BS: The Pope's Survey

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Dec 13 - 05:29 AM

Me?
I just pointed out errors of fact in your posts.
I know you would do the same for me.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: GUEST,musket again
Date: 06 Dec 13 - 04:59 AM

Yes Joe I am

Bigotry isn't something to be cuddly about.

Keith. Every day I missives from doctors who throw accurate but irrelevant statistics to justify why things should change or remain the same. Often after their colleagues have supported a position.

They are defending what they want to see happen.

And you?

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: akenaton
Date: 06 Dec 13 - 04:57 AM

Ian, obviously you are not concerned about the epidemic of STD.s amongst male homosexuals, your last post confirms that, but the health agencies are very concerned.

You appear to be concerned only for you agenda......"just don't talk about the figures"
Joe is correct, this subject is worrying, it does involve issues of "morality" and should be discussed in a civilised manner.

It also brings in wider issues like the place of the church in society and that is what terrifies the "Fascists" of the left more than anything else, that is their greatest obstacle, there will always be people of faith, Christians, Taoists, Buddhists Moslems most of whom want to see goodness and morality prevail.

I begin to see this great movement as the only defence again the continual erosion of moral and social values in our society. "Faith", that inborn feeling, there since the beginning of time, that there is a higher and greater power at work, is the only impediment to the complete demolition of our social structure.

As a Socialist, I often call for real political change, but we must never forget who the enemy really is and what are our strongest weapons against him.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Dec 13 - 04:32 AM


I notice the political party Keith once said he supported
Keith never said any such thing and supports none.

male to male are the largest set for HIV infection They aren't the majority, but not far off.
They are the majority of new diagnoses (51%)

The only reason why needle share isn't the overall highest reason for transmission is the funded free needles avaliable.

Hardly. Only 120 pa.

liberty suspended for how many?
None actually.
Opt out testing is not an infringement, and seems to be effective where tried.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Joe Offer
Date: 06 Dec 13 - 03:31 AM

Well, Steve, it looks to me like you just like to fight, and have no desire to carry on any sort of rational discussion. If you want to discuss things, you give the other person the benefit of the doubt, and seek some sort of exchange of ideas and common ground.
But apparently, you are unable or unwilling to do that.

And Musket, you're getting pretty squabbly yourself. I thought you were better than that.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: GUEST,musket asking the point
Date: 06 Dec 13 - 03:02 AM

Interesting sideshow and brought out a few otherwise hidden agendas in what should be an objective debate.

Here in The UK we have, for the time being, figures produced by The Health Protection Agency which people such as the ones I give strategic support to in the real world use to plan services. The worrying figures for male to male are the largest set for HIV infection They aren't the majority, but not far off.

Two reasons for this. 1. Gay promiscuity is higher risk than heterosexual promiscuity. 2. Due to previous health campaigns, more gay men present for testing than straight men or women with high risk sexual lifestyles.

The Health Protection Agency said that. Funnily enough, their public health role is being taken away as it is too polarised. The NHS and Department of Health agree that priority funding is based far too heavily on issues in isolation.   In short, whilst the trend in HIV is peaking at 6000 new diagnoses per annum to include all cases, not just gay men, the monthly figures for chlamydia are more. The only reason why needle share isn't the overall highest reason for transmission is the funded free needles avaliable.

I notice the political party Keith once said he supported would require The NHS to stop funding this and require knowledge of drug users to be forwarded to the police.

It fits with Keith's professed inability to balance and dig out the data behind statistics. If The NHS worked purely on headline statistics, it would grind to a halt as The Royal Colleges usually disagree with NICE who question HPA who question trust based coding who question what clinicians report.

All Department of Health funded.

Shallow people don't want to know that if it shags their hypothesis.

A sideshow and a smokescreen. 60 million people in The UK and Keith and his pet worm want liberty suspended for how many? Certainly not the 3000 who came forward and were positive last year. They came forward. .

So why?

Not nice, that worm you know. Not nice at all. Those that encourage him through lazy so called research need to ask themselves questions too.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Don Firth
Date: 05 Dec 13 - 10:59 PM

Ake:   I am sure, and the uptake figures support my view, that the vast majority of active male homosexuals have no interest in "marriage" or monogamy, and the issue is actually being driven by an anti- conservative, anti religion pressure group, which has enormous power principally in the news and entertainment media.

Sorry, not true. Any of it.

The actual figures do not bear that out. First, the uptake figures are very high. In each of the states in which same-sex marriage has been legalized, the "uptake" figures have been surprisingly high, much to the exasperation and frustration of certain conservative groups, some churches, and people like Ake. There has been a rush to the altars (there are a fair number of churches that have no problem with this) or to a Justices of the Peace by same-sex couples—women AND men.

And the campaigns have been driven, not by Liberal pressure groups, but by same-sex couples themselves. But supported by Liberal groups, who tend to be a fair-minded bunch and don't believe in trying to curtail the freedoms of others.

Like some folks.

Just because Ake doesn't like the real figures doesn't mean they're not true.

Sorry, Ake. (But not really.)

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Dec 13 - 09:18 PM

For most of us, two people making love is certainly more significant than having a Big Mac or capuccino.

Really? Have you really thought about this? Making love is a normal, easy and happy part of everyday life. Why's it more significant than doing other socialising stuff such as going out for a nosh or a coffee? Has your faith been getting at you or something?

It can be a sublime and profound expression of love, or it can hurt one or both people very deeply - so it is a moral decision, one not to be taken lightly.

Nah, you have this completely wrong. Making love can be and should be a sublime and profound expression of love (it can be a bit naff occasionally, but one gets over it). Exploitative sex is what can hurt very deeply. There is a difference, a rather profound one actually.

Abortion, too, is a moral decision that must not be taken lightly. There's the potential life of a child involved, and the possibility of lifelong grief and regret for those who will mourn the loss of that child.

Fine, but it's not for you or your Church, both somewhat "male", to point that up. It's for you and your Church, if you want to be "moral" about it, to tell the woman that it's her body and that it's none of your masculine business. After that, reflect on what makes young women get into that dilemma. Ask yourself whether the moralising and the championing of ignorance and condemnation of contraception might just have had something to do with it. I'm not going to bend on this, you know, because you are wrong. The Church you defend so stolidly has a hell of a lot to answer for.

Certainly, it's also wrong for schools and parents to fail to give their children sex education - but I think that nowadays, relatively few schools (religious and otherwise) and relatively few parents (religious and otherwise) fail to do this. My kids went to Catholic schools in the US in the 1980s, and they got sex education from both their schools and their parents in more detail than they wanted to have.

Well I think you're living in cloud cuckoo land. Sex education is a farce. We think we're so enlightened if we allow the school nurse to demonstrate condoms by rolling one over a boiling tube (with the school priest observing in the wings) and blackboard diagrams of fannies and willies and videos that excuse the embarrassed teacher from actually talking to children about sex. I've ranted long and hard about the pathetic state of education for relationships (hey, guess what: I didn't say "sex education"!) many times before and I'm not going over it all again right now. Let's just say for now that anyone who thinks sex education is about fannies, willies and condoms is seriously deluded.   

And if a woman didn't have sex education, it still behooves her not to take the decision to abort lightly.

And men? Jesus wept...

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Dec 13 - 07:33 PM

Sorry off to bed...interesting thread....catch up tomorrow..Ake

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Dec 13 - 07:28 PM

Steve says...If you think there's any agonising to do over the "morals" of a homosexual couple that doesn't apply to other people, well that's your sad lookout. Even my saying that their morals are none of my business would be a statement laden with value judgement that would be a sad reflection on none other than me. We could celebrate the diversity of humanity instead, if you like.

If these infection rates applied to heterosexuals, we would not now be discussing the niceties of "diversity", or "human rights", heterosexuals would be "rounded up" as Ian puts it, forced to to take STD tests for all of the diseases and if it were possible due to the numbers involved, incarcerated.
If these rates applied to heterosexuals, it would be "the end of society"
The reason we do not seriously address the issue by increasing testing, contact tracing and targeting of the most affected demographic, is because we can, and because it is politically beneficial NOT to do so.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Joe Offer
Date: 05 Dec 13 - 07:23 PM

Ake says: But EFFECTIVE measures to end the epidemic of sexually transmitted disease amongst homosexuals

And I am thoroughly convinced that the most effective measure against sexually transmitted disease, is a stable marriage - including homosexual marriage. Marriage institutionalizes monogamy, and monogamy is an extremely effective way to prevent the spread of STDs. Yes, many people are not faithful to their marriage vows; but most are, for the most part.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Joe Offer
Date: 05 Dec 13 - 07:09 PM

OK, Steve Shaw, here's what you said:

But what I don't do is to try to superimpose some kind of moral dimension onto stuff I don't understand. There is no more morality involved in two blokes making love than there is in you and me going out for a Big Mac or a cappuccino. There is no more morality in a young woman having an abortion than there is in her teachers not providing her with the education required to help her not have got into that position in the first place, or in her mum and dad having been too shy to talk to her about sex. There is no more morality involved in a bloke infecting someone else with HIV than there is in the state not having provided that bloke with the education and the wherewithal towards working at that not happening.

Morality isn't a matter of judging people with a bunch of arbitrary rules, Steve. It's making decisions about what is harmful, and what is helpful.

For most of us, two people making love is certainly more significant than having a Big Mac or capuccino. It can be a sublime and profound expression of love, or it can hurt one or both people very deeply - so it is a moral decision, one not to be taken lightly.

Abortion, too, is a moral decision that must not be taken lightly. There's the potential life of a child involved, and the possibility of lifelong grief and regret for those who will mourn the loss of that child. Nonetheless, there are often many factors that make abortion the best of a number of bad options. Certainly, it's also wrong for schools and parents to fail to give their children sex education - but I think that nowadays, relatively few schools (religious and otherwise) and relatively few parents (religious and otherwise) fail to do this. My kids went to Catholic schools in the US in the 1980s, and they got sex education from both their schools and their parents in more detail than they wanted to have. And if a woman didn't have sex education, it still behooves her not to take the decision to abort lightly.

Yes, it is immoral (and gravely harmful) for a person to knowingly or recklessly give another person HIV. And yes, it is also wrong for the state to fail to give education and materials to help prevent the spread of HIV. But it's not an either-or proposition. Both actions are immoral.

That's what morality is - deciding whether to do harm or do good. All people in society need to be moral people - it's not just a religious thing. And all people in society need to speak out when they see injustice.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: akenaton
Date: 05 Dec 13 - 07:07 PM

What I am saying Joe, is that these figures...and they are true, point to a serious problem affecting male homosexuals, a section of the community for whom we are presently attempting to bring in legislation which presents homosexuality as just another safe and healthy lifestyle.
The negative heath figures run at epidemic proportions for almost all sexually transmitted disease, and contradict the legislation which is about to be enacted.
I am sure, and the uptake figures support my view, that the vast majority of active male homosexuals have no interest in "marriage" or monogamy, and the issue is actually being driven by an anti- conservative, anti religion pressure group, which has enormous power principally in the news and entertainment media.

I think most of us are aware that "democracy" never did have teeth, and is now extinct......political decisions are made with both eyes on the media who's "liberal" agenda is really so illiberal as to be almost Fascist in nature.

I don't think the church should advocate enforced celibacy, the celibacy rule has caused enough trouble already for the church and contributed in large measure to the sexual assault of thousands of mainly teenage boys and young men by people who should never have been in the priesthood to begin with.

But EFFECTIVE measures to end the epidemic of sexually transmitted disease amongst homosexuals and a proper up to date study of male homosexuality and why these rate apply to it, should be forcefully supported by all churches.
I am an atheist at the moment, but I am not anti- religion, and believe the church should give a lead on moral and social issues.

If that does not happen, our society is heading in the same direction as ancient ROME. Do you understand what the lowest common denominator means when applied to morality?

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Joe Offer
Date: 05 Dec 13 - 06:05 PM

Ake says: We are presently discussing transmission rates, which are massively higher amongst MSM than any other demographic.
These rates apply to all sexually transmitted diseases, not just HIV/AIDS

I'm not going to get into the argument whether this is correct or no. But Ake, what would you suggest should be the response to this information? Enforced celibacy for homosexuals?

My Catholic Church recommends "voluntary celibacy for homosexuals" - and I have to say that I am deeply embarrassed by that ludicrous suggestion.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Dec 13 - 05:22 PM

Everything I said is true.
I do not lie, and simply do not understand why some of you do.
Here again is the right up to date and current HPA final report.
http://www.hpa.org.uk/webc/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1317140300680

If you expect to be believed over HPA you are a fool as well as a liar.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: GUEST,musket again
Date: 05 Dec 13 - 04:21 PM

Ok. Keith is a lying shit.

That's settled that then.

Don't keep saying the information you read is up to date when those with access to up to date figures are around.

A. You look a prat.
B. The updated are irrelevant to the thrust of the issue anyway. You just feel that it is important to be right and everyone else wrong. You can't resist can you? Get a fucking life.

On this you made a mistake. I am no genius on healthcare but I need to make decisions based on facts and employ a lot of resources in getting it.

It is available and in the public domain. Your lazy searching and insistence that a body you have heard of makes the definitive data. It doesn't for the simple reason it updates itself all the time.

Don't call me a liar please. I hope you pay tax because I am paid lots of money from taxes for not lying. If that sounds arrogant, it is purely that you say historians are professionals so must be respected. I speak for 1.3 million professionals in what you think is lying. Stupid twat.

Stupid little man.

I realise it is a bad idea arguing with ignorant people especially when they are trying to support bad agendas. But I realise the stupidity of doing so.

Sorry for trying to give information with my opinions. I realise there are people who will use that to make them look good. Or at least they think they do.

You adequately represent your right wing politics. No argument so lie instead.

Pathetic.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Dec 13 - 08:45 AM

Musket, you made a statement of fact.
I put up a brief quote from an HPA report that showed you were wrong.

You claimed it was because the report was an old one.

Not true.
It had only just been published.

You claimed it had been "superseded" by an "interim" report.

Not true.
It was the final report and had just been published.

You claimed to have the said "interim" report and even gave a link.

No surprise that the link did not work.

You stated here once that it is OK to lie because there is no Judgement.
You are a consummate liar and no-one should take seriously anything you say.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 05 Dec 13 - 08:31 AM

Good job this is a music site and not a parliamentary debating chamber..

Keith A. hole of Hertford doesn't understand conflicting opinions, interpretations of data and investment prioritising, and questions the right of those who have to consider all of it as to their suitability to hold office. I in return question his suitability and competence to consider anything as he could be dangerous if anyone took him seriously. If he ever read The British Medical Journal with his dogmatic "if someone clever says it, it must be right" obsession, his head would explode. If we agreed with his blind faith, we'd possibly still have MMR.

The worm is neither here nor there. Joe is wrong to say he is a decent chap and all that. He is an odious bigot and promotes hatred. Full stop. You can't ignore his wish to see lifestyle as peverted, flawed or wrong. His wish to compel people to report themselves for being what they are is nothing short of criminal. In fact, the Home Secretary announced yesterday that this side of the pond, we are tightening up on holding people to account for publishing incitement to hate.

In the meantime, this thread is about the relevance of religion.

I look at some of the absurd logic put forward and have seen that the high winds today that, as our cleaner has just contacted me to say, have stripped my garden room of ridge tiles, taken a pergola for a walk down the garden and my dustbins are being propped up by the trellis that should be shielding them.

Obviously my fault for upsetting Jesus.

Clapton knows what he would think of my support for everyone having an equal stake in society. Good job he is a construct of people whose ideas don't appeal to me, and if they don't wake up, won't appeal to the society they wish to be relevant to.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Dec 13 - 07:21 AM

Not here, Keith, eh? There's another thread if you really want to ignite it again. My post was primarily directed at ake's inconsistencies.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 05 Dec 13 - 07:19 AM

Don't fool yourself, Steve. You moralize and pass judgment more than anybody else here at Mudcat.

Easy to say, hard to demonstrate. So do demonstrate.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Dec 13 - 02:01 AM

Steve.
I doubt whether all those massacred women and children in Sabra and Shatila would have seen Keith's "common sense" that way.

There were two massacres there but you only care about one.
Why?
That one was committed by Arab militiamen, and Israel denies direct involvement.
Why is it wrong to put their side of the story?

You would enjoy seeing it debunked, but that is the problem for you.
It stands up.
You do not want any contradictions interfering with your preconceptions.
Prejudice Steve.
You have the closed mind of a bigot.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Joe Offer
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 09:57 PM

Steve Shaw says: But what I don't do is to try to superimpose some kind of moral dimension onto stuff I don't understand.

Don't fool yourself, Steve. You moralize and pass judgment more than anybody else here at Mudcat.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 09:30 PM

I for one have wasted a lot of energy replying to ake rationally. He completely ignored me when I suggested that the answer to high infection rates is education. Only a bloody dolt would disagree with that, but he was so keen on his moralising that he ignored me. You call him a "good man" but I call him an intemperate bigot with a seriously anti-gay agenda. By his fruits you could know him. Just read his posts, that's all you have to do.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 09:20 PM

That sounds very tolerant of you, Joe. I don't understand why people enjoy Big Macs (they're shit). I don't understand why someone wants to sit on the canal bank all day tossing lumps of Spam into the water failing to catch fish he couldn't eat anyway. I don't understand anyone who wants to waste his life playing golf. I don't understand why anyone would be masochistic enough to support Sheffield Wednesday. I don't understand why anyone watches Holby City. I don't understand why anyone doesn't love Shane MacGowan to pieces. But I'm fine not understanding these things. If I understood everything that came my way I'd be bored shitless. But what I don't do is to try to superimpose some kind of moral dimension onto stuff I don't understand. There is no more morality involved in two blokes making love than there is in you and me going out for a Big Mac or a cappuccino. There is no more morality in a young woman having an abortion than there is in her teachers not providing her with the education required to help her not have got into that position in the first place, or in her mum and dad having been too shy to talk to her about sex. There is no more morality involved in a bloke infecting someone else with HIV than there is in the state not having provided that bloke with the education and the wherewithal towards working at that not happening. Not only do I not see why I should morally judge these things, but I don't give a damn anyway. It would be too bad for my health. If you think there's any agonising to do over the "morals" of a homosexual couple that doesn't apply to other people, well that's your sad lookout. Even my saying that their morals are none of my business would be a statement laden with value judgement that would be a sad reflection on none other than me. We could celebrate the diversity of humanity instead, if you like.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Joe Offer
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 09:16 PM

Musket says: He says if being gay is seen as normal, men will have free rein to rape small boys...

Musket, I must compliment you on your spelling of "rein" but I still disagree with "pail." ;-)

I think, though, that you're being too hard on Akenaton. He's a good man, and he represents the conservative point of view quite well. Instead of denigrating him, I suggest that you might wish to answer his positions rationally. We can have a very fruitful discussion here, but only if we respect everyone involved - even the ones we disagree with. Those we disagree with, give us something to respond to. Otherwise, we can just stand around and pat ourselves on the back, admiring how wonderful we are. And that would be dreadfully boring.

Ake has a point. There have been times in history where wealthy men kept boys for sexual pleasure. I once came across a man in the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization service who always had foreign-born lowers who were just over the legal age of 18. I wondered if those lovers really had free choice in the matter. I think Ake has a legitimate concern.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Joe Offer
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 08:16 PM

I guess this is what I'd say about the morality of sexual conduct:

As long as it doesn't hurt anybody who doesn't consent, people should make up their own minds about their own sexual conduct, and then live with the consequences. I really don't think God minds one way or another, as long as nobody gets hurt.

I can't really understand homosexuals and homosexuality, but I feel that I am obliged to respect them. That's a perspective that is totally different from the life I live. So, I think any moral decisions about homosexual conduct, should be made by homosexuals.

Musket, I have to admit that I had never heard of "corrective rape" before you mentioned it. I can't imagine how any decent person could see justification in doing such a horrible thing. It appears to happen mostly in Africa, where the taboo against homosexuality is very strong (and I believe it is far older than Christianity is in Africa, so don't go blaming it on all Christians).

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 07:42 PM

I am my own man.

(Oh God, please don't tempt me...)

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 07:10 PM

You don't spoil my day Don, I had forgotten your disgusting insinuations earlier on this thread.

Steve, I bow to no one or to any agenda, I am my own man.
Because I am unable to practice a "faith", does not mean that others who can should be prohibited.

A sense of spirituality has always played a large part in my life, and does not conflict with my political views.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Don Firth
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 07:01 PM

Ake, you are just plain wrong about that.

True, a marriage ceremony does not guarantee fidelity. BUT--you haven't be able to supply your usual run of spurious statistics about gay marriage because there aren't any.

I know a number of gay couples who have been living together for some years now, and recently they took advantage of Washington State's recently enacted same-sex marriage law. They're healthy and happy!

The law, and other such laws, have not been in effect long enough for any meaningful statistics to emerge--except for the substantial number of gay men who are already living in monogamous relationships and among whom HIV/Aids is conspicuously absent.

Sorry to spoil your day!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 06:50 PM

A radical revolutionary socialist sucking up to religion? Gosh, times have changed since me and Blair Peach clobbered the right-wing commies in east London... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 06:43 PM

Yes I like that attitude Joe, but not when hides the true nature of an epidemic.
The church must defend itself or it will be torn apart, its opponents don't want a "reformed" church, they want to see it obliterated along with the values which it espouses.
The more we discuss these topics the more clearly I see what the Church's role should be in defending spirituality and morality

I spoke today with a member of the Free Church of Scotland, a protestant presbyterian organisation.
They were at one time, very much opposed to Catholicism, but now they look to the Catholic Church in Scotland to support them in their opposition to "homosexual marriage"
With Scotland's history of sectarianism, a coming together of the churches to support the restoration of "the family", would be a very good thing for Scottish society.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 06:27 PM

What a terrible post. Fascism personified. Dismal and repressive. :-(

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 06:18 PM

Don...Participation in a "marriage" ceremony does not guarantee fidelity or monogamy. I know of several married heterosexuals who have been unfaithful to their wives or husbands
An extended family structure is much more likely to keep men and women on the "straight and narrow".
"Homosexual "marriage" will make very little difference to male homosexual sexual transmission rates, even if they remain monogamous, the uptake RATES are so small that it is impossible for them to have much affect. This legislation does much more harm than good.

It is really a smoke screen to obscure the true nature of male homosexuality...hedonism, promiscuity and risk taking; also a double edged weapon as the "conservative" church can be attacked for opposing "equality"

It is in fact a "liberal" attack on conservative social values.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Joe Offer
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 06:15 PM

Ake says: Yes Joe...A lot of people have that stance and I see the point, but is it truly a Christian stance?

Well, I know there are religious teachings that require believers to correct others when they are wrong; but then there are other religious teachings that tell believers not to pass judgment on others. I think I'll stick with the latter. Passing judgment, closes doors. It doesn't make anything better, and just causes animosity. Homosexuals know their own sexuality, far better than I do.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 04:55 PM

Keith and I disagree about some political issues, but socially he represents common sense

I doubt whether several million Palestinians would appreciate his social common sense. I doubt whether all those massacred women and children in Sabra and Shatila would have seen Keith's "common sense" that way. Still, to you he's "factual and sensible". He's on your anti-gay crusade, and that's all that matters innit. Cherry-pick away! Whited sepulchre...

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Don Firth
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 04:38 PM

Ake:    "We are now obviously all agreed that there actually IS a problem intrinsic to male homosexuality."

No, we are NOT!

There is an intrinsic problem in sexual promiscuity in the transmission of various venereal diseases, but no more so in male homosexuality than in promiscuity in general.

People are going to have sex, and there is nothing you can do about that. There is nothing you should do about that. The way to diminish the transmission of venereal diseases of any and all varieties is to encourage stable, monogamous relationships.

Marriage.

No matter what varieties of sex people indulge in.

And since a large number of gay men (and lesbian women) have indicated that they want to have their relationships legalized and sanctified, this is a major step in the right direction.

To oppose this gives the lie to those who claim they are concerned with HIV/Aids transmission rates.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 03:27 PM

Ian no one is suggesting that the virus only attacks male homosexuals.

We are presently discussing transmission rates, which are massively higher amongst MSM than any other demographic.
These rates apply to all sexually transmitted diseases, not just HIV/AIDS

Please stop waffling.....and you are using the royal "we" again :0)
I don't believe you have anything to do with aids prevention, you simply have no grasp of the facts. I should not have to remind a "health advisor" of the facts above and no "health advisor" would seek to conceal them.
Keith should not need to correct you on health statistics.
When you are caught deliberately lying, you don't even have the guts to "fess up".

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 03:17 PM

Like that shit you made up about the HPA report I linked to.
You just get everything wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 03:14 PM

NAT has little credibility with the NHS at the best of times. Their unrealistic demands fly in the face of NICE evidence on screening.

"Unrealistic demands" referred to opt-out screening which you have just admitted is actually happening for MSMs.

NAT does have credibility, was founded by Department of Health and is still funded by them and by Scottish Government.

So Musket, you got it all wrong again.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 03:11 PM

I don't let my political views interfere with my wish to see disease eliminated, Steve, but there are a handful here who do.

I don't think I need to name them.

Keith and I disagree about some political issues, but socially he represents common sense, I agree with Keith on many social issues.

If we are to progress politically we must be prepared to examine the views of others, unite on the issues we agree upon and try to convince one another when we disagree.

Although I am a committed socialist, I have many "conservative friends" with whom I have had many civil debates,
My "radical" socialism does not involve hatred of different ideas, it is "radical" to the extent that I believe we must convince others that the capitalist system is a very bad idea, that we must find a way of survival that does not make a mockery of REAL democracy, equality and freedom, and still allows us to express ourselves and lead fulfilling lives.
This will NOT equate to "industrial communism"
It will mean less wasteful and "lower living standards"....we have come to expect too much in this life. Hard work is now something to be avoided, the truth bows to expediency, we have allowed our children to be twisted and stupefied, family life has all but vanished, the war on spirituality is being won by the "powers of darkness", we are part of the decline and fall of humanity.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 03:09 PM

The only information that is factual happens to be facts.

Try the info those who deal with health use, they are who I go to. Those are who I am asked to hold to account for the quality of their work. Keith is a perfect example of the issues we face with the duty of candour that is to be applied to The NHS. Idiots like him get hold of half facts, extrapolated statistics and sticks with wrong ends and push illogical points with them. Then nasty little bastards get an erection when someone they think is respectable uses them to support their wicked agenda.

There is a problem with blood borne viruses. It doesn't know who is gay and who isn't. Isaac Asimov died from being HIV+ Many babies in poor areas of Africa and the Indian Sub Continent die of AIDS. Over 50% of people in The UK who contracted HIV in the last reporting period were not gay. Ditto the previous year. Surprising as the statistic Keith forgets in the "rates" smokescreen is that the high number of gay people being screened is wonderful and sadly some are positive, but most women who set positive were not screened but picked up once poorly, ditto substance misuse. Gay people appear to be more responsible than straight people if both happen to be promiscuous, according to the figures.. Interesting eh? The world thinks HIV is about being gay. It's about blood borne transmission and the majority has never been through gay sex. Despite the huge risks a male sexually active lifestyle faces.

3000 for the previous reporting year by HPA. 3000 too many but a lot of fuss verses the other sexually transmitted diseases. Or even any preventable condition. Let's bring in smoking? Drinking? Greg's? Motorbikes? Tell you what, type 2 diabetes.. That's lifestyle induced if you are susceptible. Perverts are they worm? Intrinsic issue?

Evil little twat doesn't even have the guts to address Don's question over transmission in monogamous relationships (such as marriage for instance..) or indeed the 99% (derived from approximate gay population to gay infection ratio) safe sex that is part of the legitimate life of any gay person who happens to be sexually active.

The only problem intrinsic to gay people is that sick puppies like you are capable of breathing.

If it is a disease, I suggest you ring in sick tomorrow, tell your boss you're feeling a bit gay. Put it on your self cert form. You can spend the rest of the day carrying out the scientific experiment you are so fascinated by. All you need is a telly, a DVD player, your films and a micrometer.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 02:04 PM

We are now obviously all agreed that there actually IS a problem intrinsic to male homosexuality.

No we are not. We might all agree that there are issues to be addressed, but we do not all agree that we are discussing a problem "intrinsic to male homosexuality". We are discussing your obsession, that's what we're discussing.

As an idle and totally irrelevant aside, how does your avowed "radical socialism" square with Keith's "factual and sensible posts" on Israel/Palestine? Or is he only "factual and sensible" when he happens to be giving you succour? (Gosh, sorry, my mischief neurones got the better of me there for a minute...phew...)

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 01:54 PM

Of course I don't say ALL homosexuals are promiscuous or hedonistic Steve, but the figures state pretty clearly that a very large number of them are.

You said the vast majority.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 01:34 PM

I will of course, graciously accept any apologies offered, with my usual civility......Ake.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 01:30 PM

Of course I don't say ALL homosexuals are promiscuous or hedonistic Steve, but the figures state pretty clearly that a very large number of them are.
As male homosexuals get older and less sexually active, the rate of new infections decreases, young male homosexuals being worst affected.

Seems at last we are getting somewhere with this issue, thanks mainly to Keith's factual and sensible posts.

We even seem to have a grudging admission from Ian, that the present procedures for dealing with the epidemic are ineffective...in fact "failed dismally" according to one of the agencies.

"Opting out" appears to be a reasonable start in the eradication of sexually transmitted disease amongst male homosexuals.
Hopefully one day it will simply be "socially unacceptable" among Sexually active male homosexuals NOT to regularly tested.

We are now obviously all agreed that there actually IS a problem intrinsic to male homosexuality.
We would never have reached this position if all of us stuck our heads in the sand like Ian

Hooray for "the worms"!!

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 12:54 PM

It seems to me that this is simply a variation of the argumentum ad absurdum logical error. To take isolated, extreme examples of misconduct of individuals in a group as proof of the nature of the entire group, seems to be both unfair, and to be unsound logic.

Yet an extremely similar gambit is employed by so-called "pro-lifers". They will take the comparatively very rare examples of late abortion to have a good tug at our heartstrings, using, emotively, issues such as near-viability outside the womb and the infant-like appearance of the foetus that simply don't apply to the vast majority of abortions. Yes, we do know. What they would like us to dwell on are practices that are not at all in the nature of the entire group, to adopt your words. We see further similarity in ake's unsavoury attempts to brand all gay people as promiscuous and hedonistic. Yes there are fallacies in many of these arguments all right, but they are not always accidental ones.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 11:37 AM

Yes, yes, no and yes.

Sorry. You aren't capable of understanding these issues, so best to ignore you.

For everybody else, The Dept of Health fund independent groups to look at ideas. These are used to influence health policy and lead to consultations, floating ideas and influencing providers. Providers and the healthcare professionals working within them have to take final guidance into account.

With regard to HIV testing for people who declare they are MSM, every consultation where this is discussed, a test is offered. The body charged with evaluating evidence and formulating guidance, NICE, consider publicly all avenues, including opt out. This is part of a general opt out idea that covers organ donation, smoking cessation, obesity and alcohol, as well as high risk sexual activity.

The present situation is that as we have found with cancer screening, hard to reach groups become harder to reach if they feel contact with health services leads to being asked to x, y and z.

Opting out rather than in is irrelevant to screening, as in England, to give the example, although similar regulations apply in other parts of The UK, The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (regulated activities regulations 2010) section on consent make the whole idea of anything done without the consent of the person irrelevant. It is criminal assault to do anything without the express permission of the patient or where they lack capacity, a best interest meeting under The Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Keith is looking at green field thinking there to provoke debate and thinking it will happen next week.

There are huge issues with sexual health, especially HIV and chlamydia. However, those who would persecute people for their sexual preference jump on the figures in order to stigmatise people and Keith is being very very disingenuous here.

What he says should be happening in terms of offering already is. If it weren't, we wouldn't have the 6000 new diagnoses Keith whittles on about as if they come via the fucking tooth fairy. His persistence in seeing success as an issue is bad enough, but throwing opt out testing into the debate when NICE concedes it isn't legal, let alone effective is pathetic. Anonymised testing for statistical purposes goes on and helps plan services.

What more do you want Keith?

The worm's little list?

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 09:00 AM

NAT has little credibility with the NHS at the best of times. Their unrealistic demands fly in the face of NICE evidence on screening.

Not true.
NICE is itself investigating how to increase testing take up for MSMs and considering opt-out testing.

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 08:57 AM

The National Aids Trust was founded by the Department of Health.
It is funded by them and also by Scottish Government.
They are in no way just some random "pressure group."

Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Dec 13 - 08:50 AM

This looks like opt-out testing, from an NHS site.

NHS Tayside HIV Testing Guideline

May 2013

Screening of high risk groups*

People with identifiable risk factors should be routinely offered and recommended to have an HIV test

An HIV test should be recommended regardless of their clinical presentation

* The individual has the option to decline a test