BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?

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