BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?

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: 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: 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 - 05:14 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: 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: 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: 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 - 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: 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: 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: 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 - 03:10 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: 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: 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: 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: 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 - 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 - 10:38 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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 - 08:06 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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 - 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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 - 04:39 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: 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: 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 - 03:17 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: 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: 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 - 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 - 02:10 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.