BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?

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: 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: 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 - 01:44 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: 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: 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 - 10:21 AM

They're letting GfS decide when s/he lands in Kampala.

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: 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: 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: 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 - 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 - 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: akenaton
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 07:12 PM

:0(   'As it gorn?? )0:

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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: Paco O'Barmy
Date: 22 Jan 10 - 04:45 PM

Oh, post 1199 by the way....

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 - 04:44 PM

Royston,
       They aren't 'prejudices.' They are beliefs based on experience.

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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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 - 01:28 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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 ...