BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Musket
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 09:38 AM

On your second post there Keith, you start to get there.

Of all gay men who would need to go for testing if gay was the test, that would include Stephen Fry. I mention him because a) he is gay and b) he would be sent home without being tested for wasting the clinic's time. Despite being possibly the most well known for promoting gay issues, he has the disadvantage of celebrity so we all know that he has never had penetrative sex with a man.

So, do all gay people need to go for testing on the basis of being gay yet heterosexual people who have sex with more than one partner and / or don't practice safe sex not? You should keep reading and not stop when you see something about your favourite category.

You are getting to sound like Akenaton, who can't think of gay people without a sordid fascination with anal sex. I wonder if he thinks of anal sex when he encounters heterosexual women? Do you?

See? Eventually, you begin to keep up with PHE. Just like those who work alongside them. zzzzzzz

ADIS. Don't die of dyslexia.



Just out of interest, I wrote to Duncan Selbie recently saying that targeting for screening in all areas can be too prescriptive and misunderstood. I didn't supply any answers, but sexual health campaigns were prominent in my concerns, (written by me, co signed by all nine regional heads of commissioning.)

Like I said, I am too close to this subject to suffer fools.












Let alone thick twats.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 07:45 AM

Does denying marriage to gays make you a bigot? Interesting views on both sides of this issue on this debate site:




<1a href="http://www.debate.org/opinions/does-denying-marriage-to-gays-make-you-a-bigot">debate 

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 07:40 AM

"why am I opposed to the normalization of homosexual behavior? Because I love black males. I want black males to live long, prosperous, healthy, disease-free lives"


Interesting view? 

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 07:38 AM

PHE.
" Get tested regularly for HIV if you are one of those most-at-risk:
a. Men who have sex with men are advised to have an HIV and STI screen at least annually, and every three months if having unprotected sex with new or casual partners."

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 07:18 AM

National Aids Trust (NAT)
"NAT want to see a change in testing culture in the UK. 'At least annual' testing must become the norm both for gay and bisexual men"

- See more at: http://www.nat.org.uk/our-thinking/prevention-and-testing/testing.aspx#sthash.uJK02ss4.dpuf

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Musket
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 07:11 AM

Nobody, I repeat nobody is calling for any HIV testing on anybody on the basis of being gay.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 04:14 AM

Nobody, I repeat, nobody is calling for any HIV testing on anybody on the basis of being gay.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 04:13 AM

Targeting of specific demographics has always been more cost effective. Which is why big advertising companies do it. Educating a particular demographic that product A (testing in this case) is better than product B (not being tested) is what it is all about. But of course ake has already informed us that education does not work and it is not worth spending any more money on it.So I wonder how these specific demographics will be given the information they need?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 04:12 AM

"The Government's continued funding of a national HIV prevention programme targeting the groups most at risk of HIV infection (gay and bisexual men and African communities) is welcome;"
(National Aids Trust)

I'll excuse your ignorance again.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: akenaton
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 03:46 AM

The epidemic can only be halted by increased targeted testing of MSM.

HPE say that not nearly enough male homosexuals are coming forward for testing....apparently, there is a movement amongst MSM to stigmatise those who volunteer to be tested......it is important that this movement is censured.

This movement is exactly the reverse of what I have been advising for some considerable time, as a solution to the problem..... self regulation by the MSM demographic, assisted and encouraged by the homosexual agencies/pressure groups.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 01:21 AM

Yes the "NHS" does target as per a population. So in certain London boroughs gay men are encouraged. In Hull needle sharers are encouraged.

Etc.

But all groups are encouraged in all areas. It is emphasis based on prevalence that counts. You write in agreement with me but in a way designed to contradict me. You really are a nasty little shit, aren't you Keith?

By the way, it's local authorities who have the budget for health promotion not NHS bodies. But I'll excuse your ignorance.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Apr 14 - 01:10 AM

Targeting MSM for testing would be more cost effective than for any other group.
That is why NHS does it.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Apr 14 - 07:06 AM

stigma 

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Apr 14 - 07:00 AM

cdc 

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Apr 14 - 06:54 AM

Some myths  

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Apr 14 - 06:47 AM

The Sound of Stigma  

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Musket
Date: 02 Apr 14 - 06:17 AM

Everybody has called for more vigilance in at risk groups. Charities representing gay issues concentrate on gay issues, as is right and proper. But..

Nobody, I repeat, nobody is calling for any HIV testing on anybody on the basis of being gay.

Full stop.

That is what the worm said, and the is what the worm meant. He is vilifying gay people.

Everybody wishes more testing of people deemed at risk. These include people who use anal sex, and people who use any form of unprotected sex. Gay charities mention MSM as appropriate, and agencies such as PHE point out the high prevalence.

You can't call for testing of gay people any more than you can call for testing of heterosexual people. People in monogamous or no relationship exist, so nobody in any professional or indeed responsible position wants them to to come forward for testing. A waste of money, time and effort.

Contact tracing of HIV positive people has been offered since 1989 in England. Contact tracing of people deemed at risk of irresponsible behaviour has been possible through magistrate warrant for many years.

Testing of all Scottish people for heroin would be a good public health initiative on the same lines as Akenaton claims. If he wishes to undergo tests, there is a substance misuse drop in centre where you can have your name added to the list. You end up of course with a list of people in Scotland on heroin. We already know the central belt is a black spot, so why not turn up? You don't need to use heroin, just be Scottish! A bit like not carrying out unprotected anal sex with multiple partners, just be classed as gay!

Bastard.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Apr 14 - 04:57 AM

I didn't miss it at all, ake. Given your inclination to class homosexuality as being driven by nothing but sex I chose to ignore your views on targeting. I am also puzzled by how you will "make it clear that the present state of affairs is not acceptable" etc. You have already stated, in no uncertain terms, that education will not work. How are these organisations to bring about this change in attitude without education?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Apr 14 - 04:43 AM

"Just open your eyes, and realize,
The way it's always been.
Just open your mind and you will find 
The way it's always been.
Just open your heart and that's a start"
Moody Blues

""The health agencies need to get involved with the homosexual organisations to make it clear ....that the prevalence of promiscuous and risky behaviour must be amended""

(Note that I took out redundant words to get the potential intended message).

Good luck with that...as if the so named"gay organizations", have any direct control over "amending" (whatever that means or could entail) individual behaviour.

On a positive front, government agencies are, and have been, increasingly reaching out to impacted groups to better design programs to better reach potentially impacted individuals.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Apr 14 - 04:01 AM

Dave, you missed the most important word in my post TARGETED.

The group with the massively highest rates of STD infection MSM should be targeted for thrice yearly testing, there is no value in increasing testing in heteros, as the infections are very rare within most hetero demographics....it is simply not cost effective to do so.

The health agencies need to get involved with the homosexual organisations to make it clear that the present state of affairs is not acceptable. It should be made clear to active male homosexuals that not to be regularly tested is socially unacceptable....the lead must be taken from within the homosexual community itself, that the prevalence of promiscuous and risky behaviour must be amended.

The infection rates must be brought under control, if they are not, and HIV/AIDS and other STDs like syphilis become almost exclusively associated with the male homosexual community, then it will be too late.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Apr 14 - 03:36 AM

A USA medical perspective 

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Apr 14 - 03:10 AM

Good try gfs. But, no cigar for that flawed reasoning.
:)

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 02 Apr 14 - 03:05 AM

Being as the results from being tested takes about a week and a half to two weeks(depending on the place), I guess those being tested, would like to blame a 'stigma' on those who they accuse of giving them one about being a homosexual, than the real reason of having to wait an uncomfortable, high anxiety week and a half to engage in the very activity that defines them!

Sometimes idiots like to try to 'over-think' the obvious, and then try to engage others in their stupid antics!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 02 Apr 14 - 03:00 AM

"I have not heard one quick and effective solution to the problem from any of the assorted apologists."

Can you not understand that there is no "quick" solution to what is a global pandemic involving many factors? However, effective progress is being made.

No one here needs to apoligise for anything. Many agencies are working on it.Progress is being made. Deniers will continue to wear blinders to this, and continue to whine that nobody but them care for the plight if those impacted. The refrain will continue to sound hollow for many.

You have had an opportunity to put your suggested strategies forward - quick, workable, innovative, or not. But, you have not put anything meaningful forward. It's past time to put up or...Repeating the same old refrain is fine in music, but boring and annoying in discussion. Why so? Have nothing new to contribute, as others have done so?

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Apr 14 - 02:57 AM


Keith has read a book or article whatever on AIDS and now preaches answers.

No, I never have.
I have just used it to point out where contributions are contradicted by the facts.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Apr 14 - 02:54 AM

Which health agencies?
PHE, NAT, Terrence Higgins trust, Stonewall, .....

Can you think of any that do NOT recommend double or triple annual testing for MSM?

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 05:16 PM

all the health agencies suggest targeted testing thrice yearly for male homosexuals and contact tracing for any positive test......you know it makes sense!

For heavens sake. How many times do I have to say it. I agree. Testing and tracing will help. So will education. So will research and development. What you have miserably failed to provide is any mechanism of getting gay men to take tests or tracing their partners without infringing their human rights. You have shown a singular lack of understanding of gay people to the extent that you do not believe they can be gay unless they have sex with each other. You believe that gay people need apologists. You backpedalled on your original idea of forced testing but no-one is really convinced that you believe gay men should have equal status in everything.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: akenaton
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 05:02 PM

Of course it is important to determine why male homosexuality carries such large rates of STD infection, but it is even more important to stop the epidemic.......I have not heard one quick and effective solution to the problem from any of the assorted apologists.

Regardless of what WHO says, all the health agencies suggest targeted testing thrice yearly for male homosexuals and contact tracing for any positive test......you know it makes sense!

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 04:53 PM

I am not in touch with medical opinion at all, but I have read the latest report on HIV, and I see no reason to disbelieve it.
Musket claims to know more and better, but I doubt it.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 04:28 PM

""(Stigma not even mentioned)""

Not correct, you just have to look deeper before making that assessment. Check out the attachments. You will note a reference to a document (8) in the section. you refer to in your last post

Clicking on the link (8) in the footnotes, here is what you will find, that relates:

Overcoming barriers to HIV testing: preferences for new strategies among clients of a needle exchange, a sexually transmitted disease clinic, and sex venues for men who have sex with men.

""To determine strategies to overcome barriers to HIV testing among persons at risk.
RESULTS:

Barriers to testing included factors influenced by individual concern (fear and discrimination); by programs, policies, and laws (named reporting and inability to afford treatment); and by counseling and testing strategies...""


If you go further into reports linked to this section, you will find other studies listed under a (pdf) report titled, NICE: HIV testing among MSM: Final report Matrix Evidence | 15 November 2010:

One statement says:
""Three studies find that the fear of anti MSM prejudice among service providers and the broader society may be a barrier to testing...Participants in one study expressed a fear that being seen to take an HIV test would lead to the assumption that they engaged in risky sexual behaviour. One study finds that prejudices against HIV positive people among MSM may act as a barrier to testing""

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 04:02 PM

Troubadour, I have never favoured compulsion, and I think Akenaton dropped the idea months ago.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 03:42 PM

Akenaton: "There are so many anonymous guests posting on this thread that it is almost impossible to hold a serious discussion.
What's wrong with you, that you won't use a consistent handle?"

Akenaton "GUEST? I don't see how what you have quoted from WHO is going to quickly arrest the epidemic amongst MSM....They are pretty general ideas which don't really address the current problem?"

You have considerable difficulty with comprehension, where people don't subscribe to your prejudice.

1. I only ever post as Guest Troubadour (and no other name)!

2. When, being human, I slip up and post before signing, I post again to rectify the omission, as I did to point out that it was I quoting the W.H.O., which of course you didn't notice.

3. The W.H.O. article was in fact (as you would have found out if you had read it), an explanation of why they oppose compulsory testing/tracking, in direct contradiction of your and K A's claim to be in touch with current medical opinion.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 03:41 PM

Surely concerns about confidentiality covers the worry of stigma does it not? Just because something is not specifically mentioned does not mean it is excluded.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 03:16 PM

from the link provided earlier, "What the UK drs. say"

Reasons for low testing rates and hence low detection rates include:[8]
•Concerns about confidentiality, legal and insurance issues.
•Self perceptions of low risk in those who would test positive.
•Denial.
•Dislike of counselling.
•Wishing to avoid anxiety when waiting for results.

Fear and denial are the most common obstacles to HIV testing among those acknowledging that they have been at risk.

However, the most common reason is lack of time for pre-test counselling, even in GUM clinics.

(Stigma not even mentioned)

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 01:11 PM

"The perception of stigma, from other gay men or from the wider culture, is a barrier to testing."

This is plainly wrong.

From the same person who said

Male Homosexuals(MSM), are defined by who they like to have sex with, NOT by who they love.

I rest my case. This person knows nothing about human nature or relationships outside his own narrow experience.

Guest.

Some recent gay judgemental statements on this site serve as an example of attitudes towards gays that exist not far beneath the veneer of the discussion.

It is not even slightly beneath the veneer. It is plain for all to see. But thanks for pointing it out anyway.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 01:01 PM

""This is plainly wrong""

It is wrong only among those who have a very closed mind, no matter how many times these folks repeat it.


The impact of the stigma of homophobia and negative attitudes towards gays (and those impacted by HIV) is not ended as one would turn a light bulb on and off. The impact is long lasting, for gays, for many within society and among unenlightened individuals. The impact remains for some time, regardless of what common-sense changes are made in constitutional legislation.

An example of such a long term impact exists in the USA, where anti-black attitudes and impacts are still seen today, on the streets, in the workplace and in a multitude of research reports.(When in the USA, I find it interesting that many people who are very prejudiced towards blacks say, "no I am not prejudiced, I work and know many blacks and even have some black friends").

Some recent gay judgemental statements on this site serve as an example of attitudes towards gays that exist not far beneath the veneer of the discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: akenaton
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 12:36 PM

"
""The perception of stigma, from other gay men or from the wider culture, is a barrier to testing."

This is plainly wrong. As I have stated a dozen times, "stigma, and discrimination" have decreased significantly over the last decade civil unions and homosexual "marriage" have been entered as legislation, homosexuals are massively over represented in the media and in the political sphere........yet STD rates among male homosexuals have been rising steadily during that period and are still rising.

Fear of death from AIDS cut the transmission rates amongst MSM at a stroke....now it is perceived to be "manageable" and many male homosexuals have reverted to their original behavioural patterns.

Only increased targeted testing and contact tracing in the MSM demographic, can halt the epidemic of not only HIV, but all male STDs.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 12:34 PM

I got it from HPA and gave a link. Your page is superceded by the 2012-13 interim report.

You posted that on the 4th December.
My "page" was the 2012 report published just days before, and not "superseded" by anything then or since.

Four months later and still nothing.
I do not believe that there is a "2012-13 interim report" but would be happy to be proved wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 12:24 PM

The Nature of Prejudice

What's behind prejudice?

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 10:11 AM

Me too, Keith. But some have not.

To those who believe that homosexual love is somehow different, I point you to the "All you need is love" link provided by Guest, above. Not that you will believe it.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 09:54 AM

My one post was not intended to deceive, and did not.
I did not bother to use a different computer to cover my tracks because it was obviously me and it was just done to annoy an annoying Guest.

You are not convinced that Musket did it.
OK, but I am.
You think it acceptable anyway.
OK, but I do not.

I had moved on anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 09:01 AM

""All you need is love"""

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 08:49 AM

Re the impact of homophobia stigma and MSM testing:

""The perception of stigma, from other gay men or from the wider culture, is a barrier to testing. Gay and other MSM have clear preferences regarding testing services, particularly for those that are community based, include non-judgemental and gay-positive service providers, and offer a high degree of confidentiality.""


Question:is it not reasonable to propose that some on this thread would be a poor choice to garner advice on promoting greater MSM testing, as there seems to be a clear lack of non-judgemental perspectives towards the gay community?


HIV testing among (MSM): Health Education Research

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 08:37 AM

What the UK Dr.s say

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 08:07 AM

So, you did post under another name then, Keith? Yet you have taken someone else to task for doing the same. You have admitted to doing it yet and it was proven. Yet Musket has denied doing it and no actual proof has been offered. You have offered an explanation for you did and and why and Musket has offered an explanation of what he said and why.

Can you not see how hypocritical this is?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 04:31 AM

I quoted the latest PHE data even before he did

That is not true.
I quoted them just a couple of weeks after publication to CONTRADICT what you were saying.
You responded that the brand new figures were "provisional," "superseded" and much else to discredit them.

We would all like to see the new figures you speak of (first quarter 2013) but you will not produce them.

You said MSM infections were less than half when the newly published figures contradicted that.

You said I was wrong to say hetero infections were falling.
They are and have been year on year for a decade.

You said it is not an epidemic when all the agencies are clear that it is.

Perhaps you could produce a list of correct info you have contributed.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 04:20 AM

Not correct Dave.
About ten years ago, discussing the Troubles in Ireland, a Guest was aggressively attacking me with things that were not true, and refused repeated demands to retract or substantiate.

To make the point, I logged on in his Guest name and in a single post had him make a grovelling apology and admit lying.
He would never have done that so everyone knew at once it was me, and of course he came on very quickly furious that his name was taken in vain.

It was not an attempt to deceive the forum or to boost my credibility.
It was not dishonesty.
It was a harmless joke at the expense of someone who richly deserved it.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Musket
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 04:03 AM

This is how hate organises and vies for credibility. Keith keeps repeating that I have not brought any data since the last published ones to the debate and thinks that is wrong?

He tries saying I am playing down the gay prevalence when I quoted the latest PHE data even before he did. I did say that the heads up preliminary figures for the final quarter of 2012, which in NHS Speke is actually the first three months of 2013 indicate that for the year, the gay sexually acquired statistics show a small drop which should put them just below rather than just above the 50% of all positive tests. Keith uses this to call me a liar who has a subjective opinion.

Interestingly, I don't have opinions on such matters. I wouldn't be of use to anyone if I applied a prejudice to my deliberations. In any event, sexual health is a very small part of what I involve myself in. Although when a doctor working in sexual health contributed to the debate, he got the same snide comments and dismissal as I did.

No. Keith uses the word subjective. In his direction I use the word bigoted. His cherry picking of the HIV picture is almost as bad as the disgusting fool behind Akenaton, who thinks we are all as thick as him when he uses figures for one country to suggest criminalising lifestyle in another.

His latest hate, saying that gay people get together for sex rather than love is all you need to read. The best way to see his evil intent is to do no more than repeat his own words. Disgraceful.

Luckily, society has moved on. I am rather proud of living in a country where another social barrier has come tumbling down. Just got ethnicity, disability and socio economic barriers to address now.

Did you know there are more openly gay conservative MPs in the house than all the other parties put together? Another sign that bigotry is dying. The death rattles seem to be a bit loud, that's all.

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 03:37 AM

Male Homosexuals(MSM), are defined by who they like to have sex with, NOT by who they love.

What nonsense. A homosexual is perfectly capable of loving his or her partner and never having sex with them. Does that make them any less homosexual?

"Love" is hard to define most couples are "loving" some days, "hating" some days, "mildly irritating" MOST days :0) Couples stay together chiefly to raise their family in doing so they develop a deep emotional bond, they become comfortable with one another.

More rubbish. There are millions of people in partnerships with no children. Do they love each other any less? Maybe you did not love your wife before you had children but I certainly did. I would not have married her otherwise. Do you really believe that this 'deep emotional bond' is the preserve of the nuclear family? If so, then sorry, but you have no grasp of what people are really like and should keep quiet on anything to do with relationships.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Discussion of HIV transmission.
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 01 Apr 14 - 03:25 AM

You are being dishonestly selective in your 'quotes' GfS. Here is what I actually said.

What are you talking about choices when having sex for? Do you think that being homosexual is just about having sex? Neither you nor I had any choice whatsoever in who we loved. Homosexuals are no different.

The point is, yes we do have a choice who we have sex with but we have no choice in who we love. You assert that "the choice IS TO love, as in a place you live". Are you saying that who we love is as simple as picking somewhere to live? That is blatant nonsense.

As to "ALWAYS KEEP YOUR WORD...just be careful who you give it to...and 'WHY?'..might just be the measure on how much it is really love." Sorry, but I really have no idea where you are going with that one.

Keith. Do I recall correctly that you were found out in posting under multiple names some time back? That you admitted to doing the same? Why are you jumping up and down in glee at having 'outed' someone doing the same? Someone who, I add, has denied doing do. Should you not be a bit more careful in the arguments you are using? People in glass houses and all that.

DtG