 sj |
||
|
||
BS: The Pope's Survey
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: GUEST,musket Date: 04 Dec 13 - 08:06 AM I sent a link to this thread to the local CCG commissioning manager for sexual health to give her an idea of how ignorance feeds extremism. She said that luckily the more gormless ones hadn't found the pressure groups harking for illogical measures that are fantasy. NICE looked at GU screening based on the national cancer screening programme and have no evidence wish to do any more than encourage those who are perceived at risk to take up offers of screening. My concern is the local government commissioning of services where partner screening as part of the referral is missing for cost saving measures. Pressure groups, right, left, sincere or dangerous should target better. I'd subscribe myself if they campaigned for realistic targets. Man A has unprotected anal sex with a female prostitute. End of story. Man B begins a relationship with another man. With or without protection or even with or without sex. How does this particular idea get them to opt out of testing? "Hello I'm gay. But I decline any offer to be tested. " Pity there are a few man C types around eh? You are getting like your mate. I too can find pressure group websites. Let's see. Some would execute you for being an infidel. Some for the heresy of not believing everything in your Bible. Another group or other would disenfranchise you for being right of centre. I reckon at least one or two would wish to physically prevent you from enjoying folk music. You should pick and choose your sources on reasonableness not agreeing with what is slowly being revealed as an agenda. How many erb pages did you have to trawl before finding ones that agree with your prejudice? You say you support gay marriage. Perhaps you might support those who are trying to deal with sexual health issues of a small but significant number of them. If you use your skills at website searching you will find many providers of GU clinics fighting the stigmatisation of the odious bastards who see the issue as an excuse to put people on some register so others can hate them too. NAT has little credibility with the NHS at the best of times. Their unrealistic demands fly in the face of NICE evidence on screening. Plenty out there. Happy reading. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: GUEST,musket Date: 04 Dec 13 - 05:06 AM Joe. Two things. The extreme actions and statements by the two sources you refer to are to my mind no different in origin to any other hatred of equal members of society. But by using religion and Christian religion for that matter as a cloak of respectability, I am highlighting the problems your Pope faces in his reasonable quest to gain relevance for his position and outlook both in and out of his church. If organisations who feel they have a voice to be heard on moral issues can't formally banish bigotry from what they actually can control, what use do they have in trying to convince the larger community they are relevant? The Uganda priest is there in his name and ultimately by his appointment. The Russian politician in St Petetsberg who has made claiming gay to be a normal state for the people concerned as a crime is also a Catholic priest. He says if being gay is seen as normal, men will have free rein to rape small boys. His outlook is weird but to be fair, he is a priest as well as the equivalent of mayor. Instead of wringing hands and saying how broad and large your church is, perhaps you can start by realising if the vast majority of decent people who call themselves Catholic told the Vatican to get their house in order if they want bums on pews, the dichotomy of decent people and discriminatory official position could be solved. Then religious people might stop moaning of being persecuted for their beliefs. The bosses quietly dropped some of the Old Testament crap so why not the rest of the obscene stuff. If it is no longer church teaching to advocate execution for shagging a donkey or another man and the Bible advocating keeping slaves, then why cling to homophobia and the role of women? Secondly, questioning gay marriage on the basis of numbers when it is not only a recent thing but an element of choice is not worthy of you my friend. Here in The UK we could remove charitable tax exempt status for churches on the basis of dwindling numbers if that were the case. If Church of England paid tax, the social programmes it could fund. .. wow. Thirdly of the two points.. You picked me up on spelling which always excites our resident flawed researcher Keith. I laid the trap to wind him up, but to be fair you started it! Jack and Jill went up the hill To fetch a pail of water. Both spellings are admissible it seems but the medieval post I used to walk past every day as a child said pail, as they tended to be next to wells. Where you took your pails. About as distracting as the worm and his sidekick throwing statistics out of proportion to satisfy the worm's awful agenda and Keith's lack of social skills. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 04 Dec 13 - 04:53 AM The National Aids Trust is campaigning for opt out rather than opt in testing for high risk groups. Not quite compulsory. Expanded 'opt-out' HIV testing It is important that testing efforts reach those most at risk from HIV and, in particular, those who would otherwise be diagnosed late. To do this, the UK must move from reliance on its traditional 'opt-in' model of voluntary HIV testing, usually conducted within sexual health clinics, to a more 'opt-out' approach (also known as provider-initiated testing) across a range of healthcare settings. This is where an HIV test is usually offered alongside other routine tests; the patient can turn down the offer, but must explicitly say no. Opt-out testing in antenatal care has already proved highly effective in reducing mother-to-child HIV transmission. http://www.nat.org.uk/media/Files/Policy/2012/May-2012-Testing-Action-Plan.pdf |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: akenaton Date: 04 Dec 13 - 04:41 AM Yes Joe...A lot of people have that stance and I see the point, but is it truly a Christian stance? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: akenaton Date: 04 Dec 13 - 04:34 AM Steve...I'll ignore you insulting remarks. This is a very serious problem, and bringing the epidemic under control should be above any political agenda. The health agencies them selves are saying that more testing MUST be done, that practicing homosexuals should present themselves for testing at three monthly intervals.....If male homosexuals are unwilling to do so, what steps do you suggest. It is important that the true extent of the epidemic be explained to homosexuals, and the general public...... Distortion and outright lying as practiced by or resident "health expert" Ian, is no benefit to those he claims to stand for. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Joe Offer Date: 04 Dec 13 - 04:30 AM Ake, I guess I'd say I really don't have an opinion on gay marriage - but that being the case, I don't see why anybody should think they should have a right to interfere with it. I think it's up to homosexuals to decide whether their own conduct is moral or immoral. It has no effect on me, so I can't see where I have a right to interfere. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Joe Offer Date: 04 Dec 13 - 03:52 AM Musket, I have yet to find any evidence that "beyond the pail" is a legitimate expression in the English language, but I'll take your word for it - and I'll continue to use the more common "beyond the pale." I think I should ask for your logic in referring to extremists like the Westboro Baptist Church and the situation of the Ugandan priest suggesting "corrective rape" for a lesbian. 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. What were you trying to prove by bringing up these two extreme examples? I was thinking about homosexual marriage over the last day or so. I don't know any homosexual couples who are married. I do know several lesbian couples who have had long-term, stable relationships - and these couples have come to seem quite normal to me. I don't know any male homosexual couples, although I do know individual male homosexuals. I think if I knew more couples, then male homosexuals would also begin to feel more "normal" to me. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 04 Dec 13 - 02:58 AM My linked report includes drug injectors.(see appendix 2 and section in report) There were only 120 such diagnoses but if they were removed the % I quoted would be even higher. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 04 Dec 13 - 02:05 AM I got it from HPA and gave a link. Your page is superseded by the 2012-13 interim report. No. Your link is fake. Mine is not an "old link." It was only published November 2013. It is the full report, and could not be superseded by an "interim report" that only you can access. You lie. http://www.hpa.org.uk/webc/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1317140300680 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: GUEST,musket Date: 04 Dec 13 - 01:02 AM Funny. I was quoting HPA. What were you quoting? Oh. An old link. Read my type. The figures have been adjusted to remove the people in that bracket who contracted through needle share or other blood to blood contamination. Coding by many clinics has hitherto not distinguished in HRG returns. I got it from HPA and gave a link. Your page is superceded by the 2012-13 interim report. I see no point in discussing infections nor indeed infection rates because the figures are too low in population rates to infer social action. They are being used to exacerbate a problem to justify horrible bigotry. You should be ashamed of yourself for supporting the thrust of the worm's argument. Cunt. No. I take that back. A cunt is far more useful than you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Steve Shaw Date: 03 Dec 13 - 06:27 PM Does Mudcat actively encourage homophobia? Does it no longer welcome gay or reasonable members of society? It's only a small minority, but one horrid little man farting in a big lift full of decent people still manages to taint everyone else. Note that far more of us try to fight it. Had this been a real pub we'd have driven him out months ago. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 03 Dec 13 - 03:52 PM You don't even check your facts They are from HPA. They do not need checking, or are you saying those HPA researchers should know better? You have made a cunt of yourself again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Don Firth Date: 03 Dec 13 - 03:46 PM Akenaton never seems to talk about the (non) rates of HIV/Aids among gay men who are in stable, monogamous relationships, e.g. same-sex marriages. Zip! Zero! Nada! Yet he who is so concerned about MSM spreading HIV throughout the world is opposed to same-sex marriage Strange. . . . Don Firth Can you say "hypocrite"? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: GUEST Date: 03 Dec 13 - 03:12 PM Does Mudcat actively encourage homophobia? Does it no longer welcome gay or reasonable members of society? How odd. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: akenaton Date: 03 Dec 13 - 01:07 PM Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM)) represent approximately 2% of the United States population, yet are the population most severely affected by HIV. In 2010, young MSM (aged 13-24 years) accounted for 72% of new HIV infections among all persons aged 13 to 24, and 30% of new infections among all MSM. At the end of 2010, an estimated 489,121 (56%) persons living with an HIV diagnosis in the United States were MSM or MSM-IDU. From CDC The Numbers New HIV Infections •In 2010, MSM accounted for 63% of estimated new HIV infections in the United States and 78% of infections among all newly infected men. From 2008 to 2010, new HIV infections increased 22% among young (aged 13-24) MSM and 12% among MSM overall. •Among all MSM, white MSM accounted for 11,400 (38%) estimated new HIV infections in 2010. The largest number of new infections among white MSM (3,300; 29%) occurred in those aged 25 to 34. •Among all MSM, black/African American MSM accounted for 10,600 (36%) estimated new HIV infections in 2010. The largest number of new infections among black/African American MSM (4,800; 45%) occurred in those aged 13 to 24. From 2008 to 2010 new infections increased 20% among young black/African American MSM aged 13 to 24. The infection rates have been rising steadily since these figures were collated in 2011. Wakey Wakey!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: GUEST,Musket Date: 03 Dec 13 - 11:47 AM https://hpa.org.uk/intranet/HPAweb_F/7648934680753 Took less than a minute doing an Athens search to find that. Granted, I doubt you have the Athens research tool, but internet searches via google usually find them. This, for anyone who doesn't look it up, is the corrected 2012 diagnoses after allowing for errors. The errors were, whilst not large, large enough to be significant. The issue in reporting came from coding errors by NHS trusts that provide GU clinics. They were coding, as they should for reimbursement purposes, all presentations that led to positive diagnosis and referral. The HRG for monitoring purposes was for gay men who disclosed they had penetrative sex, but.... And here is why the figures were slightly out nationally and way out in inner city figures... Included the large number of needle share transmissions. That said, and in all seriousness, there is an issue. But 3,250? Great. Hopefully that can double or triple next year. The aim is to get as many diagnoses through screening as possible, as the presentations through deteriorating health need to decrease and rapidly. The demographics of the hard to reach groups within that cluster make it difficult. Even more so whilst stigmatising and hate has free rein to fetter attempts to help. Mind you, if your friend wants to round people up to achieve that aim, let's not forget that antiretrovirals are expensive but stop the condition from killing you. In the meantime, 104,000 people in The UK died from direct smoking illness in the same year. Far cheaper to ban cigarettes than to criminalise people for their tastes. Just over 6,000 diagnoses. Mmmm. Tell you what, as you love finding figures, you tell me how many diagnoses of chlamydia there were in the same period. Even better, there is sadly a growing body of published evidence that cervical cancer is more prevalent in women with multiple sexual partners than monogamous or not sexually active. Then tell me why the fucking fascination with a real issue that is far more under control in this country than those that are actually killing people. The worm said I was disgusting for saying if his logic was used, round up any woman who couldn't prove they were a virgin and stick a swab up their fanny. Do you really wish to be associated with his agenda? You go beyond pedantry. Well beyond. You don't even check your facts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 03 Dec 13 - 08:05 AM The Terence Higgins Trust figures, 51%, and HPA figures for the same period, 43%. How can that be? It can not be. You were wrong. Again. HPA. diagnoses among MSM accounted for 3,250 (51%) of new diagnoses in 2012, the highest number ever reported. http://www.hpa.org.uk/webc/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1317140300680 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: GUEST,Musket Date: 03 Dec 13 - 07:44 AM As I said, Joe picked me up on what he thought was a spelling mistake, which was not nice, especially from someone who tries to come over as nice, I replied in kind. Keith then decided to portray some of his "arrogant elitist" waffle to try to make me look a cunt. The usual backfire seems to be echoing around the place. In my last post, I spoke of massaging and misrepresenting figures. So Keith shows us how to do it. The Terence Higgins Trust figures, 51%, and HPA figures for the same period, 43%. How can that be? They are both (statistically) accurate although HPA extrapolate theirs through more robust data, it still wouldn't alter the figures that much. Oh! I see. Keith has , let's be kind and say inadvertently, looked at transmission through sex, whilst the figures he himself cut and pasted earlier up the thread today, are for all diagnosis. And the year before. Oh, and the worm loves quoting CDC figures, as if a) they are pertinent to the UK figures and b) that they are universal. Neither apply, and as Don keeps pointing out, not to be taken universally, as his figures from Washington State show. CDC figures support bids for investment from the public purse in an insurance weighted health economy. Try using them and getting published in British medical Journal and you start to see the problem. I am no expert on these matters and whilst instrumental in providing the quality side of healthcare, I am not a healthcare professional. I am however capable of reading and considering business plans from GU services, assessing the rationale and forming an opinion to put forward when planning integrated care. The sexual health issues facing us in areas where gay people are most vulnerable are there, real and being tackled. However, the sincere lobbying by those wanting more investment is one of many, and represent just under half of one service that needs more funding. There are services out there needing funding that need to get their share from the same pot. Over 20,000 old people will die unnecessarily in England alone this winter who would not die if summer carried on. A bit of a problem. Over two thirds of all deaths this year in England would not be so soon, nor the quality of life beforehand so bad if it weren't for smoking and obesity. (That one shocked me for other reasons. I would have thought that was too low a number.) So... The worm wants to force testing (not that it would do anything on its own) on people who are gay men, regardless of if they have sex, or are monogamous if they do. He says it's for their own protection and good. (Presumably being called perverts is for their own good too.). Such draconian measures for peoples' own good? Wow!! What we could do with that! Make it illegal to smoke! Shut down Gregs and McDonalds! Tell people to wear loose clothing because "we" are offended by their rolls of fat! You said he is correct with his figures. You also want us to agree with your take on use of figures in other threads. You can't have it both ways. If you aren't part of the solution, you must be part of the problem. Can we believe anything you write? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 03 Dec 13 - 06:16 AM No it is not. I never highlight anyone's mistakes and make plenty myself. It was Musket's arrogant, elitist, incorrect correction that provoked my response. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Steve Shaw Date: 03 Dec 13 - 06:04 AM You accused someone of a spelling mistake, and it was you who were wrong. There was never a spelling mistake. There was the selection of the wrong word, which was then spelled correctly. I know how important accuracy is to you, Keith. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 03 Dec 13 - 05:57 AM Less than half new HIV+ diagnosis results are from make to male transmission "MSM account for 51 per cent of all new HIV diagnoses in 2012." Terence Higgins Trust. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: GUEST,Musket Date: 03 Dec 13 - 05:46 AM Thanks Keith. They are the HPA figures I have quoted, (although more recent ones in some threads.). It is awful, bad and disturbing that people have, through ignorance confused antiretrovirals with cure, although that as a reason for the increase is subjective. The wholesale public health publicity of the mid '80s was a long time ago and there is a new generation that missed it. Less than half new HIV+ diagnosis results are from make to male transmission, and the takeup of screening of men vulnerable through MSM is encouraging. The majority (just) are from a combination of heterosexual sex and non sexual (needle sharing, mother to child and other blood / needle stick.). Akenhateon in his bid to eradicate a section of society has constantly portrayed my take on these figures as complacent. Far from it, and I am personally involved in trying to make sense nationally of the splitting of public health and screening provision in England, as this has a risk of exacerbating the issue. But read what he puts. He quotes a figure then misapplied it. He changes minority to majority. He calls anybody who puts the truth a liberal, as if it is a dirty word. (You too I presume after your cut and paste of headline figures. As you are intelligent, I would recommend digging into the figures behind the headlines, they are available via DofH.) His repeating of lies he got from a series of homophobic websites, (including figures from two so called Christian websites,) is nothing new. I subscribe to a daily briefing of what people in The UK have as news on health matters, as well as warnings of scare mongering sources, and his words, let alone his figures tally with some of them. Of course, he has, even on this thread spoke of his disgust of gay lifestyle, that it isn't natural and even against natural law. He spins a fantasy of conclusions that it is wrong based on asking straight men to view gay porn and seeing if they get an erection... Joe thought it wrong to confuse his rants with the rants of the infamous Westboro Church. The aims are the same, just that they get more publicity than sad bitter twisted nobodies. Either he is having a laugh or he is one sick puppy. The relevance to this thread is that the pope has hitherto failed to embrace the equal status of all what he calls God's children. Even worms have the right to a view, however depraved, but I question the right to hurt others by expressing it publicly. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: akenaton Date: 03 Dec 13 - 04:54 AM Joe, I disagree with Keith and yourself, I am still against the legislation on "homosexual marriage". However that battle has been almost won in Western "liberal" democracies, by the media, who have huge influence amongst younger people...the negative aspects of homosexual behaviour being almost completely ignored, to the detriment of committed Christians and to homosexuals, who's infection rates continue to rise annually. The argument has moved on to a study male homosexuality itself, and the reasons for the epidemic of sexual disease which has been reported by HPA/CDC.....Is it in the interests of society to promote this type of relationship as healthy and normal while these infection rates are associated. I feel that these figures should have been taken into account when this legislation was being debated. To be honest, it astounds me that a decent guy like you, is unaware that a section of society is so affected, or that you disbelieve the official health agencies, or that you do not understand why the issue is not being addressed. I also find it hard to understand how you can be an obviously strong believer and follower of the church, yet feel it right that the church follows a popular perception of morality. Homosexuality used to be a crime, society has determined, rightly in my view that it should no longer be a crime. If society were to take the same view of incest, or paedophilia in the future, would you encourage the Church to "evolve" in order to fit in with modern morality? I don't mean to take "pot shots" at you Joe, or diss your sincerity or your faith, I admire you for both......but these points trouble me, in the context of this discussion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 03 Dec 13 - 03:01 AM BBC Febrary. (extracts) A fall in the proportion of gay and bisexual men using condoms is behind the rise in HIV infections in those groups in the UK, say researchers. Wider use of anti-retroviral drugs has helped to stop a sharper rise, a study by the Health Protection Agency (HPA) and a number of universities found. They found a 26% rise, from 1990-2010, in the proportion of men who have sex with men who did not use condoms. The report said the figures showed it was vital to promote safe sex. Rates of HIV have been rising in recent years with latest figures showing cases among men who have sex with men (MSM) in the UK reaching an all-time high. A recent report from the HPA found that nearly half of the 6,280 people diagnosed in the UK in 2011 were MSM. Overall, one in 20 MSM are infected with HIV. For this study, researchers analysed data from 1990 to 2010. They concluded that, without the introduction of anti-retroviral drugs to treat those with HIV, infections would be 68% higher in MSM. Therapy with anti-retrovirals lowers the risk of people with HIV infecting others. The report suggested the incidence of HIV could be 32% lower if all anti-retroviral treatment were prescribed from the moment of diagnosis rather than when health declined. The data also showed that the incidence of HIV could have dropped by a quarter if more HIV testing had been done. "We also encourage men who have sex with men to get an HIV and STI screen at least annually, and every three months if having condomless sex with new or casual partners - and clinicians to take every opportunity to recommend HIV testing to this group." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-21474066 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Joe Offer Date: 03 Dec 13 - 02:57 AM Sorry, Keith - I saw in an earlier post from you in this thread that you support gay marriage, but I forgot. And I don't know if you're religious or not. But still, I can't see why churches (including my own) would complain about gay marriage, more than they do about gay sex. I suppose they don't want to give the appearance of legitimacy to gay relationships - but from a sociological standpoint, there are so many advantages to encouraging people to be married (couples care for each other and cook for each other, and sharing beds is efficient - and warmer). And in this day and age, it seems absolutely ludicrous to expect gays to marry people of the opposite sex. It would seem to me that even anti-gay people would know how problematic that is. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 03 Dec 13 - 02:47 AM BBC Friday. "We seem to have come full circle and now have to face what will certainly be an uncomfortable truth for many of us working in the sector: we have made very little, if any progress, in getting prevention and treatment to those groups of people most vulnerable to HIV/Aids, wherever they are. These groups people who inject drugs, transgender people and men who have sex with men. They make up the majority of those affected by the epidemic, except in sub-Saharan Africa, where they also make up an increasing share of infections in urban settings. New obstacles Against a backdrop of some truly extraordinary responses to the global HIV/AIDS epidemic over the past 30 years, it is both painful but necessary to acknowledge that the response for these groups remains so often a story of indifference and neglect. Indeed we can compare our failure to adequately address these issues to the situation that prevailed in 2000. At that time, effective HIV drugs had been available in rich countries for years, but were inaccessible in developing and emerging economies because of cost. Today, cost is not the primary obstacle: we have drugs and we have proven interventions. Rather, it is economic, social and political obstacles that prevent them from being made available to those who need them most." "One can draw upon an almost infinite supply of statistics that tell the true picture for those most affected by the epidemic: in low- and middle-income countries, men who have sex with men and female sex workers are 19 and 13 times more likely to have HIV, respectively, than the rest of the population. Men who have sex with men alone account for more than 33% of new infections in China, and projections indicate that this group could make up half or more of all new infections in Asia by 2020." http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-25118975 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 03 Dec 13 - 02:34 AM I do approve of gay marriage Joe. I have given my support on previous threads. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Joe Offer Date: 03 Dec 13 - 01:58 AM Keith, I would think that religious people would want to encourage gay people to get married and live life with one partner, instead of living a life of promiscuity. I think one reason that gay people may have a higher rate of Sexually Transmitted Diseases, if that's true, is that society does not encourage gay people to have stable relationships. Whatever the case, it doesn't seem logical that gay marriage would increase the rate of STDs. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 03 Dec 13 - 01:41 AM The infection rates are correct, and came from HPA. I relish people picking holes in my arguments, but not making shit up. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: GUEST,musket again Date: 03 Dec 13 - 01:30 AM Which statistics? The experiments to see if "normal" people get an erection watching gay porn? The distortion on infection rates he read on a homophobic website? The statistics that gay people aren't interested in monogamy? Take your choice. I reckon the top one to be most intriguing, the middle one to be most absurd and the latter one the most condescending. With regard to your final statement. No. You give enough material for people to pick holes in your argument without resorting to lies. Although each time you infer others lie, you are then surprised when they, not just me, taunt you with either your earlier claims or distortions. Sorry but I just cannot resist responding to some of the two dimensional agenda ridden tripe you come out with. Tell you what though. Debating with you around is fine. Ok. You are impossible at times and reason has packed it's bags and gone back to its mother but you are a legitimate person with a legitimate view. You just get caustic at times yet don't like it when others drop to your level in return. The worm however. . Beyond the Blue clicky Joe used, (see? He picked me up on spelling first and you automatically decided I had started it. Says a lot. ) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 02 Dec 13 - 05:40 PM you launched a tirade so bitter huh? You accused someone of a spelling mistake, and it was you who were wrong. No bitter tirade, just a brief quote to make the point. I have no issue with gay people or gay marriage, but I have to acknowledge that Akeneaton's statistics are accurate, because they are. You make up lies about people, including me. Why? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: GUEST,Musket Date: 02 Dec 13 - 04:55 PM I know. I just wanted your mate to read you saying it. You see, I get rather confused about the wall of silence when hatred rears it's ugly head, yet many of those who don't challenge must be as shocked and repulsed as me, surely? To permit is to promote. Perhaps those coming onto this thread wanting to know about the pope's survey now have a slightly better understanding of the bile many religious organisations give respectability to by tacit agreement. You can't just say gay people are nice but not equal. You can't say women are just as capable of getting a top job but we won't let them. You have to say why. And the only people showing their colours are the extremists such as the worm. I disagreed with your take on matters and you launched a tirade so bitter, you were blinkered enough to be confused when I gave as good as I got. Yet the worm comes out with frankly shocking distasteful hatred that is aimed at not just a large section of society but many Mudcat members, and you and many others just brush it to one side. He genuinely thinks he has a right to publish hatred with no regard of the hurt and distress he can cause. But no matter, Let's not infringe his right to opinion eh? He reckons I'm a libertarian. I'm not you know. I would happily see society protected from filth, happily see bigotry wither and die, and I will celebrate when discrimination is put on the biblical scrap heap along with the other biblical embarrassments Christians gloss over. But oh no, not discrimination, that's not beyond the pail (pale in Hertford) just yet. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: akenaton Date: 02 Dec 13 - 04:28 PM On the subject of the "mad" post (10:06am), I think Ian may have discovered where the gin bottle was hidden? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 02 Dec 13 - 03:42 PM I favour gay marriage and have stated that on a previous thread. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: GUEST,musket Date: 02 Dec 13 - 01:48 PM Nice to see you two getting on so well. You use similar evidence to support your waffle so it was only a matter of time before you start a friendship. Just think Keith, the worm will agree with all your more right wing nonsense and positively lap up your support for your church's position on gay marriage. Mind you, try not to get too associated with his views eh? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: akenaton Date: 02 Dec 13 - 01:04 PM I think Ian must have an "imaginary friend" Keith! :0) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 02 Dec 13 - 10:25 AM Huh? Anyone know what he means? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: GUEST,musket again Date: 02 Dec 13 - 10:06 AM You asked for that Keith. When you do it, I show that I can stoop too. If you must wrestle with pigs, you get dirty. And the pigs enjoy it. Oink. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: GUEST,muse Date: 02 Dec 13 - 10:03 AM |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: akenaton Date: 02 Dec 13 - 08:16 AM Steve...I can hardly be blamed if you don't see the link between hedonism and promiscuity? But this is nitpicking, lets get back to your explanation of homosexual health statistics...OK? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: akenaton Date: 02 Dec 13 - 08:07 AM Sorry, "When this sort of legislation has been enacted." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: akenaton Date: 02 Dec 13 - 08:05 AM Joe...figures are a bit "patchy", and I would assume a "spike" when this sort of legislation. Taken on population numbers the uptake rate rate works out about 2/3%, much lower than "hetero marriage". Interesting conclusion to your link, "Lesbian "marriages" constituted three fifths of all "marriages" listed".....??? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Steve Shaw Date: 02 Dec 13 - 07:59 AM The statistics of high numbers of sexual partners and risk taking point to a hedonistic and highly promiscuous lifestyle Steve. Ah, but you see, the crucial bit of your post, which you craftily omit here, is that the vast majority feel free... That is not statistics. That's your own prejudiced take. And I can't begin to think what statistics might point to "hedonism". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 02 Dec 13 - 07:55 AM UKIP has no special significance to me Musket. It was YOU who felt the need to correct someone over this usage, and you were wrong. Again. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: GUEST,musket again Date: 02 Dec 13 - 07:46 AM Old English and been standardised. The pail, spelt pail on the plaque that stands outside the Priory Gatehouse in Worksop is where I originally read it. It was often the site of a well so the ostracised could still get water and you fetched water in a pail. It seems either spelling is admissible. For that I stand corrected. Two things though. . Researching my comments as a matter of course would be a compliment if it wasn't so sad and pathetic. Tell you what Keith, research this. UKIP. Shouldn't be too difficult. I assume you have a favourites folder. Well done, the worm thinks his disgusting views are acceptable when he reckons you are on the same "side. " He licks his lips when people play smart arse at people who expose his sick agenda. He also thinks Joe doesn't get things wrong. He certainly has a respectable view on gay issues and the meaning of liberalism. That hole full of shit worm? Dig another and get back in it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: akenaton Date: 02 Dec 13 - 07:24 AM Oh! Ian is not QUITE as well educated as he thinks he is! :0) Thanks Keith, for the information, Joe rarely makes mistakes in his posts,......of course he does have an edit facility! :0)) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: akenaton Date: 02 Dec 13 - 07:14 AM The statistics of high numbers of sexual partners and risk taking point to a hedonistic and highly promiscuous lifestyle Steve. I don't want to keep cut and pasting figures here, you are perfectly capable of finding them for yourself if you don't believe me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 02 Dec 13 - 07:14 AM Etymology[edit] From pale, a jurisdiction under a given authority; often held by one nation in another country, hence suggesting that anything outside their control was uncivilized. It was in use by the mid-17th century. The phrase may be a reference to the general sense of boundary, but is often understood to refer to the English Pale in Ireland. In the nominally English territory of Ireland, only the pale fell genuinely under the authority of English law, hence the terms within the pale and beyond the pale. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: Steve Shaw Date: 02 Dec 13 - 06:51 AM I picked you up for saying that the vast majority of homosexuals feel free to carry on a hedonistic and highly promiscuous lifestyle, a remark loaded with value judgement and weasel words and empty of any "health statistics", as well as being patently untrue. I would not call you deluded for producing germane and well-researched statistics for discussion, but that is quite plainly not what you were doing in the quoted post: you were letting your well-known prejudice take wing, no more than that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope's Survey From: akenaton Date: 02 Dec 13 - 06:44 AM Hey Joe!!.....How come you can edit your posts and we can't?? That's not fair!!! :0)
-Joe- |
