses are likely to be amongst the British black African community.

I can google up any amount of stuff because it is true.
You can find nothing because you are wrong.
I have given you 2 bang up to date, lengthy, authoritative reports on AIDS in our African communities.
They endorse what I say.
You must have scoured them by now for any crumb of comfort.
You have found nothing.
You are wrong.
De Cock, head of the AIDS Department of WHO said that there is no risk to our heterosexual community.
Everything he said contradicts your stance except his one reference to networks which is neutral.
And you say we should dismiss his expert opinion and believe you.
Why should we believe you over every world expert either of us has been able to find?
You are wrong.
There is no threat to our heterosexual community.
If you have any evidence put it up.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 04:05 AM

Keith, you say I am like Canute, after that Lear-esque outburst which included

"De Cock, head of the AIDS Department of WHO said that there is no risk to our heterosexual community.

He did not say that. You wish that he said that. He actually said that he does not believe there will be an African-style pandemic in Europe or America. That is not to say "no risk tio straight people"

And your rant included:

"There is no threat to our heterosexual community" which is just your stupid comment. Nobody can possibly take that seriously.

You see, Keith, we all agree with WHO and UNAIDS. No dispute at all. It's just that you have tried to twist their work to prove an agenda that you kept hidden until yesterday.

Your agenda is that you fervently believe that gay men and black people are dirty and bring HIV on themselves in ways that decent, white, straight people do not.

WHO and UNAIDS do not support your view. They assert that views of that sort are part of the HIV problem.

Let's look at UNAIDS, shall we?

http://data.unaids.org/pub/FactSheet/2009/20091124_FS_nawce_en.pdf

Where the majority of HIV cases (53%) in Central Europe were heterosexually transmitted. Central Europe (I have travelled there extensively) has little or no immigration. You certainly won't see Africans there. So what's happening?

The report also singles out the UK, France and USA for having the largest proportions of undiagnosed heterosexual carriers - Ake, we'd better start that compulsory testing with you, hadn't we?

Don't come back here and whittle away at all the numbers on Africans and Gay men, all the numbers are agreed and accepted. What matters is your beliefs about WHY these groups are so affected by this disease.

de Cock said - and I explained in more detail why this is true - that what defines the epidemic-affected groups is sexual networks - small, confined sexual networks that propagate the disease so effectively. It is not behaviour that defines those affected as being apart from those unaffected, becasue the other STI data shows that all demographic groups are pretty poor with their sexual hygiene in our part of the world.

You have confessed your beliefs, and there is not much more to be said on the subject. This has now boiled down to your fundamental beliefs, which others do not share. Numbers, now, are pointless.

People will be less inclined to accept your neutrality in future, that is a good thing. Me, I have never claimed neutrality or impartiality. That is why I argue my belief, explain my personal justifications and any external support I think I have, then leave people to make their own minds up.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 04:22 AM

And to boil down the essential point here,

HIV is spread by vaginal sex. Quite effectively so.

Straight adolescents and young adults are contracting STI's at a very high rate and so are having high rates of unprotected intercourse.

The only reason that HIV is not more prevalent is that those people, behaving as they do, have not yet had sex with an HIV+ person. That is good fortune, because the number of straight carriers has been low, historically.

The numbers of straight carriers in this country has grown greatly (regardless of origin) over recent years.

The number of UK-acquired cases has grown 500% over recent years.

African people may tend to find partners in their own communities so the disease may have been contained to a large extent in what amounts to an African social/sexual network. That is de Cock's point, by the way, about the importance of networks in edpidemiology.

Black and white people (outside your racist fantasies) do have sex together.

And you say their is "No risk to our heterosexual population"

As in no risk (at all).

Really, Keith?

You could exchange African for Gay, in that analysis - it is the sexual/social network that contained HIV in gay men in this country. Straight people bevave just as badly as gay people, it's just that the disease emerged in one network, whose members do not find partners in the other network.

As I have been saying all along.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 05:14 AM

Kevin de Cock, the head of the WHO's department of HIV/Aids said there will be no generalised epidemic of Aids in the heterosexual population outside Africa.

Dr De Cock, an epidemiologist who has spent much of his career leading the battle against the disease, said understanding of the threat posed by the virus had changed. Whereas once it was seen as a risk to populations everywhere, it was now recognised that, outside sub-Saharan Africa, it was confined to high-risk groups including men who have sex with men, injecting drug users, and sex workers and their clients.

Dr De Cock said: "It is very unlikely there will be a heterosexual epidemic in other countries.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 05:25 AM

Well done, Keith.

As I said, de Cock says an African style epidemic is 'unlikely'

He does not support what you say.

Why don't you quote in full his comments on networks, as I won't be at a computer until Saturday morning now. Not possible to research and paste on a blackberry.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 05:39 AM

He says no heterosexual epidemic.
You have been telling us it has already started, or now that it is about to start but we have been "lucky"
He says no heterosexual epidemic.

Here is the extra bit you asked for.
In the industrialised world transmission of HIV among men who have sex with men is not declining and in some places has increased.

"In the developing world, it has been neglected. We have only recently started looking for it and when we look, we find it. And when we examine HIV rates we find they are high.

"It is astonishing how badly we have done with men who have sex with men. It is something that is going to have to be discussed much more rigorously."

The biggest puzzle was what had caused heterosexual spread of the disease in sub-Saharan Africa – with infection rates exceeding 40 per cent of adults in Swaziland, the worst-affected country – but nowhere else.

"It is the question we are asked most often – why is the situation so bad in sub-Saharan Africa? It is a combination of factors – more commercial sex workers, more ulcerative sexually transmitted diseases, a young population and concurrent sexual partnerships."

"Sexual behaviour is obviously important but it doesn't seem to explain [all] the differences between populations. Even if the total number of sexual partners [in sub-Saharan Africa] is no greater than in the UK, there seems to be a higher frequency of overlapping sexual partnerships creating sexual networks that, from an epidemiological point of view, are more efficient at spreading infection."

Low rates of circumcision, which is protective, and high rates of genital herpes, which causes ulcers on the genitals through which the virus can enter the body, also contributed to Africa's heterosexual epidemic.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 06:53 AM

Thank you, Keith.

I rest my case.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 07:02 AM

But stop saying that I, and others, have argued things that we have not argued.

I have argued that heterosexual infections have risen at a faster rate in the uk than have other demographics. This sign true.

I have argued that the reason HIV has not been more prevalent in British heterosexuals is NOT just because they behave better. Their behaviour is as risky as is that of other groups and the proof is in the rates of abortion, teenage pregnancy and other STI's

UNAIDS say that britain is at the top of the table for undiagnosed heterosexual carriers.

de Cock argues that behaviour is NOT the principle reason for the shape of the different epidemics of HIV.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 07:06 AM

You will have to explain that!
He says "no generalised epidemic."
You say there is one or is about to be one.
He says "a heterosexual epidemic is very unlikely."
You say it is very likely.
Either he is wrong or you are.
You are making an arse of yourself.
Keep going. I am happy to help you.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 07:23 AM

Finally, some hard evidence from Royston!
He says "UNAIDS say that britain is at the top of the table for undiagnosed heterosexual carriers."

No link though.
Anyway, we know that those heterosexual carriers are overwhelmingly confined to a single high risk group.
It is not generalised.
So, not worth posting really.
Just making an even bigger arse of yourself.
Keep it up.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 07:37 AM

No, Keith, I do not say those things.

Look.

I say that a generalised African-style epidemic is unlikely in Western Europe. Is that clear enough for you, Keith.

The UN says the same thing.

You say the same thing.

Is that clear now?

I say that there has been a 500% increase in heterosexual UK-acquired infections year on year. That is true, you do not dispute it.

You said "there is no risk to our heterosexual population. That is wrong and dangerous.

I say that there has only been a 74% increase in homosexual infections over the same period. That is true, you do not dispute it.

I say that behaviour alone is not what differentiates straight from gay or black from white. HIV is spread by unprotected intercourse. The prevalence of other diseases, acquired by unprotected intercourse, in straight people proves that the behaviour alone, of straight people, is just as risky as is the behaviour of gay people.

So what differentiates the groups is some other factor. It is wrong to say that homosexual practice and behaviour alone is the 'cause' of gay HIV prevalence. It is no more the sole-cause than is the behaviour of straight people.

Do you agree to those things? They are the things I am saying. They are simple, they are right in front of your nose. Everyone can see them as well as you can. So answer me. Do you agree these things? Yes, or No?

As a secondary issue, de Cock says that what differentiates is sexual networks. Those worst affected happen to be in sexual networks where there are tighly overlapping sexual, or other-vector, relationships.

That is prostitutes and their punters, sexual minorities with a greatly reduced pool of available partners (like gay men) and needle-sharing drug users. I had to introduce "other-vector" networks because, of course, junkies don't necessarily contract HIV sexually, the vectors in their network are the needles they share.

The generalised epidemic in Africa started in tightly overlapping sexual networks but spread because of political or labour-driven mass migration of male workers that provided the high-volume sexual networks necessary to propagate the disease - prostitution and prion-style homosexuality and, to some extent, rape as weapon of war.

They then took the disease back home and infected their families and children because of ignorance about the disease and lack of access to healthcare and treatment. Bingo, generalised epidemic.

That is unlikely here for all the obvious reasons. We are very lucky not to live in such political, economic and social conditions. We have healthcare and treatment on-tap.

But anyone practicing risky behaviour is at risk of contracting HIV. Go to any town-centre nightclub on a friday or saturday and you'll witness a real meat-market of overlapping sexual relationships. Things probably won't get 'Africa' on us, but they could get pretty fucking back for a lot of people. The risk gets worse with every carrier out there - diagnosed or not.

Unless we get stronger intervention, support, socially tolerant and inclusive attitudes, pervasive general - as well as targeted - education programs.

The last paragraph is, of course, my opinion but it is also advocated by UNAIDS and every UN government.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 07:38 AM

Keith, the link to UNAIDS statement about the undiagnosed sraight cases is in my 04:05. I can't repeat it here, you will just have to scroll down and read.

Are we going to get a reply to the specific points from you any time?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 08:10 AM

I have played your game so many times where you put up points and I have to respond.
You have excelled yourself with this list.
Let me have a turn.
On 11th Jan you said,
"This is how it played out in Africa, it is how it will play out here"

Do you now accept that you were wrong?

I have not been "twisting and turning."
I have been steadily attacking that position you took on 11th Jan.
I say that in UK there is no significant infection and certainly no epidemic outside the high risk groups.
Am I right?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 08:25 AM

What I said on 11 Jan was wrong. It certainly went beyond the available evidence.

The only thing that can be concluded is that it "Probably" won't happen. Exactly as de Cock says.

Now are you ready to withdraw your "no risk to our heterosexual population" comment?

And are you ready, finally, to engage on the real reasons for HIV prevalence in certain groups - which cannot be differentiated by behaviours, as these behaviours are shared by the most affected and by the least affected groups.

It is the essence of this whole debate: that minorities suffering most with HIV are not suffering because their behaviour is "worse" or "less good" or "more risky" than the behaviours of others. That there should be no moral judgement against some, in the fight to control and defeat the spread of HIV.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 08:30 AM

And seriously, if you don't hold reactionary views against gay men or black people, do you understand that people will find that hard to accept from someone who said:

"The difference between general population UK, effectively zero prevalence, and the MSMs and African born, is to do with their practices."

And that you might have to rethink some of your assumptions about yourself and your motivations?

It's a rhetorical question, one that everyone should ask of themselves. I do regularly: recheck my assumptions.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 08:34 AM

Keith: "I have played your game so many times where you put up points and I have to respond.
You have excelled yourself with this list."

That sounds a lot like you do agree with me, but just can't bring yourself to say it.

Putting up points, stating beliefs, raising issues is exactly what a debate is about isn't it?

There has to be a point, doesn't there?

You've made yours with your "practices" comment, haven't you?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 08:48 AM

I do not hold those reactionary views, and the statement carries no stigma.
What is your correct, PC ending to the sentence,
"The difference between general population UK, effectively zero prevalence, and the MSMs and African born, is ....." ?

Fair play to you for withdrawing your earlier assertion.

De Cock said "very unlikely" and said there is "no generalised epidemic"

"No risk to heterosexual population" should read "Except for high risk groups, there is negligeable risk to heterosexual population."

Behaviour and practices. De Cock says it is "important" Why should I doubt him?

"minorities suffering most with HIV are not suffering because their behaviour is "worse" or "less good" or "more risky" than the behaviours of others"
I would have to leave in "more risky."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 09:43 AM

Keith a lot of your 08:48 is good and fair enough.

But is unfair of you to keep quoting de Cock as saying "Behaviour is important..." without quoting the rest of that sentence, which continues

"...but it doesn't seem to explain [all] the differences between populations. Even if the total number of sexual partners [in sub-Saharan Africa] is no greater than in the UK, there seems to be a higher frequency of overlapping sexual partnerships creating sexual networks that, from an epidemiological point of view, are more efficient at spreading infection."

And I invite people to consider a reasonable contraction of that statement:

Behaviour is important...but doesn't explain the differences between populations...sexual networks...from an epidemiological point of view, are more efficient at spreading infection

Because that is my point. That the circumstances people faultlessly and blamelessly find themselves in, from an epidemological viewpoint, are more efficient at spreading infection, than just behaviour.

Behaviour is patently important - don't have sex and you certainly won't contract HIV unless you are staggeringly unlucky. But given that all groups share and practice the same sexual transmission vectors, the reasons for differing outcomes lie elsewhere

We can go further with the at-risk heterosexual groups. Let's leave the numbers for a moment, talk about common sense issues.

Chlamydia and other STI's spread by promiscuous sexual activity involving unprotected penetrative sex. They can also hit the unlucky person that has one encounter with a carrier.

The people most at risk of contracting STI's are the most sexually active people - typically adolescents and "young adults".

So that is consistent with, it explains, the prevalence (up to 10%) of some STI's amongst young women, for instance. They were either statistically unlucky on a one night stand in a sexual network of overlapping partners or they acuired it by being a regular member of such a network.

That is exactly the sexual network that propagates HIV. All it takes is for the virus to be introduced into the network. That the networks exist is proven by the prevalence of other STI's. All that's missing is a few HIV+ people in each town centre on a friday or saturday and we know the numbers of carriers are rising and that we are particularly singled out by UNAIDS for late-diagnosis of heterosexual carriers.

So it is clear that if we are to prevent pockets of HIV outbreaks in these at-risk heterosexual people - and quite a lot of them as well - then we have to be looking at a more concerted general education and outreach program, don't we? We need to persuade these at-risk young men and women to come and get tested, don't we? Or should we, as Ake says, bring in compulsory testing annually for them? As well as for gay men?

It is, of course, silly to send condoms and leaflets to Granny, there is no point blanket testing WI meetings, but all sexually active people outside of a monogamous relationship are at risk and there is no real differentiation between gay straight, black or white when it comes to prevention.

Incidentally, while the only safe sex is to abstain until married and then never "stray". the reality (and reality is all that matters) is that this does not happen universally. A couple, where one or both has a sexual history, could not declare themselves "safe" until 6 months of celibacy with an HIV test at each end and then a lifetime commitment to each other. Food for thought.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 09:46 AM

What is your correct, PC ending to the sentence,
"The difference between general population UK, effectively zero prevalence, and the MSMs and African born, is ....." ?

...that HIV has thus far not infiltrated the sexual networks of the majority in the UK, to the extent that other diseases have.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 10:00 AM

...that HIV has thus far not infiltrated the sexual networks of the majority in the UK, to the extent that other diseases have.
That is inadequate.
There have to be reasons or it would have, decades ago.
Behaviour and practices are important factors.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 10:04 AM

On the subject of risk.

Insurance companies used to ask "Have you had an HIV test?" or similar words with the same effect.

They largely stopped doing that. Actuaries realised that the underwriting risk was not particularly associated with those people that did choose to get tested. They were a somewhat better risk than someone of the same demographic that didn't.

So the question tended to shift to one along the lines of "Have you ever been medically advised to take an HIV test", because they worked out that the greater risk came from people who were contracting other STI's, turning up at the GUM clinic in ignorance, testing positive for Herpes or Chlamyidia or whatever, and were then told that this proved them at high risk of contracting HIV and that they ought to be tested for it for their own safety and that of others.

And France, USA and UK are still top of the UN for late diagnosis - that is the level of undiagnosed - heterosexual HIV.

Food for thought.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 10:06 AM

"Behaviour is important but it doesn't seem to explain [all] the differences between populations. Even if the total number of sexual partners [in sub-Saharan Africa] is no greater than in the UK, there seems to be a higher frequency of overlapping sexual partnerships creating sexual networks that, from an epidemiological point of view, are more efficient at spreading infection."

You must keep the "all" in the first sentence or the meaning is changed.
A higher frequency of overlapping sexual partnerships is the kind of difference in behaviour I am talking about. That must stay in.
Also, concurrent sexual partnerships

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 10:10 AM

Can't you two just get a room ?????

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 10:11 AM

Keith: That is inadequate.
There have to be reasons or it would have, decades ago.
Behaviour and practices are important factors.

For gawd's sake, practice and behaviour is important. The expert says not as important as types of sexual network.

HIV has had low heterosexual prevalence in the UK, because the gay men that were unlucky (or silly) enough to get it were hardly likely to spread it to Doris, Maud, Janet and Jane, were they?

Recently the numbers of straight carriers were dramatically increased by folks who got it somewhere else and brough it here.

There has been a contingent rise (500%) in the rate of HIV infections acquired in this country.

You're not arguing statistics, Keith, you are desperately trying to hang on to your earlier racist and homophobic statement.

We've got your number, old chap.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 10:23 AM

The expert says not as important as types of sexual network.

No he does not.

And, in 40 years, there has been ample opportunity to cross into heterosexual community via bisexuals.
But it has not happened.
And, there is still no sign of it doing so.
If you deny that you are wrong according to the experts.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 10:30 AM

Or rent a holiday villa ?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 10:38 AM

OK, Keith. Enough is enough.

As I rather suspected, if we take away your numbers, you are left arguing an unsupported right-wing, reactionary position that gays and black are dirty and bring the consequences of HIV upon themselves in ways that other 'normal' folks don't.

There is nothing 'neutral' or 'academic' or 'impartial' about your interventions.

I suspect you will be in a minority of two (possibly three) in opposing that assessment.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 11:10 AM

Sounds nice Smedley.
He says he has my number.
I'll wait for the call!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 11:18 AM

I need the numbers to make my argument objective.
I make quantitative, objective, verifiable statements instead of loaded value judgements.
I think that is a good thing.

If the virus had a shred of Left/liberal credentials, it would attck all groups equally.
I am sorry that it does not, but it is not my fault.
I just report it.
The virus is racist and homophobic.
I am not.
You only try that on because you have no other reply.
And you say that I am a nasty piece of work!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 12:21 PM

Oh my, Keith. Now you sound very silly and very deeply prejudiced.

You are very good at telling us who is affected by the virus. That is the easy bit, the numbers.

It is the "why" where you fall down and expose your prejudice for all to see.

Like I said, fewer people will be prepared to regard you as an impartial reporter of facts from now on and, to that extent, a lot of good has been achieved here.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 02:42 PM

But I don't know why in 40 years it has not crossed over to heterosexuals via bisexuals, needle sharers and early blood doners.
Behaviour and practices is all I can think of though.
Please educate me with the unprejudiced reasons.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 03:06 PM

It's all in black and white, Keith. From me and de Cock. I can't explain it any more clearly and you are the only one having difficulty with it. Save for Ake, who will have difficulty with anything and everything.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 03:08 PM

But then, Keith, we know what you are and why you choose to carry on this way.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 03:36 PM

Are you running away from this Royston?
I ask you again.
What are the (ideologically sound) reasons why there has been no heterosexual epidemic despite 40 years exposure via bisexuals, needle sharers and infected blood transfusions?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 03:40 PM

Another 11th jan post you may want to withdraw Royston.

And while we are being candid, let's just clear up this whole 'gay plague' thing. As a percentage of the whole group, gay men suffer disproportionately with HIV infection.
The numbers show that this will soon be a historical irrelevance.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 03:42 PM

Another.
The numbers show it is on the way to being a mostly heterosexual problem in this country.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 03:46 PM

Another couple of years and UK Caucasian Heterosexuals will have caught up nicely.
14th Jan

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 03:56 PM

Watch Keith run from the current discussion back to picking away at old news and numbers. Laughable. What a one-trick pony.

At present, more straight people are newly diagnosed each year than gay people - regardles of where they got it, they are here.

So it only a matter of time before HIV in the UK is mainly, numerically, a heterosexual phenomenon.

Now you just play away Keith. You're doing a grand job.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 04:03 PM

And here is just one scientific explanation for the slow spread of HIV in straight people in the UK. They are lucky enough that the principal strain of HIV sub-type doing the rounds in straight circles just happens to be slower in transmission.

It's easy to find this information if you try. If you choose to try. If you are not a bigoted fool.


http://cordis.europa.eu/fetch?CALLER=NEWSLINK_EN_C&RCN=31290&ACTION=D

There seems to be quite a good discussion about networks and clustering of HIV - a lot of the things I have been saying.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Paco O'Barmy
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 04:58 PM

Errrhhhh.... Nobody is listening. Why don't you just ask Keith for his home number so you can ring him and save bandwidth! You will never accept that anal sex between two men, and the passage of semen/blood that results causes Aids will you? Drone on baby!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 05:16 PM

"So it only a matter of time before HIV in the UK is mainly, numerically, a heterosexual phenomenon."
So, you are reinstating the opinion you withdrew a few hours ago.
EXCELLENT!
Now again you are expressing and asserting beliefs diametrically opposed the the people who are supposed to be world experts.
OUTSTANDING ROYSTON!
You should contact de Cock at once. He will be so gratefull.
He probably has no one down at the WHO who knows as much about AIDS as you do.
You have now made a complete arse of yourself, and with only minimal help from me.
I am so enjoying this.
Now we have the results of 10 days frantic googling.
A different strain of the virus.
You still have not told us why the main strain could not cause a heterosexual epidemic Royston. They have been exposed to it for 40 years. It can not be differences in behaviour because that would be ideologically unacceptable.
The virus must know that obviously!
And the different strain is the one found in subsaharan Africa!
Who would have thought it!
How ever did it get here and who ever might be carrying it?

I do not go in for abuse.
I will just remind you of some epithets you have used recently.
Dim.
Idiot.
Shit For Brains.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 05:29 PM

Keep crowing Keith, you just look more and more stupid.

There will probably not be an African style epidemic here.

Only 4% of gay men are HIV+ - that is tiny compared to Africa.

If, every year, more straight people are diagnosed than are gay men, and if that continues, then how could HIV fail to become - in time - a disease that mainly, numerically, affects straight people.

That is very simple, all the statements are compatible.

You are degenerating rapidly, but that's fine.

You know, it just occurred to me that if you claim to be on an impartial quest for factual knowledge, how is it that after all your efforts you fail to find the academics that find against your ideas?

By the way, that academic paper about the different strains - 2 minutes googling on a blackberry. How or why did you miss it. You are one that claims to have scoured the earth for facts and truth. I never made any such claim. I prefer issues.

If you have anything new to say on today's points then I will respond.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 05:40 PM

And anyway, it is not for me or you to discover why HIV is not more prevalent in UK heterosexual populations.

It is enough to have proven that the low prevalence is not primarily or mainly a result of their sexual behaviour. That is the issue in debate here. The prevalence of STI's in straight people shows appalling sexual hygiene and behaviour.

De Cock reckons that networks are a more important epidemiological factor, the scientists at Edinburgh with their peer-reveiwed paper also assert this. They also find a different, slower in transmission, strain of the virus.

It's all out there for you Keith, you just have to have an intelligent, open and enquiring mind.

But you will run away from these issues. Ho hum. We tried.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 06:02 PM

Crikey Keith,

You will come to regret asking me to google stuff.

in the last 10 minutes (including reading a few long articles, I found this from the BMJ

"The number of people becoming infected with HIV through heterosexual intercourse in the United Kingdom is rising steadily. As the number of heterosexuals living with HIV (diagnosed and undiagnosed) in the United Kingdom grows, the likelihood of heterosexual transmission within the country will increase, particularly among ethnic minorities."

Which confirms what I say about the rise of HIV that is coming for heterosexual people in this country notwithstanding the truth - that remains - that we will probably never have an African-scale problem.

How did your detailed research miss that Keith?

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/330/7503/1303

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 06:30 PM

Keith, hang on to your breeches, you'll love this.

Correction to AIDS Story in The Independent, 8 June 2008
New York, 11 June 2008

http://data.unaids.org/pub/PressStatement/2008/20080611_notetomedia_en.pdf

We wish to clarify misinterpretations concerning WHO and UNAIDS' positions on the status of the AIDS epidemic in recent media articles. The story in the Independent on Sunday titled: "Threat of world AIDS pandemic among heterosexuals is over, report admits" contained a few seriously misleading statements that have led to inferences and conclusions that bear no relation to the highly complex realities of the HIV epidemic.

First and foremost, the global HIV epidemic is by no means over. At the end of 2007, an estimated 33.2 million people were living with HIV. Some 2.5 million people became newly infected that year, and 2.1 million died of AIDS. AIDS remains the leading cause of death in Africa.

Worldwide, HIV is still largely driven by heterosexual transmission. The majority of new infections in sub-Saharan Africa occur through heterosexual transmission. We have also seen a number of generalized epidemics outside of Africa, such as in Haiti and Papua New Guinea.
Heterosexual transmission continues to drive the epidemic among sex workers, their clients, and their clients' partners.

In addition, prisoners, injecting drug users, as well as men who have sex with men, may also engage in heterosexual relationships. In sub-Saharan Africa almost 60% of adults living with HIV were women, 48% in the Caribbean.

HIV prevention and treatment efforts are showing results. Building on these successes will require improved outreach to populations most at risk with evidence-informed approaches based on local HIV epidemiology — an approach we call "knowing your epidemic." In all settings, a supportive environment is required, free from stigma and discrimination, legal barriers or other obstacles that prevent access to services. AIDS awareness campaigns and school-based efforts are essential to promote sexual and reproductive health, ensuring young people have the knowledge and ability to protect themselves against sexually transmitted diseases, and teenage pregnancy.

UNAIDS and WHO remain focused on strengthening monitoring of the epidemic to refine responses further and to recognize changes in transmission patterns should they occur.

To recap: AIDS remains the leading infectious disease challenge in global health. To suggest
otherwise is irresponsible and misleading.

Dr Kevin M. De Cock
Director
Department of HIV/AIDS
WHO, World Health Organization

Dr Paul De Lay
Director
Department of Evidence, Monitoring and Policy
UNAIDS, Joint UN Programme on HIV/AIDS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 06:34 PM

So the experts do in fact agree with everything I said about outreach, removing stigma, caring. In particluar they do agree with my assertion that schools-based, generalised education is very important.

You laughed at me and derided me for that. I stuck to my guns, I was right. I didn't even need to go googling for the truth (but I've found the activity quite compelling this evening.)

You are just not very bright are you, Keith?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 06:35 PM

In fact, I am filing you in the same bin as Ake and Paco.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 06:40 PM

I really am going to stop now.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 06:45 PM

""Now we see that most of those are accounted for by a newly arrived high risk group.
They caused your dogleg up turn.""

NO! THEY DID NOT!

The 500% increase is in UK acquired HIV. Therefor it is not as a result of African import.

If those people acquired it here, it matters not where they came from, because they didn't initiate it, they caught it from contact with indigenous carriers.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 06:54 PM

""Kevin de Cock, the head of the WHO's department of HIV/Aids said there will be no generalised epidemic of Aids in the heterosexual population outside Africa.""

""Dr De Cock said: "It is very unlikely there will be a heterosexual epidemic in other countries.""

The above are two sentences from the same post, by Keith.

So Keith, which is it? You can't even quote him consistently in the course of typing a two minute post.

And we should take what you post as factual because............?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Feb 10 - 07:12 PM

""Errrhhhh.... Nobody is listening. Why don't you just ask Keith for his home number so you can ring him and save bandwidth! You will never accept that anal sex between two men, and the passage of semen/blood that results causes Aids will you? Drone on baby!!""

Barmy indeed.

Anal sex between men does NOT, and never did, cause HIV/AIDS.

It merely transmits it, when one of the men is infected.

The idea that anal gay sex causes it was discredited years ago, and only ignorant, bigotted, twerps like your good self are stupid enough to still believe it.

Why don't you educate yourself, then rejoin the discussion when you know what you're talking about. By the looks of things, it will still be going strong.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 01:05 AM

Not one valid point in all those posts.
I am going to enjoy knocking each one down.
Bear with me, it will need a few posts.
Inorder ot posting.
"So it only a matter of time before HIV in the UK is mainly, numerically, a heterosexual phenomenon."

I showed days ago that at this rate the growth will make it a rare disease in heteros for well over a hundred years.

"By the way, that academic paper about the different strains - 2 minutes googling on a blackberry. How or why did you miss it. You are one that claims to have scoured the earth for facts and truth. I never made any such claim. I prefer issues."

I did not miss it. Hetero AIDS here is overwhelmingly confined to black African Communities. The report acknowledges that.
And they have brought with them the sub Saharan strain.
And that is what your researches found.
An African strain in African people, less virulent because transmission is so much easier there.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 01:10 AM

"And anyway, it is not for me or you to discover why HIV is not more prevalent in UK heterosexual populations."
So you could not come up with a politically correct reason, and try to avoid the question.

Your BMJ piece just goes over the same ground again. The hetero epidemic is a black African epidemic. That is what it says.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 01:14 AM

The Independent correction by de Cock does not retract a single thing that he said about AIDS in the developed world.
He was just worried that people might infer that the global epidemic was over.
Don T, he made both those statements.
I was not being inconsistent at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 01:17 AM

Here is the cut and paste Don.
Kevin de Cock, the head of the WHO's department of HIV/Aids said there will be no generalised epidemic of Aids in the heterosexual population outside Africa.

Dr De Cock, an epidemiologist who has spent much of his career leading the battle against the disease, said understanding of the threat posed by the virus had changed. Whereas once it was seen as a risk to populations everywhere, it was now recognised that, outside sub-Saharan Africa, it was confined to high-risk groups including men who have sex with men, injecting drug users, and sex workers and their clients.

Dr De Cock said: "It is very unlikely there will be a heterosexual epidemic in other countries.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 01:19 AM

The 500% increase is in UK acquired HIV. Therefor it is not as a result of African import.

Yes it is and it is confined to their communities.
There is no generalised epidemic.
Just the high risk groups.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 01:22 AM

Not one post stood up to a moment's scrutiny.
The people who know tell us it is not going to break out of the high risk groups and cause a general epidemic.
You can not deny that.
You were wrong and you are still wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 02:55 AM

Quotes from your BMJ piece.
Although the number of people becoming infected with HIV through heterosexual intercourse in the United Kingdom is rising steadily, most of the overall rise in HIV diagnoses among heterosexuals is among people who originate from and were infected abroad, mainly in Africa.
Numbers of HIV infections acquired through heterosexual intercourse in the United Kingdom have risen in recent years but continue to represent a small proportion (< 10%) of all HIV infections diagnosed in heterosexuals in England, Wales, and Northern Ireland each year

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 03:02 AM

From your new strain piece.

Transmission in heterosexuals also progressed at a much slower rate than in homosexuals, the study finds, with only 2% occurring within the first 6 months of infection (25% in homosexuals).
(Why might that be Royston?)

While in the 1990s genetic characterisation of the virus in heterosexuals showed a predominance of subtype B - the most common form in the Americas, Australia, Europe, Japan, and Thailand - more recent studies find that there has been a shift. Most HIV cases these days in the heterosexual risk group in the UK are of the non-B subtype, 'indicating viruses originating among immigrants from sub-Saharan Africa,' the scientists state.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 09:21 AM

I'm stopping by here every now and again.

In the event that Keith stops banging on about all the things on which we agree - mostly African straight HIV, probably won't be a generalised academic, etc etc etc and addresses some of the more recent issues, then there might be a further discussion to be had.

We could try and draw him back to how he leapt around like an angry chimp laughing at me for advocating general and school-based education in spite of what de Cock was REPORTED AS SAYING.

As he was reported in the article to have said - in summary - that general education and school-based education in the UK would not be beneficial, and was not reported making a comment anywhere about education in other places; so it follows that the CORRECTION which said "In all settings..." such programs and removal of stigma and other barriers are essential to HIV prevention, asserts his advocacy for these measures in the UK.

You see, Keith, I will continue to read these stories and then apply my knowledge, intellect and experience to them and I will come to my own conclusions. You are too witless to do anything other than lap up the things that you like the sound of. Either that or you are a liar - you are intelligent enough to know that what you say is wrong, yet you say it anyway.

On the BMJ piece, we all know what we agree on, Keith, no point you reposting it. What about the assertions that you don't like, but the BMJ make nonetheless?

On the scientific paper from Edinburgh, I don't claim to understand the genetic heritage of HIV subtypes well enough to comment other than to say that the abstract and summaries are clear in talking about the operation of sexual networks as a driving factor in the disease and also variant subtypes in different networks of transmission.

It is just an example of the complexity of the epidemic that you could have found, had you chosen to do.

There are now so many points on the table over the last few days that you are ignoring in favour of repeating all the same stuff on which we have largely agreed. Until you calm down and get up to date, there isn't a lot of point to this.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 11:10 AM

I really do not want "a further discussion." I only wanted to establish that there is no sign of AIDS breaking into the general population.
First you thought it was, then yesterday you changed your mind and then changed it back again.
De Cock. "Reported as saying" in capitals.
Is that you suggesting he did not say those things? Say what you mean.
I laughed last night at your about turns and posturing, but never about the value of education, which I am part of.
I have told you I don't agree with stigmatising.
You talk about me knowing what I say is wrong and being a liar.
I have said nothing that is wrong and do not lie.
That casual false indictment makes me bloody angry.
You never give examples, because you can not.

The BMJ piece just said what I have been saying. What is not to like?

The Edinburgh research. Strains have evolved slightly differently in different places.
The strain we in the West have mostly experienced. Heteros have been exposed and a few have caught it, but no epidemic.
The African one has now arrived with our new communities, and local heteros will be exposed to it, but it is less virulent than the one that has already failed.

I am taking a week off.
Good luck with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 12:38 PM

de Cock, by issuing corrections, tells us that he did not say those things or that he was misrepresented. Or that he subsequently thought he was wrong to say those things.

In any event, I was right, you swallowed fallacy and laughed at me. Who's the fool?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 01:10 PM

de Cock was also reported as saying that there had been no generalised epidemics outside sub-saharan Africa and that there would probably not be one anywhere else. You liked that a lot

He then corrected that by saying actually there have been two other such epidemics and he made clear that preventing more of them required exactly the interventions that I described - including in this country - and for which you first mocked me and then said 'Honestly, Royston, I don't know'

The edinburgh study, echoed my comments and de Cock's comments about transmission networks and their roles in defining who gets HIV and who doesn't, behaviours being - as they are - very similar. You mocked me for those assertions.

The BMJ article asserts as I did, that as the number of carrier's here grows, so does the risk to all. You mocked me for asserting that.

The BMJ article mirror's my view and de Cock's view that early and effective education and intervention is needed to avert a much bigger crisis in our country.

For being so wrong about the role of behaviour in differentiating affected groups, about the risks to individuals in this country, about the measures needed to protect ourselves and care for our communities, about 'responsibility' for disease, for making overtly racist and homophobic statements (your 'behaviours' outburst), for supporting bigots and mocking people, not just me, that clearly always had a much better understanding of this subject than you, I would expect at least a little humility.

Have a nice week off.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 05:42 PM

""Yes it is and it is confined to their communities.
There is no generalised epidemic.
Just the high risk groups.""

Pay attention Numbnuts!

If it is UK ACQUIRED, they contracted it here.

They did NOT bring it with them.

It cannot, then, be the African strain.

African immigrants do not necessarily confine their activities to their own closed communities.

I worked for a disabled charity, which employed dozens of African carers, and they were out in the mainstream of social interaction.

Your blythe assumption that, because something hasn't happened yet, it can't happen, is mind blowing in its naive stupidity.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Keith A
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 05:54 PM

Don, if you read any of those reports on the Africam communities that I linked to, you would see that the infection is spreading within those new communities.
You would see that dangerous patterns of behaviour are being practiced.
Massive intervention is going on that will help to bring it down.
Mercifully, it is not spreading outside those communities.
The new UK infections are within those communities.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 06:00 PM

How devious to try to change de Cock's opinions to suit yours.
He foolishly said no heterosexual infection outside Africa meaning not in developed countries.
He should have remembered that other third world countries like Haiti have very similar epidemics.
That is what he corrected.
Read his correction.
He does not correct his statements about the developed countries.
If you say that he corrected those statements, that is a lie.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 06:08 PM

Here is the correction again.
Ther is no change in the statements about developed countries.


We wish to clarify misinterpretations concerning WHO and UNAIDS' positions on the status of the AIDS epidemic in recent media articles. The story in the Independent on Sunday titled: "Threat of world AIDS pandemic among heterosexuals is over, report admits" contained a few seriously misleading statements that have led to inferences and conclusions that bear no relation to the highly complex realities of the HIV epidemic.

First and foremost, the global HIV epidemic is by no means over. At the end of 2007, an estimated 33.2 million people were living with HIV. Some 2.5 million people became newly infected that year, and 2.1 million died of AIDS. AIDS remains the leading cause of death in Africa.

Worldwide, HIV is still largely driven by heterosexual transmission. The majority of new infections in sub-Saharan Africa occur through heterosexual transmission. We have also seen a number of generalized epidemics outside of Africa, such as in Haiti and Papua New Guinea.
Heterosexual transmission continues to drive the epidemic among sex workers, their clients, and their clients' partners.

In addition, prisoners, injecting drug users, as well as men who have sex with men, may also engage in heterosexual relationships. In sub-Saharan Africa almost 60% of adults living with HIV were women, 48% in the Caribbean.

HIV prevention and treatment efforts are showing results. Building on these successes will require improved outreach to populations most at risk with evidence-informed approaches based on local HIV epidemiology — an approach we call "knowing your epidemic." In all settings, a supportive environment is required, free from stigma and discrimination, legal barriers or other obstacles that prevent access to services. AIDS awareness campaigns and school-based efforts are essential to promote sexual and reproductive health, ensuring young people have the knowledge and ability to protect themselves against sexually transmitted diseases, and teenage pregnancy.

UNAIDS and WHO remain focused on strengthening monitoring of the epidemic to refine responses further and to recognize changes in transmission patterns should they occur.

To recap: AIDS remains the leading infectious disease challenge in global health. To suggest
otherwise is irresponsible and misleading.

I hate your dishonesty.
In the end, no one else is reading any of our shit so I suppose it does not matter.
It is all yours for now.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,keith
Date: 12 Feb 10 - 06:10 PM

last 2 posts were me.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 Feb 10 - 08:24 AM

""The new UK infections are within those communities.""

Now that is a barefaced LIE!

You cannot possibly know what proportion of new infections are within which communities, and to claim that there are no infections of heterosexuals other than those of Africans is a)bloody nonsense, and b)a cynical, and dishonest attempt to apportion blame for the whole to African immigrants.

With each post your agenda becomes more clear. Royston has you pegged!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Feb 10 - 09:33 AM

Keith: "I hate your dishonesty"

That's a bit rich coming from you.

de Cock was REPORTED as saying that there was no point teaching HIV prevention in Schools in London. He didn't make any comment about education or outreach anywhere else.

So when the correction was made:

"In all settings, a supportive environment is required, free from stigma and discrimination, legal barriers or other obstacles that prevent access to services. AIDS awareness campaigns and school-based efforts are essential to promote sexual and reproductive health, ensuring young people have the knowledge and ability to protect themselves against sexually transmitted diseases, and teenage pregnancy."

What other sort of education and outreach related comment was he correcting - other than the one about London? Hmm?

You're either so thick that you can't read. Or you're a liar. You clear that one up for us, why don't you?

My assertions about effective prevention measures are stated by de Cock as being the correct ones IN ALL SETTINGS

You mocked me. You were, and are, the fool.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 15 Feb 10 - 03:34 AM

Don False: "Yes, GfS, I met two homosexuals who insisted that they had been "cured." But it was plainly obvious to those who knew them much better than I did that the form their "cure" had taken was that they were completely abstaining from sexual activity of any kind, and that they were showing signs of anxiety, depression, and hostility. I was told that they had been reasonably happy....."

You're so misleading, and not even good at it! "You were told..."..by who? Did you talk to them? NO! I would think that as much as you are a champion of crackpot politicized 'science' that you'd check it out yourself....NOOO!
You also lied and waged a campaign against me and my posts, based on a lie! The lie being homosexuals were 'genetic' and couldn't change over..and the whole time you knew OF two, but just never checked out the story yourself....BECAUSE IT WAS CONTRARY TO YOUR BULLSHIT POLITICS! Which by the way, is, was, or never will be for the interest of individuals..just the masses, who are deceived at distance, ..so you're oblivious to any of their real needs!

"As to the rest of your most recent post, once again I invite people here who have the stomach for it to go back over our posts in both threads and see for themselves who said what."

PLEASE DO!...and you will plainly see that you twist words, quote things out of context, accuse people of bigotry, and hatred, misrepresent what I've said..then 'comment' on your misrepresentation!
You've LIED too many times, and now this time it's out front. You espoused crap, that you knew wasn't even true!....Go back,..read it for yourself!

I'm not wasting my time trying to find solutions for lies. You and your whole trip is bogus...and its all there for anyone to check it out! Every 'theory', every excuse, every contention has been completely blown out of the water, and you've very adequately discredited yourself.

Remember, you knew of two the whole time!...but never asked them anything!...and certainly not lifting a fucking finger to offer anything for their well-being...because you, like you 'cause' don't give a shit about people!

If you had been honest, we could have had some GREAT stuff going on. Now as it is, everyone got to witness a phony activist being exposed!
See YA!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 15 Feb 10 - 06:09 PM

Well, well, well, GfS! That was quite a little temper tantrum!

As I have already written (definitely establishing that you read very selectively, assuming that you read at all), that I was told about these two, whom I had met on a couple of occasions, by people who knew them very well and had known them for a long time. [Shall I retype that in all caps, or can you actually read it as is? If so, read it again!]

Cured? No flippin' way!

From a post of mine on the Prop 8 thread:

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth - PM
Date: 02 May 09 - 07:01 PM

I'm not all that sure that you do have more information, GfS, and most certainly not more compassion.

Most of the "cures for homosexuality" usually include a heavy dose of fundamentalist religion, involving "accepting Christ as one's Savior" and deliberately choosing a life of denial. More often than not, the participants in these programs either "lapse" after a brief time, or become sexually inactive altogether.

Another characteristic of gays or lesbians who have been "cured" by one method or another are frequent bouts of depression and anxiety.

Robert Spitzer of Columbia University claimed to have developed a "cure" for homosexuality through therapy he had devised, and published a study on his results. He called it "reparation therapy" and claimed that it worked successfully, thereby proving that gender orientation is not "hard wired." However, a follow-up study by John Bancroft of the Kinsey Institute a few years later found that "Only six of the 202 'gay' men and lesbians who had been through counseling reported changing their sexual preference to heterosexuality. According to the interviews, 178 failed to change their orientation and 18 reported adopting celibacy or becoming conflicted about sex.

"What's more, the majority of subjects were left with a mistrust for mental health professionals and had to relearn how to form intimate relationships. Many said they were misled by counselors into thinking homosexuality was caused by child abuse, bad parenting, or an unspecified 'psychological disorder.'"

Other methods of "treating" homosexuality involved so-called "aversion therapy." These treatments involved tactics such as pairing homosexual imagery with electric shocks to induce feelings of revulsion.

So much for the claimed "cures."

The brain research that led to the discovery of the differences in the hypothalamus of heterosexuals and homosexuals definitely establishes that there is a physical component. The question raised is "are these differences the cause or the result of a particular gender orientation?" This question has yet to be answered, but researchers are still working on it.

There is also the discovery—in identical twins, who should be genetically identical—that occasionally one will be heterosexual and the other will be homosexual. Rather than supporting the idea that gender orientation is a matter of choice, this unexpected phenomenon has been traced to imbalances in the infusion of hormones in utero during a crucial stage in the development of the fetuses.

So—no matter how you slice it, there is every reason (supported by physical evidence) to believe that gender orientation is "hard-wired" one way or another, and not a matter of choice.

Also there is the phenomenon of very young children behaving like, even wanting to dress like, the other gender. These children almost invariable become homosexual when they sexually mature.

Don Firth

GfS, the scientific information that I have been posting regarding genetic research on sexual orientation is the latest, and it is sound. You just don't like it, hence your tendency to foam at the mouth. And I have been honest enough to acknowledge that the research into the genetic basis of same-sex orientation is ongoing and so far not totally conclusive, although all indications are that this is the case. You, on the other hand, are so prejudiced and closed minded that you keep saying, flatly and absolutely, that sexual orientation is strictly a matter of choice—nothing more than a matter of a person flipping a coin.

My "bullshit politics," as you so rationally and calmly put it, is concerned with the civil rights of a minority—and to my opposition to the matter indicated by the title of this thread. Not just the Ugandans refusal to grant the civil rights of this minority, but thier intention to pass laws mandating that homosexuals be imprisioned and executed! And this is being promulgated and supported by at least one American fundamentalist religious group, "The Family," using spurious information published by Richard Cohen, the snake-oil saleman of whom you think so highly!

Lest we forget, Adolf Hitler ALSO advocated the execution of homosexuals.

As to the matter of your father. One this thread, you said that your father died of a heart attack. Perhaps so. But this is the post on the Prop 8 thread about your father. It's a few paragraphs down.

GfS in italics. My comments in brackets.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity - PM
Date: 06 May 09 - 12:38 AM

When are those that are trying to prove there is a gene that causes one to be gay going to give up?
Billions of dollars have already been spent to no avail. No one experiment has proved and concluded that there is a "gay gene," and no one ever will.

["Billions?" "To no avail?" The research, is, as yet, inconclusive, but there are sufficient indications that geneticists are on the right track in searching for a gene or combination of genes that determines gender orientation that the research continues. To claim that "No one experiment has proved and concluded that there is a 'gay gene,' and no one ever will," is neither true no scientifically defensible at this point in the research. Strictly wishful thinking on the part of GfS. – DF]

By the way, all of those who think that I have no experience with this, and that I'm just spouting from no experience with this issue, you should know that my father CHOSE a homosexual lifestyle after he had 6 children with my mother.

[There it is, GfS. In your own words! – DF]

Not to get to personal, but to squash any type of statement about my father already being gay, I'll explain this. He was molested when he was a child by his father and uncle. He learned how to deal with the shame and pain of this act by storing it inside and never talking about it. This, undoubtedly, led to prolonged psychological effects that plagued him and eventually chose him to choose his lifestyle.

[This is pure, sophomoric psychobabble. GfS is trying to find a reason OTHER than the fact that his father was a latent homosexual living in denial, as, almost assuredly were GfS's grandfather and great-uncle. And GfS's father finally gave in to his true nature. Once again, wishful thinking on the part of GfS. Much to GfS's consternation (not to mention terror), there are strong indications that not only is gender orientation genetically determined, but that it runs in families. Not all members of the family, of course, or it would simply die out, but certainly in some members. Further indication seems to be that the genetic determinants of male homosexuality are carried by some of the females of a particular family. – DF]

Further. There is this tidbit also posted by GfS on the Prop 8 thread:

To answer your question, I'm a musician, sound engineer, screenplay author, and composed a soundtrack for a film, and when I originally stumbled upon this forum, which was by sheer happenstance, I found it extremely stimulating, and interesting. Being as I also am a marriage and family counselor, I was drawn into some of the discussions, with a certain passion, if you will. My post explains my reasons for remaining a 'Guest'   In addition, I have personal information on here, that is highly confidential. Hope that answers your question. Re-read my last post, if you need clarification. Thank you.

You know, GfS, you remind me a lot of a recurring character on the Canadian comedy, "The Red Green Show. His name was Hap Shaughnessy.

The big difference between you and Hap is that Hap is funny!

Considering the childish temper tantrums, especially evident in your recent posts, you appear to have the emotional maturity of a four-year-old. Rather than giving counseling (if, indeed, you actually are a counselor), you appear to be drastically in need of competent counseling.

I really don't think it would be possible to have a mature and productive discussion with you until such time as you get your act together, start respecting the truth instead of clinging desperately to the way you would like things to be, and stop screaming and whining when it's pointed out to you that they are not.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 16 Feb 10 - 12:04 AM

GfS, since you are thicker than jug of molasses that's been buried in a glacier in the Antarctic for a couple of centuries, let me clarify what I mean when I said, "I was told about these two, whom I had met on a couple of occasions, by people who knew them very well. . . ."

The occasions upon which I met them (one man and one woman) were at a number of congregational meetings of Central Lutheran Church, when Central was in the process of deciding to adopt the "Affirmation of Welcome" statement, which includes welcoming people of different sexual orientations as well as those of different races, nationalities, and economic classes.

These two were not members of Central. But they came to the meetings to argue against including the "gender orientation" clause in the Affirmation. Apparently, this was what they did:   go to different churches in the process of adopting the "Affirmation of Welcome" as written and try to talk them out of accepting the gender orientation clause.

Since these were meetings of the Central Lutheral Church congregation, and these two people were not members of the church, the fact that they were being so vocal about Central's policies raise a lot of questions as to who they were and why were they there, trying to influence the policies of a church to which they did not belong.

Their claim was that they had been homosexual, but when their church discovered this, their church insisted that they submit themselves to both psychological and religious counseling and, with the help of the church, be "cured of their perversion." They claimed that they had, indeed, been cured, and that churches in general, rather than welcoming "perverts," should deny them admission until they have been cured.

Very "Christian" of them!

I talked with them quite a bit and I made my own evaluation. Then, I (and others in the congregation) talked to several other people who had been friends and acquaintances of these two since well before they had "taken the cure." And they described how these two, and their lives, had changed—not, everyone agreed, for the better. Where they had been leading reasonably happy lives up until their church (quite conservative and leaning toward fundamentalism) learned of their private lives and jumped on their cases. We were told that after being talked into "taking the cure," they had become two obviously unhappy and angry people. Their main method of renouncing their "perversion" was to give up sex entirely.

No, I do not know them personally, but I had a very good chance to assess their personalities and attitudes face to face. Not people I would care to associate with. Too hostile. Not to me in particular, but to life in general.

I thought I would explain that further, GfS, before you go off on another toot and make up yet another whole fantasy novel about me, as you seem to have a penchant for doing.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 16 Feb 10 - 01:14 AM

Just to make absolutely SURE that Don Firth wasn't lying through his fingers I went to the Prop 8 thread, did a search and GUESS WHAT, GfS! He told the truth! YOU lied!

Suddenly I feel sorry for you.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 16 Feb 10 - 12:24 PM

Donny, Posting one of your earlier posts from the 'Prop 6' thread is silly! Why don't you post the one you posted about the study in Massachusetts, that discarded all the other studies, and excuses, that you posted before??

As for your father, being molested, having six kids, then turning homosexual....maybe he should have tried the counseling, that you seem to deny the rights of homosexuals to be able to get?...even heterosexual rape victims get counseling.

Your 'rap' still falls down!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 16 Feb 10 - 12:49 PM

Donny, Posting one of your earlier posts from the 'Prop 6' thread is silly! Why don't you post the one you posted about the study in Massachusetts, that discarded all the other studies, and excuses, that you posted before??

As for your father, being molested, having six kids, then turning homosexual....maybe he should have tried the counseling, that you seem to deny the rights of homosexuals to be able to get?...even heterosexual rape victims get counseling.

Your 'rap' still falls down!

GfS

Don was quoting you there GfS, not talking abut his own experience.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 16 Feb 10 - 12:52 PM

I am rapidly feeling less sorry for you, GfS. You very clearly said in the Prop 8 thread in May 2009:

"By the way, all of those who think that I have no experience with this, and that I'm just spouting from no experience with this issue, you should know that my father CHOSE a homosexual lifestyle after he had 6 children with my mother."
*******************

"Not to get to personal, but to squash any type of statement about my father already being gay, I'll explain this. He was molested when he was a child by his father and uncle. He learned how to deal with the shame and pain of this act by storing it inside and never talking about it. This, undoubtedly, led to prolonged psychological effects that plagued him and eventually chose him to choose his lifestyle."

You were NOT postulating on anyone else's experience, you wrote in the first person. If you cannot see that, I think that you deserve no more attention from anybody.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: frogprince
Date: 16 Feb 10 - 01:09 PM

It's been apparent for some time that what we have in Gfs is one of two things, or some combination of both. Either he(?) has unraveled mentally to the point of losing all grasp on reality, or he(?) has such a vile, perverse sense of "humor" that he regulary takes great pleasure in spouting absolutely anything in the hopes of making other people miserable. I suggest that we've gone well past the point at which we should have switched into ignore mode.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 16 Feb 10 - 03:20 PM

GUEST from SLIME—    No, I'll leave that alone! I'm not going to sink to your level. I don't think I could get that low anyway.

It was not my father who sired six children and then "decided" to become a homosexual. My father sired three children—two girls (both of whom became national figure skating champions, by the way) and me. And he did not become a homosexual, nor have any of my relatives.

GfS, I was quoting from what YOU posted on the Prop 8 thread, on the 6th of May, 2009, at 12:38 a.m., in which you said:

By the way, all of those who think that I have no experience with this, and that I'm just spouting from no experience with this issue, you should know that my father CHOSE a homosexual lifestyle after he had 6 children with my mother.

YOU said that, GfS. Not me. YOU!!

GfS, you are either a wind-up artist of the most contemptible sort, or you have completely lost touch with the real world and are running in circles spouting gibberish. In either case, you twist what people say all out of shape, either because you have the mind of a snake, or you are totally incapable of understanding simple concepts.

There is no point in arguing with you any further. KB in Iowa, Ebbie, and Frogprince are right.

GET HELP!!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 16 Feb 10 - 05:35 PM

"wind-up artist" = troll

Been that way for, oh, 1770 posts?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 16 Feb 10 - 09:05 PM

GfS:    "Donny, Posting one of your earlier posts from the 'Prop 6' thread is silly! Why don't you post the one you posted about the study in Massachusetts, that discarded all the other studies, and excuses, that you posted before??"

Only my mother called me "Donny," and that was many decades ago. You'd look pretty silly in a dress and apron, GfS.

No, I'll take that back. You might look quite chic.

Now—the reason I'm back is to ask you just which post about what study in Massachusetts that I allegedly posted in the Prop 8 thread (not "Prop 6")?? I've done a "Find" search on the Prop 8 thread, and the only mentions I find of Massachusetts is that Massachusetts is one of the first three states (along with Connecticut and Iowa) to legally recognize gay marriage.

I had to search the Prop 8 thread to find the post where you revealed that most interesting story about your father (which you apparently forgot about and tried to claim was my story), so here's your chance to return the favor. Get off your butt and find the post you're talking about, or just admit that you are a hopeless Nebbish.

The problem that almost invariably trips up liars, whether pathological liars or those who just lie as a hobby, is that they invariably forget what all lies they've told and sooner or later (usually sooner) they start telling conflicting stories (as you did) and wind up looking like total idiots.

That's one of the side effects of eating a lot of lead paint chips when you're a toddler.

Don Firth

P. S. I don't think he'll be back, folks. Once again, he's running toward the horizon with his ass on fire.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Feb 10 - 09:00 AM

Now that is a barefaced LIE!
You cannot possibly know what proportion of new infections are within which communities, and to claim that there are no infections of heterosexuals other than those of Africans is a)bloody nonsense, and b)a cynical, and dishonest attempt to apportion blame for the whole to African immigrants.

Accused of a lie in capitals!.
I had better reply.
Don T, we all here have discussed the figures for hetero infection.
Since the start of AIDS here, they have been comparable with lightning strike.
It did not spread.
A few years ago there was a slight upturn, that coincided with the arrival of large numbers from a well recognised high risk group.
I have not said that the connection was real, I have linked to highly authoratative reports that describe the spread of infection within that new group.
The old infection could not spread among heterosexuals. Royston has provided evidence that the new strain is LESS virulent.
No lie.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Feb 10 - 09:06 AM

Royston, I am part of AIDS education in schools.
I have never spoke against it.
De cock wrote as if there was only the African epidemic, ignoring the plight of countries like Haiti and New Guinea.
He needed to correct that.
He did not withdraw what he said about industrialised countries, nor the named countries he said would have no generalised epidemic.
If you say he did, that is dishonest.
You always accuse me of that but never supply an example.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 21 Feb 10 - 11:25 AM

After that last GfS bit I sincerely hoped this thread was dead.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Feb 10 - 11:43 AM

Sorry Ebbie, but I have to challenge when accused of "bare faced LIE" and dishonesty.
Would you let that go?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 21 Feb 10 - 11:57 AM

I too was hoping it had withered on the vine.

But at least it now seems to be sponsored by Ugg Boots !!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Feb 10 - 03:29 PM

I, too, was hoping that this thread had folded its tent and slunk away. Okay, one question:

Just exactly where is this haggle over statistics leading?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 Feb 10 - 07:56 PM

Well, I see someone pulled up the Prop 8 thread...still didn't find the post in question

Also, it shows me as the last post....frankly, I don't know what the hell you're all squawking about.
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 Feb 10 - 08:33 PM

Gosh, I can't find that post...refresh my memory....my father was NOT ever a homosexual....let me see if that post is even there...or show me.
(or someone used my name).....

Actually, I think this is just one of your antics.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Feb 10 - 09:22 PM

Don Firth, I am not leading the argument anywhere.
I came in to it because Royston was saying things that I knew to be wrong, i.e. that AIDS was breaking out of the high risk groups and into the general population of this country.
When I politely corrected him I was subject to vile abuse and called racist and bigot.
I was not and am not prepared to let that slander stand, because I have been correct and truthful all the time.

My position all along has simply been that there was and is no significant infection outside the high risk groups in UK.
Every time it is denied I provide evidence to prove that it is true.

If Royston and Don T stop accusing me of dishonesty I can stop proving myself right and them wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Feb 10 - 09:47 PM

GfS, I gave the reference to your post—where you say what you now claim you never said—in my post, here, of 02 May 09 - 07:01 p.m. But since I'm always glad to help the lost and bewildered, I will post it again for you:

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity - PM
Date: 06 May 09 - 12:38 AM

Go read what you wrote there, GfS.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Feb 10 - 10:19 PM

In fact, GfS, let me cut-and-paste it for you here:

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity - PM
Date: 06 May 09 - 12:38 AM
        
Again, from the 'For what its worth Department': (If you want the link, I'll post it.


Resolved Question
Show me another »
When are those that are trying to prove there is a gene that causes one to be gay going to give up?
Billions of dollars have already been spent to no avail. No one experiment has proved and concluded that there is a "gay gene," and no one ever will.

Additional Details
By the way, all of those who think that I have no experience with this, and that I'm just spouting from no experience with this issue, you should know that my father CHOSE a homosexual lifestyle after he had 6 children with my mother.


Not to get to personal, but to squash any type of statement about my father already being gay, I'll explain this. He was molested when he was a child by his father and uncle. He learned how to deal with the shame and pain of this act by storing it inside and never talking about it. This, undoubtedly, led to prolonged psychological effects that plagued him and eventually chose him to choose his lifestyle.

But go to the Prop 8 thread and read it for yourself.

Don Firth

P. S. By the way, YOU are the one who resurrected the Prop 8 thread. By posting on it again, you brought it to the top of the page.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 Feb 10 - 11:17 PM

Yes, I did bring up the 'Prop 8' thread again, by posting my reply on it, by mistake, while searching the post, you alleged, as mine. I never wrote the post you are referring to. Methinks it was done by one of those who you stirred up...maybe not, but it was not authored, nor posted by me.

Thanks for your 'concern'.
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 22 Feb 10 - 02:12 PM

GfS, considering that the position expressed in the post in question was consistent with the kind of things you had written before, and also considering that you let it stand for over 10 months and didn't challenge it, the fact that you're challenging it now, when it has become a little inconvenient for you, has all the credibility of "The dog ate my homework."

If you REALLY want to establish that you indeed did NOT write that post and that someone else did using your moniker, I suggest that you contact the mud-elfs and have them check it.

Every computer on the internet has an IP number, a series of numbers that is unique to that computer alone. And I'm sure the mud-elves have access to those numbers and can identify what computer a message is coming from because they are able to block certain computers from getting into the Mudcat site. Indeed, there are a number of people who have behaved so badly that they have been blocked and can no longer post to Mudcat. And the mud-elves would have to be able to determine what computer a particular post is coming from to be able to do that. The unique IP number will identify a specific computer.

A comparison of the computer signature on that message with that on the other messages you have posted will either verify what you now claim or it will establish that it did come from your computer. And if it is not from your computer, it can identify which computer it did come from.

Don Firth

P. S. No "antic" of mine, GfS. I'm not so naïve as to believe that I can surf the net with anonymity. No matter what kind of pseudonym one uses, every message one posts comes with a clear "license plate" on it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Feb 10 - 05:24 PM

Interesting article in today's Times.

"The global Aids epidemic could be contained within just five years by testing everybody in high-risk regions and immediately treating all those who are found to be HIV positive, according to a leading scientist.
In the absence of a vaccine, an aggressive treatment programme is the first promising way of controlling a condition that affects 33 million people worldwide and kills 2.1 million every year, he said. It also has the potential to halve tuberculosis infections associated with HIV and Aids.

Two randomised trials of universal testing and treatment are to begin in South Africa shortly, and the World Health Organisation (WHO) has indicated that it will back the strategy if they prove successful. The approach is also supported by Anthony Fauci, the influential scientist who leads the US National Institute on Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which is funding further trials in areas of Washington DC and New York where HIV is widespread.

Projects in Kenya, Botswana and Malawi have shown that regular testing and good compliance are achievable in Africa. "Compliance in Africa is actually much better than in developed countries, because in the latter HIV tends to affect intravenous drug users and other marginalised groups, whereas the victims in Africa are just poor," Dr Williams said."


Dont you just LOVE the PC press
" Compliance in Africa is actually much better than in developed countries, because in the latter HIV tends to affect intravenous drug users and other marginalised groups,"

"Other marginalised groups" contains the Male homosexual demographic the highest of any and about four times higher than IDU's

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Feb 10 - 05:32 PM

I wonder why they didn't get a mention?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 22 Feb 10 - 07:23 PM

How about some actual figures, Ake?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 22 Feb 10 - 08:51 PM

""_Accused of a lie in capitals!.
I had better reply.
Don T, we all here have discussed the figures for hetero infection.
Since the start of AIDS here, they have been comparable with lightning strike.
It did not spread.
A few years ago there was a slight upturn, that coincided with the arrival of large numbers from a well recognised high risk group.
I have not said that the connection was real, I have linked to highly authoratative reports that describe the spread of infection within that new group.
The old infection could not spread among heterosexuals. Royston has provided evidence that the new strain is LESS virulent.
No lie.""
______________________________________________________________________

What you actually posted was:-

""Don, if you read any of those reports on the Africam communities that I linked to, you would see that the infection is spreading within those new communities.
You would see that dangerous patterns of behaviour are being practiced.
Massive intervention is going on that will help to bring it down.
Mercifully, it is not spreading outside those communities.
The new UK infections are within those communities.""

Would you now like to point out to me where I have falsely accused you?

You did state clearly that the new UK infections are within those communities. The tenor of your post was undoubtedly that there were NO new UK infections outside of those communities.

You could not possibly believe such a patently ridiculous idea, and therefor you lied!.........in CAPITALS!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 22 Feb 10 - 09:51 PM

Don, the post isn't mine...and it is COMPLETELY out of context to any discussion we were having..,if you even noticed. It was just another, in a series of snipes.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 22 Feb 10 - 11:33 PM

Snipes from whom, GfS?

Re-examining the post and noting that it's paragraphed (and you often run everything together in one long paragraph), and that the punctuation was grammatically accurate (where you usually fire commas at the page with a shotgun and often tend to lean on the exclamation point or question mark key for a few minutes at at time, especially when you are tooted up), I am willing to accept the possibility that you may not have written that particular post.

However--that post was supporting your position and the comments about your father were by way of trying to support that position, so there's plenty of good reason to assume that you indeed did write it. And either lied about your father in an attempt to manufacture evidence--or that it is, in fact, true and you let something slip that you later regretted.

One of the advantages of registering as a Mudcat member and picking a name rather than remaining as a GUEST, is that you have a consistent name without the "GUEST" prefix, and the only way anyone can post something under your name is as a "GUEST." Also, you can PM (send private messages) to other Mudcat members, and they to you.

I have been a member since fall of 1999 and I have always used my own name.

And NO, I do not EVER post masquerading as someone else if that's what you're thinking. Never have, never will.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 22 Feb 10 - 11:48 PM

Look, asshole..the post isn't mine! Stop spinning it, as you always do...to be ANOTHER ONE OF YOUR FUCKING LIES!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 12:21 AM

Now, I ask you folks. Is that a rational response to what I just posted?

GfS, you're showing signs of coming apart emotionally. Get a grip!!

Don Firth

P. S. Over and out. I won't be back this evening.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 01:48 AM

DON T,
there were NO new UK infections outside of those communities.
You could not possibly believe such a patently ridiculous idea, and therefor you lied!.........in CAPITALS!

Don, you could not possibly believe I meant actually ZERO!
How long have we been talking about the few hundred a year before Lox's Dogleg?
In 2008 there were about 300 white hetero home infections and about 90 other hetero home infections not counting Africans.
NO CHANGE!
That level is down with rare diseases only medicos have ever heard of. Miniscule, but not actually ZERO Don!
Royston has been telling us from the start that dangerous behaviour by heteros had reulted in a dramatic rise in hetero infection.
I do not say that he LIED, but the only other explanation is ignorance.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 03:14 AM

OK, Ok, calm down. If you need me to verify authorship of a post, give me the date, time, thread name, and the posted user name.
-Joe-
[e-mail]

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 03:40 AM

You know that bit in a lot of horror films when you think think the monster is dead

But it comes BACK


And BACK




And BACK AGAIN...........




This thread is, for Mudcat, that monster.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 03:48 AM

Oh, and 1800.

(Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh.)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 07:32 AM

Don Firth, can I help with those figures you asked for?
Just specify please.
keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 08:29 AM

Don Firth, I think you want a comparison between MSMs and drug injectors (IDUs)
Total diagnoses for 2008
MSMs 1615
IDUs   91
Hope that helps.
keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 09:31 AM

""Don, you could not possibly believe I meant actually ZERO!""

Stop trying to spin your way out of the situation.

For about three quarters of this thread, you have been trying to beat several posters over the head with statistics.

You have consistently asserted that the only reason you have for participation, is to offset the false use of statistics. You have set yourself up as the true arbiter of fact, and a stickler for accuracy in all circumstances.

You said that "The new UK infections are within those communities."

You did not say "The majority of UK infections". You did not say "are mostly within". You did not say "with a few exceptions".

The inference I draw is that you intended to plant that erroneous idea yet again, in the hope that it would either be believed, or pass without comment, for future use.

You now ask us to believe you didnot lie.

THe alternative is that your passion for accuracy is variable, in inverse proportion to the support it lends to your point of view.

Oh! Hang on That's also lying.

So why are you here?.......To attach blame for HIV/AIDS to homosexual men, and Africans!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 10:35 AM

Don T , what would be the point of me trying to make anyone believe that not one heterosexual was catching AIDS?!
We have discussed endlessly the figures, always of a few hundred a year.
I would not even get that past you Don, would I!
No comment on the fact that Royston has been spinning, with your support, a false impression of a non existant heterosexual epidemic since he came on here then?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 10:48 AM

If you are concerned about planting false ideas Don T, remember that there has been no increase in home acquired hetero infections, and that AIDS is among the rarest of diseases in the heterosexual community, and read this rubbish;

"In USA and Western Europe, that HIV is mostly a "gay thing" is now a footnote in history as the new UK infection rate by heterosexual transfer has been approaching and exceeding the homosexual transfer rate for a long time now - as at August 2009 the male/male new infections were only at 44% - source, UK Health Protection Agency.

Because "straight" people are in such denial about their risky behaviours they are less likely to get tested and treated and the prevailing view amongst health agencies is that the heterosexual figures are the tip of an enormous iceberg.

Add to that the well-documented tidal wave of heterosexually acquired STI's amongst straight teenagers in the UK, and the only statistical conclusion is that heterosexual communities are paying the greatest price for their loose morals and grotesque sexual hygiene."

Funny isn't it that Royston blames only hetero infection on loose morals and grotesque sexual hygiene!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 11:27 AM

""remember that there has been no increase in home acquired hetero infections""

Same lie again!

UK acquired infections among heterosexuals increased by 500%.

OFFICIAL FACT!

Irritating, I know, but indisputable.

More irritating by far, is your unbelievably naive faith that heterosexuals of African origin will never engage with anyone outside of their own group.

What do you think we are dealing with here, the Warsaw Ghetto?

Do you know how many of those Africans are out there, in social and work contact with British Born citizens. I worked for a charity caring for people with profound learning difficulties, and that charity would have collapsed if all the Kenyan, Ghanaian, and other African carers had left.

By all means pull the blankets over your head, and suck your thumb, while hoping it will all go away, but don't expect us to join you.


""The old infection could not spread among heterosexuals. Royston has provided evidence that the new strain is LESS virulent.""

So where do you suppose all the hetero victims of the 70s and 80s got it then? And how many cases went unreported because the victims died, as is normally the case, of pneumonia, and other similar causes, not of AIDS, and their condition was simply not noticed?

You should be thanking Royston, not slagging him off, for supplying you with FACTS about the lifestyle of young heteros in this country, because they are putting themselves at risk, in much larger numbers than are gay men.

The facts about other STDs confirm what he says, and HIV is an STD!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 11:33 AM

In that first post of his, Royston gave the Health Protection Agency as his source, but no link.
Looking at that source now I see this, which tells us that Royston was aware of the African dimension all along, but must have hoped to conceal it from the forum.

Men who have sex with men and black African heterosexuals remain the groups with the highest
HIV prevalence within the UK; efforts are needed to reinforce prevention messages and promote
regular HIV testing within these populations.

An estimated two-thirds (2,790/4,220) of new diagnoses acquired heterosexually were among
black Africans, of whom the majority (87%) acquired their infection abroad, mainly in sub-Saharan
Africa. In contrast, among the estimated 2,760 HIV-infected MSM diagnosed in 2008, 83% (2,280)
probably acquired their infection in the UK.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 11:41 AM

Don T, you do not need to worry about the influx of large numbers of infected and high risk immigarants.
The few hundred hetero infections in a single year are more than ample to start an epidemic if one were possible, never mind the thousands of heteros who must now have it.

It has been in the hetero population for decades, but has proved incapable of causing an epidemic as in the MSM and Black African communities.

And remember, the African strain is even less virulent.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 12:05 PM

You just keep that head down there in the sand mate.

At least that way we'll know which orifice you are talking through.

I'm outa this.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 01:15 PM

Help me out before you go Don.
Keeping my head in the sand means I am ignoring something significant.
What is it please?
We would all like to know.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 05:10 PM

Game set and match I believe....but not much glory Keith, given the quality of the opposition! :0)

No comment on the proposed aggressive testing and contact tracing amongst "at risk" groups I see.

Could be stormy weather ahead for our "liberal" friends.

Best send over a few loads of sand for them!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 07:06 PM

Okay, GfS, I've e-mailed Joe Offer the information he asked for:    Name of thread, date and time of the post, and the name of the person who allegedly posted it.

So we'll soon see whether you posted it, or if it was posted by someone else.

Okay?

Don F

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 07:26 PM

Don...Keith has been kind enough to post the information you requested.....anything to declare?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 07:36 PM

.... given the quality of the opposition

And the beat goes on.........

I'll check back in... maybe not.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 07:43 PM

""Don...Keith has been kind enough to post the information you requested.....anything to declare?""

None of your business my bigotted friend, but Keith already knows to what I refer. He just hasn't the guts to address it.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 23 Feb 10 - 10:36 PM

Joe, here is the address Don posted, as to the one in question. I'm posting it, because I don't trust him.

06 May 09 - 12:38 AM (Californians opposed Prop 8)

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 24 Feb 10 - 12:49 AM

GfS, the question here is "Can YOU be trusted?" Are you or are you not the author of that post?

I sent the following e-mailed to Joe at 1:22 this afternoon, Pacific Standard Time. I have not heard back from him yet. And what I included was a copy-and-paste of the heading of the post in question:

Okay, Joe, here it is:

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity - PM
Date: 06 May 09 - 12:38 AM

Guest from Sanity swears he didn't post that message. Checking it out and verifying it one way or the other would clear up a lot of screaming and yelling, not to mention the veracity, or lack therof, of GfS. I suggested that to GfS, but he apparently didn't see fit to follow up on it.

Don Firth

If you don't trust me, then e-mail Joe yourself. His Mudcat e-mail address is:

[e-mail].

I, at least, want to get to the truth.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Joe Offer
Date: 24 Feb 10 - 01:24 AM

OK, so I gather the message in question was on this page posted at 12:38 AM on 6 May 2009. There are 74 messages from that group of IP numbers, and all (except a few no-name ones) were signed by Guest from Sanity. That's not absolute proof that the post came from GfS, but it's a good indication that it came from him or from somebody using his computer. At least part of the message appears to have been copy-pasted from another source, but I could not find the source and could not determine whether the statement about the father may have come from that source. Are you people really arguing about a message that was posted nine months ago?
-Joe Offer-

---

I got confused and posted this message in the "Californians" thread, and GfS responded to me there. I moved my message and the one from GfS over here. Sorry for the mistake.
Despite evidence to the contrary, I'd tend to believe whatever GfS says about the message in question. GfS has been here for quite some time, and I have seen no evidence of deception or manipulation in posts from GfS. You people know GfS better than I do - make your decision based on your own experience.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Feb 10 - 02:10 AM

Thank you, Joe. As I posted earlier, a couple of posts ago, when asked about it, and why I didn't say anything, back then..I said, "Because the more you feed it, the more it grows'. I thought it was stupid. I wasn't the one who just brought it up! ..and I do resent his inference!

I didn't get the whole explanation, but it wasn't sent from here, by me, to my knowledge. There are only two of us using this computer, and it's silly or vindictive, and neither of us live there ....but, anything else you can find out..is OK with me!

Regards and Thank You,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Feb 10 - 02:35 AM

Don: 'If you don't trust me, then e-mail Joe yourself. His Mudcat e-mail address is:

[e-mail].


GfS: I posted back to him, on the other thread. I have no problem being out front with it.

Don: "I, at least, want to get to the truth"

GfS: Well that's a first!...Usually you make up your own truths!(Based on the biases of the audience you play to...then piss every one off, twist words, then blame others!..for saying things, they never said, and interpreting other phrases, out to left field, that if people get emotionally hostile, you think they're on your side........regardless of the negative crap you feed them). I just don't know how much discrediting you do to yourself, until, the 'light' goes on, and you begin to wonder.."This is Houston, and we got a problem here with our facts". Perhaps, instead of resorting to bringing up this stupid, and false post..you might stick to the issue!
Maybe your bad rationalizations are running low on fuel....and Ebbie is pushing an empty car.

Waving,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Feb 10 - 03:19 AM

Don T, your last post to Ake was all mixed up.
Ake was addressing Don F, not you.
Don F had asked him for some figures, which I provided.

Then you said "but Keith already knows to what I refer. He just hasn't the guts to address it."

I honestly have no idea what you are on about.
I doubt anyone else does.
Just tell me straight what it is and I promise to address it.

Some things you have not addressed Don T.
You are still pushing the "500% increase" !!
We now know that it was caused by the arrival of thousands of infected and high risk African immigrants.
There has been no change in the pattern of infection, indeed the problem is a lack of change in the newcomers.

You have also not addressed Royston's highly misleading posts about hetero infection and the fact that he must have known about the real cause of the rise.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Feb 10 - 04:32 AM

Thank you, Joe, for your vote of confidence. Your instincts are indeed correct.
Regards,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 24 Feb 10 - 05:38 AM

""We now know that it was caused by the arrival of thousands of infected and high risk African immigrants.""

NO! UK acquired means contracted in the UK, not brought in from outside.

There was a 500% increase in UK acquired infections.

And the issue you can't handle is the one concerning your ongoing attempts to blame gay men and Africans for HIV, combined with your lunatic belief that "if it hasn't happened yet, it never will". 65.5 million years ago the dinosaurs (had they been capable of rational thought) might have had the same notion.

With increasing contact between the African group and others, and an increase in the pool of carriers, you, and a lot of others will have to re-think that before long.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Feb 10 - 09:21 AM

Yes Don T, there was a 500% increase in UK acquired hetero infection over those 8 years.
The increase of about 200 cases per year made the 500% increase.
Those 200 cases a year could all be accounted for by new infections among the Africans.

I explained all this at 7.54 AM on 8th Feb.
Royston conceded the point and dropped the "white" from his silly statement about "straight, white British" leading the increase.

It may not seem fair, but it is a fact.
AIDS is a very rare disease except among MSMs and Black Africans for whom it is a devastating epidemic.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 24 Feb 10 - 04:07 PM

GfS, whether you actually wrote that or not is still up in the air.

From Joe:

That's not absolute proof that the post came from GfS, but it's a good indication that it came from him or from somebody using his computer [emphasis mine – DF].

So--Joe's research did solidly establish that it did not come from me! And that's what you've been trying to claim—that I posted the comment about your father, using your handle.

So, rather than continuing this stupid charade and your childish string of abuse, you owe me an apology.

But you can forget that. I recommend that you let the nurses take you back to The Home. They have some nice rooms there with padded walls where you can bang your head all you want without injuring yourself.

Have a nice day.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Feb 10 - 05:37 PM

Have you people stopped addressing the issue?.....I haven't seen the white flag!

Everything you have been saying has been blown out of the water by Keith, and the WHO's comments on the proposed "aggressive" testing and contact tracing of "at risk groups, has proved my ideas on treatment will be proved to be correct.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 24 Feb 10 - 05:48 PM

Good grief. Shades of Sarah Palin- evidently all one has to do to WIN is to say you won. Ake says he has been proven correct, GfS says he has been vindicated by Joe...

Well, guess what. Neither one of you is reading correctly. Ake's position(s) are as nonsensical as ever, GfS, far from having been told that he is correct, has merely been told that the moderator is not aware of his using such tactics, while at the same time saying bluntly that it appears that the post in question virtually without a doubt came from G's computer.

GuestfS, do you sleep walk?

Don Firth has been here a good long time, long enough for us to know him and his views and his 'tactics'. I have not ever known him to knowingly lie, even when his patience with utter balderdash runs thin. I have no doubt but that polling Mudcat members would elicit the same information.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Feb 10 - 06:47 PM

You are quite wrong Ebbie, What Joe actually said was that he did NOT believe Sanity had written the piece in question.

Would you like to qualify your opinion of my position, or is describing it as "nonesensical" the sum total of your contribution to this thread?

The reason I brought this up at all is that the opposition seem to have descended into simple abuse with no attempt to answer questions or defend their stance.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 24 Feb 10 - 07:13 PM

Ake,

Read this from Joe.

"There are 74 messages from that group of IP numbers, and all (except a few no-name ones) were signed by Guest from Sanity. That's not absolute proof that the post came from GfS, but it's a good indication that it came from him or from somebody using his computer."

So the post came from GfS's computer.


Then,


"Despite evidence to the contrary, I'd tend to believe whatever GfS says about the message in question."


Did you get that? "evidence to the contrary" ...


Joes faith is admirable, but as he says: "You people know GfS better than I do"


DUH!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 25 Feb 10 - 03:12 AM

This is my position..as stated before when I wrote this thread. When I go back over my posts, subsequent to this post, there IS a CONSISTENCY to this frame of mind. Only when I had to be 'misinterpreted', (by design), called names, and accused falsely, did I have to address the moron, in particular, who was INTENTIONALLY SPINNING lies...and false accusations.

Shortly after, came the other bogus post, in question...which i will not even address much more.
Certain people will believe what the WANT to, and create their own 'reality'...but who cares?

Now for all those who need a refresh, of what I was/am saying,and why...here it is!

From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 12 May 09 - 04:28 AM

Thank you both for clarifying, "political rhetoric", because that's exactly what I meant, when I wrote it.
Just open your minds, just for a moment. I am not writing this in any contentious manner, but rather trying to give you something very salient, to consider. (A wise man hears all the matter, before he speaks)
As I've said MANY MANY times, especially during the primaries(you can go back and check), is that the right wing, and left wing are on the same bird! (I used an analogy of a boxer, in the ring, beating his opponent, with a right, another right, then a left, a left hook, then another right.)..What he is beating up, is US!!! Both the wings, and political parties these days are nutzo, do not represent the people, have everybody bickering over shit, that they TOLD you is important, while keeping us distracted from the major shit going down!
When I first started posting on this particular thread, I already knew what was going on with the homosexual agenda, verses the actual hurt, pain and resentments that not only bring on homosexuality, but how they, through this issue, are only evading confronting any honest help, or solution, to a situation that they have found themselves in, because they FEEL helpless to do anything about it!!
Now its become a political issue, which is comfortable, and far enough away from their inner needs, and their sense of being helped out of it, to have a normal life, being able to survive and reproduce,(as ALL living organisms on this ball spinning in space), and have to confidence to raise their own natural children, with the woman that bore them with him. Why??? Because their sensitivities,(needed ones, and gifted ones), were neglected, or perceived of being neglected, when they were young?..For the male homosexual, a needed, and not fulfilled place in his heart, from his father...so he resents his masculinity. Why??..Because a child, even you, either created or expected certain attentions, and love, security, and bonding as a given, to and from your parents. It is one's reality he lives in. When he is denied those things, or perceives he is being denied these things, he FEELS two things as a result. One, the realization that he is resented by his father, which leads him to feelings of worthlessness, to be loved by him, and hopelessness, that it will ever come from him. Two, resentment of his own masculinity, because he is like his dad, in that way, can't get the love and attention, gravitates, to the mother, resents the dad, and takes on unforgiveness to him, and learns more feminine traits to communicate closer to the mother..to be of interest to her!
In other words, the love inside them, towards their dad, he sees as ineffective!!
Listen to me,..open up...these two things are prominent, in virtually all homosexuals. The reverse for lesbians, except in cases of sexual abuse, and or, being with a man, who usually they feel ineffective with.
You have heard homosexuals say, "I FEEL like a woman trapped in a mans body(and vice versa)"...Ok?....Who gets trapped??!!?? VICTIMS!!!! Yes, VICTIMS..and who is victimizing them?........a combination, of neglect, and their sensitivities. That's how powerful it was! Ever notice some of the most brilliant artists, are homosexual??...Why? Sensitivities, and learning to speak to the other side of themselves, giving them sometimes a wider perspective!
I had originally thought of sharing a story with you, about a friend of mine, I mentioned in another post, I guy I knew, who was the most brilliant, composer, sound engineer, laser engineer, it think I had ever met, up to that point..and still heads and shoulders above many since. He taught me volumes about sound, and composing, that still is ahead of the pack. He finally opened up to me, when he finally felt no threat from me, or condemnation, but rather objective, caring, interest in him,, and his true inner needs. He and his father were distant, due to a long history of mutual bitterness, and disapproval. This guy was in the USMC Marine Band, had scholarships for music, and could play a variety of instruments..and WELL!
When we talked about sensitivities, I pointed out to him, that being sensitive was a huge quality, and being as he knew that, and we both acknowledged it, and he was gifted with it, I asked him, if instead of either resenting it, or hiding it, why not nurture it, in a child of his own, being as he knew so very well, how valuable, and powerful it was. Just hearing that, tears welled up in his eyes, and he admitted that he always wanted to do that, but didn't think he could because he had been Homosexual so long, that he lost touch with that ability, of what he really always wanted to do.
Not long after, he found his partner, Mark had come down with something he just could shake...and not too long after, Mark died of AIDS. Mark had the same issues with his dad, and in that, they found 'common ground'.
Deeply saddened, bordering on mourning, we talked more, and he opened up more. I asked him if his father had ever heard his incredible recordings. He was resolved to the thought, that his dad wouldn't like them, be interested in them, or him, and so his father never heard it.
Making a long post shorter, I'll skip the details of our conversations,(unless anyone is curious), and he took his recordings, and masters, up, and was going to get 're-acquainted with his dad, in Sacramento...possibly with the hopes of reconciling with him. Turns out, he stayed up there with him for better part of a year....and then died from AIDS, with his father, taking care of him, to the end.
So Dale, (the guy), you told me, that you wish you could have known before, and sooner...so where ever you are out there,..I'm honoring your wish..to all the other 'Dales' out there. I told you I would have, if I would have know sooner too!
Now, dying of AIDS was not the issue, I was trying to underscore. He could have died, for any reason....The thing is, my children's generation, is also denied of that genius and that gene pool is forever lost...NEEDLESSLY!!!!!! THOUGHTLESSLY!!!
What I just related to you, is the absolute truth....and to all those who give me crap, about being a 'bigot' or 'hating' homosexuals,..well frankly, you can go fuck yourselves in you little pea brain. You don't know shit, as your posts so vividly illustrate...OR..you really can, consider another side.
Thank you.
GfS

Spin it all you want..I don't care!
...and as far as 'owing you an apology' Don......Don't flatter yourself!...Shove it!

Sincerely,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Feb 10 - 07:22 AM

What GfS, Akeneaton and myself have all had in common here, is that we have all been told, not that we were wrong which you can reasonably expect in debate, but that we were liars and bigots.
Even though we told no lies and spoke no bigotry.

Royston's belief that the pattern of infection was changing and new groups were now at risk proved wrong.
No shame in that but it would be unforgiveable if, as seems likely, he knew it was false but pushed the lie because it suited his twisted ideology, while calling me "liar."

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 25 Feb 10 - 02:43 PM

Keith, You are absolutely correct!..Meanwhile, it is those folks, of whom you speak, that have posted some of the most outrageous lies and disinformation....and did it, while they KNEW they were lying!!!

The rest is just name calling.....and as the old saying goes, 'You know when the debate is lost, when the loser resorts to name calling!'

All the best, Keith!

Regards,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 25 Feb 10 - 03:00 PM

The Three Wise Monkeys.

As far as I can recall, originally One blind, One deaf, and One dumb.

In this instance all three blind and deaf, and one could heartily wish that all were dumb as well.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 25 Feb 10 - 04:29 PM

I will not waste my time re-reading GfS's screed just above because it is copy-and-paste from a previous post of his. It was psychobabble then and it has not improved with time. It's still psychobabble.

This whole discussion here on Mudcat started on another thread having to do with California rescinding the same-sex marriage law, despite the fact that such laws are being passed in one state after another and will continue to be passed at an accelerating rate. The proposition in California was not put forth by Californians, but by out-of-state fundamentalist religious groups, who consider homosexuality to be a sin.

This is a direct violation of the doctrine of separation of church and state as set forth in both the United States Constitution and the Constitution of the State of California. Whether it was voted in by a narrow majority of California voters or not is irrelevant. It is still un-Constitutional.

Nevertheless, this thread brought several people out of the woodwork to express a spectrum of anti-homosexual sentiments, not based on any legal or constitutional positions, but upon their own prejudices. When challenged, they tried to support their positions by citing various studies of dubious scientific validity and by inundating the thread with carefully selected and edited statistics.

The thesis of one of the more prominent opponents of same-sex relationships, tried to claim that homosexuals, homosexual men in particular, are not just plague carriers, but plague creators, invoking the medieval notion that HIV/AIDs is created by male homosexual activity, not just that the virus can be transmitted that way, if and only if one of the two is already infected. This "spontaneous generation" idea was debunked by many of the more enlightened scientists early on, and definitely put to rest by Louis Pasteur in the mid-1800s. Nevertheless, this person continued (and continues) to assert the same medieval nonsense.

The other more prominent opponent of same-sex relationships involved the claim that same-sex orientation comes as a result of early psychological problems and, in the end, is simply a matter of the individual's choice. And that same-sex orientation can be cured through counseling, when, in fact, if such deeply rooted psychological problems were the source of same-sex orientation, they would require, at the very least, extensive psychotherapy, not just "counseling."

This person cites the work of people such as Richard Cohen, a self-proclaimed "ex-gay" who "counsels" his clients by lying on a sofa with them, caressing them, and assuring them that they are loved. A book that Cohen wrote to this effect has been used by an American fundamentalist religious group to support the Ugandan anti-homosexual laws, going to far as capital punishment for homosexuals.

This person, when confronted by the studies refuting the so-called "cures" claimed in a study by Robert Spitzer, merely ignored the data presented, reiterated their claim that same-sex orientation is merely a matter of personal choice, and became personally abusive toward me.

He becomes especially abusive when I, or anyone else, quote or post links to sites that indicate that same-sex orientation is not a matter of choice, but there are strong indications that it has a genetic component. Same-sex orientation tends to run in families, appearing even when the relatives have no contact with each other, and there is some indication that the gene or combination of genes is carried by the females of a particular line and results in the mis-timing of the release of specific hormones in utero to a developing male fetus.

Granted, the specific gene of combination of genes have not been isolated yet, but research continues, and geneticists are confident that it is only a matter of time.

Rather that being willing to admit that the possibility (probability according to geneticists involved in the research, since all other factors are present), this person categorically denies that such a gene exists or will ever be found.

Both of these people attribute those who are not strenuously opposed to legally recognized civil partnerships or gay marriage as slaves of the "liberal agenda." And are, indeed, "liberal fascists!" Thereby demonstrating that they have no idea of what "liberal" or "fascist" really means.

This is a civil rights issue, pure and simple. No matter who complicated the opponents try to make it sound.

Recently, one of these people in particular, one who has been especially free with the childish personal insults (such mature epithets as calling me an "asshole") has chosen to attack me with accusations of lying about him—when I quoted something that was posted under his own "handle"—which he now denies having posted, going so far as to claim that it was me who authored it and posted it under his name. But Joe Offer has confirmed that it came from his computer, not mine. (Now, how could I have managed that, I wonder? Bloody clever of me!!).

I suggest that anyone interested (and who has their gag reflex well under control) merely read some of the posts for themselves and make up their own minds as to who it is who is actually posting the "outrageous lies and disinformation" and doing the "name calling."

Crystal clear.

By the way, I have not followed the wrangle between Keith and Royston because after being inundated with carefully selected and skewed statistics by Ake, and trying to follow them, I simply don't have the stomach to go through the same song and dance routine yet again!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 25 Feb 10 - 04:41 PM

Keith,

Not true I'm afraid.

Ake's posting history is a catalogue of biggotted assertions against Moslems, Immigrants, Gypsies and homosexuals.


On the subject of the latter, Which aspecct of his assertions that homosexuals are a "scourge", or that they have a natural propensity to abuse children do you find not to be bigotted or not to be a lie?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Feb 10 - 04:42 PM

Oh! Is that right?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 25 Feb 10 - 09:02 PM

Yup!

Just read the posts!! It's all right there.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 25 Feb 10 - 11:33 PM

You'll love this!

Don: "I will not waste my time re-reading GfS's screed just above because it is copy-and-paste from a previous post of his...."

GfS:And because you are a brain locked ideologue who might learn something from ANOTHER point of view..other than your quasi-pseudo 'concern' about your misinterpretation of 'civil rights'

Don: "This whole discussion here on Mudcat started on another thread having to do with California rescinding the same-sex marriage law, despite the fact that such laws are being passed in one state after another and will continue to be passed at an accelerating rate. The proposition in California was not put forth by Californians, but by out-of-state fundamentalist religious groups, who consider homosexuality to be a sin."

GfS: "Wishful thinking..regardless of the FACTS! The people of California voted it down because they don't agree with it..PERIOD!"

Don: "This is a direct violation of the doctrine of separation of church and state as set forth in both the United States Constitution and the Constitution of the State of California. Whether it was voted in by a narrow majority of California voters or not is irrelevant. It is still un-Constitutional."

Constitutional??? Since when did you give a flying fuck about the Constitution???!!!?? You must be not watching the news about what this (along with others) administration is doing to our Constitutional precess. The only thing you know about the Constitution is 'freedom of speech'..because it allows you to run your mouth, about things you know NOTHING about!"


Don; "Nevertheless, this thread brought several people out of the woodwork to express a spectrum of anti-homosexual sentiments, not based on any legal or constitutional positions, but upon their own prejudices. When challenged, they tried to support their positions by citing various studies of dubious scientific validity and by inundating the thread with carefully selected and edited statistics."

GfS: "ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT!! Every one of YOUR plastic fantasy land, 'arguments' have been blown away...and you just can't get over it...like some child, whose mother took his thumb out of his mouth.
Anti-homosexual???? YOUR the one who is denying them of their rights(if you had your way), of getting counseling SHOULD THEY WANT IT, because you want to 'define' them into a category, that denies the reality of their situation!...and you THINK you're a 'champion' of civil rights????? Your a deluded village idiot!

The thesis of one of the more prominent opponents of same-sex relationships, tried to claim that homosexuals, homosexual men in particular, are not just plague carriers, but plague creators, invoking the medieval notion that HIV/AIDs is created by male homosexual activity, not just that the virus can be transmitted that way, if and only if one of the two is already infected. This "spontaneous generation" idea was debunked by many of the more enlightened scientists early on, and definitely put to rest by Louis Pasteur in the mid-1800s. Nevertheless, this person continued (and continues) to assert the same medieval nonsense.

GfS :"Medieval??"...rolls eyes. Methinks he's really grasping at straws!

Don: "The other more prominent opponent of same-sex relationships involved the claim that same-sex orientation comes as a result of early psychological problems and, in the end, is simply a matter of the individual's choice. And that same-sex orientation can be cured through counseling, when, in fact, if such deeply rooted psychological problems were the source of same-sex orientation, they would require, at the very least, extensive psychotherapy, not just "counseling."

GfS: "Only a downright idiot would interpret what I've been saying, and the truth about what I've said, as how you convoluted that priceless gem of biased crap!...YOU OBVIOUSLY DON'T GET IT! I Think you've blinded yourself, by poking yourself in your 'I'..and what you heard some political activist told you, that SOUNDED sophisticated and 'hip'"

Don "This person cites the work of people such as Richard Cohen, a self-proclaimed "ex-gay" who "counsels" his clients by lying on a sofa with them, caressing them, and assuring them that they are loved. A book that Cohen wrote to this effect has been used by an American fundamentalist religious group to support the Ugandan anti-homosexual laws, going to far as capital punishment for homosexuals."

GfS: " Again, nonsense! I only posted about Dr. Cohen, as an example of an ex-'gay', going straight. In those post(s), I also said I didn't agree with his methods...but do you think our wise bullshitter, comprehended what he was reading???? N-O-O-O-O-O!...He just blabs on, like like a precocious little 'mommies little helper'..ignoring any thought from anyone else. Methinks he just skims the posts from those, who he disagrees with..just looking for a line, or phrase, which he can expound his moronic blather...and ignores the rest. How else could one explain such scrambled lameness?? How else can he rationalize away, that it is he, who is discriminating against homosexuals..by his sheer naivete??..then starts accusing others who happen to know more on the subject than he does??..WHAT An ASS!!"

Don; "This person, when confronted by the studies refuting the so-called "cures" claimed in a study by Robert Spitzer, merely ignored the data presented, reiterated their claim that same-sex orientation is merely a matter of personal choice, and became personally abusive toward me."

GfS: "The key word here that Don the moRON, uses is 'merely'. I have never alluded to that...so he must be talking about someone else....like one of the voices in his head!

Don: "He becomes especially abusive when I, or anyone else, quote or post links to sites that indicate that same-sex orientation is not a matter of choice,...

GfS:...Even if those same links conclude that all the other possibilites explored have been ruled out.."

Don: "...but there are strong INDICATIONS that it has a genetic component. Same-sex orientation TENDS to run in families, appearing even when the relatives have no contact with each other, and there is SOME INDICATION that the gene or combination of genes is carried by the females of a particular line and results in the mis-timing of the release of specific hormones in utero to a developing male fetus."

GfS: "(The caps I inserted, from his original text).....So, you think its an established FACT, yet??....or tends to be an indication????

Don: "Granted, the specific gene of combination of genes have not been isolated yet,..."

GfS: " .....NO SHIT, SHERLOCK!!!"

Don: ".....but research continues, and geneticists are confident that it is only a matter of time."

GfS: "..as long as there is grant money for a wild goose chase, they'll ride as long as they can. Maybe they can find another 'indication'......extend the grant and it might make it up to a 'tends'. Meanwhile, they'll issue a report, and let the moron activists make meringue out of diarrhea.
Even the post, YOU posted, by a homosexual researcher, couldn't find support for any of the popular 'theories'!...That don't matter....just keep headin' on!

Don: "Rather that being willing to admit that the possibility (probability according to geneticists involved in the research, since all other factors are present), this person categorically denies that such a gene exists or will ever be found."

GfS: "The 'researchers'(?) should try, as I posted, looking at the development of receptors, during pregnancy, and factors that could influence their development.......oh oh...Don can't wrap his brain around that concept...I must be a bigot, then...(at least he can spell that word)!

Don: "Both of these people attribute those who are not strenuously opposed to legally recognized civil partnerships or gay marriage..."

GfS: "False again. Civil partnerships is one thing marriage is another. So he combines them, for the spin..blah blah blah"

Don; "...as slaves of the "liberal agenda." And are, indeed, "liberal fascists!" Thereby demonstrating that they have no idea of what "liberal" or "fascist" really means."

GfS; "The rest of that sentence is so stupid, why comment on it..it's self explanatory, that you haven't got a clue!"

Don: "This is a civil rights issue, pure and simple. No matter who complicated the opponents try to make it sound."

GfS: "Yeah, not a medical, psychological, emotional, spiritual issue...just a civil rights issue...because you're a one trick pony..and have a one track mind. Therein lies your narrow mindedness!..but you can't see that, either!

Don: "Recently, one of these people in particular, one who has been especially free with the childish personal insults (such mature epithets as calling me an "asshole") has chosen to attack me with accusations of lying about him—when I quoted something that was posted under his own "handle"—which he now denies having posted, going so far as to claim that it was me who authored it and posted it under his name. But Joe Offer has confirmed that it came from his computer, not mine. (Now, how could I have managed that, I wonder? Bloody clever of me!!)."

GfS: hey, I call them as I see them! Now you want to make an issue, not addressing the topic, but of a post that I did not post..and Joe said he wasn't all the way sure.....but you'll run with it....just like your 'tends' and 'indications' and 'some'....and anyone could have put my 'handle' in....blah blah blah."

Don: "I suggest that anyone interested (and who has their gag reflex well under control) merely read some of the posts for themselves and make up their own minds as to who it is who is actually posting the "outrageous lies and disinformation" and doing the "name calling."

GfS: "Yeah, and you'll see the difference between wit, satire, and political insanity, taken to the absurd!"



Don: "Crystal clear."

GfS: "Yup!"

Don: "By the way, I have not followed the wrangle between Keith and Royston because after being inundated with carefully selected and skewed statistics by Ake, and trying to follow them, I simply don't have the stomach to go through the same song and dance routine yet again!"

GfS: "...and because he's obsessed with locking horns with anyone who isn't impressed with his self image, and other accompanying bullshit!'

Don Firth
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 26 Feb 10 - 12:16 AM

GfS: "Anti-homosexual???? YOUR the one who is denying them of their rights(if you had your way), of getting counseling SHOULD THEY WANT IT, because you want to 'define' them into a category, that denies the reality of their situation!...and you THINK you're a 'champion' of civil rights????? Your a deluded village idiot!"

How in the world did you get the idea that any one of us - saying that we wanted to - would wish to deprive anyone of therapy that they want to have? And just how would we go about denying them such a right?


GfS: "Yeah, and you'll see the difference between wit, satire, and political insanity, taken to the absurd!"

Guest from Sanity, you may not be aware of it but you are impressing no one. I'd lay money on it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 26 Feb 10 - 01:30 AM

Oh, here she is!..the driving force behind Don's nonsensical cheerleaders!

Ebbie: "How in the world did you get the idea that any one of us - saying that we wanted to - would wish to deprive anyone of therapy that they want to have? And just how would we go about denying them such a right?"

GfS: "Finally you asked! By the absurdity that it is a genetic defect, if you will, and equating it to race, creed, color, and giving it the status of equality, as such, under civil rights, if a homosexual seeks to not be homosexual, for whatever reason, and people have posted of those who did just that, you deny them counsel...because you say that they can not switch from homo to hetero sexual...which is in complete error! What would they counsel for..if it doesn't exist?? How would that be covered under Obama's(or any) health care bill????? Would you want to deny them the 'pursuit of happiness'?.....or deny them the opportunity to have and raise their OWN from them, (genetic) family???...because of some stupid political position?????????? You want a political posture to allow what people can, and can't WANT??

Ummm, ....any lights going on?

Ebbie: "Guest from Sanity, you may not be aware of it but you are impressing no one. I'd lay money on it."

GfS: "Ahhh yes, 'to lay'.....object of the proposition.(wink)

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Feb 10 - 02:57 AM

Don T, we have been on opposite sides throughout, but you have risen above that.
You have recognised that, like the famous monkeys, I have shown wisdom, knowledge and understanding.
You are a fair man.
From your interest, AIDS is clearly an important matter for you.
I expect that you are grateful that I have uncovered some erroneous statements that would have left you operating under serious misconceptions.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Feb 10 - 03:02 AM

Don Firth, I have not agreed with all of Ake's posts, but I have not spotted any slanted statistics from him. Unless you can direct me to some, I will say that you are wrong about that.

Royston has certainly provided skewed statistics, starting with his first Jan 10th post and continuing with his "5 fold increase" posts.
They appeared to show a change in the pattern of infection, but the change was really due to the arrival of thousands of infected and high risk people from sub Saharan Africa.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Feb 10 - 03:06 AM

Lox, if I referred to cystic fibrosis as a scourge, it would not mean I was bigotted in my attitude to anyone.
That is not to imply that homosexuality is a disease, just a condition that you are born with.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 26 Feb 10 - 01:30 PM

GfS, just because you don't know the distinctions between lay and lie, don't assume that others also do not.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 26 Feb 10 - 02:17 PM

Ebbie, you missed the pun. try re-reading it slowly, and don't assume you know what it is before hand.
GfS.

P.S. Is that ALL you got from the post???? I mean you missed that one, too.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 26 Feb 10 - 03:06 PM

I don't think I need to answer GfS's little tirade (running in circles, frothing at the mouth, and peeing his pants), do you?

I'd say it speaks volumes--not about me, but about GfS.

Just read what I wrote, read what he wrote, and make up your own ninds.

I wonder how he can manage to get around with all those bullet holes in his feet.

(Okay, back to the real world.)

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 26 Feb 10 - 03:58 PM

I'm not a statistician, Keith, but a friend of mine is (he works for the census bureau and deals with statistics all the time) took a look at some of Ake's posts. He commented that the way Ake interpreted some of the statistics was like—and I stole his phrase and posted it on the Prop 8 thread—claiming that all those with prostate cancer are male.

As they say:    "Well, DUH!!!"

It may sound impressive and learnèd, but it's not statistically significant. It ignores the bigger picture and tells you nothing beyond what is self-evident.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 26 Feb 10 - 04:16 PM

Don, if the statistics are insignificant, why are the WHO contemplating an agressive testing and contact tracing programme for homosexuals, IDU's, and "sex workers"?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 26 Feb 10 - 06:33 PM

I'm only coming back on here to respond to something new.

Ake, I'm not having a go at you.

I can't find any indication of WHO policy being as you suggest, I have searched extensively. Where did you get that information from? Contact tracing happens all the time in all countries as a part of diagnosis counseling, but "aggressive" and "aggressive testing", I don't understand what you mean.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 26 Feb 10 - 06:44 PM

GfS, I didn't miss the pun- I gave it a little smile of recognition then went on to the pertinent point. You see, that is part of your problem- you would love to think of yourself as superior in some way. You know what a police officer once told his audience in a seminar on the criminal mind? He said that the one constant of the criminal is that he thinks he is smarter.

Not that I'm making any implications. :)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 26 Feb 10 - 07:08 PM

"Lox, if I referred to cystic fibrosis as a scourge, it would not mean I was bigotted in my attitude to anyone.
That is not to imply that homosexuality is a disease, just a condition that you are born with."

Keith, you know better than that - I hope ...

Cysric Fibrosis is a condition suffered by those infected.

Homosexuality is neither a condition, nor is it suffered by homosexuals any more than heterosexuality is suffered by heterosexuals.

In fact, reading this thread, i was under the impression that much of the criticism of "promiscuous" homosexuals was that they enjoy it too much ...

Your last posts is a bit surreal and out of character for an impartial statistician.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 26 Feb 10 - 07:13 PM

Keith,

More pointedly, Ake meant that homosexuals themselves are the scourge, suffered by the rest of society.

Unless you are saying that cystic fibrosis sufferers are a scourge on the rest of us then you'll have to forgive me for continuing to find your analogy more parallel universe than parallel.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 26 Feb 10 - 07:34 PM

Royston.

"The global Aids epidemic could be contained within just five years by testing everybody in high-risk regions and immediately treating all those who are found to be HIV positive, according to a leading scientist.
In the absence of a vaccine, an aggressive treatment programme is the first promising way of controlling a condition that affects 33 million people worldwide and kills 2.1 million every year, he said. It also has the potential to halve tuberculosis infections associated with HIV and Aids.

Two randomised trials of universal testing and treatment are to begin in South Africa shortly, and the World Health Organisation (WHO) has indicated that it will back the strategy if they prove successful. The approach is also supported by Anthony Fauci, the influential scientist who leads the US National Institute on Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which is funding further trials in areas of Washington DC and New York where HIV is widespread.

Projects in Kenya, Botswana and Malawi have shown that regular testing and good compliance are achievable in Africa. "Compliance in Africa is actually much better than in developed countries, because in the latter HIV tends to affect intravenous drug users and other marginalised groups, whereas the victims in Africa are just poor," Dr Williams said."


Dont you just LOVE the PC press
" Compliance in Africa is actually much better than in developed countries, because in the latter HIV tends to affect intravenous drug users and other marginalised groups,"

"Other marginalised groups" contains the Male homosexual demographic the highest of any and about four times higher than IDU's

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 26 Feb 10 - 07:49 PM

Oh Ake, you must learn to read. If you can read then you must learn not to tell lies. I am not calling you a liar, those are the two explanations for what you have said, so you tell us. Ake: Thick? or a liar?

A South-African researcher is about to trial an universal testing programme in South Africa and will give ART to all positive people, regardless of CD4 or viral load.

That is an UNIVERSAL testing programme. Not a selective one.

It is not supported by the WHO: they have said they WILL support it IF it produces good results. In South Africa.

I am already on the record as saying that I believe UNIVERSAL testing programmes are probably a brilliant idea in any country.

But unfortunately it isn't happening any time soon.

And a selective testing programme; whether aggressive, vindictive or otherwise, is still nothing more than one of your deranged fantasies.

Compliance is better in Africa, because the affected groups in The West are marginalised, not just poor. What that statement means, Ake, is that if IDU's and MSM's were not marginalised [by bigotry] then compliance would be better. This is what all the experts agree on: that prejudice and bigotry kills people.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/article7035256.ece

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 26 Feb 10 - 11:00 PM

Ebbie: "GfS, I didn't miss the pun- I gave it a little smile of recognition then went on to the pertinent point."

What is the 'pertinent point', that you're not addressing? Actually, its the whole point of this stupid 'controversy', that you and the politicos are ignoring. So let's deal with that. Did you give what I posted any deeper thought?

Now check this out:

Don: "I don't think I need to answer GfS's little tirade (running in circles, frothing at the mouth, and peeing his pants), do you?

GfS: Nice way to say you CAN'T answer it, without admitting that you have been WRONG!

Speaking of running in circles, and tirades, and frothing at the mouth..............:

Don: "Just read what I wrote, read what he wrote, and make up your own ninds."

GfS: What the hell is 'own ninds'......ooops, a little too much frothing going on there, ol' chap??!!

The weak accuse others of their own bullshit!

Love and kisses,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 01:24 AM

I don't have to answer anything because you haven't said anything that hasn't been answered many times before, both by me and by others. You keep singing the same song over and over and over and over and. . . .

That's why I suggested that people read what's already been posted.

You ARE a boring little twit. Hell, GfS, why don't you just have a bunch of rubber stamps made?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 06:19 AM

Lox, Cystic fibrosis is a disease you are born with.
Homosexuality is a condition you are born with.
Both groups will miss out on certain experiences which the rest of us think of as joys of life.
Both groups will go through unpleasant experiences related to their condition.
Both are at a heightened risk of acquiring an infection that will kill them before their time.

I think that Akeneaton does regard heterosexuality as a disease.
Before denouncing him, remember that that was the mainstream public and medical belief within our lifetimes. The change is not due to any scientific breakthrough, just a change in perceptions.

We can disagree, but it is a valid point of view.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 06:23 AM

Don Firth, what were Ake's statistics used to argue?
If it was to argue that AIDS is overwhelmingly a disease of Msms and a rarity in the general population, then whatever your friend told you, that was the truth.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 06:40 AM

Royston, this new approach is to test everyone, but only in high risk regions.

"By testing people in high-risk regions and immediately treating putting the patients on medications that reduce their viral-loads, Williams said that public health officials could "render HIV-infected people not infectious."

"We've been using drugs to save lives, but not stop the infection," he said, adding that proper treatments makes someone 25 times less infectious. "It's time to look beyond that."

Kenneth H. Meyer, professor of medicine and community health at Brown University, said that public health officials have been moderately successful in getting people onto anti-viral treatments. But as people live longer, the trend of more new infections than deaths will continue, especially in high-risk regions.

He cited statistics that while the number of HIV- infected people in the United States is 1 in 300, it's much higher in hot spots like Washington, D.C., where the prevalence is 1 in 15 people"
http://news.aaas.org/2010/0220battling-hivaids---test-all-treat-all.shtml

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 06:43 AM

Typo in post to Lox.
For heterosexuality read homosexuality.
Sorry.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 06:44 AM

Keith, is this more evidence of an opinion that you might hold?

"I think that Akeneaton does regard heterosexuality as a disease.
Before denouncing him, remember that that was the mainstream public and medical belief within our lifetimes. The change is not due to any scientific breakthrough, just a change in perceptions.

We can disagree, but it is a valid point of view."

Because when you argue against "liberals" you tell them that settled scientific conclusion and evidence is the only thing to be considered. So the only view that can be tolerated is that homosexuality is not a disease, isn't it? That is the settled scientific position.

Or are we to understand that you assert ignorant ranting bigots are deserving of some special protection, indulgence or consideration?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 06:52 AM

Royston, do you deny that 50 years ago, medical science regarded homosexuality as a disease?
There is no new science on the subject, just a difference of perception that could even reverse again.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 07:11 AM

Thanks, Keith. You have answered my question.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 07:14 AM

I doubt it Royston.
I do not regard homosexuality as a disease.
That should answer your question quite clearly.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 07:19 AM

But you consider that settled fact to be subject to future revision and you say that we should support or excuse ranting bigots.

You answered my question.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 07:21 AM

Keith, you miss the point.

Ake says that homosexuals are a scourge suffered by the rest of humanity, not that that homosexuality is a scourge suffered by homosexuals.

Unless you mean that Cystic Fibrosis 'Sufferers' are a scourge on the rest of us then your analogy is false.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 07:34 AM

Just to put some background on this.

Clinical Psychiatry classed homosexuality as an aberrant, treatable condition. A 'disease' in the true sense of the word; that being homosexual, per se, caused mental harm.

After a long time the profession came to the realisation that homosexuality could not be treated. It had no symptoms, it was natural in other species, as well as humans.

The profession realised that they were treating symptoms - depression, self-loathing, anxiety, self-harm, in a tiny minority of homosexual people where the root-causes of the symptoms were not being homosexual but were the results of how the patient was abused and mistreated and harmed by other people for being homosexual.

So the profession realised it had simply been wrong, and reversed its position. The "problem" was societal prejudice, of which the clinicalisation of homosexuality had been a prime-mover.

Yes, some pseudo-scientists argue differently. They normally have quite obvious politico-socio-religious affiliations. They are a fringe group as in creationists, global warming-deniers and the like.

Only ignorant, ranting bigots pay them regard - because ignorant ranting bigots appreciate, selectively, what they have to say, Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 07:55 AM

I think it very likely that a genetic cause will emerge.
People will then have to decide if it is a genetic "defect" and if parents will be allowed to make choices about the sexuality of their babies.
This is the current position with Down's and other conditions.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 07:58 AM

Lox, I do not have such a good memory of Ake's posts. My version of his belief seems more likely, but he can and no doubt will speak for himself.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 08:25 AM

Royston, I question this.
"After a long time the profession came to the realisation that homosexuality could not be treated. It had no symptoms, it was natural in other species, as well as humans"

It can be said to have symptoms. That is how it is recognised.
There are many conditions regarded as diseases that occur in other species as well as humans.
No treatment has yet been found, but it may.

We may not regard it as a disease, but that remains a valid point of view.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 09:22 AM

Keith: I think it very likely that a genetic cause will emerge.
People will then have to decide if it is a genetic "defect" and if parents will be allowed to make choices about the sexuality of their babies.
This is the current position with Down's and other conditions.

I agree with you about the genetic component. I'm interested in your opinion: Do you think that society should move to "treat" (by which we mean, in the short term, to abort) a feotus that displays a genetic trait, which of itself causes no harm or prejudice to the life that follows that could not be prevented by people just being nice and showing respect to each other?

We are coming back to Eugenics aren't we? Prejudice and bigotry harms people, so rather than stop prejudice and bigotry, let us just cull the victims? Would that be a better world for anyone? Where do you stop with the list of victims that should be culled?

The Down's analogy is a poor one, I hope that you will reconsider it. Parents receiving an in-utero diagnosis of Down's have an agonising choice to make (whatever they decide), but they have to make it because their child may be utterly dependant on constant, life-long, painstaking care and financial and material resources in order to realise their potential.

Whereas a gay person just requires people not be nasty.

For the record, I believe that abortion is problematic and too freely resorted to. I don't believe that Down's is necessarily a reason to abort a foetus - I have known too many people with Down's syndrome who are just wonderful people leading good lives with the right support and care. But I recognise that people struggle to make difficult choices and they must be supported to make and live with those choices, whichever one they made. All choices have consequences, and the decision by a couple to abort a pregnancy they hoped would be a cherished child must be absolutely heart-breaking for them.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 11:05 AM

Don: "You ARE a boring little twit. Hell, GfS, why don't you just have a bunch of rubber stamps made?"

You either could read them, or understand them anyway.

here, here's a thought to consider, oh wise one...same thing I gave to Ebbs:.....GfS: "Finally you asked! By the absurdity that it is a genetic defect, if you will, and equating it to race, creed, color, and giving it the status of equality, as such, under civil rights, if a homosexual seeks to not be homosexual, for whatever reason, and people have posted of those who did just that, you deny them counsel...because you say that they can not switch from homo to hetero sexual...which is in complete error! What would they counsel for..if it doesn't exist?? How would that be covered under Obama's(or any) health care bill????? Would you want to deny them the 'pursuit of happiness'?.....or deny them the opportunity to have and raise their OWN from them, (genetic) family???...because of some stupid political position?????????? You want a political posture to allow what people can, and can't WANT??

Ummm, ....any lights going on?

Your political stance fed to you, that has left you 'hung over' from when there were valid issues, has both deceived you, and blinded you. Now they are working to destroy the very basis on which they were founded.......

"A wise teacher does not take a student into his own throne room, but brings him to the threshold of the student's potential"

Hop aboard the clue train, Don!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 12:30 PM

I SAID:-    ""The Three Wise Monkeys.
As far as I can recall, originally One blind, One deaf, and One dumb.
In this instance all three blind and deaf, and one could heartily wish that all were dumb as well.

Don T.""


KEITH REPLIED:-    ""Don T, we have been on opposite sides throughout, but you have risen above that.
You have recognised that, like the famous monkeys, I have shown wisdom, knowledge and understanding.
You are a fair man.
From your interest, AIDS is clearly an important matter for you.
I expect that you are grateful that I have uncovered some erroneous statements that would have left you operating under serious misconceptions.""

Talk about missing the point!

You, Keith, were indeed one of the three monkeys to whom I was referring, along with Ake and GfS. The word that was out of place was "wise".

Deaf and blind, and the more I hear, the more I believe "DUMB" as well, in its modern sense.

Think twice before you assume that I am complimenting you. That would be the "serious misconception", as you have said nothing on this topic that would merit it.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Keith A
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 01:55 PM

Don T, you are priceless!
Keep posting mate.

Royston, it will be an ethical minefield.
I fear that many parents, if given the choice, would prefer the standard model with grandchildren down the line.
If they are not given the choice, people will get round it.
Gender choosing is not supposed to happen now, but male births significantly outnumber females in some communities.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 04:12 PM

On the program "This American Life" this morning, the narrator described how a psychiatrist noted that all the homosexuals that she knew of—who were undergoing psychotherapy or counseling—were doing so, not directly because of their same-sex orientation, but because of other psychological difficulties, primarily such things as depression and anxiety engendered by the abusive attitudes some people had toward them due to the fact that they were homosexual—not because of their same-sex orientation per se. And it was this that led them to try to seek a cure for their "aberration," not their sexual orientation itself.

So—she rounded up a group of gay men who were not undergoing psychotherapy or counseling, and who, to all appearances, seemed to be perfectly normal and happy just as they were. No salient psychological problems, save their same-sex orientation, which some may have regarded as a problem, but which they did not.

She gave these men a big battery of standardized psychological tests—the whole ball of wax. Then, she took the results to a group of psychiatrists and assigned them the task of picking out any psychological problems. The panel was unable to find any problems of significance. And—NONE of the subjects were identified by the panel as homosexual!

So—is same-sex orientation a psychological aberration? Not so even a panel of psychiatrists would notice.

Now, GfS:

The matter of whether or not same-sex orientation is a condition that needs to be cured or whether or not attempted cures have ever been successful (not) has been gone over on this and the other thread time and time again. I have posted the date several times. And your "refutations" have all taken the form of calling me an "asshole" and saying that the data is "bullshit."

That is hardly what anyone could call "rational discourse."

As I have pointed out several times, there are no documented cases on record (save by unreliable sources such as you, or Richard Cohen, who is completely lacking in training and credentials) of "successful cures" that did not leave the subject in a worse psychological state than before. Often these "treatments" consisted of aversion therapy—presenting homosexual images to the subject, then electrically shocking the subject if they responded. The end result was a group of people who were suffering from anxiety, depression, who avoided the situation by simply abstaining from sexual activity entirely, and in at least one study of 202 subjects, six suicides.

You keep lying by saying that I would prevent same-sex oriented people from seeking psychotherapy or psychological counseling if they are convinced that their orientation is an abnormality. Not true! I have never said that. If they wanted to give it a try, okay. But I think they should at least be made aware of the results (or lack thereof) of previous attempts and the possible psychological "side-effects" of undergoing such therapy. The depression—and the suicides—of the cited study came basically from the fact that the therapy was oversold, and when it didn't work, the subjects tended to blame themselves for the failure. The vast majority of those who participated (78%, as I recall) finally said "To hell with it," and simply returned to their former same-sex activity. But on the other end of the spectrum, as I noted, six of the subjects were so depressed by the failure to achieve a "cure" that they killed themselves.

And as to my "political stance" being "fed" to me, don't be an ass, GfS!! (Sorry. I shouldn't ask the impossible of you.). I see things perfectly clearly, thank you, and I am slave to nobody's "political agenda"—a favorite stock put-down used by both you and Ake in lieu of a sensible response. It signifies nothing in the real world.

And about hopping on the "clue train."

GfS, you couldn't get a clue if it were the middle of clue mating season, you rubbed your body with clue musk, then dashed out into the middle of a field full of horny clues and did the clue mating dance.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 06:34 PM

Just to clarify, the post that Ebbie cited from 2004.

Cruiser says the answer is to turn away and let the homosexuals get on with their lives,but unfortunatly this is getting harder and harder to achieve, as "gay culture " ouzes from every media orifice,
with all its nasty innuendo,like little boys behind the bike shed
and god help anyone who tries to stop them....Ake
PS At least folk music seems to be pretty clear of this scourge.
Just shows what well adjusted ,sensible hetros we are!

It should be obvious that I was referring to the promotion of homosexuality in the media as a scourge in this particular instance.

I did then and still do view homosexual practice based on the latest health figures as unsafe and dangerous...if you wish to catagorise this as a "scourge", feel free....I wounld not.

I do not see Homosexuality as a "disease", more as a state of mind, like bi polar disorder or a form of depression. I base this opinion on psychiatric statistics and personal observation.

In common with the vast majority of heteros, I find homosexual practice repugnant....perhaps homos feel the same way about hetero sex?

I do not agree that in general terms homosexuals can be changed, or even that it would be a good thing, but that does not mean that we should endorse a lifestyle which is so very obviously hazardous.

Right from the start my stance has been on the health figures for homosexuals, why are they so bad? and while they continue to be so bad why are we allowing homosexuality to be looked upon as "just another lifestyle" and absorbed into mainstream society?.The entertainment media contains large numbers of homosexuals, they are certainly over represented and as such are in a prime position to effect the public perception.....the health figures are never presented to the public.
I had no idea they were so bad, untill I started doing some research for these threads.

Royston I think you see my point very well Universal testing and contact tracing would be incredibly expensive and a waste of time and money as such a small percentage of heteros are infected.

To be effecatious, the treatment would have to be targeted on "high risk groups" and would have to be "aggresive" (code for compulsory) as the scientist said. The word "aggressive" or similar was also used in the UNAIDS conclusions further up the thread.

My other point was that the press had no hesitation in naming intravenous drug users in their article, yet the highest by far demographic,Male homosexuals, was classified as "other marginalised groups" Bringing homosexuals into the mainstream, as has been happening over the last few years, has certainly not improved their promiscuity or health statistics!!

So much for the benefits of de-marginalisation!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 06:57 PM

""Male homosexuals, was classified as "other marginalised groups" Bringing homosexuals into the mainstream, as has been happening over the last few years, has certainly not improved their promiscuity or health statistics!!""

96% HIV NEGATIVE!

That hardly bears out your assertions of promiscuity, or of excessive health problems.

Maybe you are confusing them with the 10% of young heterosexual females who are infected with sundry STDs, some of them HIV positive, and promiscuous enough to spread it around rather effectively.

I'll give you a clue Ake. The homosexuals are the ones who are flat chested, and have the bulge in their trousers which so frightens you.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 27 Feb 10 - 07:28 PM

How do you know they've got a big bulge in their trousers Don??

Does Mrs Don know about this?

Christ! every time I open this threid anither wan o' the buggers jumps oot o' the wardrobe!! :0(

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 03:41 AM

No, straight as they come, Ake. That's why I don't have your prurient fascination with other peoples' sexual practises.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 04:15 AM

Well said Don,

And to answer your question, Ake, about are homosexuals repulsed by the idea of straight sex, I don't think a lot about any type of sex. There are some women after whom I lust, in my mind. Would/could I actually have sex with them should the opportunity arise...I really don't know. Very probably yes

Most of my straight male friends - who are not screwed up and sexually insecure - are happy to admit to having similar thoughts in reverse.

When you rant on you really do tell us rather more than perhaps you even know yourself, about your hang-ups and insecurities. The rest of us are just getting on with life rather than developing unhealthy obsessions about others.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 04:43 AM

Can't you guys take a joke......I knew Don didnae live in a wardrobe!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 07:38 AM

Don T, re your repeated assertion that 96% msms are not infected.
According to HPA
In 2007,    The prevalence of HIV (both diagnosed and undiagnosed infections) among MSM aged 15-44 was estimated to be 8.5% (range 7.0-10.5%)

By 2007, 32% of all MSM seen for HIV care were aged over 45, and 17% were over 50.
http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAweb&HPAwebStandard/HPAweb_C/1203928687610

So well over 10% of MSMs are infected.
Probably 12% to 15% or even 20%
For comparison, the great flu pandemic of 1918 killed 3% of population, and the Great Plague of 1665 killed 15%

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 03:21 PM

In 2007,    The prevalence of HIV (both diagnosed and undiagnosed infections) among MSM aged 15-44 was estimated to be 8.5% (range 7.0-10.5%).

Uh . . . okay, but. . . .

Now, Zippy the Clown might ask at this point, "If a number of men are undiagnosed, how can they be included in any kind of accurate statistics?"

But the, Zippy is only a simple-minded pinhead.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 03:38 PM

From the HPA "about Us" section .
Same link.
The Agency combines public health and scientific knowledge, research and emergency planning within one organisation – and works at international, national, regional and local levels. It also supports and advises other organisations that play a part in protecting health.

The Agency's advice, information and services are underpinned by evidence-based research. It also uses its research to develop new vaccines and treatments that directly help patients. Although set up by government, the Agency is independent and provides whatever advice and information is necessary to protect people's health.

Don Firth, are you casting doubt on the testimony of the greatest professional experts on AIDS in UK?
What would you put the figure at Don?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 04:04 PM

Sorry Don.
You were only asking right?
I was thinking of Royston trying to dismiss expert restimony that contradicted his own views.
The numbers of undiagnosed infected people is calculated from the numbers of infections discovered fortuitously when carrying out unrelated procedures.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 04:53 PM

Okay. Thank you, Keith.

It's just that I hear so many figures bandied about (and not just here) with the word "estimate" attached to them that one would rather like to know if these estimates are based on anything substantial, or merely the bias of those presenting the statistics.

It pays to be cautious and skeptical in a world in which propaganda and disinformation exceed actual hard data by many orders of magnitude.

Mark Twain said it when he outlined "lies" in order of enormity:

"There are lies, damned lies--and statistics."

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 05:26 PM

Statistics, from a reputable source are many times more pertinent than political dogma.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 06:37 PM

True. But one should be sure to destinguish between political dogma and verifiable scientific data.

Even when--especially when--the scientific data does not support one's personal biases and the political dogma one has accepted.

Being willing to change one's mind in the face of the facts is a test of one's character and personal integrity.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 06:52 PM

"Being willing to change one's mind in the face of the facts is a test of one's character and personal integrity."

Well the floor is yours Don!

The oppositions case has been based on "liberal" political dogma, and has been proved wanting.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 07:26 PM

Once again, Ake, you demonstrate that you have no grasp of the meaning of "liberal." Unless you are using the word in some specialized local sense. A phrase like "liberal dogma" is a self-contradiction.

The subject of this thread (which people keep dodging) is the matter of human rights in Uganda. The American fundamentalist evangelical religious group, "The Family," that has been pushing this to the Ugandan lawmakers is calling for the slaughter of God knows how many human beings merely because of their sexual preference. Very Christian of them!!   

You're not saying that opposing those who advocate the passing of such viciously discriminatory laws is merely an issue of "liberal dogma" are you?

I suggest that you learn a little about political science and what words like "liberal" and "conservative" really mean, as opposed to the way they are used loosely by propagandists before you start flinging "catchphrases" like "liberal dogma" around (see Zippy cartoon I posted).

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 10:00 PM

Don: (from Twain)""There are lies, damned lies--and statistics."

Don's reply to Ake: "Statistics, from a reputable source are many times more pertinent than political dogma."

Don: "Being willing to change one's mind in the face of the facts is a test of one's character and personal integrity."

GfS: THIS IS COMING FROM YOU???????????????????????????????????????

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 10:20 PM

Damned straight, GfS.

When are YOU going to start telling the truth?

When your posted that item on the Prop 8 thread about your father and it came back in this thread to bite you on the ass, THEN you accused ME of posting it, I contacted Joe to determine where it came from. Joe found that it had come from YOUR computer.

That vaporized any vestige of credibility you ever had.

NOTHING you say is worth paying any attention to.

Crawl back under your rock.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 28 Feb 10 - 11:12 PM

Don: "NOTHING you say is worth paying any attention to."

GfS: Not to you...too bad...."When loving comes to giving, some people stop at nothing."

Highly happy, and wishing you the best!

Guest from Sanity

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 01:47 AM

"When loving comes to giving, some people stop at nothing."

One of your many rubber stamps, I take it. Too bad you have no real idea of what the words mean,

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 03:12 AM

Don Firth, since Royston came on 10th Jan, this thread has NOT been about Uganda.
He asserted that AIDS was spreading in the general population because of dangerous behaviour, and that AIDS affected rather few MSMs and that was due to "networks" not behaviour.
You took his side, and called Akeneaton's stats. skewed when they were accurate and Royston's were deceiving.

Royston and Don T have been proved wrong on everything they have said.

Being willing to change one's mind in the face of the facts is a test of one's character and personal integrity. Can you rise to that test Don?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 03:25 AM

WE have seen that there has been no increase in general HIV infection, that AIDS is raging in plague like proportions among MSMs, and actually increasing.
This increase is said to be due to worsening behaviour, except by Royston who blames it on "networks."

There is no shame in being proved wrong, but Royston and Don T have couched every groundless attack on my position in the most offensive, personal, unprovoked abuse.
They have called me liar, bare faced liar, racist, homophobe, bigot, dim, idiot, and on and on.
And all the while I was the one telling the truth.

Each time I show them to be wrong they just slink away for awhile and then come back with another groundless attack and more abuse.
I even appealed that we were all friends in folk and we should be able to disagree with civility.
That was thrown back at me with more abuse.

Twice now I have accused Royston of knowing all along that the increase in hetero infection was due to African immigration, and that he was attempting to perpetrate a huge Stalinist lie upon the forum to promote his worthless ideology.
So far he has chosen not to reply.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,guest from Sanity
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 04:06 AM

Don: "When loving comes to giving, some people stop at nothing."

One of your many rubber stamps, I take it. Too bad you have no real idea of what the words mean,

Don Firth

GfS: "Don: "NOTHING you say is worth paying any attention to."

You wouldn't be lying, again, would you?..It's all just theater, for ya' huh?

GfS: Not to you...too bad...."When loving comes to giving, some people stop at nothing."

Highly happy, and wishing you the best!

Guest from Sanity

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 11:13 AM

Keith, Don is somewhat beyond his own control. Reminded me of this:

Don Firth's Logic


"Don: "NOTHING you say is worth paying any attention to."
GfS: P.S. Best wishes, and may you get a hard on!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 01:34 PM

Keith, you can toss yourself off into thin air all you like.

We know what you are.

Our business was concluded here on the cusp of your half-term holiday. Reinventing it now is not going to impress anyone.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 01:36 PM

1900!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 01:39 PM

I always wanted to get one of those centuries.

Back to Keith, Kevin de Cock says that networks are more important than any other factor in defining who does and who does not get AIDS - all other factors being equal.

Bad behaviour is pretty universal - the heterosexual STI figures prove it.

You choose not to understand, that is your lookout.

The reason you choose not to understand is that you are an insidious and nasty little bigot. I make that my lookout. I'm watching everything you write!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 03:04 PM

Keith, I am not particularly following what appears to be a rather nit-picky discussion between you and Royston on the statistics in the UK. Earlier on, I was following the stats that Ake kept posting, and found them highly selective, and edited and interpreted in ways to support his biases. That included his distorting of stats that he picked up from the American CDC.

I do not see the current discussion between you and Royston as addressing the matter of the anti-homosexual laws in Uganda, or (harking back to the other thread) of same-sex marriage in the United States. Legalizing same-sex marriage would encourage the establishment of stable relationships and thereby tend to reduce promiscuity and the spread of sexually transmitted infections. Both Ake and GfS, express concern for the mental and physical health of homosexual men, yet they strenuously oppose what would be a major step toward the goal that they claim to espouse. Since human rights and civil rights—AND the reduction of STIs—are my primary interests here, I will leave the UK statistics up to the pissing match between you and Royston.

As to GfS's constant sniping at me, he has managed through his inability to remember what he already posted, to keep tripping over his own feet and contradicting himself. I find it rather ludicrous in the light of his penchant for talking out of both sides of his mouth, that HE keeps kvetching about MY devotion to matters of truth and personal integrity. He has more than amply demonstrated that he is either totally lacking in these things, or he is suffering from severe multiple personality disorder.

After throwing a number of tantrums during which he indulged in gross, scatological personal insults, (which, interestingly enough, displayed a tendency toward hysteria and—there is no other word for it—bitchiness), now he claims he is very happy and wishes me the best.

Well, thank you very much, GfS.

And I do hope you get your psychological problems worked out. I think if you would just relax, acknowledge your true nature, and embrace it, you will be much happier and far less prone to emotional outbursts.

And, Gfs . . . have a lovely day, sweet'ums (kiss kiss).

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 03:37 PM

Sorry, Don F.

Keith selects facts and opinions to support his prejudices. They often prove to be wrong.

Keith believes - he has told us this on a number of occasions - that he believes that the reason HIV affects different groups is because some people - gay men and black people - have sexual behaviour that "brings the disease on themselves, whereas white and straight people are protected by their higher, better standards of behaviour.

He tries to ignore that his own preferred experts deny this; and state rightly that diseases spread in, and can remain largely contained within, sexual networks. Gay people don't have sex with straight people and so largely keep their HIV misfortune to themselves. Ditto for recent African immigrants - although that group *might* be more "leaky" into the general heterosexual population, for fairly obvious presumptive reasons.

Straight white sexually-active people in their local nightlcub sexual networks are quite happily spreading other STI's by their unprotected sexual encounters - evidence by infection rates way above the HIV infection rate in gay men or in black people. The straight/white kids are simply epidemiologically lucky that HIV has not be introduced into their network. The individuals are fortunate - the reason they are fortunate is simple science.

But Keith will carry on saying that it isn't so. For the sake of his own agenda.

Or alternatively he will deny everything I have been saying and start prattling on about statistics again, which are irrelevant to this discussion about *why* some groups are at greater risk than others of contracting HIV.

My money is on the tired old statistics again.

We finished this a couple of weeks ago, and I partly regret letting Keith drag me back in. I should have left to his hand-job.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 04:23 PM

And Royston, I have long since finished with GfS. I find most of what he says rather like someone breaking wind loudly in church:   it displays a complete lack of control, general rudeness, or both, but in the Grand Scheme of Things, of no significance whatsoever.

Why don't we just wade out of this swamp and return to real life, and leave the terminally bewildered to stagger around by themselves?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 05:26 PM

I hear the bugles sound the retreat.

I hear the locking of wardrobe doors

It is indeed the end!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 07:02 PM

No, Ake, anything but retreat. Don't make the mistake of confusing being bored by trying to deal with the same old anti-gay propaganda you and GfS have been spouting all along. It's time that I quit wasting my time and apply my energies to bringing about the right conclusions to this issue in the real world. Which, incidentally, is swiftly leaving folks like you and GfS behind.

GfS, of course, will also charge in, do a little dance, and crow, "I've won! I've won!"

Well, if self-deception makes you guys happy, then have at it.

See ya! I've got some legislators to talk to!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 09:32 PM

Don: "It's time that I quit wasting my time and apply my energies to bringing about the right conclusions to this issue in the real world. Which, incidentally, is swiftly leaving folks like you and GfS behind.
GfS, of course, will also charge in, do a little dance, and crow, "I've won! I've won!"
Well, if self-deception makes you guys happy, then have at it.

See ya! I've got some legislators to talk to!"


Hmmmm, Gosh Don, how relentlessly gracious of you, but, it

Sounds like........

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Mar 10 - 10:56 PM

If it makes you happy to think that, GfS, go right ahead. Frankly, I don't give a s**t. I have more important things to do than argue with empty-headed bigots.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 02:03 AM

Don: "If it makes you happy to think that, GfS, go right ahead. Frankly, I don't give a s**t. I have more important things to do than argue with empty-headed bigots."

Yeah, like trying to promote laws and legislation for things you KNOW are false????

Gad-zooks..haven't we had enough of that crap going on in this country?

Come on, what is so hard for you to want to allow homosexuals, who wish to not be homosexual, any longer, to go see a counselor??..I mean, if that's their choice, why not let them do it, and love them just the same? Besides, what business is it of yours who or what they want to do? I can't fathom why you, a self described 'liberal' would want to prohibit that...do you?

Hey, and I'm not being 'snipie' here....but it seems from your past posts, like there is something deeply personal, that offends you about homosexuals deciding they want to go straight.....if they want to.

I'm holding out an olive branch to you, here. Do you really think that way?...or was it the challenge of the debate?

Peace,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 02:28 AM

All that ranting and posting Royston, without addressing either of the issues I put to you.
1. You were wrong to state that HIV is starting to spread in the general population.
Our whole debate has been me establishing that and you not accepting it. (Yes Don F, nitpicking!)
And
2. You may have known that the apparent rise was due to the influx of Africans

MSMs are 90 times more at risk than the general population.
Whatever the reason, it is not "luck." Science and superstition do not mix.
Heteros have been catching the same virus since the start, but it only caused an epidemic among MSMs.

You are quick to ascribe hetero infection to their behaviour.
Your very first post."heterosexual communities are paying the greatest price for their loose morals and grotesque sexual hygiene"

I have never made comparable statements about gay or African people.
You are prejudiced against straight people.
Smedley is gay too, but he does not rant on like you.

I am happy that you will watch my posts.
You will learn more.
You will not find me posting any slander against any minority.
I am not the sort of person who does that.
You post all those bad things about me, with nothing from me to justify any of it.
You can not find one thing.
Can you Royston?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 03:08 AM

Yes, Keith, and my first post "grotesque sexual hygiene..." was just turning Ake's sentiments around - sauce for the goose, slight irony?

And just for the record - unlike you, I always state what I mean - I do believe that the cause of sexual tranmission of STI's and HIV in The West, where we have all the privileges of healthcare and education, is *often* the result of poor sexual hygiene and *possibly* poor morality - whether gay, straight, black or white.

The difference between me certain others around here is that I don't judge and pontificate about selecting some people for greater blame and others for punitive treatment. I would just rather see everyone educated, respected, protected and cared for.

You are the one ranting.

And I was spot on about the nature of your response.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 03:10 AM

And it hardly took you a day to start spouting your prejudice at me directly - telling me how you think I should behave now that you know I am gay.

Smedley and Royston are gay, all gays are the same, Royston and Smedley should be the same.

Take a close look at yourself!

I have, others are now learning about you as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 03:24 AM

Royston, in your 03.37 PM post you falsely claimed that I have made derogatory remarks about the behaviour of gay and African people.
Anyone reading you would think that you were quoting me, because you ACCIDENTLY dropped in one pair of a set of quotes.

But that requires two, simultaneous key strokes.
It was no accident.
It was deliberate, and calculated to deceive.

I would rather lose an argument than resort to such devious, despicable tactics.
That neatly and clearly illustrates the difference between you and me.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 03:28 AM

And, I have spouted no prejudice.
I have none.
I do not tell you how to behave because you are gay, but because your behaviour is unacceptable in anyone.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 04:09 AM

I'm happy to clarify, Keith, that the quote marks at 03:37pm were mine, I added them to try to indicate I was paraphrasing the way I understood your position.

You don't have to resort to lower 6th debating club tactics at all.

Keep going. as I say: Everyone is learning quite a lot about what lies beneath your faux-academic love of statistics.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 05:24 AM

I have never said anything remotely like that.
The whole statement is a lie about me.
The quotes compound the offence.
What does that tell us about you?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 05:27 AM

The offending statement.

Keith believes - he has told us this on a number of occasions - that he believes that the reason HIV affects different groups is because some people - gay men and black people - have sexual behaviour that "brings the disease on themselves,

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 06:57 AM

""Royston and Don T have been proved wrong on everything they have said.""


Only in your twisted fantasy world, Keith, and we respectfully decline to join you in there.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 07:11 AM

Don T, if I am wrong I do apologize.
Just remind of one thing you were right about and I will withdraw at once.
Not the spread of HIV into the general population.
Not the numbers of MSMs infected.
Not the undesirability of targetted testing.
What was it Don?
I may have missed it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 07:20 AM

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford - PM
Date: 09 Feb 10 - 06:12 PM


The difference between general population UK, effectively zero prevalence, and the MSMs and African born, is to do with their practices.

Are you saying that because we have established a community of people from Subsaharan Africa, that the locals are going to take up their customs??

Experience suggests that the reverse will happen as they slowly integrate.

There you have it.

Keith on how gays and blacks bring HIV on themselves by behaving more badly that whites and straights. But he believes, generously, that the blacks who come here may be able to improve themselves.

Contrary to the medical experts and the STI statistics for straight folks.

But then Keith never really lets fact get in the way of his prejudices. He just wants you all to think that he has no prejudices in order that whatever information he selects for you, appears to be true and impartial.

As I say, Keith, people are learning about you.

They already know about me - I have transparent points to make and I argue them. You try to hide your agenda. Not any more.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 07:32 AM

Yes Royston, and that is self evidently true.
But I express no blame, or opine that they brought it on themselves.
It is a difference of cultures.
And it is not "contrary to the medical experts"
Massive intervention is going on now in those communities to reduce their risk.
I posted links and quotes from two authoratative, current reports on that very subject.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 08:08 AM

A direct quote from one of the reports.
You can not castigate me for repeating expert testimony.
But, no blame. No "bringing it on themselves."

In particular, cultural practices that place some Africans at particular
risk of transmitting or acquiring HIV requires specific, culturally competent attention. Examples
include: perceptions of condoms, polygamy, meanings attached to sexual behaviours, reproduction,
breast-feeding and secrecy and taboos regarding sex and relationships.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 09:21 AM

Yes, Keith, *some* aspects of *some* outreach to *some* africans requires *some* culturally specific experience and context.

That is not what you said in your "practices" comment, that is not what you meant. You are back-pedalling on the racist part of your prejudice, not your homophobic views (yet).

Taking aside the breast feeding element of HIV transmission, the fact remains that heterosexual and homosexual HIV is spread primarily by unprotected genital sex.

The report you quote is about the reasons why some Africans are missed or not well served by the mainstream outreach and prevention measures. It is not saying that Africans have practices that are more risky / less hygienic / less 'good'

Straight white people are doing very well at contracting and spreading a wide range of STI's by having unprotected genital sex with multiple overlapping partners - more so than other demographics - so their practice of the primary mode of transmission is just as prevalent, or greater, than any other group. They just don't encounter HIV so often.

So it is not 'practices' in the sense of sexual acts that explains primarily why one group is 'afflicted' while another is 'saved'. The group that is afflicted by HIV then has to develop group-specific prevention measures.

The biggest definer of individual risk is about accidental (from the victim's perspective) membership of epidemiological networks - which I know that you understand; and your utter resistance to acknowledging that is one of the most telling points to emerge about your underlying beliefs.

Now we are back where we were just before your little school holiday, and I am certainly not going to go round the circle again.

Cue a load of masturbatory self aggrandising old twaddle and old statistics again, I suspect.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 09:50 AM

Royston, re.
"It is not saying that Africans have practices that are more risky "

Yes it is. It says exactly that. Over and over if you look in to the reports.

But it is just cultural differences.
No blame attached.

I have never made derogatory remarks about the behaviour of gay or African people.
You have about straight people though.
"grotesque sexual hygiene" in your first post bore no relation to anything Ake said, as you just claimed.

And you said it again next day! "This means that straight people are suffering from grotesque sexual hygiene and morals. "

So it is alright for you to say it about straights.
I never say it about anyone, but you say I do.

You tell lies about me Royston.
Why?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 11:05 AM

Royston: "Yes, Keith, and my first post "grotesque sexual hygiene..." was just turning Ake's sentiments around - sauce for the goose, slight irony?"

'Sauce for the goose'????...Thought provoking!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 02 Mar 10 - 01:33 PM

(I don't know why I bother!!)

GfS, you are LYING again!

I have never, at any time, said that I am opposed to a homosexual, male or female, going to a qualified psychotherapist or psychological counselor for any reason whatsoever, including wishing to alter their sexual orientation--if that's what they want to do and feel that it will help them.

That is the choice of any free citizen. And if you will note, freedom of choice has been my thesis all along. It is YOU who insists that same-sex oriented people must seek counseling for their "condition."

And I have no problem with folks who are oriented toward their own gender, nor am I offended by them. It is YOU who have expressed deeply personal negative feelings toward homosexuals and have indicated that you are offended by their "lifestyle"—to the extent that you would try to force them to seek counseling.

And no, you are not holding out any kind of olive branch. YOU are the one whom I find offensive because of your constant lying and generally misrepresenting what I have posted.

Frankly, GfS, judging from what YOU have posted—and which you now deny and try to blame on others, me in particular (the message in question came from YOUR computer, not mine)—I tend to suspect that you would rather climb the vertical face of El Capitan and swan-dive off the top rather than admit to yourself that you are gayer than a night in Rio during Carnival, but you haven't got the guts to face the possibility.

Which accounts for you obsessive homophobia.

Have a nice day!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 01:52 AM

Don T, how are you getting on with that list of things I have not proved you wrong about?
How many so far, in round figures?
I think it is a very round figure indeed. Right?

Nought?

So welcome to my world Don, but it is not a fantasy world after all, is it Don?

And of course, this is yet another thing you have been proved wrong about!
I will chalk it up.
Thanks for bringing it up Don.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 02:00 AM

Again they slink away from difficult questions.
I will restate them and insist this time they answer before raising more spurious issues.

Royston, why do you call me bigot and falsely accuse me of making derogatory remarks about gay and African people, even putting quotes on something I never said nor, anything like it?

Why do you yourself make bitter, hate filled remarks about straight sexual practice?

Did you know from the start that the apparent rise in heterosexual infection was actually caused by the influx of African peoples, so that your whole excursion on this thread was a huge lie, perpetrated to promote your twisted, anti straight agenda?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 04:57 AM

Keith,

That you keep repeating the same old dross at thin air, does not mean that anyone is trying to "slink away". This is exactly the behaviour I predicted from you, accurately.

I have no problem with my "grotesque sexual behaviour / morals" comment. I have explained it twice now - why do you keep shouting into thin air that I have not explained it?

Ake/GfS were asserting that gay men were suffering HIV because of those things. I explained, given the other STI figures, that on that basis, straight people must be suffering other STI's for exactly the same reasons. My position is that the argument is bogus when directed any person or group. So don't be so fatuous, you are not in school now, teacher. When people cast an inaccurate assertion at one group, the simples way to deal with it is to show how it could equally apply to another - and be inapplicable therefore to either.

Yes, Keith, I accuse you of being a bigot. I have explained why. I have provided as a direct copy/paste the principal comment that leads me to that view. You deny it. Fine, people will have to make their minds up. But don't say that anything has not been explained, it has been.

Why are you banging on about the damn quote marks. You asked for a correction to that, which I happily gave.

And now you show your true colours: "Anti straight agenda". Is Lox "anti-straight", or Don T or Don F or any of the others that argued against homophobia? Am I "anti-white" for arguing against racism? Am I anti-atheist (or a Catholic) for arguing here against religious intolerance? Am I anti-Christian for arguing against islamophobia? How far are you going to tie yourself in knots with that line of your bigoted attack.

No, my views are clear and consistent.

So are yours...now! This is good stuff, Keith. Keep it coming.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 05:55 AM

Was I pursuing some "anti-straight agenda" when I said:

"And just for the record - unlike you, I always state what I mean - I do believe that the cause of sexual tranmission of STI's and HIV in The West, where we have all the privileges of healthcare and education, is *often* the result of poor sexual hygiene and *possibly* poor morality - whether gay, straight, black or white."

Grow up, Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 07:59 AM

The damn quote marks.
You explained "I added them to try to indicate I was paraphrasing the way I understood your position."
No one uses quotes like that.
Anyone would believe you were quoting me.
You have to fake bigotted quotes because I never make any.

The direct copy paste was me repeating official government health reports endorsed by all the African and AIDS organisation about high risk practice and behaviour.
How can it be bigotted to repeat that?
It is just a different culture. It is not perjorative. They may have a higher AIDS risk, but they have a lowere risk for diabetes, cancer and heart disease.

No other contributor has made rabid, anti straight gibes like yours.
You have not told us why you made them.

Did you know at the start that the apparent rise in hetero infection was caused by the influx of African peoples?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 09:58 AM

""Are you saying that because we have established a community of people from Subsaharan Africa, that the locals are going to take up their customs??

Experience suggests that the reverse will happen as they slowly integrate.""

Do you actually understand (really understand) the meaning of the word integrate?

Can you then oblige by telling us how the Subsaharan African grouping is going to integrate with the indigenous population, while still keeping all their relationships within their own group.

Some of the nonsense you spout, can be put down to honest misunderstanding, but the above smacks of plain stupidity.

You have taken a position, and in two sentences shot it to pieces, and you are claiming Royston and I are discredited.

Stunning!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 10:11 AM

They will have relationships outside from the start.
Infection will cross.
We have seen that the general population is not susceptable to an epidemic.
As they integrate their lifestyle will become more British and less African. That is how it goes.
You of all people should be carefull of shouting "stupidity" Don.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 12:33 PM

Don: "It is YOU who insists that same-sex oriented people must seek counseling for their "condition."

GfS: This is another bold faced lie, from you...besides, you already lost this debate.....I held out an olive branch to you..it wasn't to pick off the olives to put in your gin, to bolt down a couple or so shots...then jump back on the computer, and type out more of your nonsensical, tirades, based on your misquotes, to stir up animosities to promote your particular mental illnesses!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 12:40 PM

GfS, if you persist in throwing commas around like that, we're going to run out of them.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 12:52 PM

GfS, rave on!

Everything I said still stands.

I leave it for others to make up their own minds as to who's telling the truth. You're the one who's frothing at the mouth.

TTFN

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 02:13 PM

Keith: "No other contributor has made rabid, anti straight gibes like yours.
You have not told us why you made them."

Keith, you're lying again. I made one comment. Not plural "gibes". One comment, that you keep picking away at. Yes it is a "gibe". Is it anti-straight? Is it bollocks.

I have told you why I said it - twice. Most recently this morning.

You repeatedly saying otherwise won't change a lot. It's there in black and white. You knew the context of the comment when it was made two months ago, nearly, and you know it now.

The reason your faux-outrage is so pointless is that there is never any doubt about my views or opinions - they are there for everyone to see and they rarely change. So nobody is really listening to you, except to note that since I told you I was gay you think you've found a stick to beat me with.

Marvellous stuff, Keith. Speaks volumes about you. Keep it coming.

By the way, those reports you keep banging on about, the ones about African cultural practices, like polygamy. They are reports about Africa, aren't they? Not about the disease in UK populations of any colour? That is right, isn't it? Correct me if I'm wrong. I'd hate for there to be any confusion. I'd hate for anyone to get the wrong impression that they had anything to do with the UK-acquired infections, if in fact they talk of something totally different. I know that you like everything to be completely clear, Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 02:25 PM

Can someone confirm that my posts are visible please?

You see I worry that Keith can't see what people write and that this is why he sounds as though he's talking to the voices in his head.

Can anyone see me repeat my comments, like this one:

"And just for the record - unlike you, I always state what I mean - I do believe that the cause of sexual tranmission of STI's and HIV in The West, where we have all the privileges of healthcare and education, is *often* the result of poor sexual hygiene and *possibly* poor morality - whether gay, straight, black or white."

Or the ones where I give Keith the corrections that he asks for, or answer a question, only for him to keep going on about quote marks and saying that I haven't answered a particular question?

There is question I haven't answered, sorry - I did not know that the 500% increase was *mostly* in immigrant populations. But this emerged weeks ago and was accepted. I said at the time that I was uninterested - not being a racist - in the skin-colour of people suffering disease. I pointed out that black and white people (gay and straight) do have sex together, so any increase is a threat to everyone. Particularly a threat to the sraight white people who are having so much unprotected sex (other STI infection rates at 10%!!) in the mistaken belief that the odds of contracting HIV are staying as low as they have been.

It's all there in errm, black and white.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 03:01 PM

10th Jan.
only statistical conclusion is that heterosexual communities are paying the greatest price for their loose morals and grotesque sexual hygiene.

11th jan.
The point Lox is making about HPV and any other STI is that the incidence is sky rocketing amongst straight people.
This means that straight people are suffering from grotesque sexual hygiene and morals.

So straight infection is down to loose morals and grotesque hygiene, but gay infection is due to "networks."
No bias there then.

I have posted no reports about Africa. They were both about African communities in Britain.
thread.cfm?threadid=125426&page=34#2833696

I scanned Ake's posts for days previous. There was nothing to justify that outburst of bile.
I recall other slanders, like saying all straight men (I remember it was "all") like a bit of sex with their friends in prison.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 03:31 PM

No, you wilful idiot. It's mostly about networks.

You wont' get HIV "networking" with Mrs A.

But the kids you teach will be exposed to infection when/if they "network" in the local nightclubs on a regular basis. That is how they contract so many other STI's

Gay men face greater risk because they are members of a far tighter sexual network.

Africans (in Africa) have had an epidemic in the general population because of the networking symbiosis of labour and political migration with prostitution, coupled with poor access to education, healthcare, diagnosis and ART treatment which - most critically - breaks the mother to child tranmission vector that has shot HIV through generations of Africans.

The reasons for different groups suffering HIV in different ways are NOT PRIMARILY differentiated by behaviours.

And thank you for confirming that I have only made the one comment that excites you so much, rather than the "rabid anti-straight gibes" that you incorrectly described.

You and I both know the context to that, so does everyone else.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 04:09 PM

You will have to help me out here Royston.
Make it simple for me.
When you said "This means that straight people are suffering from grotesque sexual hygiene and morals." did you mean it or not?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 04:10 PM

Oh, and did you mean it when you said it again next day??

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 04:20 PM

The same comment, in the same dialogue. As in one gibe. Trouble counting, Keith?

In context - gay men and black people getting judged by GfS and Ake for behaviour - it was throwing their implication back at them. If that sentiment was justified for one group it must be justified for the other.

"And just for the record - unlike you, I always state what I mean - I do believe that the cause of sexual tranmission of STI's and HIV in The West, where we have all the privileges of healthcare and education, is *often* the result of poor sexual hygiene and *possibly* poor morality - whether gay, straight, black or white."

Never any doubt about my views, Keith. Just lots of questions about yours.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 04:31 PM

I have looked for refs. to morals and sexual hygiene from Ake and GFS prior to your post.
Can't find any.
Have I missed it or did something else goad you to twice make that gibe?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 05:22 PM

10/1 @ 11:50am Do you not even consider the life expectancy/ health figures pertaining to homosexual practice?

9/1 @ 02:01pm Sex outwith marriage will always be part of life.....its just nature at work......totally different from homosexual practice with all its associated problems, which have been well documented here

27/12 @ 09:14 Despite all the shit you post Don.....your only arugment amounts the belief that all sexual minorities should be treated equally.

A dozen times I have made the argument that this is not the case and provided facts to prove it. Rights are conditional on health psychiatric considerations and homosexuality at the moment contravenes both these considerations.

26/12 @ 03:08 I am addressing the health issues associated with homosexual practice, and the dangers of promoting homosexuality as a safe and healthy lifestyle.Marriage is to be redefined to accomodate homosexuality.
This promotion is in fact a tactic to turn what should be a health issue into a political issue.
As I have said many times sexual minorities are not all treated with "no prejudice" nor should they be if the welfare of these same minorities and society at large is to mean anything at all

22/12 @ 07:00 I'm amazed that you can joke about a disease which is showing a steady increase in the figures and continuing to decimate your community.....Are you really happy to allow these figures to climb, rather than address the reasons why they are so bad in comparison to heteros. Your remark about "virus ridden homosexual practice" may have been a joke, but it betrays a lamentable lack of understanding about the real extent of the problem and a lack of will in addressing it.

20/12 @ 07:47am I too think homosexuality is repugnant,against nature and based on psychological problems. ... the answer is to turn away and let the homosexuals get on with their lives,but unfortunatly this is getting harder and harder to achieve, as "gay culture " ouzes from every media orifice with all its nasty innuendo,like little boys behind the bike shed and god help anyone who tries to stop them."

Hmmmm. I wonder who could have written this?

This post has been extensively cut in a typical "hatchet job" by one of the most devious posters on the forum, but I stand by all my remarks even tho' they were made many years ago.

-----------------------------

And that is just a small sample I clipped before I lost the will to live reading this shit again.

All the little slanders, chisel-blows, overt slagging off and innuendo that gay men are peculiarly sick, have unhygienic practices or are immoral in ways that straight people are not. And then they extended their pontification to black people as well. All with the implicit and/or explicit agenda that minorities bring it on themselves.

So I got pissed off and slapped them in the face with one angry comment uttered twice in a dialogue.

And you support them.

Congratulations. Like I say, we are learning about you.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 05:34 PM

I was right then.
No refernce to morals or sexual hygiene.
Just concerns about health, which I would hope that you share.
Your nasty, bigoted remarks were unprovoked, and came from your own hangups.

So, we both accuse each other of being bigots, which of course we both deny.
The difference is that I have never made a single bigoted remark, and you had to resort to faking one.
You have made this extreme bigoted gibe twice, and posted others including that nasty one about straight people in prison.

The excuse for making them was pathetic, and you could not even substantiate that.
You will go on denying it, but your motivation is clear.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 06:15 PM

""We have seen that the general population is not susceptable to an epidemic.""

NO! WE HAVE NOT!

All that we have seen is that there are few contacts with carriers, as yet, but as your "integration" scenario takes place there will be many more, and as the numbers of contacts increase, so will the numbers of infections, because the indigenous grouping are not very good at avoiding sexually transmitted diseases, and HIV is a sexually transmitted disease.

This is what Royston has been trying to explain to you for weeks past.

I don't know how to put this more simply so that you might understand straightforward logic.

The fact that something has not happened so far is not proof that it will not happen in the future.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 06:41 PM

Keith: "No refernce to morals or sexual hygiene.
Just concerns about health, which I would hope that you share."

That you could read Ake's shit and reach that conclusion is extraordinary. I should just shut up and let you hang yourself. Amazing.

Straight people in prison. Nasty comment. What was that?

I said "The straightest of the straight is quite happy to get a bit from one of the lads when they're all in prison together, so sexuality is hardly a fixed reference."

How is that nasty? How is that inaccurate? You are aware, aren't you, of the well documented sexual behaviours in prisons, the HIV problems in prisons and the condom provisions and education programs that are deployed in prisons?

A lot of people have referenced heterosexual men who have sex with other heterosexual men in this thread - prisons being the most obvious example. Oh, but of course Keith, you only want to attack the gay guy that said it. Of course. We see.

Keep it coming Keith, keep it coming. I am happy to be called a zealot or even a bigot - by people like you. I have never claimed any political or other impartiality. You have claimed those things. You won't be able to in future. You have shown your hand and are continuing to do so nicely.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 06:46 PM

Keith: "posted others including that nasty one about straight people in prison"

So, the prison comment was neither nasty nor a gibe.

What "others" are you referring to Keith. Do tell...or retract.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 06:50 PM

Oh, is it that you see homosexuality as some sort of accusation that can be made to hurt someone - your reference to remarks on prison homosexual acts being "nasty". Yes, that would be entirely consistent with your prejudices, wouldn't it.

My word we are learning, aren't we.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 11:28 PM

Don: "Everything I said still stands.
I leave it for others to make up their own minds as to who's telling the truth."

Don: "It is YOU who insists THAT SAME-SEX ORIENTED people MUST SEEK COUNSELING for their "condition."

GfS: Now being as I've contended that you misquote, and lie, and 'go on' about what you MISINTERPRETED what I say, I'll Show you...Now Ebbie, pay attention, ..I mean, YOUR the one who would lay money down, about Don being right.....(Shhh..don't take up gambling)

OK Don, You big mouth maggot liar, find where I posted that! (MUST SEEK COUNSELING) Cut and paste the quote, with the date, from the thread, or you can apologize to the posters and all those reading who don't post, for deliberately lying to them!
If you can't do that, then shut the fuck up!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 Mar 10 - 11:34 PM

Royston: "In context - gay men and black people getting judged by GfS and Ake for behaviour....."

GfS: WHAT??????? Okay, you cut and paste where I mentioned 'black people's behavior, or you can join the ranks with Don.

Some of you, will go to no limit on finding stuff to bullshit about!
Hey, 95% of all forest fires are caused by trees, too!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 01:29 AM

You said "The straightest of the straight is quite happy to get a bit from one of the lads

Happy to betray the wives anf girlfriends outside. Is that what you think about them?
Royston, the overwhelming fear of the straight man going to prison is that he will be forced into gay sex.

Those early posts of Ake and GFS (it was only Ake in your first attempted excuse!) are robustly put, but they only reference the increased risk of infection which you acknowledge.
Not once do they ascribe it to loose morals.
Not once do they comment on sexual hygiene.
There is nothing there to incite your nasty anti straight gibe.
In any case, when criticised early on for raising old issues, you apologized and said you had not read it.
You have not excused yourself. It came from you and revealed something you would now want to conceal.

Don T, by now thousands of straight people have been infected.
If they were susceptable to an epidemic it would have happened.
The extra number of African contacts will not alter that.
This has all been gone over. Use pm next time.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 03:02 AM

Sex in prison.

You need to do some more reading, Keith. Yes I would imagine most inmates fear prison sexuality, sometimes it amounts to rape and sexual violence. For many it does not. And the people involved do not - whether consensual or not - identify themselves as homosexual. So my comment was wrong or nasty in what way, exactly?

Plenty of articles, this is just the first I found.

http://lockupdoc.com/2009/11/sex-between-prison-inmates-why-it-cannot-be-ignored

In the context of the discussion at the time it was an important comment on the fact that sexuality is not a fixed thing in very many people.

Now, Keith, why aren't you attacking any one else that made the same observation. it was on the thread before me? What does that tell us about you?

At least we got you to admit that you do wholeheartedly support Ake's view's as "robustly put" concern for his fellow man.

You're busted, Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 03:31 AM

Those early posts of Ake and GFS (it was only Ake in your first attempted excuse!) are robustly put, but they only reference the increased risk of infection which you acknowledge.
Not once do they ascribe it to loose morals.
Not once do they comment on sexual hygiene.

So there was nothing in those posts to warrant an attack on morals or sexual hygiene, and you had not read them then anyway.
But, unlike me, you say you are happy to be called bigot, so we can move on.

You said you did not know that the 5 fold (uk acquired) increase was in people from Africa, so can we take it that you did know that the bigger rise referred to in your first post was mainly due to infection in Africa?
So was the "loose morals and grotesque sexual hygiene" remark mainly intended for them?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 04:03 AM

Did you mean to say,"networks"?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 05:11 AM

Guess what......

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 05:12 AM

.......is looming up......

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 05:13 AM

.....in this thread ?????

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 05:16 AM

My nervous breakdown, that's what. (Oh and another nice big round number.)

Can't you just let it go ? You all have sincere views, ranging from the righteous to the deranged, but do you think you are ever going to persuade each other to back down ? No. So why not let it shrivel ?

And if someone says "because X called me a dirty rotten liar and I'm not", IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER, because nobody is reading this thread except you yourselves.

And me, evidently. But I couldn't really give a flying fuckeroo.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 05:44 AM

Please don't spoil it for me Smedley.
I imagine an audience of thousands hanging on my every gibe.
We are hurting no one, and although no one else cares, I will not meekly allow myself to be called bigot, homophobe, racist, liar,...

I will not blame you if you leave us to it Smedley.
All the best,
keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 08:14 AM

More evidence of an anti straight agenda.

In Royston's first post he also refers to "the well-documented tidal wave of heterosexually acquired STI's amongst straight teenagers in the UK"

Is it well documented that straight infection is worse?
I have evidence to the contrary.
What do you have Royston?

That post says that hetero AIDS has overtaken gay Aids, and hetero STIs are worse than gay STIs, because of straight loose morals and disgusting sexual hygiene, and none of it is true.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 09:40 AM

""Use pm next time.""

For what reason?.....To hide the untenability of your insistence that how things are is how they will always be?

No thanks, I'd rather set you up for the inevitable results of your dumbass naivete.

It'll take time, but I'll be on your case, come the day.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 10:19 AM

Don, it is just that you keep asking to be taken through things again that we have already finished with.
Since no one else is reading I suppose it does not matter, but you get in the way of the current debate.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 01:30 PM

Debate?, Keith. What, you and I hitting each other with handbags?

We could go at this ad infinitum. You have proven your point: that accusations and name-calling are easy to bandy about, others will just have to make their own mind up where, if anywhere, there is any substance to what you and I accuse each other of.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 02:00 PM

Royston....I would be obliged if you would address any problems you have with what I have written here, to me and not to Keith.

Keith has supplied only factual evidence to this thread, he has never to my knowledge expressed any personal opinion on homosexual practice.

Keith and I are opposed on quite a few political issues, but is straight in the true meaning of the word.

I dont suppose he would be presently involved here, had you not verbally abused him earlier.

I also suppose you regret that mistake rather deeply.

Why dont you just give up?   The opposition to the views concerning homosexual health statistics has faded, leaving only the lunatic fringe; Don T, yourself and Smedley....who seems to be in the throes of a nervous breakdown..... Is it really worth it? best just go back to sleep!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 02:42 PM

Akeneaton, we have traditionally been on opposing sides when we have been in debate.
We do not exactly agree even here.
Royston tried to use your posts as justification for his anti straight outburst.
I just pointed out that nothing you or anyone else said had any bearing on that nasty bit of bile he spat out.
I was not trying to speak for you.

So Royston, what about your claim that STIs are worse among straights, and your attacking the morals and sexual hygiene of African immigrants?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 04:35 PM

I have explained my comment - the one and only gibe. There is nothing more to add, Keith.

I did not attack anyone - gay, straight, black or white. You saying otherwise does not make it so.

Others will have to decide what to make of both of us.

I

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 04:38 PM

I...hit send too early

I suspect that you subscribe to the "last man standing" school.

So go ahead, knock yourself out.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 04:45 PM

I guess they're still looking...........

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 05:12 PM

Royston, you posted about STIs more than once.
You have not been asked about it before.
Can you justify your claims?
A reasonable request surely.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 05:41 PM

Official figures:- 10% of young heterosexual women in the UK infected with STDs, most commonly Chlamydia.

What do you reckon, Keith, is likely to happen to that figure when you add in the number of young heterosexual men with infections?

Where did the girls get it from, Keith?

Then think about the older heteros of both sexes.....Frightening, isn't it?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 05:46 PM

Keith, you and Lox argued the toss (no pun intended) over STI rates and reached a number of agreements that knocked back a lot of your claims at the time. I am not about to get dragged back into your private statistical hell. We've been at this for months, it was execrable going in one direction - going round in circles again now is absurd.

Don't tell Ake that you "don't exactly agree" with him or that you are "traditionally on opposing sides" when a few posts back you looked at his prejudices and called them "robustly put" concerns for people's well being and when you came into this argument to defend those views. You must really be hoping that nobody else is reading this. Nobody else is going to take you seriously for that.

My posting record is here in black and white. If, now that you know I am gay, you want to forensically analyse months of discussion for new lines of attack then you will do it alone.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 05:49 PM

Careful, Don. T, you will be labelled a part of the homosexual conspiracy in a moment. Mrs. T. will have to take your handbags and heels away.

Seriously, mate, I wouldn't give these tired embers any further oxygen.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 07:56 PM

GfS, while my wife and my son (who is visiting this week from eastern Canada) are out doing some shopping, I just spent a disgusting half-hour wading through some of your posts on the Prop 8 thread.

You constantly refer to same-sex relationships as "dysfunctional behavior" and insist that homosexuals need to seek "counseling." True, I cannot find a specific instance of you saying—in so many words—that same-sex oriented people should be compelled to seek counseling. However, this is the thrust of most of your posts all through that thread.

Along with this, you keep insisting that "Homosexuality is NOT a political issue. It is, in FACT, A MENTAL HEALTH ISSUE!!" [direct quote from your post of 04 Jan 09 – 3:40 p.m. on the "Prop 8" thread]. And, of course, same-sex orientation was removed from the APA's list of psychiatric problems a few decades back, so it is not a mental health issue, according to those who know best. And you keep yapping that those who favor gay marriages being legally recognized are pushing the "liberal agenda" when you said in that same post that the matter is not a political issue.

I presume that this sort of flip-flop and chronic self-contradiction is because your tongue gets all tangle around you eye-teeth, so you can't see what you're saying.

Also, in the vast majority of posts in both that thread and in this one, you indulge in abusing those with whom you disagree and sprinkle your posts with smutty-mouthed personal insults (your latest being to call me a "big mouth maggot liar"—very mature in the debating department, GfS!), and in the Prop 8 thread, you are warned several times by Joe Offer to stop cutting and pasting from other peoples' posts, and when quoting others, to indicate that it is a quote and to give proper attribution to whoever you are quoting from. And—to lay off the personal insults and abuse. But you go right on doing it anyway, from that thread on into this one.

If you can't remember from one post to another which lie or which piece of misinformation you posted previously, then I'm not going to spend any more time wading through that septic tank you call a brain and try to find them for you. Do your own damned homework!

There is no need for me to apologize to anyone, especially not you.

I think I'll go take a shower!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 08:10 PM

Good idea Don....there's a westerly blowin tonight and I can smell you from here......don't forget to brush your teeth! :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 09:43 PM

Don: "Also, in the vast majority of posts in both that thread and in this one, you indulge in abusing those with whom you disagree and sprinkle your posts with smutty-mouthed personal insults (your latest being to call me a "big mouth maggot liar"—...."

GfS: Speed is a bi-product of accuracy.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 09:54 PM

In case you missed it, Ake, what you're smelling is the reek of contamination from the contents of GfS's so-called brain. I'm not ever going to go there again! Disgusting!!

By the way, GfS:   "Hey, 95% of all forest fires are caused by trees, too!"

Isn't that sort of like blaming the window for breaking when someone throws a brick through it?

In matters of cause and effect, it's a good idea to try to figure out which is which.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 10:09 PM

Don: "By the way, GfS:   "Hey, 95% of all forest fires are caused by trees, too!"
Isn't that sort of like blaming the window for breaking when someone throws a brick through it?
In matters of cause and effect, it's a good idea to try to figure out which is which."

GfS: By golly, he's ALMOST getting it! Maybe more smelling salts!

Do I have to explain that it is a joke.....used by the late Pat Paulsen? (Used to describe people such as the slow Don F...and their logic(?).

Jeez!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 04 Mar 10 - 11:00 PM

Oh! For some bizarre reason, I thought you were being serious!

I mean, after all, it's a fair example of the kind of "logic" that you have been using.

Don Firth

P. S. No, I have not memorized all of Pat Paulson's routines. TTFN.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Mar 10 - 01:39 AM

Don: "Oh! For some bizarre reason, I thought......"

GfS: I believe you on that one!(wink)

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Mar 10 - 02:23 AM

Royston, you are resorting to deception to cover your tracks.
Your credibility sinks even further.
"you and Lox argued the toss (no pun intended) over STI rates "

No we did not.
He referred to them and I let it go. (I was determined to establish the truth about AIDS first.)
No one has justified your claims about STIs.
I say they can not be justified.

You quote the first half of my sentence, but make up the second half!
Why not quote the whole sentence? I only said it he same day!
Who is going to be fooled?

Here it is again.
Those early posts of Ake and GFS (it was only Ake in your first attempted excuse!) are robustly put, but they only reference the increased risk of infection which you acknowledge.

We both agree that MSMs have a higher risk, don't we?

Don T, thank you for that figure but it is no help.
Where is it from?
Is it stable or rising?
What is the corresponding figure for MSMs?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 05 Mar 10 - 03:05 AM

Keith, the point about that 10% figure - which you accepted - was that amongst sexually active heterosexual goups (which I think you agreed was an appropriate comparison for the MSM statistics) there was a chlamydia rate of 10% and this was higher than the 4% HIV rate for MSM's. Both of those are other people's figures - the 4% was yours, was it not? They are both accepted, aren't they? I am not getting dragged back into nit-picking other people's figures. The government is bombarding us with information about STI's being more prevalent because of the failure to use condoms

Chlamydia (just one such example) is spread by unprotected penetrative sex.

So heterosexual people are not being protected from HIV by their behaviour, are they? The context being that behaviour was being used as a judgement against gay and later against black people.

That is the point, Keith. For most other people there is a point to these discussions.

Is that point wrong?

If behaviour is what defines HIV/STI infection rates between groups, then groups displaying similar and shared behaviours should have the same prevalences of the same diseases, shouldn't they? Well they do display shared, risky behaviours, yet the disease outcomes are different

The point is not that one group behaves "better" or "worse" than the other - the point is the exact opposite, it is to refute that suggestion completely. This it not about gay=bad, straight=good (which is what Ake believes and consistently and honestly argues)

That has been my utterly consistent point all along.

Now that you know I am gay, you can try all you like to spin that 180 degrees - people will draw the only logical conclusion about you for that.

You are proving everthing of which I accused you, thank you.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Mar 10 - 04:04 AM

Your being gay is absolutely not an issue for me, but it puts your anti straight posts in an entirely different perspective than when we assumed you were straight yourself.

The final and best figure I gave for MSMs with AIDS was 8.5% at the most extreme conservative figure. Probably double that.

Chlamydia is symptomless and harmless in men. Not of much interest to MSMs.
I say that for any STI you can think of, MSMs are infected at a much higher rate than straight people.
Do you agree Royston?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Mar 10 - 07:41 AM

An example of a post of yours that looks different now.
From an 11th Jan post.

"I shows that heterosexually acquired HIV has outstripped homosexually acquired HIV for the entire period - in some years by a factor of at least 3 to 1.
Oh dear Ake, by your rational we now need to do something to control these filthy heterosexual types, don't we? For what do you think heterosexual people are now receiving the AIDS punishment? GfS, anything to say about this?"

You already knew that the rise was simply due to people moving from one country to another.
You also said that it showed Ake to be a liar and a bigot.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 05 Mar 10 - 08:33 AM

Keith, you carring on like this is absurd.

We already busted you for that 8.5% nonsense because your figures were bogus - they were based on gay men being 1-2% of populations, which was show to be utterly silly.

So - and it was still imperfect - 4% HIV prevalence was accepted apparently for the sake of argument.

But the point was not about gay/straight better/worse more/less STI's, it was about the fact that Ake and GfS were wrong to assert - as they did - that homosexual practice was in and of itself causative of the HIV prevalence.

The way to disprove that assertion is to point out the heterosexual STI prevalence - spread by the same risky behaviours as evidence that practice is not solely responsible for the outcome.

I was angry, I had a tongue in cheek. I stand by my comments totally.

You are a nasty bigotted lying piece of work.

And now everyone knows it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Mar 10 - 08:54 AM

I was not "busted" over the 8.5% figure.
You never even respondes to it!!
They came from the most authoratative source, the HPA!
28 Feb 10 - 07:38 AM

Don T, re your repeated assertion that 96% msms are not infected.
According to HPA
In 2007,    The prevalence of HIV (both diagnosed and undiagnosed infections) among MSM aged 15-44 was estimated to be 8.5% (range 7.0-10.5%)

By 2007, 32% of all MSM seen for HIV care were aged over 45, and 17% were over 50.
http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAweb&HPAwebStandard/HPAweb_C/1203928687610
So well over 10% of MSMs are infected.
Probably 12% to 15% or even 20%
For comparison, the great flu pandemic of 1918 killed 3% of population, and the Great Plague of 1665 killed 15%

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Mar 10 - 09:07 AM

According to you I am a "nasty, bigoted, lying piece of work."
But, unlike you I do not say nasty things.
Unlike you, I have never made a bigoted remark.
Unlike you, I have not resorted to lies.

You would like this debate to be about something else now, but you set the agenda.
You arrived spewing abuse at individuals and at straight people, and crowing gleefully that AIDS had taken off among heterosexuals (LIE), and crowing gleefully that STIs were worse among heterosexuals (LIE).

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 05 Mar 10 - 10:14 AM

""Don T, thank you for that figure but it is no help.
Where is it from?
Is it stable or rising?
What is the corresponding figure for MSMs?""

1. Official government figures, also recently reported on by the BBC.
2. Latest figure, as far as I can make out, and if they are reporting on it now, that in itself suggests a rise.
3. You know this already. 4% infected with HIV, which you claim as a homosexual disease, so, presumably a similar situation with other STDs, else HIV would be higher too.

Since these figures are based on percentages of the various groups, MSMs come over as being somewhat safer, wouldn't you say. More especially as there has been NO equivalent to the 500% increase in UK acquired hetero infections.

I suspect, when they stop separating young women, and give figures based on ALL heteros, it will be vastly worse.

This may well be the reason for giving figures only for young females. As I said above, "Where do young heterosexual females acquire their STDs?" Do I hear anyone whispering "Young heterosexual males"?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 05 Mar 10 - 10:25 AM

""I was not "busted" over the 8.5% figure.
You never even respondes to it!!
They came from the most authoratative source, the HPA!
28 Feb 10 - 07:38 AM

Don T, re your repeated assertion that 96% msms are not infected.
According to HPA
In 2007,    The prevalence of HIV (both diagnosed and undiagnosed infections) among MSM aged 15-44 was estimated to be 8.5% (range 7.0-10.5%)""

And your 8.5 percent is based on age groups 15 to 44.

We have a population now, in which there are more people over 65 than there are under sixteen.

So you take a figure based on nineteen years out of an expected average eighty one, and claim it applies to the whole grouping.

That is total bollocks Keith and I suspect that you know it, and still cynically misrepresent the situation.

Your statements lack any credibility when you insist upon cooking the books to make a point.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Mar 10 - 11:00 AM

Don, 8.5% of the 15 to 44 age group are infected.
But it also clearly states that,

By 2007, 32% of all MSM seen for HIV care were aged over 45, and 17% were over 50.

I will give you STI facts with sources Don.
Stand by!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Mar 10 - 11:18 AM

http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1216022461534
Young men who have sex with men
There have been worrying increases in the number of younger men
diagnosed with STIs in the past decade, with more than a doubling of
diagnoses of HIV (from 128 in 1998 to 281 in 2007) and a threefold
increase of gonorrhoea (339 to 1001) – increases similar to that observed
in older men who have sex with men.
http://www.swish.org.uk/?q=sex_info/stis
Numbers of all STIs have increased in the last few years and some of them, such as Chlamydia, have doubled in the past 6 years, especially amongst young people and gay men.
http://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/LGBhealth/Pages/Sexualhealthgaymen.aspx
Gary Williams from Birmingham's Healthy Gay Life project

"Gay men should have a check-up at least every six months at a sexual health clinic, because for some infections you will not see any symptoms," says Williams.
http://www.avert.org/stdstatisticuk.htm
Cases of gonorrhea rose steadily from 1999 and peaked in 2002. Since then, the number of new cases has declined. Diagnoses are high among specific groups, such as black ethnic populations and men who have sex with men (MSM).
The UK's syphilis epidemic is largely concentrated among men who have sex with men (MSM),

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 05 Mar 10 - 01:04 PM

Royston: "But the point was not about gay/straight better/worse more/less STI's, it was about the fact that Ake and GfS were wrong to assert - as they did - that homosexual practice was in and of itself causative of the HIV prevalence."

GfS: Actually Royston, my main thrust was that PROMISCUITY was the reason STI's were spreading. Re-read my posts, before commenting on them with inaccuracies.

Keith: "GfS, anything to say about this?"

GfS: Let me review your posts and the exchanges, so I get a better picture, before I post.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 05 Mar 10 - 04:49 PM

Keith you unravelling like this far exceeds my greatest expectations.

But you have gone absolutely mental.

The only true figure you've quoted is that according the the HPA, HIV prevalence rates amongst MSM's 15-44 might be as high as 8.5%

Your comment:

"So well over 10% of MSMs are infected.
Probably 12% to 15% or even 20%"

Is just hyperbole with no support and you need to withdraw it.

We established from this

http://www.avert.org/gay-people.htm

That at least 6.3% of men are MSM's that have had "genital sex". More if you include other forms of sexual contact, and the point of that survey is that numbers identifying and self-reporting as gay keep growing.

I genuinely haven't managed to find a way of removing, say, under 15's from the population statistics to make a totally like for like comparison with the STI/HIV figures that start recording at age 15 upwards - please feel free to do it.

But as a rough indication, if there are 63mm people in the country then should be about 31.5mm men and if at least 6.3% are gay then there are at least 1,984,500 gay men.

Your data here:

http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAweb&HPAwebStandard/HPAweb_C/1203928687610

Says there are an estimated 32,000 MSM that are HIV+, that is an overall prevalence of 1.6%

So, Keith, piss off with your ignorant, lying, bilious attacks on gay men.

Is that clear enough for you?

Keith on Gay men and HIV

"Probably 12% to 15% or even 20%
For comparison, the great flu pandemic of 1918 killed 3% of population, and the Great Plague of 1665 killed 15% "

Like I said, Keith, your implosion has exceeded my wildest expectations.

Bloody fabulous!

GfS, I still have some of your more sensational comments ringing in my ears - you said that you kick out (or words to that effect) when pushed, maybe it stops people from listening to what you were saying before the 'kick'.

When I went back to read the stuff going on when I came into the thread, the really offensive stuff wasn't coming from you, but from Ake. I want to acknowledge that openly. What you were saying about the ex-gay movement and the assumptions that we are all suffering from something that needs to be cured are wrong-minded and do cause offence: but you do not set out to be offensive - until that 'kick' comes.

I have a lot more respect for you and for Ake, who are at least honest (to me) even if I believe you to be wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 05 Mar 10 - 04:55 PM

Because, Keith, your comment

"Probably 12% to 15% or even 20%
For comparison, the great flu pandemic of 1918 killed 3% of population, and the Great Plague of 1665 killed 15%"

Must be either:

Ignorant,

Ingnorant and prejudiced,

or lying and prejudiced.

You choose, I couldn't care less.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 05 Mar 10 - 05:06 PM

So when, in order to explain that risky behaviours were common to all sexualities, I pointed to 10% of young women having Chlamydia - which is true - I was 'anti-straight', whatever that means.

Oh, yes, that didn't trouble you when I said, and when other people said it - and more. It only became a live issue for you when I told you I was gay and then suddenly you attack me - and not anyone else that said the same thing - as being 'anti-straight'. And you think that is acceptable? Really? Do you?

When I said that HIV prevalence among gay men appeared to be 4%, I must have been homophobic - given that it appears to be only 1.6% or thereabouts.

So what does that make you, when you said of gay men that their HIV prevalence was:

"Probably 12% to 15% or even 20%
For comparison, the great flu pandemic of 1918 killed 3% of population, and the Great Plague of 1665 killed 15%"

None of which was true - all of which is a lie dreamed up in your twisted little head.

Tell us, Keith. Go on. Carry on.

I haven't had this much sport for ages.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 05 Mar 10 - 05:16 PM

Keith: "There have been worrying increases in the number of younger men diagnosed with STIs in the past decade, with more than a doubling of
diagnoses of HIV (from 128 in 1998 to 281 in 2007)"

And when we talked about increases in straight HIV diagnosis from about 200 to 1,300 over the same period, you told us the increase was from infinitessimal to insiginificant - or words to that effect.

Do you remember that Keith? Do you?

This is like shooting fish in a barrel.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Mar 10 - 01:58 AM

Royston, I told you that I let the STI lie pass because I wanted to establish the truth about AIDS first.
It is not all about you. That just changed the perspective of your nasty attacks on straight people.

that ghon. rise would be infinitesimal if it was for the general population. The best survey we have found says MSMs are about 3%.

Around 8.5% of MSMs between ages 15 and 44 are infected.
None of your frenzied statisticking changes that.
We know that a third of all MSMs receiving treatment are over that age.
That is a very large number of people who will eventually die of AIDS, but THOUSANDS more would be in that age group if AIDS had not killed them already.

So, it is not ignorant, billious, lying, hyperbole at all, is it Royston.
But your reply was.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Mar 10 - 01:59 AM

Who wants the double millenium?
My gift to you.
keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 06 Mar 10 - 02:18 AM

Oh, hell!! Why not!??

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 06 Mar 10 - 04:23 AM

Keith, you nasty little man, you just can't stop telling lies can you?

Gonorrhea: "The best survey we have found says MSMs are about 3%.

Well, according to the OFFICIAL DATA (take your imaginary survey and shove it, don't even bother to try to justify it)

http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1215589015024

There were 16,929 diagnoses of gonorrhea in the UK population in 2008.
There were a further 8,578 suspected cases that were treated as such to be on the safe side or as a matter of post-exposure or post suspected exposure prophylaxis.

So worst case = 25,507 cases in all.

Of those, 4,777 were MSM's.

So that gives us - using the total guideline number of 1,989,500 MSM's in the population - a prevalence of ARE YOU READY FOR THIS

0.24%

3% you say! 3%! You lying bugger!

Now to your 8.5% HIV prevalence among 15-44 y/o MSM's. The rest of the sentence from from the HPA report says:

" The prevalence of HIV (both diagnosed and undiagnosed infections) among MSM aged 15-44 was estimated to be 8.5% (range 7.0-10.5%) within London"

In the interest of total honesty, it concludes:

"...3.7% (range 3.1-4.5%) elsewhere in England and Wales and 5.3% (range 4.7-6.1%)overall."

So screw me if you weren't lying yet again. I trusted you on that, I didn't imagine even you would twist a lie out of a simple document like that. You just can't be trusted on anything can you?

So put all that together and you get a figure of 4.7% to 6.1% MSM HIV prevalence in the sexually active age groups which is kind of in the ballpark of the 4% figure that we were all thought was basically realistic - until your prejudices got in the way of whatever common sense you have.

So, that is the 8.5% demolished. I take back my comment that it was "the only true fact you found"

And yes, therefore, you were in fact all lies and hyperbole directed at advancing your prejudices.

And when you get busted for lying and twisting don't you fucking dare to tell me or anyone else that takes you to the cleaners for it:

"None of your frenzied statisticking changes that."

Because you are always claiming that statistics - your statistics - are all that is important, and that people should listen to nothing else. Statistics are the truth, the truth shall set you free - isn't that what you believe and preach?

You excuse all your support of outright bigots by telling us that all you care about is statistical truth.

Keith: "So, it is not ignorant, billious, lying, hyperbole at all, is it Royston.
But your reply was."

Yes, Keith you were ignorant and/or lying and bilious and hyperbolic.

Whereas my reply was ruthlessly accurate and intelligent.

My reply was angry, it was bilious and it displays an enormous prejudice - against you! For very good reason!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 06 Mar 10 - 04:24 AM

Slam Dunk!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 06 Mar 10 - 04:43 AM

What you need to learn, Keith, is that these discussions start with issues, principles.

You, without fail, appear with statistics that support right-wing socio-political positions.

Why is that?

You select data from dubious sources (like virusmyth.org at the start of this episode) and when you get knocked down, you don't re-evaluate your assumptions but you go on long guests for more data that supports the right-wing positions.

Do you believe that is academic impartiality?

In a recent thread attacking Muslims you produced with a flourish some report that said (for the sake of argument) small% of Muslim students want Sharia law in the UK. Your "angle" was clear and then when someone pointed out that large% didn't want it, we just got a load of confused mumbling from you about blah blah, sizeable minority, blah blah, - to what end, Keith - you are always slewing or inventing things to support a very obvious agenda. Everyone gets it...now.

Gradually you get pushed to extreme measures - like the bare-faced lies and outrageous unsupported exclamations of the last day or so - still in an effort to support those same right-wing views.

And when people accuse you of being a right wing bigot, you cry foul and run away and do things like reactivate an old thread - where everyone lines up to tell you that you are regarded as such, for the reasons I cite.

And then you still refuse to re-evaluate your assumptions and carry on with the same old stuff, until you end up in the state you are now.

Eventually you will get the message. But you are going to have to stop and look carefully at your assumptions and your motivations.

Because at the moment you are positively Melville-esque in your appearance, Ahab.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 06 Mar 10 - 04:44 AM

long guests = lonq quests

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 06 Mar 10 - 06:07 AM

And a final thought from me.

When, Keith, you mocked me for weeks because I said that the comments in 'The Telegraph' ascribed to Kevin de Cock were significantly wrong, when you called me arrogant and a fool for that, only then to have Kevin de Cock repudiate the very things I maintained were wrong: When that happened, you had the opportunity to stop and think - outside of the statistics - that maybe you don't actually know or understand as much as you like to think that you do.

But no, you carried on regardless.

When I told you I was gay, you had another opportunity to stop and think. You might have suspected - correctly as it happens - that someone who has lived his life as a gay man and community activist, might just know and understand a lot more than you do about the issues around sex, sexuality and HIV. You might have considered that I have lived my life in the shadow of this disease (thank God, HIV negative) and have watched friends and loved ones receive diagnoses and have buried a few too many of them. You would have been correct.

You might have considered that having watched people go down with this disease for a range of reasons ranging from "couldn't care less" to youthful naivete, to being infected by a cheating partner, to being raped; that I have a much keener understanding of exactly how and why this disease spreads that you could ever fear to acquire and certainly could never learn from your statistics even before you corrupt and bastardise them.

But you didn't consider any of those things.

You just carried on regardless.

I suspected, because you are a right-wing bigot, that me being gay would just appear to you to be a brilliant line of attack. I could have been proven wrong but I wasn't was I?

Like I said, you have exceeded my greatest expectation, and now we all know what's what.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Mar 10 - 02:28 PM

You are right Royston!
I did miss that it said "in London" on the next line.
Sorry. A mistake.(If it was a lie I would hardly have provided a link to it would I?)
Remember, you gave a figure of 4%, so you were wrong too.
So, replace 8.5% with 5.6%, and everything else I said still stands.
Over a third are over 44, and that is just the survivors!

It also says
"There has been a large rise in newly diagnosed HIV infections among MSM each year since the turn of the century. In 2007 there were a total of 2,679 newly diagnosed HIV infections (increasing to 3160 if adjusted for missing data), representing an increase of 8% since 2006, and 74% since 2000"
(The increase for heteros, remember was infinitesimal and only due to immigration anyway.)

The 3% I mentioned was the proportion of MSMs in the population.
The quote I provided gave the figures for ghon.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 06 Mar 10 - 07:35 PM

""representing an increase of 8% since 2006, and 74% since 2000"
(The increase for heteros, remember was infinitesimal and only due to immigration anyway.)""

MSM increase since 2000 = 74%
Hetero increase since 2000 = 500%

Compare apples with apples laddie, and stop being disingenuous.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 07 Mar 10 - 03:39 AM

Royston: "I haven't had this much sport for ages."
Royston: "GfS, I still have some of your more sensational comments ringing in my ears - you said that you kick out (or words to that effect) when pushed, maybe it stops people from listening to what you were saying before the 'kick'."

GfS: How sporting of you!...The word I used, was 'shove'..'If someone shoves me, I'll shove back'...I don't get the 'kick' thing; why that is so offensive,..unless it has another connotation, of which I'm not aware.

Stay tuned...I've got some real goodies for ya'!.....but I've been spending a lot of time in the basement.....(project).

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Keith A
Date: 07 Mar 10 - 05:30 AM

It is you making false comparisons Don T.

The increase for heteros takes their number from infinitesimal to negligable, and is only a result of people moving countries anyway.

The increase for MSMs is an worsening of a raging epidemic.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 07 Mar 10 - 06:16 AM

""The increase for MSMs is an worsening of a raging epidemic.""

You are beginning to be a class comedy act Keith, along the lines of those guys who used to pratfall over everything in sight.

You've just spent a couple of months trying to tell us that HIV is incapable of reaching epidemic status in heteros, so how can it do so in gays?   Are they a different species?

And as for your smoke screen, I say again:-

Equate apples with apples, not submarines!

Seventy four percent is 74%!
Five hundred percent is 500%!

Whatever the numbers involved, that is the truth.

The increase among heterosexuals is 6.76 times greater than the increase among MSMs.

No amount of juggling will change that FACT, and making ridiculous comments like "infinitessimal to insignificant" merely serves to highlight the gaping holes in your perception of fact.

Every epidemic since life evolved on this planet has, at some point, passed from "infinitessimal to insignificant", but they don't tend to stop there, do they?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Mar 10 - 08:53 AM

Don, you will never get it.
If the number increases from 1 to 5, that is a 500% increase, but it is still only five people.
The increase among heteros is hundreds of times lower than the limit for a rare disease, and it is only due to people moving here anyway.

You ask a very valid question. Why is it a raging epidemic for MSMs and an extremely rare disease in heteros?
The rest of us having been debating that for weeks, but it has all gone over your head.
Royston says it is because of "networks".
You always believe everything he says and attack anyone who disagrees with him, so I will leave it there.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Mar 10 - 04:32 PM

Royston, I did not realise you were signing off.
You have left as you began with false assertions.

Kevin de Cock did not repudiate anything significant to our differences.
He did not repudiate that no hetero epidemic is likely.
It is all there.

I was interested in your situation as a gay Muslim, but otherwise gave not a shit about your sexuality.
No one does these days.
You are not the only gay in the village.
It did occur to me that you would have personal experience of AIDS sufferers. I would have dropped the discussion any time you withdrew the false assertions in your first posts.
You still have not done that.

Your coming out did reveal your bigotry against straight people.
You had been calling others "bigot" but no one else approached the level of bigotry in those posts.
You are an arch hypocrite.

Your motive for trying to make people believe that the pattern of infection was changing against straight people also became clear.
You really wanted it to be true.
It is not my fault that it is not true.
I was just the messenger.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Mar 10 - 09:57 AM

I expected to be challenged on why I extrapolated on the 5.6% figure.
I will explain anyway.
5.6% is an average over a 30 year span of ages, 15 to 24.
There will be zero 15 and 16 year olds infected by sex with men, and a very low number for teens and low 20s.

That means the numbers infected in the higher age range are much higher.
I would infer 10-15% or more.
Remember the Great Plague of 1665, second only to the Black Death, killed 15%

Royston says I can not be believed because I am right wing.
Not true, but even if I was Hitler this information is still from an official source, the HPA.
Completely neutral and authoratative.

Don T, on why MSMs suffer more than their fair share of AIDS.
Again from HPA.

"Behaviour change and sexual health promotion
MSM remain a priority for targeted HIV/STI prevention and health promotion
work in the UK, ......
Efforts need to focus on reducing the high numbers of sexual partners and
rates of partner change, and addressing the irregularity of condom use
during anal intercourse reported among MSM [7]."http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1227515298225

Finally then, Royston was wrong to suggest AIDS is worsening among heteros, but it is worsening among MSMs.
Royston was wrong to say heteros suffer more from other STIs, they are all worse among MSMs.
Royston's offensive anti straight statements were all based on these false premises, should never have been made, and should be withdrawn.
He has just said that he stands by them.
No politics. No unreliable sources. Just plain truth.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 09 Mar 10 - 06:00 AM

""5.6% is an average over a 30 year span of ages, 15 to 24.""


No wonder you have so much trouble with your statistics.

When I went to school, 15 to 24 was generally thought to be nine years.

How times have changed.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 09 Mar 10 - 06:10 AM

And it still doesn't change the FACT that an increase of 500% is larger than an increase of 74%.

True that MSMs were the first group infected in the WEST, so the actual numbers infected are different. Nevertheless, heterosexual infections are increasing 6.76 times faster than MSM infections, regardless of the point of origin of the victims.

This knocks down the opinions expressed in this thread about male homosexuals being more promiscuous, and therefore more at risk than heteros.

Anyone having unprotected sexual intercourse is at risk, as the figures for other STDs clearly show, and those figures also show that promiscuity is a serious problem in young hetero women.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Mar 10 - 06:52 AM

Sorry about the typo Don.
It should have been 15 to 44 of course.

In the West, MSMs may have been the first, but heteros were exposed from the earliest days too, 40 years ago now, via bisexuals, infected blood transfusions and shared needles.
If an epidemic was going to start, it could have done so in everyone of those 40 years.
It just can not spread among heteros as it does among MSMs. Not my opinion but an observation.

There is not really a rise among heteros now. It is just that a community of African people are living here now and it does spread among them.
The numbers are small because there are only a few thousands of them.

Royston was wrong about it, probably knowingly wrong.
He just really wished it was true, and wanted it to be believed.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Mar 10 - 06:59 AM

As for other STIs, hetero girls do suffer a lot of them , but MSMs far more.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 09 Mar 10 - 08:14 PM

""There is not really a rise among heteros now. It is just that a community of African people are living here now and it does spread among them.
The numbers are small because there are only a few thousands of them.""

Priceless.

What is the figure on HIV in Africa? 40% of heteros infected, or thereabouts.

And the African group you speak of is now mingling with our population, and you really believe that no infection will result, with 10% minimum of young hetero women obviously disregarding the need for safe sex, as evidenced by the STD figures.

Being blindly optimistic isn't a crime, but you are abusing the privilege.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 09 Mar 10 - 08:16 PM

""As for other STIs, hetero girls do suffer a lot of them , but MSMs far more.""

And HIV in heteros is rising 6.76 times faster than in MSMs.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 09 Mar 10 - 09:09 PM

"It [an epidemic] just can not spread among heteros as it does among MSMs. Not my opinion but an observation."

Would you care to explain that, Keith?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 02:32 AM

I have described how the scourge of AIDS in UK infects MSMs in numbers comparable to The Great Plague.
The situation for UK heteros could not be more different.
To be classed as a rare disease, it should infect only 0.07% every year.
0.09% of heteros have it IN TOTAL, after 40 years, even including the newly arrived Africans!
It is the rarest of rare diseases.

Why? There are ample numbers with the disease to start an epidemic, and have been from the start.
If an epidemic could start, it would have started decades ago.
We observe that it has not started.

There is an epidemic in Africa.
Africans have come here which affects our statistics.
There have always been a few hundred heteros infected per year.
We still see that plus the extra African cases.

There are thousands of heteros with AIDS. A few thousand more African cases will make no difference, and Royston found out for us that the Africans' strain is even LESS virulent than the strain that has ALREADY FAILED to cause a hetero epidemic in UK.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 03:13 AM

0.09% of heterosexuals, 1.6% of homosexuals.

Every single case is a tragedy, HIV is a minority experience for both groups.

Don, let it go, with every masturbatory post Keith just settles deeper in his mire.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 03:57 AM

1.6 to 0.09 is 18 times worse, BUT where did you get 1.6% from anyway??

5.6% as an average over the age span 15 to 44, according to HPA.
Even higher above 44years except that death removes thousands from the statistics.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 04:37 AM

Don is just trying to establish the truth.
Why don't you want him to do that Royston?
Why do you fear the truth?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 05:06 AM

It appears that we have at last established and to a certain extent accepted what I have been saying all along, that homosexual practice and its associated lifestyles are dangerous and unhealthy....perhaps more unhealthy than other sexual minority practice which is illegal and whose participants have no "rights" whatsoever.

So much time and effort could have been saved here if certain members were not so constrained by a lunatic political agenda.

Many lives could also be saved, if this fact was taken on board by governments and an attempt made to target "at risk" groups as recommended in the UNAIDS conclusions.

The problem of course lies in that such targeting blows the crazy "liberal" equality agenda, straight out of the water.

This world is not "equal"....will never be "equal" and in some cases equality is not in the interests of society.

The targeting of "at risk" groups would also mean that immigration control would require to be reviewed, to bring the UK into line with the US. This of course would be another victory for common sense over "liberalism".

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 10:44 AM

Blah blah blah....liberals...blah blatter blah...fascists.....blah blah gays blah promiscuous.....blah blah.........


And on, and on, and on..............

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 03:24 AM

Akeneaton says that targeted intervention and testing of at risk groups is advocated by UNAIDS.
In the course of this debate I have looked at the sites of all the government and official health agencies, and the AIDS and British African organisations and charities.

Every site that expresses an opinion advocates such intervention.
The consensus is that MSMs should be tested for STIs incuding AIDS every 6 months. (It would probably take 10 years to test the whole population!)

The only opinion I have found to the contrary is Royston, who opposes it on ideological grounds.
As you are once again at odds with all expert opinion, will you reconsider your stance on this Royston?
After all, you have been wrong about everything else.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 04:07 AM

Akenaton is suggesting that MSMs should be singled out as the only group to be forced to accept compulsory testing.

I don't know whether the news has reached Hertford and Scotland, but Britain is still a free nation.

Offering a screening service is perfectly acceptable, but dragging people in and performing tests or treatments "Will he, Nil he" is, in point of fact, illegal, and would require an act of parliament.

Royston and I are not advocating that MSMs should not be tested, if they so choose. We are also advocating that the screening program must include heterosexuals.

Influenza kills more people each year than AIDS, but we don't force Flu jabs on the public at large. People are allowed to make up their own minds.

By the reckoning of you and Ake, we should be hauling 'em in for the jab, because they are much more likely to cause an epidemic.

But neither of you are commenting on that, or other highly infectious diseases. It would seem that your criterion for taking an interest owes more to their sexual orientation, than to their, or anybody else's, health.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 04:34 AM

Flu is rarely fatal in otherwise healthy people.
AIDS always is.
All the experts in the field advocate targeted, not general intervention.
Do you think they are right about that Don, or do you and Royston have a better understanding?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 03:39 PM

Flu is pretty hard to avoid when an epidemic is under way. Get on an elevator with someone who has it (and who may not even know it at the time), be near someone who sneezes, touch a door knob shortly after someone with incipient flu has, or shake hands with them, and bingo! You've got it!

Flu gets easily passed from one person to another, often just by being in the same room at the same time as an infected person—or even shortly thereafter. Someone sneezes and you happen to walk through the aerosol cloud they left behind and there you are.

But even so. It can often be avoided by taking a few sensible precautions (avoid crowds if possible, wash your hands often). Several decades worth of flu epidemics have gone by and I haven't had the flu in all that time (knock on wood).

HIV/AIDs is a whole different matter. It is not anywhere near that easily transmitted. It requires the transfer of bodily fluids through such things as sex—either homosexual or heterosexual sex—or, say, a blood transfusion. Or, for that matter, druggies sharing needles. It is an "equal opportunity" infection. And it's easily avoided by taking a few intelligent precautions.

Also, if you check the figures, I think you'll find that flu affects a vastly larger number of people than does HIV/AIDs.

Apples and oranges.

Don Firth

P. S. By the way, AIDs is not always fatal. It can be handled by drugs, and there are many people (homo and hetero) who are surviving despite being infected.

One really needs to get one's ducks in a row.

P. P. S. Also by the way:   Flu can be passed between heterosexual couples. This is hardly a reason to ban heterosexual marriage. . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 05:18 PM

The opinion of all the experts, Keith, is that at-risk groups should be educated, reached out to, encouraged, supported to come forward and be tested.

The experts say that this should be achieved by advocating acceptance, tolerance, compassion, equality, reducing stigma.

I agree totally.

I have said that plainly on many occasions in the course of this dialogue.

Bigots like you and Ake support rounding folks up and dragging them to the clinic. That is not supported by any expert opinion.

The experts say that you are part of the problem, part of the hindrance to effective outreach to at-risk groups.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 05:25 PM

Oh, and Keith, there was a time - when my life was more interesting in that way - that I myself attended quite diligently for an MOT at the GUM clinic. I am responsible and well educated. I know what I'm taling about But I understand how difficult that is for many. You neither understand nor know what you talk about.

There is presently a general education campaign - on buses, tubes, TV, radio, appealing for heterosexuals to get tested for the diseases that are prevalent amongst their sexually active demographic groups.

I think there should be a similar general education and appeal towards gay men - because not all gay men receive the deluge of materials and outreach directed at the gay ghetto.

By the way, Keith, I am properly delighted to see your prejudices still oozing out. I don't even need to pull your strings anymore, do I?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 05:57 PM

UNAIDS official policy on HIV testing

http://data.unaids.org/una-docs/hivtestingpolicy_en.pdf

Read it, weep then piss off Keith.


World AIDS day 2009:

Statement by UNAIDS and the European Union
World AIDS Day ─ 1 December 2009
The Presidency of the European Union (EU) and the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) welcome South Africa's strong focus on HIV prevention and HIV testing.

The EU and UNAIDS stress the need for the full respect of all human rights -- that no man,woman, boy or girl must be subject to stigma and discrimination due to his or her HIV status,sexual orientation, age, or gender.

The rights of women, young people and key populations must be protected. Their voices must be heard and their needs must be met. An effective AIDS response requires gender equality. Women's and girls' rights must be respected, including the right to sexual and reproductive health. All forms of gender-based violence must come to an end.

Evidence-based and comprehensive HIV prevention policies and programmes must be scaled up, and access to the full range of HIV services must be secured. HIV must be part of the broad health and development agenda.

HIV services must be integrated into other comprehensive health services; sexual and reproductive health and rights must be recognised as an essential component in the HIV response. The EU and
UNAIDS reiterate their commitment to and support for the continued response to the epidemic.

Today in Pretoria, South Africa, the Swedish Minister for International Development Cooperation, Ms Gunilla Carlsson, on behalf of the European Union, and Mr Michel Sidibé, UNAIDS Executive Director, warmly welcomed the renewed South African focus on HIV and
AIDS. They strongly supported the focus on prevention and South Africa's call for all people to get to know their HIV status. Ms Carlsson and Mr Sidibé emphasized that HIV testing is crucial for en effective response to HIV and AIDS. They also recognized that testing must build on the full respect for human rights, the absolute need of not being forced to disclose your HIV status and that counselling and other support activities must be provided.

In welcoming this renewed South African focus, Ms Carlsson and Mr Sidibé noted that not only Africa but also the rest of the world needs this clear message from South Africa. They stressed that the South African leadership is necessary for a continued effective response to the pandemic.

Ms Carlsson and Mr Sidibé stressed the need for the full respect and adherence to all human rights. The right not to be subject to stigma and discrimination must be guaranteed. They noted that this is relevant for all men and women, children and young people, regardless of HIV status, sexual orientation, age, or gender.

They emphasized that an effective response to HIV and AIDS requires increased gender equality. Women's and girls' rights must be protected, including the right to sexual and reproductive health. All forms of gender-based violence must come to an end. Gender norms must be changed, traditional roles of women and men and the relationship between them must be addressed. Both the beliefs and behaviour of many men and boys must be changed.

Ms Carlsson and Mr Sidibe stressed that evidence-based and comprehensive HIV prevention policies and programmes must be scaled up. Access to the full range of services and commodities must be secured, including life skills and sex education for adolescents, male
and female condoms and HIV harm reduction programmes, based on relevant UN recommendations.

They emphasized that HIV and AIDS must be part of the broad health and development agenda. HIV services must be integrated into other comprehensive health services; sexual and reproductive health and rights must be recognised as an essential component of HIV and AIDS programmes and prevention. They noted that the real challenge in the response to the pandemic is to translate principles, declarations and agreements into reality on the ground.

Ms Carlsson and Mr Sidibé recognized the important role to be played by international partners in the response to HIV and AIDS. They emphasized that such support must be based on harmonised projects and programmes, aligned to national priorities, plans, budgets and systems. They reiterated the strong commitment and support by the European Union, the 27 member states and the EU Commission, and UNAIDS in the further response to the epidemic.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 05:57 PM

From the UNAIDS website:

The term "men who have sex with men" - frequently shortened to MSM - describes a behaviour rather than a specific group of people. It includes self-identified gay, bisexual, or heterosexual men, many of whom may not consider themselves gay or bisexual. HIV responses for transgender populations are also often considered alongside MSM initiatives.

MSM are often married, particularly where discriminatory laws or social stigma of male sexual relations exist. Largely because of the taboo, the female partners of men who have sex with men are often unaware of their partner's other liaisons, and may therefore be exposed to additional HIV risks. Forced sex among men is not uncommon, especially in men-only environments such as prison settings.

Sex between men occurs in every culture and society, though its extent and public acknowledgement vary from place to place. Sex between men is thought to account for between 5 and 10% of global HIV infections, although the proportion of cases attributed to this mode of transmission varies considerably between countries. It is the predominant mode of HIV transmission in much of the developed world.

There is the potential for rapid HIV transmission within populations of men who have sex with men, especially if the rate of unprotected anal intercourse is high. There is also high potential of prevention benefit of the programmes among men who have sex with men. However the coverage of the prevention has been low: where countries report on coverage, only around 40% of men who have sex with men have access to the HIV prevention and care services they need. Many factors contribute to this situation including denial by society and communities, stigma and discrimination, and human rights abuse. Also where prevention programmes are in place, potential increase in risk behaviours due to prevention fatigue should be taken into consideration on the programming.

Vulnerability to HIV infection is increased where sex between men is criminalized, as men are either excluded from, or exclude themselves from, sexual health and welfare agencies out of fear. The essential HIV prevention measures for men who have sex with men include consistent and proper use of condoms, including access to condoms and water-based lubricants, must be promoted. High quality HIV-related services like voluntary counseling and testing and specialized clinics must be made available as well as specific and targeted information on prevention and risk reduction strategies designed to appeal to and meet the needs of men who have sex with men. Further quality treatment for sexually transmitted infections with referral for HIV services must be made available.

Specific policy measures are crucial for making prevention, care and support available to men who have sex with men. First and foremost, they must be included in national HIV programming and funding priorities. Gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender communities must be empowered to participate equally in the social and political life of their communities and countries.

Legal and policy reforms to promote human rights and access to health services of men who have sex with men and transgendered people, should be undertaken, where barriers exist. There is need to respect, protect and fulfill the rights of men who have sex with men and transgendered people and address stigma and discrimination by amending laws prohibiting sexual acts between consenting adults in private; enforcing anti-discrimination; providing legal aid services, and promoting campaigns that address homophobia.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 06:00 PM

So, Keith, there is just a small example of the expert opinions I have supported consistently.

What is your point?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 02:30 AM

Don Firth, we agree.
It was Don T who made the false comparison with flu, and I pointed out that they were not comparable.
We do provide flu vaccination here but only for people more at risk.
Improved treatment has extended lives of AIDS victims, but there is no cure.
They get the best treatment free of charge here, but the median age of death is about 40.

Royston, we all know that the situation in S.Africa is totally different. Heteros are high risk there.
All your cut and paste is irrelevant.
You are irrelevant.
(Your second paste says "Specific policy measures are crucial for making prevention, care and support available to men who have sex with men. ")

You say I show prejudice, but I have not even expressed an opinion.
I have merely reported what the experts say, e.g. The National African HIV Prevention Programme, Department of Health, Health Protection Agency, National Aids Trust, Avert, Terence Higgins Trust,etc.
Can you find a single expert who agrees with you?
If not, why should we take any notice of you?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 03:18 AM

Don T....I'm sorry to say it, but you are lying.

I did not say only Homosexuals should be tested and contacts traced.

What I said was that "at risk" groups should be tested including male homosexuals, sex workers, intravenous drug users and some immigrants.

As far as Homosexuals are concerned, the message has been out for over twenty years about the use of condoms and the dangers of promiscuity.......They are simply not responding voluntarily, the figures continue to worsen in an already high demographic.

Time to stop viewing this as a political issue.
Lets try a bit of humanitarian thought and start trying to save lives.

Royston, for a "well educated person", you display disappointingly poor understanding of the stance taken here by myself, Keith and Sanity. The debate has become heated from time to time, but your continued use of the B word to describe anyone who does not agree with your views, undermines your complete stance .....which is unfortunate.
You do appear to have a good grasp of the issues involved, unlike your supporters. Just relax, and stop getting so paranoid and we may begin to make some progress.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 07:18 AM

Royston, I have been looking at your posts.
Sometimes you seem to be in favour of intervention targeted at high risk groups.
If you are, you do agree with the experts and I have no problem.
They advocate that MSMs and black Africans should be tested every 6 months.
Happy with that?
No suggestion that other sexually active people need testing as often, or even at all.
Happy with that?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 10:32 AM

You need to be clear, Kaith, about what is meant by intervention.

I am totally in favour of targeted education, outreach, support, empowerment, encouragement aimed at getting at-risk people to be savvy and tested. Regularly tested.

I have said it many times. It is the view of all experts in the field. The other prerequisite for makind headway with this disease is the promotion of tolerance and acceptance both of each other's lifestyles and of people who are HIV+. All the experts are clear that at risk people need to be respected, valued, de-marginalised. That their human and civil rights must be valued and protected.

Testing must be a freely made choice, and HIV-status must remain confidential.

If you agree with the expert's on that broad definition of 'intervention' then you and I are in agreement. Is that what you are saying? Just be clear?

Because your opening post allied your views with Ake's - and he is not thinking in the same way as the experts. He believes something quite different.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 11:13 AM

Your opening posts asserted that non African heteros had become a high risk group and needed targeted intervention and testing.
We now have established that that is not true.
I see no need for compulsory testing, as no one knowingly at risk would be likely to refuse.
Confidentiality, but it must remain a notifiable disease.
Happy with that?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 11:37 AM

Yes, indeed. I would not disagree with those assertions.

I just still wonder why you cannot sign up to the unabridged views and recommendations of all the experts.

"as no one knowingly at risk would be likely to refuse

That is the most important issue here. People are in denial, people do refuse. Because they don't self-identify as being at risk because they fear prejudice and judgement. Both for *being* at risk and then for *being* HIV+.

So some prefer to live in ignorance and hope for the best.

Everyone has the same tendency. Example: the mass-media campaigns to get folks to face up to the other STI's.

If there were less stigma, less fear, more understanding and acceptance of lifestyles and of HIV status, then the epidemic can be managed better. It is the same message for Africa, America, Germany, UK...

Any attitudes or social pressures that keep people underground or on the margins, makes them hard to reach and keeps them from taking the support and treatment they need.

Do you understand that? It is the expert view, not just something that Liberal Royston dreamed up. Prejudice and stigma is killing people. Not just in Africa, in Europe as well. Those statements by the EU and UNAIDS and other bodies are not aimed at any one country or demographic, they are universal statements.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 12:34 PM

I think there is a case for compulsory testing of immigrants from places where AIDS is endemic.
I accept all expert recomendations.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 01:31 PM

Royston, I don't believe that "stigma" causes homosexuals to reject testing.

As far as I can see homosexuality is more tolerated now than it has ever been, yet the hiv and promiscuity figures continue to rise and has been said many times, the hiv figures in percentage terms are horrific.

I think this has to do with the lifestyle of many, not all, of homosexual men, who seem to see hedonism, risk taking and promiscuity as defining their sexuality.....a symptom of psychiatric problems.

Homosexuals have had ample time to put their sexual practices in order but are unwilling or unable to do so.
The article I linked to on homosexual marriage details how many homosexuals favour "open marriage" with multiple sexual partners, which would lead to another re-definition of traditional marriage.
Same sex and multiple partners?    Where are we going, if we find this acceptable?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 02:52 PM

Ake, we all know what you think and didn't really need reminding of it.

You are entitled to your thoughts.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 03:06 PM

Yes...but are you prepared to settle for what is happening right now?

If homosexuals will not help themselves...what do you propose?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 03:28 PM

Ake, I repeat: you don't know diddly-squat about homosexuals and their "lifestyle." You have your own little fiction cooked up and you keep dipping into that same rancid pot.

I know a fair number of homosexual men, and most of them are in stable, monogamous relationships, whether the law recognizes those relationships or not. They do want those relationships to be legally recognized so they, too, can have the same legal advantages that heterosexual couples enjoy, hence the gay-marriage movement.

There is no more promiscuity among this group than their is among heterosexuals. And what they want is for ignorant and prejudiced people to stop butting into their lives, harassing them, insisting that they are "perverts," and basically treating them like lepers when what they are and do in the privacy of their own homes simply does not affect anyone else.

Even if there are individual homosexual males who do not want to form stable relationships and prefer a life of promiscuity, the same holds true for a lot of heterosexual males as well! Anyone who is not aware of this hasn't been paying attention to the world around them!

What these men (and women) want are the same rights that heterosexuals have, and this is what makes it a civil rights issue.

It's really very simple.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 03:44 PM

Don.....With the greatest respect, your friends do not sound as if they are representative of the homosexual lifestyle, as shown in the health and promiscuity figures.

You simply cannot construct an argument based on the way a couple of your friends behave and ignore studies by respected organisations.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 03:58 PM

It's considerably more than just a couple of friends, Ake. I've been acquainted with this issue for a long time and I've kept my eyes open.

When I knew nothing about homosexuals and what they do, I had the usual prejudices. But I have since learned that those prejudices (which, incidentally, means "to pre-judge") are not true in most cases. I revised my ideas accordingly.

And when the church I attend adopted the "Affirmation of Welcome," I learned a great deal more about the matter. So what I am saying comes from actual knowledge of people, not just faceless (and I might add, edited) statistics.

What your keep saying is that because some members of a group do something, ALL of them do it. Ake, that's what is known as bigotry.

Sorry, but that's what it is!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 04:11 PM

""I did not say only Homosexuals should be tested and contacts traced.

What I said was that "at risk" groups should be tested including male homosexuals, sex workers, intravenous drug users and some immigrants.""

Yes indeed Ake, my mistake.

You did include those other two groups you despise and blame for the existence of HIV/AIDS.

Gays, Junkies and Africans.

No prejudice there then!

No comment then about Gay Junkies, Gay Africans, and African Junkies?

The permutations are there for you to tie your argument in knots.

Bottom line, I didn't lie. I simply forgot about the number of groups you discriminate against.

Funny though, you haven't mentioned Gay Travellers, Traveller Junkies , or for that matter African Travellers.

You're not slipping,........are you?

Don T

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 04:13 PM

Thanks, Don. F.

Ake, hedonism does not spread HIV. Promsicuity does not spread HIV.

Having sex without a condom spreads HIV.

Whatever the cause of HIV spreading, the prevalence amongst gay men overall is only 1.6%

98.4% of gay men are not hedonistic/promiscuous/unsafe. Delete as appropriate.

Take the most sexually active, highest risk demographic of 15-44 year-olds and you have 5.6% prevalence.

So 94.4% of the statstically riskiest gay men are, errm, NOT hedonistic/promiscuous/unsafe.

So you are just a relentlessly fucking stupid bigot.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: gnu
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 04:20 PM

I think that is false. Ake is not stupid. And I think bigot is a stretch.

I shant repeat myself. Ad infinitum. Over and fucking over and...

See you next thousand.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 04:21 PM

The groups I mention as being "at risk", are the same groups listed by UNIADS and other respected bodies, and all the vile abuse will not change that.

You are I'm afraid, all slightly mad.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 04:25 PM

Yes, Ake, gay men are at greater risk.

Most gay men are not, and never will be at risk.

Therefore you can't just keep banging on at the 94.4% to 98.4% of gay men that have nothing to worry about.

Why is that simple fact so hard for you to understand?

The answer is that *you want* to throw stones and blame and guilt at the people *you don't like or value*

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 04:32 PM

No, I don't think Ake is stupid. And that's what makes it worse.

I DO stand by "bigot." Harsh, perhaps, but judging from what Ake keeps posting and comparing that with the dictionary definition, he meets all the criteria.

Sorry, Ake. I'm not the one who is branding you as a bigot. You are.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Keith A
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 04:57 AM

Royston, again where do you get the 1.6% figure, and why do you dismiss the much higher figure given by HPA?
Don Firth, what is your explanation for the massively higher rate of all STIs including AIDS among MSMs?
Don T, black Africans, IV drug users and MSMs are the highest of all risk groups, but you don't believe that truth can be spoken because it offends your ideology.
Do I have that right?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 05:40 AM

Keith, please don't drag this back by two weeks.

Minimum 1,984,500 gay men (from the NATSAL survey)

The total figure for gay men living with HIV from HPA was whatever is was when I posted it 10 days or so ago. The calculated overall prevalence was 1.6%

I specifically quoted 5.6% as the median prevalence for 15-44 year olds from the HPA dataset.

So I hoped I was being quite scrupulous in putting both numbers forward.

Please don't obscure the point - that HIV is a tragic, minority experience whether you are gay, straight, black or white in this country.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 08:43 AM

At age 15, I am sure the number of boys infected with HIV through having sex with men is zero, or very, very close to zero.
It will rise steadily with age.
If 5.6% is the average for ages 15 to 44, it will be about 11% at age 44, and still rising except that the median age of death is about 40.

So where does 1.6% come from?
Can you post a source?
Did you make it up for your own purposes?
Please explain, because it appears to be another attempt to deceive.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 10:32 AM

Keith, why can't you just read and remember things? It would stop these circuitous wastes of time.

My post here...

http://www.mudcat.org/detail.cfm?messages__Message_ID=2857047

...sets out the reasoning and the sources for 1.6% overall HIV prevalence in MSM's. It also sets out the biggest defect in the calculation - that I don't know how to remove male children from the population figures, but I invited others to do it and to improve the figure.

But if you don't like that, then fine. Stick with the trimmed and sliced and carefully selected fact that tickles your prejudices and just stick with the 5.6% prevalence among MSM's 15-44. My point still stands, HIV is thankfully a minority experience for all groups affected in this country.

It really doesn't matter to anyone what age the HIV+ people are - unless you now have an age-related line of attack on HIV+ people? I can't see what point you are trying to make except to twist numbers again to suit some more of your prejudices.

But I am sure you will treat us to an explanation.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 10:53 AM

Thank you Royston.
So your figure is your own calculation, based on false assumptions. The official figure provided by the government sposored Health Protection Agency is rather more reliable I think.
Why do you choose not to use it?

It is probably, but not certainly, true that a minority of MSMs are infected, in the same why that only a minority succumbed to The Great Plague.
Historians regard that as rather serious though.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 01:44 PM

Keith, what on earth are you talking about?

I used both figures, together in the same post and explained where each of them came from.

There are no false assumptions. I gave sources for a reasonable estimate of the number of MSM's in the population and the HPA fact of the number of HIV+ MSM's. The result is not a false. It is a credible estimate of 1.6% HIV prevalence in the overall MSM population.

Where is the error? Explain yourself.

Why do you say I chose not to use the HPA figure - when I did use it? Alongside the 1.6% estimate.

Why do you lie all the time?

What on earth do you mean by:

"It is probably, but not certainly, true that a minority of MSMs are infected"

Are you seriously suggesting the possibility that most MSM's are HVI+

Are you? Really?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 01:52 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston - PM
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 05:40 AM

Keith, please don't drag this back by two weeks.

Minimum 1,984,500 gay men (from the NATSAL survey)

The total figure for gay men living with HIV from HPA was whatever is was when I posted it 10 days or so ago. The calculated overall prevalence was 1.6%

I specifically quoted 5.6% as the median prevalence for 15-44 year olds from the HPA dataset.

So I hoped I was being quite scrupulous in putting both numbers forward.

Please don't obscure the point - that HIV is a tragic, minority experience whether you are gay, straight, black or white in this country.
----------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston - PM
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 04:13 PM

Thanks, Don. F.

Ake, hedonism does not spread HIV. Promsicuity does not spread HIV.

Having sex without a condom spreads HIV.

Whatever the cause of HIV spreading, the prevalence amongst gay men overall is only 1.6%

98.4% of gay men are not hedonistic/promiscuous/unsafe. Delete as appropriate.

Take the most sexually active, highest risk demographic of 15-44 year-olds and you have 5.6% prevalence.

So 94.4% of the statstically riskiest gay men are, errm, NOT hedonistic/promiscuous/unsafe.

So you are just a relentlessly fucking stupid bigot.

--------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston - PM
Date: 06 Mar 10 - 04:23 AM

[GONORRHEA SECTION REMOVED]

Now to your 8.5% HIV prevalence among 15-44 y/o MSM's. The rest of the sentence from from the HPA report says:

" The prevalence of HIV (both diagnosed and undiagnosed infections) among MSM aged 15-44 was estimated to be 8.5% (range 7.0-10.5%) within London"

In the interest of total honesty, it concludes:

"...3.7% (range 3.1-4.5%) elsewhere in England and Wales and 5.3% (range 4.7-6.1%)overall."

So screw me if you weren't lying yet again. I trusted you on that, I didn't imagine even you would twist a lie out of a simple document like that. You just can't be trusted on anything can you?

So put all that together and you get a figure of 4.7% to 6.1% MSM HIV prevalence in the sexually active age groups which is kind of in the ballpark of the 4% figure that we were all thought was basically realistic - until your prejudices got in the way of whatever common sense you have.
--------------------------------------------------------------

So there are your lies exposed, Keith. I have been using HPA figures consistently. It was I that extracted the truth of them from your initial attempts to distort them.

You just don't know when to stop digging, do you?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 02:51 PM

""Regarding racism, I see little difference between the views being expounded by the BNP and those from a large section of the Conservative party....A party which Don is proud to support.

In fact, the biggest racist idiots that I ever met were right wing Tories!""

If you had ever taken the opportunity actually to read my comments, you would not be stupid enough to accuse me of being a right wing anything. I am a Tory, but so far to the left of the party as to be better qualified as a Socialist than either Blair or Brown.

""Virgin....My posts were on topic, as to discuss "racist teachers" one must determine the naqture of racism.

My view on hiv testing had nothing to do with race per se, but the fact that these particular immigrants have very high levels of infection and THAT is a fact, not an opinion.""

I'm still unconvinced, as you do not express any concern about the possibility of white immigrants bringing this "plague" (your word) into the country.

However few those immigrants might be, it would seem logical to want to prevent them bringing an infection, unless of course your real concern is other than one of health.

I believe that you use "concerns about health" to hide your antipathy to immigrants, and particularly to African and Asian immigrants.

You gave pretty clear indications of that in the immigration thread.

In short I don't believe your protestations of impartiality.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Keith A
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 03:30 PM

No lies from me Royston.
I use the most reliable figure from the most reliable source.
It does seem devious that you keep using the smaller figure.
As if you were trying to deceive people.

At age 15, I am sure the number of boys infected with HIV through having sex with men is zero, or very, very close to zero.
It will rise steadily with age.
If 5.6% is the average for ages 15 to 44, it will be about 11% at age 44, and still rising except that the median age of death is about 40.

If it is 11% at age 44, were it not for deaths, the proportion would only grow.
No one ever gets better.
Most people are sexually active into their 70s
Do you know how many would have succumbed by then?

My guess would be as valid as yours.
But only a guess.
I do not know.
Unless you have reliable figures, neither do you.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 03:42 PM

Royston posted:-

""Now to your 8.5% HIV prevalence among 15-44 y/o MSM's. The rest of the sentence from from the HPA report says:

" The prevalence of HIV (both diagnosed and undiagnosed infections) among MSM aged 15-44 was estimated to be 8.5% (range 7.0-10.5%) within London"

In the interest of total honesty, it concludes:

"...3.7% (range 3.1-4.5%) elsewhere in England and Wales and 5.3% (range 4.7-6.1%)overall."

So screw me if you weren't lying yet again. I trusted you on that, I didn't imagine even you would twist a lie out of a simple document like that. You just can't be trusted on anything can you?

So put all that together and you get a figure of 4.7% to 6.1% MSM HIV prevalence in the sexually active age groups which is kind of in the ballpark of the 4% figure that we were all thought was basically realistic - until your prejudices got in the way of whatever common sense you have.""


This is the whole of the HPA comment, out of which you extracted one sentence, to support your erroneous understanding of the issue.

Your figure related to London only, and last time I checked, London and England were not in the thesaurus as synonyms.

The figure for England was pretty much what Royston has said all along.

Stop trying to move imaginary goalposts, and you might even make sense once in a while.

I'm not holding my breath though.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 03:44 PM

Don....I would have absolutely no objection to the universal testing of immigrants but the cost would be prohibitive and the exercise would be of very limited value, given the low numbers of infections in other groups(of immigrants)
In much the same way, I would support the testing and contact tracing of other "at risk" groups like male homosexuals and "junkies"( your very non PC discription of intravenus drug users)

I wonder why your "liberal" ideology does not extend to these un fortunate people......not flavour of the month obviously!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 04:04 PM

Well honestly, Keith. If you'd said at the start that your post was based on guess-work extrapolation aimed at supporting your slanted view of things then I would never have bothered responding.

My 1.6% estimate is a valid proposal supported by HPA facts and a NATSAL survey.

We both agree on the 5.6% HPA figure from HPA for a segment of the population, so what was your point?

And you were lying when you repeated twice the lie that I was not using official figures in my assertions.

So can we take it then that you withdraw your rumination...

"It is probably, but not certainly, true that a minority of MSMs are infected"

...on the grounds that it is patently absurd, we all know it to be undeniably true - thankfully - that a small minority of people of any grouping will have to bear the pain of living with HIV.

I'm so glad we are having these chats. Your days of perceived unbiased contributions are well and truly at an end here.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 06:45 PM

Royston.....If the figures for male homosexuals were replicated in the heterosexual community, the UK health service would be unable to function, we would be unable to afford a treatment programme, society would virtually collapse.

Trying to equate Hetero and Homo figures in the UK or US is disingenuous....if 5% of heteros were to become infected, we would be facing a national emergency

Why do you try to hide the seriousness of the situation....do you not care what happens to your community?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 06:54 PM

Ake, there is nothing that here that tries to deny the scale or seriousness of anything.

It's how to approach it that is important.

You and Keith continue to pursue a racist and homophobic agenda that men who have sex with men and black people need to be forcibly "dealt with" in some way that other groups do not.

You both seek to inflate the scale of the problems affecting those groups to the extent that you both tell lies to the extent of claiming that "most" gay men or black people are HIV+.

And that is even before we get on to the fact that you think gay men are "to blame".

So after those lies of exaggeration are out there, you - but not necessarily Keith - seek to impose punitive and discriminatory measures. Measures that all the UN and other experts assert unequivocally are unhelpful and damaging to the cause of tackling this disease.

The experts - without exception - are clear that prejudice and stigma against at risk groups and against HIV+ people are two of the biggest blocks to prevention and treatment for many people.

The problem is easy to see. The causes are more subtle. The solutions are even more subtle and require a level of experience and intellect that you are utterly lacking.

All you need to do is read the damned stuff that you keep talking about, but it seems even that mental facility is beyond you.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 06:58 PM

And don't you dare to claim that you give a shit about anyone.

For you, gay men are a "scourge". They cannot and should not be equal or treated as such.

For you, HIV is just proof of and justification for your prejudices and a weapon that you can use to attack minorities with.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 07:48 PM

Ake: ".if 5% of heteros were to become infected, we would be facing a national emergency"

Exactly. So where is the action to teach sex and sexual health in a fashion that is relevant to gay people in schools?

Reach people early, get the message across.

Why aren't we teaching kids to celebrate diversity, to fight prejudice.

Why aren't we having discussions about challenging stereotypes and social "hang-ups" so that we remove the fear and stigma that presently stops at risk groups from accessing prevention and treatment resources?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 13 Mar 10 - 08:20 PM

There is much less prejudice against homosexuals than there was a few years ago, but the health figures are much worse.

What you are saying does not make sense.

Homosexuals appear unable or unwilling to modify their behaviour, for example the number of casual sexual partners.

International Aids Agencies like UNAIDS are saying that "new and effective measures to combat infection must be introduced, ALONGSIDE education on sexual promiscuity and condom use".

This was made clear much earlier in the thread, so please dont start posting more falsehoods.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 12:14 AM

"Homosexuals appear unable or unwilling to modify their behaviour, for example the number of casual sexual partners."

All Indians walk in single file. At least the one that I saw did.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Keith A
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 03:55 AM

Straight talk.
If you say HPA supports your figure of 1.6%, that is a deliberate lie to conceal the scale of the problem.
HPA STATES 5.3%.
Not for London, but overall for England and Wales.

As an average for ages 15 to 44, if a steady rise from zero, at age 44 it will be at 10.6%.
(If the rise is not linear, that will be an underestimate.)

10.6% will be a great underestimate of the proportion who have succumbed because by age 44, half have ALREADY DIED.

And the figure will go on rising for another 30 years.

1.6% is a lie Royston.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 05:44 AM

http://www.terradaily.com/reports/HIV_Life_Expectancy_Now_Normal_999.html

http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/extract/170/1/6

Ake, you told us that you don't believe in equality or fairness and that some people have less rights than others. I respect your honesty, but in every other respect; why can't you just go and bother someone else with your rants?

Keith - delicious. Thank you. Your ignorance and your prejduce just jeeps oozing out with every post.

Overall, HIV+ people will suffer challenges and complications but have a life expectancy - and quality of life expectancy - pretty much the same as someone who is HIV-

It is one of the principal reasons why total numbers living with HIV are rising.

So it betrays two of your principal prejudices - that they're all at it and they've all got it; along with the assumption that they're all dying.

If there are about 2mm gay people and only about 32,000 gay men that are HIV+ then however much it upsets your prejudices, there are only about 1.6% of gay men living with HIV.

You have never felt the need to strip out so many portions of other demographics - like straight people - in order to inflate the results of your fiddling, have you? Why is that?

I have not misled anyone - I have always quoted the 5.6% figure for 15-44 year olds alongside the 1.6% overall estimate. But we had to recover that 5.6% from your lies that put it at 10% or more. OK, so no more lies, Keith."

I have friends that HIV+ and healthy after 20, nearly 30 years. I have one friend who is HIV+, healthy after 18 years and doesn't even yet require drug-treatment - and that is not an isolated event.

The thing is Keith, that your internal narrative on this and so many other subjects is utterly false.

I said to you about 10 days ago that at various points in this dialogue you might have stopped and reconsidered a) your prejudices and b) that you just don't know or understand as much as you like to think that you do.

Are you ready to think yet?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 05:49 AM

Let me break this down for you, Keith.

5.3% of MSM's aged 15-44 are HIV+

about 1.6% of gay men, overall, are HIV+

Both of those have factual support, both of those can be true. They are not mutually exclusive.

I have not misled anyone if I have always stated the two figures together.

I have always stated the two figures together.

I copied and pasted the posts where I did so.

So stop with the lies, Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 06:05 AM

It is good that treatment is improving, but the median age of death from AIDS is 47, and "Deaths within the first year of diagnosis accounted for 18% (29/159) of all
deaths among MSM in 2007." (HPA)

Can you challege any single statement in my last post?
Can you fault any of the logic? One example?
Is there one single false assertion?

I showed that the proportion of MSMs who succumb is well over 10%, and possibly many times that.
Perhaps 40%.
That is the proportion who succumbed to the most cataclysmic epidemic in human history.
The Medieval Black Death.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 06:11 AM

Royston,
"about 1.6% of gay men, overall, are HIV+"
I deny that and defy you to quote any reliable source for it.

Are there any MSMs below age 15?
5.3% age 15 to 44 are HIV positive.
No one gets better so that number GOES UP after age 44, except that they die of AIDS.

1.6% is a lie.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 06:33 AM

On the 1.6%

The HPA says that there are about 32,000 MSM's living with HIV

The NATSAL indicates that there are AT LEAST 1,984,500 MSM's

So the proportion of MSM's is probably about 1.6%

I have stated several times where the defect lies - we need to find a way of removing kids from the population figures. 1.6% remains a good indication.

It is necessary to quote that alongside the HPA 5.6% figure for a slice of 15-44 year olds.

I have always quoted both figures together. Neither of them are lies.

Until we have some figures with better banding for age groups, your points are totally unsupported by anything. We have no idea whether the number/age line is linear. We have no idea how well the ages are distributed in the group. There are no reliable conclusions that can be drawn. We have no idea whether most of the HIV+ in that group are in their 20's, 30's or 40's

You are making leaps in the dark in order to support your prejudices.

If you claim that your observations are fact or even supported opinions, then you are a liar.

You have totally failed to understand the HPA statistics.

When they say "Deaths within the first year of diagnosis" they are referring to people that first presented themselves in 2007 with full blown symptomatic AIDS. Those people have generally been HIV+ for a very long time but undiagnosed and therefore untreated. So by the time they dragged themselves to a doctor, it was too late. Tragic. Totally tragic.

There will be statistically anomalous cases - as in flu or other diseases - of people that get infected in May and are dead by December, but they are the statistical 'blips' the extreme exceptions.

The Median age of death at 47 is the median age TO DATE. It is slewed by the early-years, pre-treatment tidal wave of funerals.

Going forward, HIV+ people have normal life expectancy. As they die at ripe old age, so that median age figure will rise daramtically, but it will not rise for a long time, because the positive and healthy people are not going to die for a long time.

So, Keith. You need to correct your assumptions and insinuations from these figures, which you have failed to understand.

I am not calling to call you a liar. Just ignorant. Are you ready to learn yet?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 06:43 AM

Keith. Your quote: "Deaths within the first year of diagnosis accounted for 18% (29/159) of all
deaths among MSM in 2007." (HPA)"

Can you tell me which document that came from?

I'm concerned that you might have selectively clipped that from an observation on the dangers of late diagnosis.

If you did then I will wish to have a field-day at the further expense of your credibility.

If you did not clip it, then fine. I have explained the context for you.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 06:54 AM

Oh, just one thought that occurred to me, Keith.

If Kevin de Cock and I were so stupid as to think that sexual networks - all other factors being equal - were the most important determinators of HIV risk, then how do you explain that for gay men in the UK, the biggest differentiator of HIV prevalence is where you happen to live?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 07:06 AM

I don't intend to answer your dispute over the 1.6% figure again. I have given the same clear answer many times. People know my view, they know yours.

How about you answer some of the points put to you.

We are still waiting to hear your explanation or your withdrawal of the rumination that it is "not certain" that only a minority of MSM's are HIV+

We want to know why - on a quest for understanding the overall prevalence of MSM's living with HIV - you keep trying to distort the size of the group and try to discount large numbers of healthy people and try to count the dead as living. And you say you are not prejudiced?

We are waiting for your acceptance that the median age of death for HIV+ men is the median age to date and can't possibly tell us anything about the future, in view of the effects going forward of treatment which is giving people diagnosed today, a normal life expectancy.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 10:04 AM

1.6% and the HPA figure can not both be true, but you kept putting them together to detract from the true HPA figure.
No one else spouts your ridiculous figure.
You constructed it yourself out of bogus figures, i.e " The NATSAL indicates that there are AT LEAST 1,984,500 MSM's"

No it does not.
Nothing like that.
A ludicrous over estimate to give you your ludicrous under estimate of the proportion of MSMs infected.
I had put you straight on that before, but you hoped to get it past us again.

I see a change in your position.
Having been proved wrong on everything you have claimed about AIDS, you are now saying that AIDS is not so serious anyway!
What happened to the caring Royston who though every case a tragedy?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 10:33 AM

So, nothing of substance to add then, Keith?

Jolly good.

We'll treat this as finished then.

I have nothing more to say to you either.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 11:07 AM

Nothing of substance!
I have just shown that you have been deceiving the forum with fake statistics, and shown how you faked it.
I have just shown that the epidemic among MSMs, which you keep trying to understate, is comparable to the greatest plagues in history.

Plenty of substance there.
You just have no reply.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 12:54 PM

I will not overstate my own case.
Probably approaching the Great Plague but not The Black Death.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 01:09 PM

""Don....I would have absolutely no objection to the universal testing of immigrants but the cost would be prohibitive and the exercise would be of very limited value, given the low numbers of infections in other groups(of immigrants)
In much the same way, I would support the testing and contact tracing of other "at risk" groups like male homosexuals and "junkies"( your very non PC discription of intravenus drug users)

I wonder why your "liberal" ideology does not extend to these un fortunate people......not flavour of the month obviously!""

No, Ake, not my description, merely a word I used to highlight the attitude you display toward these people.

You profess to have their best interests at heart, yet would selectively compel them to undergo testing which is illegal in the UK for very godd reasons.

This is biased and discriminatory. Anyone who is HIV positive poses a risk to those indulging un unsafe sex, yet your attitude is to say some groupings are too small to be worth testing.

Your agenda is utterly transparent, but fortunately the laws of his country prevent bigots from forcing their ideas upon others.

Nobody in the UK can, or should be forced to accept any medical procedure, and it is a good thing too. It prevents the next logical discrimination, namely euthanasia for those you wish to remove from your proposed healthy culture.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 01:19 PM

Don,
some groupings are too small to be worth testing.

This is true.
Anyone can get bowel cancer, but only over 60s are screened.

With finite resources, testing low risk groups means you can not test so many from high risk groups.
That means more cases are missed, and lives needlessly lost.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 01:20 PM

""10.6% will be a great underestimate of the proportion who have succumbed because by age 44, half have ALREADY DIED.""

If you are talking about HIV Keith, you are wrong because only 50% of HIV positives actually develop AIDS at all.

If you are talking about AIDS sufferers, you are still wrong because The figures you are using relate to HIV diagnoses, and the number of AIDS cases won't become clear for approximately ten years, and maybe (with improved treatment) not even then.

In short, Royston's figures, culled from the HPA, are bound to be much closer to the truth than your flawed and slanted claims.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 01:37 PM

Don....I dont understand you, why do you continue to print lies about what I say, when one only has to scan up the page to read what I actually wrote.

I did not say any grouping was too small to be tested, what I did say was that I would be in favour of universal testing, but that testing everyone, like very large groups with very small infection rates would be a waste of money which could be better used on other prevention methods like contact tracing.

I am in favour of targeting small groups with very high percentage of infections, like male homosexuals, African immigrants, perhaps some other immigrant groups as the Aids picture becomes clearer, intravenus drug users and sex workers.

Is that clear enough for you?
If Aids figures continue to rise amongst "at risk" groups you can be absolutely sure that these measures will be implimented....there is no doubt of that....those who make the laws can also change them, when it suits them to do so.

Dont lecture me on the problems of drug abuse, I know better than most what is in the interests of addicts.....and what is in the interests of idiot political dogmatists!!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 01:40 PM

Sadly Don, all HIV positive people do go on to develope AIDS.
Retrovirals just delay it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 01:46 PM

ANTI retrovirals!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 01:55 PM

Yeah, you asked for it Keith.

The full context of your misleadingly selected and clipped quotes from the HPA about AIDS deaths.

"Late HIV diagnoses, AIDS and death

In 2007 19% (499/2,679) of MSM were diagnosed after the point at which
treatment should have begun (CD4 cell count less than 200 cells per mm3), a reduction from 30% (417/1,384) seen in 1998.

Between 2003 and 2007, late diagnosis (CD4<200) was associated with a 13-fold increase in mortality within a year of diagnosis, compared to those diagnosed more promptly.

Deaths within the first year of diagnosis accounted for 18% (29/159) of all deaths among MSM in 2007. Late diagnosis is more common among older MSM and those diagnosed outside London [3].

Since 1996 new diagnoses of AIDS and deaths (from any cause) among HIV
positive individuals have remained low. In 2007, there were 193 cases of AIDS reported among MSM, of which 74% (142) were made at the same
time as their HIV diagnosis. MSM accounted for 32% (159/495) of deaths
among all HIV-infected people in 2007. The median age of death was 47,
with 57% occurring in those aged over 50."

Lie after lie upon lie with you Keith. And I was spot on when I identified this latest one even befor needing to check it out.

All because - if you're honest - you want to round 'em all up and drag 'em down the clinic.

You lie and you distort and you twist and turn to support your prejudices while claiming some sort of saintly impartiality.

Well you are busted mate.

Keep going, just you keep going.

Are you going to answer the points put to you about your other lies?

We are still waiting to hear your explanation or your withdrawal of the rumination that it is "not certain" that only a minority of MSM's are HIV+

We want to know why - on a quest for understanding the overall prevalence of MSM's living with HIV - you keep trying to distort the size of the group and try to discount large numbers of healthy people and try to count the dead as living. And you say you are not prejudiced?

We are waiting for your acceptance that the median age of death for HIV+ men is the median age to date and can't possibly tell us anything about the future, in view of the effects going forward of treatment which is giving people diagnosed today, a normal life expectancy.

If Kevin de Cock and I were so stupid as to think that sexual networks - all other factors being equal - were the most important determinators of HIV risk, then how do you explain that for gay men in the UK, the biggest differentiator of HIV prevalence is where you happen to live?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 02:07 PM

And for the last time, the NATSAL survey does INDICATE how many MSM's there are.

6.3% of men at least admit to having had genital sex with another man.

63mm people or thereabouts in the population

Half of them are men - 31.5mm

6.3 of 31.5mm is 1,984,500 MSM's

It's not perfect, it is an indication.

The HPA figures are for one slice of men aged 15-44. They are totally different. It is a truth, but it is a partial truth.

I would never (and did not) put the NATSAL derived figure forward on its own - but it is a fair observation.

You, on the other hand, only want to count those MSM's at peak risk - discounting everyone else, and you want to add in the dead to boost your prejudiced view of this awful problem and your odious opinion which amounts to an assertion that gay men make up a tiny group of deviants who are all either dead or dying and deserved it. You toxic little man.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 02:16 PM

Keith, why don't you call the Lighthouse Centre in Ladbroke Grove (The Terence Higgins Trust centre)

They will probably confirm that all the gay men who come to them for health and counseling services are HIV+

So that would probably have you concluding that all gay men are HIV+ and all HIV+ men are gay.

Idiot.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Mar 10 - 02:27 PM

Royston, in replying to your assertion that many AIDS victims now survive much longer (which is true) I pointed out that Deaths within the first year of diagnosis accounted for 18% (29/159) of all deaths among MSM in 2007.
That is a fact, and pertinent to our discussion.
No need for a vast cut and paste that no one will read.

No lies from me. Ever.

My "but not certain" statement.
You had stated as fact that most MSMs were not infected, but you had not established that.
You still have not.
I have looked into it and I am now confident that it is true.
No lies from me. I just like to be sure of the facts.

You say I try to count the dead as living.
It is convenient for you that death removes infected people from the statistics.
I am concerned with the numbers of people who succumb.
Those who have died are entitled to be counted.
No lies from me. I regard it as deceitful to try to hide the dead.

You say the median age of death tells us nothing about the future.
I was concerned with the present situation.
For the future, the median age is creeping up.
No lies from me.

Kevin de Cock.
Have you decided to reinstate him?
I thought everything he said had been repudiated.
He made one passing mention of "networks" but his explanation of what he meant, multiple and concurrent sexual partners, is really a description of behaviour.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Mar 10 - 05:39 AM

Gosh..I've been pretty busy..and spending a LOT of time in the studio, so I was away, for a bit.....

So, you're still arguing over the statistics? Mercy! I've got a great idea...

Why doesn't everyone who is all for minimizing the effects of 'how many get what', and 'why', and with the odds, you've figured out, convince yourselves that there is hardly any chance you won't get anything, because its all safe now, it's your civil right,too, and the road to eternal bliss....and fuck everything in sight, with a smile on your face,..because you felt 'right'! You won't catch anything because, sheesh,.. you fancy yourself a liberal, and everything is O.K., and you are exempt from consequences, and common sense!

Oh well,.....Hey, Hi, All
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 15 Mar 10 - 05:42 AM

Been gone so long, forgot to sign in right...... (Joe, hi!..you can delete the one with just 'Guest', it was me. Thank you)


Gosh..I've been pretty busy..and spending a LOT of time in the studio, so I was away, for a bit.....

So, you're still arguing over the statistics? Mercy! I've got a great idea...

Why doesn't everyone who is all for minimizing the effects of 'how many get what', and 'why', and with the odds, you've figured out, convince yourselves that there is hardly any chance you won't get anything, because its all safe now, it's your civil right,too, and the road to eternal bliss....and fuck everything in sight, with a smile on your face,..because you felt 'right'! You won't catch anything because, sheesh,.. you fancy yourself a liberal, and everything is O.K., and you are exempt from consequences, and common sense!

Oh well,.....Hey, Hi, All
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Mar 10 - 11:16 AM

Royston, you said "The HPA figures are for one slice of men aged 15-44. They are totally different. It is a truth, but it is a partial truth."

Are there any MSMs beow age 15?
It IS a partial truth, because no one gets better as they get older.
The numbers in the higher age group are EVEN HIGHER, ignoring the fact that AIDS is reducing their number by killing them.

I am a little man, but neither toxic nor an idiot.
You seek to conceal the size of the epidemic.
I seek the facts.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Mar 10 - 04:15 PM

The official figure for the number of MSMs infected was inconveniently far bigger than your own figure.
To persist with it showed arrogance and a determination to push your own agenda.
As an honest man, you would want to know where your calculation went wrong.
I will tell you anyway.
Meanwhile, 2100 is there if anyone wants it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Mar 10 - 04:21 PM

The first problem is your source for the proportion of MSMs.
You used a NATSAL survey that you yourself said had too small a sample (FEB 5th).
You could have used the other NATSAL survey that was nearly double the size, but it found barely a half as many MSMs.
So that did not suit you.
You probably started off with an overestimate.
You then applied that proportion to the whole population.
That means you are counting in thousands of children who are not yet sexually active, and old men who are no longer sexually active.
All these are not at risk.
You thus overestimate the number of active MSMs thereby underestimating the risk factor.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 19 Mar 10 - 07:20 AM

""Why doesn't everyone who is all for minimizing the effects of 'how many get what', and 'why', and with the odds, you've figured out, convince yourselves that there is hardly any chance you won't get anything, because its all safe now, it's your civil right,too""

Ignoring the lousy grammar, and making some kind of sense out of this rant, I gather you are talking about hetero Keith A, who is the only one minimising dangers here.

He won't thank you for calling him a liberal though. Akenaton would never back him up again.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Mar 10 - 07:37 AM

I like to think that I am liberal Don, but there is no liberal virtue in concealing any known facts about infection.
Is there?

I am bemused that you say I minimise dangers.
I feel that I have gone to extraordinary lengths to define and quantify the dangers.
Could you explain your criticism please?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 19 Mar 10 - 03:21 PM

Don T: "Ignoring the lousy grammar, and making some kind of sense out of this rant, I gather you are talking about hetero Keith A, who is the only one minimising dangers here."

GfS: Quit being stupid, OK?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 20 Mar 10 - 10:26 AM

""GfS: Quit being stupid, OK?""

Quit giving orders, OK? You have NO authority here.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Mar 10 - 02:12 PM

Don has every "right" to practice stupidity GFS

You are a "stupidiphobe" and Don is an acknowledged expert!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 20 Mar 10 - 03:37 PM

The death penalty has been shown to be ineffective as a deterrent to homicide.
As for homosexuality, this is a human right that is biologically determined and to
put people to death because of it is no different than any other type of dictatorship
that executes those who disagree with the dictator for any reason.

One of the chief causes of AIDS is drug use. Legalizing drugs and helping those who
are addicted would go a long way to dealing with this epidemic.

Homosexuals can be as judicious and monogamous as heterosexuals and don't require any special policing. AIDS is now transmitted by hetero as well as homo sexuals.

It will be impossible to determine exactly how many people are afflicted with AIDS.
Those who are because they are targeted will keep their statistics under wraps.
The only way to get people to come forward is to "decriminalize" the problem.

For this, needless to say, every civilized country needs to decriminalize homosexual
or lesbian activity and respect the rights of loving couples anywhere to engage in a
monogamous or continuous relationship based on mutual respect.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Keith A
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 05:20 AM

Stringsinger,
In this thread it has been shown that in UK
It is not spreading among heteros, except in the new African communities.
Experts advise MSMs to be tested every 6 months.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 08:34 AM

Stringsinger, my reply was abrupt and lacking compassion.
It was not meant to be and I agree with your sentiments.
It is just that since Jan 10th, I have been trying to correct false assertions and to find the evidence to establish the true situation.
In return I have had nothing but ridicule, abuse and insults.
keith.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 21 Mar 10 - 07:07 PM

Don T: "Quit giving orders, OK? You have NO authority here."

Is that an order, sir?????

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Mar 10 - 05:05 AM

Royston, you were always telling me to "keep it going" but you are giving me no more ludicrous, deceitful assertions to unravel.
Shall I just summarise our part of the debate and be finished?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 03:36 AM

Hey Keith.....Hi!

Have all the bullets stopped flying?

Regards,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Mar 10 - 05:00 AM

On the first chime of "Big Ben" all hostilities will cease.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Mar 10 - 10:13 AM

To wind up the debate started by Royston on 10th Jan.
He claimed a change in pattern of infection.
Not true.
He claimed that it was starting to spread among heteros.
Not true except among expat Africans.
He claimed that heteros disproportionately effected by STIs.
Not true.
He claimed the non existant rise among "filthy heterosexuals" was due to their lack of morals and disgusting sexual hygiene.
Bigot.
He claimed only about 2% of MSMs get AIDS.
Over 10% become infected.
Everything he ever said about AIDS was wrong, and I believe he knew it to be false all along.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 25 Mar 10 - 01:33 PM

Ye gods. Give it up, will you?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,en passe
Date: 26 Mar 10 - 12:12 PM

Sadly Zimbabwe PM rejects gay rights move the original topic of the thread is still very much on the agenda :-(

The language of hate is never far away

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 26 Mar 10 - 06:04 PM

Now I'M confused......Is it racist to call Ugandans homophobic?

Fuck it! I'm away for a pint!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Mar 11 - 04:51 AM

Men who have sex with men remain the group most at risk of becoming infected with HIV.

New diagnoses in this group alone have increased by 70% in the past 10 years.

There are more than 30,000 men who have sex with men living with HIV in the UK and experts estimate nearly a third of these are currently undiagnosed and unaware that they are infected.

Another high risk group that would benefit from increased HIV testing, according to NICE, is the black African community living in England.

In 2009, more than 2,000 black Africans were diagnosed with an HIV infection; one-third of all new diagnoses in the UK.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-12817564

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Mar 11 - 06:55 PM

HPA (UK) figures and recommendations.

.
                  
Routine HIV tests for areas with high levels
Share.
.
RSS
:
..Behind the Headlines
Brought to you by the NHS Knowledge Service
.Categories
All Headlines
Food/diet (367)
Lifestyle/exercise (353)
Pregnancy/child (340)
Cancer (316)
Medication (276)
Heart/lungs (252)
Neurology (230)
Medical practice (224)
Older people (172)
Genetics/stem cells (166)
Obesity (123)
Mental health (113)
Diabetes (74)
QA articles (69)
Swine flu (35).Wednesday March 23 2011

"A doubling of new HIV infections in the UK in the past decade is leading experts to tell GPs to offer testing to all adult male patients in some areas," reported BBC News.

The news report is based on the latest data, which showed that new diagnoses of HIV acquired in the UK have nearly doubled in 10 years, from 1,950 cases in 2001 to 3,780 in 2010. The figures, published today, have been released by the Health Protection Agency.

The data shows that men who have sex with men remain the group most at risk, with new cases rising by 70% (1,810 in 2001 to 3,080 in 2010).

The figures have been published in connection with new guidance by NICE. The guidance is aimed at increasing the uptake of HIV testing in this group.

The guidance suggests that regular, routine testing is offered to all men who register with a GP surgery in areas that have high levels of HIV. Routine testing will also be offered to men who live in areas that have a large community of men who have sex with men. It is also recommended that men in these areas are offered HIV tests when admitted to hospital.



What is the news based on?
The figures for the numbers of new HIV diagnoses have been released by the Health Protection Agency (HPA), an independent UK health watchdog, set up to protect the public from threats to their health from infectious diseases and environmental hazards.

The guidance comes from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), which provides guidance, sets quality standards and manages a national database to improve people's health and prevent and treat ill-health.



What are the aims of the new NICE guidelines?
To increase HIV testing to help reduce undiagnosed infection and prevent transmission among men who have sex with men. The guidance suggests that healthcare professionals offer regular, routine testing to all men in high-prevalence areas, and to those who live in areas with large communities of men who have sex with men.



Why focus on men who have sex with men?
Men who have sex with men remain the group most at risk of becoming infected with HIV. In 2009, there were 6,630 people diagnosed with HIV in the UK. Over 40% of these new diagnoses were among men who have sex with men.

In total, there are about 30,800 men who have sex with men living with HIV in the UK. It is estimated that nearly 9,000 of these men are unaware that they are infected.



What areas have a high prevalence of HIV?
For these guidelines, high prevalence was defined as areas with more than two diagnosed cases per 1,000 people. The HPA has produced a table showing which primary care trusts fall within this definition.



Why increase testing?
Generally, the sooner a person with HIV is diagnosed the better their outcome. HIV can be successfully managed with antiretroviral therapies. However, if someone is diagnosed late it's more likely that the virus will have already seriously damaged their immune system. Late diagnosis is one of the biggest contributing factors to illness and death for people with HIV. Almost a third of people in the UK who are diagnosed as HIV positive are diagnosed late.

By getting an early diagnosis, people with HIV will have better health and a longer life expectancy.

Lack of a diagnosis also increases the likelihood that the virus will be passed onto other sexual partners.



What is the advice to GPs for routine HIV tests?
NICE advises that HIV testing should be offered and recommended to all men who:

•register with a practice in an area with a large community of men who have sex with men
•register with a practice in an area with a high HIV prevalence (high prevalence means more than two diagnosed cases per 1000 people)
•disclose that they have sex with other men
•are known to have sex with men and have not had a HIV test in the previous year
•are known to have sex with men and disclose that they have changed sexual partner or engaged in high-risk sexual practices
•have symptoms that may either indicate HIV, or that HIV is part of the differential diagnosis
•are diagnosed with, or request screening for, a sexually transmitted infection
•live in a high-prevalence area and are undergoing blood tests for another reason
HIV testing should also be offered to men who are admitted to hospital with the following circumstances:

•are admitted in areas with a high prevalence of HIV
•disclose that they have sex with men
•have symptoms that may indicate HIV, or HIV is part of the differential diagnosis

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mauvepink
Date: 24 Mar 11 - 07:37 AM

Am not sure what the stats and this particular branch on the news has to do with OP or the topic of hanging homosexuals.

More significant news was released yesterday about the rights of gay people in other countries, more in keeping with the thread perhaps

85 countries sign UN gay rights resolution

Somewhat tongue in cheek it may be worth reiterating Women who have sex with men are most likely to contact HPV and thus risk their chances of cervical cancer. Women who have sex with men and get pregnant risk death from associated pregnancy risks and Women die having abortions, men never do! Now people are at risk too of esophageal cancer due to HPV. No doubt about it. Unprotected sex is risky without doubt for anyone having sex with men!!! Now no-one is suggesting that women should not have sex with men but it is worth noting the unprotectedness element is what spreads disease and makes it very risky indeed

Smoking certainly kills. Maybe they should invent a condom for cigarettes as so many die from cancers and and heart disease associated with smoking. Driving and even being a pedestrian is quite risky too

mp

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Mar 11 - 08:12 AM

The latter part of the thread was about the comparative risks of HIV.
Royston and Lox claimed that the risk to MSMs was declining, and hetero infections were overtaking them.

It was not true then, and the trend has continued in the opposite direction since.
They were wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Mar 11 - 04:52 AM

Of course, there is no disgrace in being wrong about a complex issue.
What is not forgiveable is that instead of just making their case, they tried to undermine and discredit those of us who were actually right with constant accusations of bigotry.

Lox and Jim Carrol have been using the same disgraceful tactic on the Muslim Prejudice thread right up until yesterday.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 26 Mar 11 - 05:06 AM

Not surpised to find you here Keith, cuttin'-an-pastin' away - along with your friend Ake.
And certainly not surprised to find that your first appearance and recurring theme on this thread was to link homosexuality with race.
Shouldn't you be at a Beirkeller rally somewhere, or maybe on a 'Pakie-bashing' mission?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 26 Mar 11 - 05:41 AM

Bloody hell, if there was EVER a thread that didn't need dredging up from the Mudcat seabed.....

But since it has been, in keeping with what it was originally about, it might be of interest to some that the proposed law in Uganda has now lost any chance of being passed. Good news for once, though the issue of endemic and severe homophobia in that country remains alive and well.

Now Keith, could you please go back to your 'Muslim' thread, as it still need several hundred more posts to reach the size of this old monster.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Mar 11 - 05:41 AM

Despicable.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Mar 11 - 05:44 AM

Not you Smedley.
We cross posted.
keith.