BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 01:59 PM

Nothing dogmatic or far-out about my political position, GfS. I believe I am pretty much in the same position as Benjamin Disraeli, who said, "I am a fiscal conservative, but a social liberal." And unlike a few others I could point out around here, I am perfectly willing to revise my positions on various issues if I encounter new and valid information, and/or if someone can give me a good and sufficient reason why I should do so.

It's called "having an open mind." You really ought to try it sometime.

I am not a member of any political party, although I tend to vote Democrat, all too often because the Dems represent the lesser of two evils. The one person I would vote for for president with no qualms in Dennis Kucinich, but he, of course, has been systematically excluded from candidacy by the Democratic Party because he has proven during his political career that he is a man of integrity. Also, I agree with the platform that he enunciated.

No, to the goose-stepping arch-conservative, I may be so far out that I'm no longer in the ball park, but I'm right in there shoulder to shoulder with most Americans who were born with a brain, are in the habit of using it, and feel that the benefits of living in a democratic society should be shared by everyone, not just those who are wealthy enough or influential enough to afford it.

I pay my taxes because I feel that that is one of the prices of living in a civilized society. But along with a lot of other people, I don't see that I'm getting my money's worth.

And one of the uncivilized parts of this society is that it denies freedoms and benefits to certain specific members of society because they don't conform to what the self-appointed arbiters of personal behavior feel is proper—even though what they do has no effect whatsoever on the lives of others.

I do not believe that anyone should be allowed to go into other peoples' bedrooms and try to tell them what they can and cannot do. This, of course, in the case of consenting adults.

If that makes me some sort of far-out, raving "liberal" in your mind, then—so be it! I can definitely live with that!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 04:21 PM

The one person I would vote for for president with no qualms in Dennis Kucinich, but he, of course, has been systematically excluded from candidacy by the Democratic Party because he has proven during his political career that he is a man of integrity.

Maybe. I'd say he's proven --or at least given very good reason to believe -- he's so far left he can't win in the generals. At least can't win the center and right-of center center, which are necessary to win 1600 PA.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 04:53 PM

Don: "Nothing dogmatic or far-out about my political position, GfS. I believe I am pretty much in the same position as Benjamin Disraeli, who said, "I am a fiscal conservative, but a social liberal."

Fiscal conservative..hmmm.....what do you think of Obama?

As so far as, "I do not believe that anyone should be allowed to go into other peoples' bedrooms and try to tell them what they can and cannot do. This, of course, in the case of consenting adults."

And while in agreement with you on that one too, I don't want the homosexual agenda, teaching our kids. Nor even the heterosexuals, bringing in their agenda, in the early primary grades. Fair enough?

Smeds had nothing to say of any substance, so we'll let that slide.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 05:15 PM

What pray tell is the homosexual agenda? Answers on a postcard.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 06:36 PM

""If you PMd me, I would look up the met. office 24 hour forecast for your area, and tell you it was the most likely outcome based on the evidence available and expert opinion.
Royston would tell you that rain was not coming, and anyone who said it was, was a rainphobe bigot and a liar.""

Your bad example, mate, because on this thread Royston says the rain is coming, and you are the one ignoring past experience, in favour of predictions of the future which are at best educated guesses.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 06:47 PM

""You know, Back when he was Governor of California, we were having a three day folk and rock festival, in a park, in L.A., he was staying at a hotel across the street from the park, and was on the roof, of the hotel, listening and watching the concert below. When we(two of us) were on. I had a moment on the mic, where I went into a 'little talk'. During that talk, I addressed him, because I knew he was there(reliable source in the hotel), and spoke to him about his policies, and priorities, and their effect on us 'peons'. To tell you the absolute truth, I was stellar, even you would have been proud!! No shit! I was not a defiant jerk off, like most 'protesters', but addressed him wonderfully. I thought he was wrong, about a few things, and a few things he stood for.......but nonetheless, even a broken clock is right...twice a day!!!.............therefore:""

Homophobia, a belief that homosexuality can be cured, bigotry, a dichotomy of identity which prevents it from being sure of its own gender, and now megalomania and delusions of grandeur. And it really believes Ronny Raygun was listening.

BOY OH BOY Does it need help!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 07:02 PM

""It's only because the homosexuals, on here, have a need to justify their position""

If it were only the homosexuals on here that opposed you, it would, I believe, be a pretty even contest.

And in case you have any deep insight into my mental state, or gender orientation, let me save you from making an even bigger fool of yourself (as if THAT were possible).

I have been married for forty five years, to the love of my life, who has presented me with two fine upright children, who have, between them, further enriched me with five healthy, vigorous, grandchildren, who absolutely love their kind old grandad (their words, not mine).

So, unlike yourself, I have no personal axe to grind, when I say that I want to see gay couples have exactly the same opportunities for a loving, caring, relationship, with which I have been blessed.

Sex was never a huge part of my marriage, especially with advancing age and medical issues, and I don't believe that it plays any greater part in loving gay relationships.

I could never understand this preoccupation of homophobes with the sexual activities of gays, which they erroneously see as the basis for all gay relationships (absolute bunk, of course).

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 07:39 PM

". . . I don't want the homosexual agenda, teaching our kids. Nor even the heterosexuals, bringing in their agenda, in the early primary grades."

And your verifiable evidence, GfS, that anyone is actually attempting to do this?

And, no, a link to some conservative/religious "protect the family" web site will not do.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 01 Feb 10 - 10:34 PM

Don T: "And it really believes Ronny Raygun was listening.

BOY OH BOY Does it need help!"

One of my parents, who was a department heads, at that hotel, was on the roof with him. Sit on it Ralphie!

You just can't bring yourself around, that everyone is not as much as a loser, as you..therefore, everybody else is bullshitting. Get a life!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Ebbie
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 12:58 AM

Due to someone's importuning I have watched a dozen Bill O'Reilly YouTube videos tonight. Interestingly, GfS is sounding more and more like O'Reilly. Fascinating.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 01:05 AM

.......lookin' out for you!

Naw, I watch him occasionally. Oberman, I used to watch, but he was getting ridiculous. Mathews is a lunatic...but in fairness, I watch both sides, and am impartial to both, to a large degree. I more often than not, watch them to check out the bullshit their feeding the American public...but, if I want actual news, I have other sources.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 04:08 AM

On the vexed question of teaching, the 'homosexual agenda' and young people, a few thoughts.....

In British schools today, there are some teachers in some schools who discuss sexuality within an 'equal rights' framework that GfS would contest. Plenty of other schools (especially though that operate within a religious framework - which in the UK are called 'faith schools') do not do this.
   
The peer-group culture in schools (of all types) is often viciously anti-gay - lots of bullying that ranges from name-calling to physical attacks; plenty of young gay people in the UK still commit suicide while at school.

Children do not just learn at schools, of course. A child might get the equal rights agenda from a liberal teacher then go home to a very conservative household. (Or vice versa.) Teachers are not all-powerful (although some of them think they are!).

I shouldn't say 'they', really, I should say 'we', as I myself work in education, though at university level, not in schools. So I teach adults (albeit mostly young ones). Depending on the theme or topic of the class, if issues relating to homosexuality are relevant, I make no secret of my identity and the views that I hold. To me, it is honest to do so, as it allows students to filter what I say through the context of who I am. Among other things, I see this as important and supportive for my gay students and instructive for my non-gay students.

I admire the fortitude and bravery of teachers (whether ther are gay, straight or whatever) who discuss these things at school with students younger than university age. The culture of anti-gay prejudice in schools is such that their task is unenviably difficult - I couldn't do it myself.

Am I delivering a 'homosexual agenda' ? Quite possibly.
Are there other educators delivering a 'homophobic agenda' ? Quite possibly.
Is there a range of more or less 'neutral' positions that lie between the two ? Definitely.
Should I aim to adopt one of those 'neutral' stances ? Well that's a political and personal choice, and I've made mine.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 04:15 AM

GfS

I owe you an apology: I am sorry for calling you a liar on the issue of your gender and the descriptions you gave us of your family life.

I can see now that the belief a few of us came to have, that you were claiming to be a woman, came from a misreading of some of your posts around 11 Jan 04:32pm. Your response to the suggestion didn't scotch the rumour, but that's still my fault.

As I went back and read all that stuff again, I was still of the view that for someone with such an apparently happy life, you have some serious hate-issues, a superiority complex and a really nasty judgmental side.

I don't understand how all that emerges from such contented happiness but I don't believe you lie, to us.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 04:24 AM

In case misinterpretation ensues, the 'though' in the brackets in my second para should read 'those'.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 02:08 PM

I don't see speaking up for equality of treatment as a "gay agenda". It seems a perverse way to use the word "agenda".

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 02:37 PM

The opposition have marched on to the next battle.

Just lie down a play "dead"....when it gets dark, you can all go home.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 03:07 PM

Ake,

If you were paying attention you would have noted that the debate has moved on significantly.

I don't think you'll be needing to play dead at this rate as brain death has very clearly set in.

We know that HIV is overwhemingly a heterosexual disease.

We know that in the UK it is proportionately the fastest growing disease (500%)

We know that the increase in the rate of growth is not linear.

We know that anal sex is only about twice as efficient in transmitting HIV as vagingal sex

We know that 95% of homosexual men have no HIV

The evidence does not support your assertion that Homosexuality is a more unhelthy lifestyle.

There is evidence that homosexuals currently suffer disproportionately, but this is not the same thing as saying that homosexuality is unhealthy.

If by your reckoning, high numbers of STI infections are evidence of unhealthy sexuality, then we must also conclude that heterosexual sex is an unhealthy lifestyle for young women, as 10% suffer from chlamydia, and they are also the worst infected by ghonnorhea, syphilis and HPV.

HPV kills women indirectly just as HIV kills everyone indirectly.


Lets not forget what you have been asserting.

1. Homosexsuals are a scourge
2. homosexuals are closet paedophiles
3. homosexuality is unhealthy.


There is only one unhealthy thing on here and it remains your obsession.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Smedley
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 03:42 PM

I don't see speaking up for equality of treatment as a "gay agenda". It seems a perverse way to use the word "agenda".

said mousethief.

----------------------------------

Not sure I do, really, but we both know somebody who will.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 06:34 PM

Shhhh!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 07:55 PM

Lox, you forgot:

4. Rounding homosexuals up (for their own good) against their will and sequestering them in quarantine (for their own good).

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 02 Feb 10 - 07:59 PM

""You just can't bring yourself around, that everyone is not as much as a loser, as you..therefore, everybody else is bullshitting. Get a life!""

Got one thanks, and a bloody good one too!

And this loser doesn't need to find someone to despise, denigrate, and deprive of humanity, and human rights, in order to be able to live with himself.

I despise only those who can't feel whole unless they are kicking somebody they classify as inferior.

I wouldn't want your idea of a life, if it came with green stamps, so crawl back under your stone, and wait for a cockroach to get too near.

That'll be much more your mark.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Feb 10 - 09:52 AM

Lox, I do not agree with all your statements.

"We know that HIV is overwhemingly a heterosexual disease."
Yes, but only in Africa

"We know that in the UK it is proportionately the fastest growing disease (500%)"
Not meaningful in view of the fact that 500% only takes it from infinitesimal to miniscule.

"We know that the increase in the rate of growth is not linear."
It is linear. The rate of new cases has gone from around zero to a steady value (hence linear) that is still in the very rare disease category.

"We know that anal sex is only about twice as efficient in transmitting HIV as vagingal sex"
I do not accept your interpretation of those research results.

"We know that 95% of homosexual men have no HIV"
True.

"The evidence does not support your assertion that Homosexuality is a more unhelthy lifestyle."
Debateable

"There is evidence that homosexuals currently suffer disproportionately, but this is not the same thing as saying that homosexuality is unhealthy."
Agree

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 03 Feb 10 - 01:31 PM

Royston, and Smedley,, Thank you. You'll also find that I posted, 'If you shove me, I'll shove back'..perhaps some of the perceived 'hostilities' toward homosexuals, was somehow misinterpreted by some, when actually it was a rebuttal toward being attacked. Thank you for going back over my posts, and pointing that out.

Respectful Regards,.....(but keeping one eye open, one eye closed, and one eyes...just to see with!)
GfS

Here, just for fun:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-_W18CWypE&feature=related

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 02:08 AM

A new perspective on the increasing numbers of heterosexuals infected in UK.
For the last decade we have seen a steady rise in those numbers.
But, the population, and therefore the at risk population, has itself not been static.
Due mainly to current and recent immigration the population has been growing at a very much faster rate.
Thus the proportion of heterosexuals who are infected has actually been, and is, in steep decline.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 02:51 AM

Oh, Keith. You can't have that last post. You already removed the migrant HIV from the statistics. The fastest growing group is that of the "locals", and that demographic, overall, is decreasing - as you have pointed out elswhere. I'm not arguing stats about HIV with you, but even you'll agree that one might not have long legs.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 03:04 AM

UK acquired infections only.
The pool of infected heterosexuals is growing by well under 200 per year.
The pool of sexually active heterosexuals is growing by over 200 000 per year.

The proporton of infected heterosexuals could multiply 35 times and still be a rare disease, but is actually decreasing.
It is an extremely rare disease of heterosexuals in UK, and is getting steadily rarer.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 07:04 AM

""The pool of sexually active heterosexuals is growing by over 200 000 per year.""

Some credible support for that bald assumption?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 07:21 AM

Keith: UK acquired infections only.
The pool of infected heterosexuals is growing by well under 200 per year.

Now Keith, we can't take you seriously if you say things like that. It shows you never understood the numbers to begin with.

Without prejudice to all the things on which we do agree, you must understand that you are wrong on this statistical issue that YOU claim is so important.

The pool - the number of straight people living with HIV in this country - is not increasing by 200 a year. It increased by over 4,000 in 2008, if I remember the earlier statistics properly. Of those, about 1,300 contracted the disease in this country, the balance contracted it elsewhere.

The number of straight people contracting the disease in this country every year is rising by about 200 each year. So 2008 = 1,300, 2007 = 1,100, 2006 = 900 etc etc etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 07:58 AM

UK acquired infection Royston.
Remember your link, page 6 table A
240 330 490 600 740 830 870 1000 1130 490
These are the number of new infections from 2000, the last one being incomplete.
The number is increasing by well under 200 per year.
As a proportion of the population, the total number of infections are decreasing because the population is growing so much faster.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 08:08 AM

Just over 1 thousand new cases a year, minus deaths, compared to a poulation increase of over 200 000.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 09:00 AM

Yes, Keith, but you said

"The pool of infected heterosexuals is growing by well under 200 per year

And that is wrong.

It increased by well over 4,000 people in 2008 alone. Of that number, 1,300 were UK-acquired infections.

The only thing increasing at 200 per year is the additional number of NEW, UK-ACQUIRED heterosexual infections. That is 200 more, each year than in the previous year. As in the figures you helpfully reprinted today. All those new infections add to the existing pool.

You are confusing these numbers of new UK-acquired infections EACH YEAR, with the size of the total pool. Do you not see that?

There is no support for your 200,000 figure. Whatever increase in population, it will be comprised of gay and straight in the same proportions. So both demographics rise at the same rate; at least that is the only assumption one could possibly draw. But if you want to tie your immigration judgements to your disease judgments then you will also have to accept the 3,000 or more non-UK acquired infections into your comparison. Because they also add to your "...pool of infected heterosexuals..." And then it all falls apart for you.

I was beginning to have some respect for you. Sadly, I was wrong. You are just DESPERATE to twist things around so that HIV appears to be the the responsibility and fault of blacks and gays. When we agreed on stuff - and you agreed the same things with Lox - was that just a provisional agreement while you carried on trying to distort numbers? or do you actually agree those points?

If you agree them, why not just shut up now? What point are you trying to make?

Or you could carry on making a fool of yourself. Either way is fine by me.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 09:09 AM

I found the HPA figure I was looking for again.

The correct figure for Keith's stated increase in the "pool of infected heterosexuals<"/b> was 4,200 in 2008 alone. The lowest increase in the "pool of infected heterosexuals" was in 2000 when it increased by 2,100.

http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1237970242135

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 10:32 AM

There was a typo Royston
200 a year is the increase in new cases.
I had clarified that already when I said, "just over a thousand new cases per year"
In proportion to the straight population that is about 0.002%
The rise in population is about 0.5%. (250 times higher)
Do not confuse the issue with infections acquired in Subsaharan Africa where things are very different to UK.

the figures I last posted were from your table A that you have just linked to again, UK acquired heterosexual infections.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 11:01 AM

OK, Keith. So no point then. Just numbers. Just so long as we know.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 11:25 AM

Keith: The rise in population is about 0.5%. (250 times higher)

But you attribute that rise - with no evidential support - to immigration. You can't count the immigrants in when it suits you and then count them out again when it doesn't. If you count the immigrants in then you have to accept a 4,200 increase in HIV+ straight people.

If populations split 90/10 gay straight, then 10% of any mass immigration will be gay as well. So Immigration increases gay/straight populations at the same rate. So the assertion is doubly meaningless.

If you count immigrants out then - because you have claimed previously that 'indigenous' populations are falling - you have to accept a 500% increase increase in UK-acquired infections against the backdrop of a falling indigenous straight population.

Either way, your assertion was wrong, wrong-minded, racist and a classic example of what I accused you of - trimming a bit, ignoring a bit, bending a bit, lying a bit...to prove that bollocks ain't bollocks.

And it is even more irritating, and supportive of the dim opinion that I and others hold of you, that you continue this nonsense in light of the otherwise quite progressive opinions that you "confessed" to.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 12:08 PM

We thrashed out the population figures on another thread. it is all there.
I am surprised you want to exclude immigrants from our population.
They are here now. Accept it.
I exclude no one, but we are discussing transmission of HIV here.
Not in subsaharan Africa.
I was leaving you to do the sums for the gay population.
I worked on a figure of 2% being gay
I came up with a rise of about o.2% which you see is also below pop increase.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 01:12 PM

ok, to cut short a potentially long story, today's discussion represents a zero sum game, nothing new has been added to the debate. Just some more doubt as to motivations. ok.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 02:36 PM

I offered it as a new perspective.
In all our discussion we ignored the signifcant fact that the population is increasing at a greater rate than the rates we were discussing.
Much greater in the case of heterosexual infection.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: mousethief
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 02:38 PM

If populations split 90/10 gay straight, then 10% of any mass immigration will be gay as well.

That's like saying any time you roll a die 6 times, you will get exactly one "three". We need to know a lot more about the immigration to know if the general population ratio holds for the immigrant population as well. Are gays being selected for? selected against? What counts as a "gay"? If somebody has the "gay gene" (assuming there is such a thing) but doesn't self-identify as gay in Africa, and isn't a MSM, how does that affect our numbers? We don't know any of this stuff so it's more than a little glib to say it must be 90/10.

O..O
=o=

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 02:47 PM

MT, in my 09:00 post I said that an equal distribution of gay/straight in migratory populations was the only reasonable assumption to make in the absence of data. I don't think gay people are selected in or out of migratory communities so that supports the reasonableness of the assumption without making it any less of an assumption.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 03:36 PM

Royston: "OK, Keith. So no point then. Just numbers. Just so long as we know."

Just numbers?? Isn't just one more case a tragedy?? I've lost two close friends to AIDS, as I posted a while ago, in the Prop 8 thread. Please, NO number is 'acceptable' or 'wins' a discussion. In every 'number' is a person, with loved ones, family and friends. If there should be a point to all of this, let it NOT be to prove a point...but to save lives!! Discourage ANYTHING that spreads this fatal disease!! Any form of promiscuity is NOT 'hip'!!!!
Regards,
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 03:44 PM

Agree with every word of your last post, GfS. A lot of effort has been spent getting us to that consensus. I'm determined to see Keith join us.

Keith, had enough numbers yet? Are you finally going to accept the various points that were agreed on and stop trying to prove that some HIV suffering is meaningless while others are to blame for the problem?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 03:47 PM

Therefore, the intelligent thing to do is to do everything possible to encourage stable, monogamous relationships.

Obvious!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 03:54 PM

Don: "Therefore, the intelligent thing to do is to do everything possible to encourage stable, monogamous relationships."

YES!!!!!!!!! MY EXACT POINT FROM THE BEGINNING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thanks!   (until your next post)..wink!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 04:07 PM

The contention all along has been over the relative risks of infection between the different groups.
You can only discuss that quantitatively.
I have just shown that the tiny proportion of straight people being infected is becoming a yet smaller proportion.
There are estimated to be about 500 000 MSMs in UK.
That is less than 1%
That means that their rise in infection matches the rise in population, while for straight people it is about 250 times lower.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 05:30 PM

Keith, where do your ever-decreasing estimates of the number of gay men come from?

It is an increasingly surprising claim that I think you should back up with some sources.

It's irrelevant to the discussion, but I'm interested to understand it.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Paul Burke
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 05:38 PM

It's also been contended that most men are gay. I'm not as far as I'm aware, but I think it's probably closer to the truth.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 05:51 PM

Look, I'm so sick of wasting my time on Keith's contorted and fantastical half-truths. I just googled 'size uk gay population' and learned enough to know what I suspected - that this 1 percent thing is yet another of Keith's more pernicious concoctions. There are a range of estimates, the page on the subject from avert.org.uk seems quite balanced.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 06:19 PM

Keith is nearly being a clever clogs, but not quite.

200/60,000,000 is not a higher proportion than 1200/60,250,000

So the proportion is still increasing.

But it was just a frivolous diversion anyway.

The Criteria Keith sets out in his position is to do with the proportion of new diagnoses per demographic.

It is also to do with the rate of increase of the growth in numbers of HIV infections in each demographic.

And in Heteros that has been growing at a linear rate for under ten years, and at a contrasting very low rate for the previous twenty odd years.

In all, the rate of growth can be seen to increase dramatically less than a decade ago.

Overall, the rate of growth has changed, resulting in a dog leg shaped graph

Any golfer knows that a dog leg is not linear, and is certanly very unpredictable.

The rate of Growth could change again.



As for the transmisssion efficiency stats, Keith has to admit that they are not as clear as he makes out.

33.8 times riskier does not make sense as a base rate, only as a subsequent rate once other factors have been included.

otherwise the 1 in 10 versus 1 in 3 figures would be unattainable.

If you took 33.8 as your base risk factor, it would increase with the inclusion other risk factors.

So with the addition of the risk associated with being more likely to encounter a HIV positive partner, the factor of 33.8 would increase several fold.

1 in 10 versus 1 in 3 indicates a factor of just over 3.

If you take 1 in 10 as your base factor, then with the addition of other factors you could arrive at an overall factor of 33.8

Someone else can do the actual donkey work.

It is also possible that there is a mistake on the page that these figures come from.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Lox
Date: 04 Feb 10 - 06:27 PM

By The Way ....



    We have a distinguished contributor to our thread here today ...




          He might be troll though ....