BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 06 Mar 10 - 04:23 AM

Keith, you nasty little man, you just can't stop telling lies can you?

Gonorrhea: "The best survey we have found says MSMs are about 3%.

Well, according to the OFFICIAL DATA (take your imaginary survey and shove it, don't even bother to try to justify it)

http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1215589015024

There were 16,929 diagnoses of gonorrhea in the UK population in 2008.
There were a further 8,578 suspected cases that were treated as such to be on the safe side or as a matter of post-exposure or post suspected exposure prophylaxis.

So worst case = 25,507 cases in all.

Of those, 4,777 were MSM's.

So that gives us - using the total guideline number of 1,989,500 MSM's in the population - a prevalence of ARE YOU READY FOR THIS

0.24%

3% you say! 3%! You lying bugger!

Now to your 8.5% HIV prevalence among 15-44 y/o MSM's. The rest of the sentence from from the HPA report says:

" The prevalence of HIV (both diagnosed and undiagnosed infections) among MSM aged 15-44 was estimated to be 8.5% (range 7.0-10.5%) within London"

In the interest of total honesty, it concludes:

"...3.7% (range 3.1-4.5%) elsewhere in England and Wales and 5.3% (range 4.7-6.1%)overall."

So screw me if you weren't lying yet again. I trusted you on that, I didn't imagine even you would twist a lie out of a simple document like that. You just can't be trusted on anything can you?

So put all that together and you get a figure of 4.7% to 6.1% MSM HIV prevalence in the sexually active age groups which is kind of in the ballpark of the 4% figure that we were all thought was basically realistic - until your prejudices got in the way of whatever common sense you have.

So, that is the 8.5% demolished. I take back my comment that it was "the only true fact you found"

And yes, therefore, you were in fact all lies and hyperbole directed at advancing your prejudices.

And when you get busted for lying and twisting don't you fucking dare to tell me or anyone else that takes you to the cleaners for it:

"None of your frenzied statisticking changes that."

Because you are always claiming that statistics - your statistics - are all that is important, and that people should listen to nothing else. Statistics are the truth, the truth shall set you free - isn't that what you believe and preach?

You excuse all your support of outright bigots by telling us that all you care about is statistical truth.

Keith: "So, it is not ignorant, billious, lying, hyperbole at all, is it Royston.
But your reply was."

Yes, Keith you were ignorant and/or lying and bilious and hyperbolic.

Whereas my reply was ruthlessly accurate and intelligent.

My reply was angry, it was bilious and it displays an enormous prejudice - against you! For very good reason!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 06 Mar 10 - 04:24 AM

Slam Dunk!

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 06 Mar 10 - 04:43 AM

What you need to learn, Keith, is that these discussions start with issues, principles.

You, without fail, appear with statistics that support right-wing socio-political positions.

Why is that?

You select data from dubious sources (like virusmyth.org at the start of this episode) and when you get knocked down, you don't re-evaluate your assumptions but you go on long guests for more data that supports the right-wing positions.

Do you believe that is academic impartiality?

In a recent thread attacking Muslims you produced with a flourish some report that said (for the sake of argument) small% of Muslim students want Sharia law in the UK. Your "angle" was clear and then when someone pointed out that large% didn't want it, we just got a load of confused mumbling from you about blah blah, sizeable minority, blah blah, - to what end, Keith - you are always slewing or inventing things to support a very obvious agenda. Everyone gets it...now.

Gradually you get pushed to extreme measures - like the bare-faced lies and outrageous unsupported exclamations of the last day or so - still in an effort to support those same right-wing views.

And when people accuse you of being a right wing bigot, you cry foul and run away and do things like reactivate an old thread - where everyone lines up to tell you that you are regarded as such, for the reasons I cite.

And then you still refuse to re-evaluate your assumptions and carry on with the same old stuff, until you end up in the state you are now.

Eventually you will get the message. But you are going to have to stop and look carefully at your assumptions and your motivations.

Because at the moment you are positively Melville-esque in your appearance, Ahab.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 06 Mar 10 - 04:44 AM

long guests = lonq quests

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 06 Mar 10 - 06:07 AM

And a final thought from me.

When, Keith, you mocked me for weeks because I said that the comments in 'The Telegraph' ascribed to Kevin de Cock were significantly wrong, when you called me arrogant and a fool for that, only then to have Kevin de Cock repudiate the very things I maintained were wrong: When that happened, you had the opportunity to stop and think - outside of the statistics - that maybe you don't actually know or understand as much as you like to think that you do.

But no, you carried on regardless.

When I told you I was gay, you had another opportunity to stop and think. You might have suspected - correctly as it happens - that someone who has lived his life as a gay man and community activist, might just know and understand a lot more than you do about the issues around sex, sexuality and HIV. You might have considered that I have lived my life in the shadow of this disease (thank God, HIV negative) and have watched friends and loved ones receive diagnoses and have buried a few too many of them. You would have been correct.

You might have considered that having watched people go down with this disease for a range of reasons ranging from "couldn't care less" to youthful naivete, to being infected by a cheating partner, to being raped; that I have a much keener understanding of exactly how and why this disease spreads that you could ever fear to acquire and certainly could never learn from your statistics even before you corrupt and bastardise them.

But you didn't consider any of those things.

You just carried on regardless.

I suspected, because you are a right-wing bigot, that me being gay would just appear to you to be a brilliant line of attack. I could have been proven wrong but I wasn't was I?

Like I said, you have exceeded my greatest expectation, and now we all know what's what.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Mar 10 - 02:28 PM

You are right Royston!
I did miss that it said "in London" on the next line.
Sorry. A mistake.(If it was a lie I would hardly have provided a link to it would I?)
Remember, you gave a figure of 4%, so you were wrong too.
So, replace 8.5% with 5.6%, and everything else I said still stands.
Over a third are over 44, and that is just the survivors!

It also says
"There has been a large rise in newly diagnosed HIV infections among MSM each year since the turn of the century. In 2007 there were a total of 2,679 newly diagnosed HIV infections (increasing to 3160 if adjusted for missing data), representing an increase of 8% since 2006, and 74% since 2000"
(The increase for heteros, remember was infinitesimal and only due to immigration anyway.)

The 3% I mentioned was the proportion of MSMs in the population.
The quote I provided gave the figures for ghon.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 06 Mar 10 - 07:35 PM

""representing an increase of 8% since 2006, and 74% since 2000"
(The increase for heteros, remember was infinitesimal and only due to immigration anyway.)""

MSM increase since 2000 = 74%
Hetero increase since 2000 = 500%

Compare apples with apples laddie, and stop being disingenuous.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 07 Mar 10 - 03:39 AM

Royston: "I haven't had this much sport for ages."
Royston: "GfS, I still have some of your more sensational comments ringing in my ears - you said that you kick out (or words to that effect) when pushed, maybe it stops people from listening to what you were saying before the 'kick'."

GfS: How sporting of you!...The word I used, was 'shove'..'If someone shoves me, I'll shove back'...I don't get the 'kick' thing; why that is so offensive,..unless it has another connotation, of which I'm not aware.

Stay tuned...I've got some real goodies for ya'!.....but I've been spending a lot of time in the basement.....(project).

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: GUEST,Keith A
Date: 07 Mar 10 - 05:30 AM

It is you making false comparisons Don T.

The increase for heteros takes their number from infinitesimal to negligable, and is only a result of people moving countries anyway.

The increase for MSMs is an worsening of a raging epidemic.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 07 Mar 10 - 06:16 AM

""The increase for MSMs is an worsening of a raging epidemic.""

You are beginning to be a class comedy act Keith, along the lines of those guys who used to pratfall over everything in sight.

You've just spent a couple of months trying to tell us that HIV is incapable of reaching epidemic status in heteros, so how can it do so in gays?   Are they a different species?

And as for your smoke screen, I say again:-

Equate apples with apples, not submarines!

Seventy four percent is 74%!
Five hundred percent is 500%!

Whatever the numbers involved, that is the truth.

The increase among heterosexuals is 6.76 times greater than the increase among MSMs.

No amount of juggling will change that FACT, and making ridiculous comments like "infinitessimal to insignificant" merely serves to highlight the gaping holes in your perception of fact.

Every epidemic since life evolved on this planet has, at some point, passed from "infinitessimal to insignificant", but they don't tend to stop there, do they?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Mar 10 - 08:53 AM

Don, you will never get it.
If the number increases from 1 to 5, that is a 500% increase, but it is still only five people.
The increase among heteros is hundreds of times lower than the limit for a rare disease, and it is only due to people moving here anyway.

You ask a very valid question. Why is it a raging epidemic for MSMs and an extremely rare disease in heteros?
The rest of us having been debating that for weeks, but it has all gone over your head.
Royston says it is because of "networks".
You always believe everything he says and attack anyone who disagrees with him, so I will leave it there.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Mar 10 - 04:32 PM

Royston, I did not realise you were signing off.
You have left as you began with false assertions.

Kevin de Cock did not repudiate anything significant to our differences.
He did not repudiate that no hetero epidemic is likely.
It is all there.

I was interested in your situation as a gay Muslim, but otherwise gave not a shit about your sexuality.
No one does these days.
You are not the only gay in the village.
It did occur to me that you would have personal experience of AIDS sufferers. I would have dropped the discussion any time you withdrew the false assertions in your first posts.
You still have not done that.

Your coming out did reveal your bigotry against straight people.
You had been calling others "bigot" but no one else approached the level of bigotry in those posts.
You are an arch hypocrite.

Your motive for trying to make people believe that the pattern of infection was changing against straight people also became clear.
You really wanted it to be true.
It is not my fault that it is not true.
I was just the messenger.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Mar 10 - 09:57 AM

I expected to be challenged on why I extrapolated on the 5.6% figure.
I will explain anyway.
5.6% is an average over a 30 year span of ages, 15 to 24.
There will be zero 15 and 16 year olds infected by sex with men, and a very low number for teens and low 20s.

That means the numbers infected in the higher age range are much higher.
I would infer 10-15% or more.
Remember the Great Plague of 1665, second only to the Black Death, killed 15%

Royston says I can not be believed because I am right wing.
Not true, but even if I was Hitler this information is still from an official source, the HPA.
Completely neutral and authoratative.

Don T, on why MSMs suffer more than their fair share of AIDS.
Again from HPA.

"Behaviour change and sexual health promotion
MSM remain a priority for targeted HIV/STI prevention and health promotion
work in the UK, ......
Efforts need to focus on reducing the high numbers of sexual partners and
rates of partner change, and addressing the irregularity of condom use
during anal intercourse reported among MSM [7]."http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAwebFile/HPAweb_C/1227515298225

Finally then, Royston was wrong to suggest AIDS is worsening among heteros, but it is worsening among MSMs.
Royston was wrong to say heteros suffer more from other STIs, they are all worse among MSMs.
Royston's offensive anti straight statements were all based on these false premises, should never have been made, and should be withdrawn.
He has just said that he stands by them.
No politics. No unreliable sources. Just plain truth.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 09 Mar 10 - 06:00 AM

""5.6% is an average over a 30 year span of ages, 15 to 24.""


No wonder you have so much trouble with your statistics.

When I went to school, 15 to 24 was generally thought to be nine years.

How times have changed.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 09 Mar 10 - 06:10 AM

And it still doesn't change the FACT that an increase of 500% is larger than an increase of 74%.

True that MSMs were the first group infected in the WEST, so the actual numbers infected are different. Nevertheless, heterosexual infections are increasing 6.76 times faster than MSM infections, regardless of the point of origin of the victims.

This knocks down the opinions expressed in this thread about male homosexuals being more promiscuous, and therefore more at risk than heteros.

Anyone having unprotected sexual intercourse is at risk, as the figures for other STDs clearly show, and those figures also show that promiscuity is a serious problem in young hetero women.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Mar 10 - 06:52 AM

Sorry about the typo Don.
It should have been 15 to 44 of course.

In the West, MSMs may have been the first, but heteros were exposed from the earliest days too, 40 years ago now, via bisexuals, infected blood transfusions and shared needles.
If an epidemic was going to start, it could have done so in everyone of those 40 years.
It just can not spread among heteros as it does among MSMs. Not my opinion but an observation.

There is not really a rise among heteros now. It is just that a community of African people are living here now and it does spread among them.
The numbers are small because there are only a few thousands of them.

Royston was wrong about it, probably knowingly wrong.
He just really wished it was true, and wanted it to be believed.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Mar 10 - 06:59 AM

As for other STIs, hetero girls do suffer a lot of them , but MSMs far more.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 09 Mar 10 - 08:14 PM

""There is not really a rise among heteros now. It is just that a community of African people are living here now and it does spread among them.
The numbers are small because there are only a few thousands of them.""

Priceless.

What is the figure on HIV in Africa? 40% of heteros infected, or thereabouts.

And the African group you speak of is now mingling with our population, and you really believe that no infection will result, with 10% minimum of young hetero women obviously disregarding the need for safe sex, as evidenced by the STD figures.

Being blindly optimistic isn't a crime, but you are abusing the privilege.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 09 Mar 10 - 08:16 PM

""As for other STIs, hetero girls do suffer a lot of them , but MSMs far more.""

And HIV in heteros is rising 6.76 times faster than in MSMs.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 09 Mar 10 - 09:09 PM

"It [an epidemic] just can not spread among heteros as it does among MSMs. Not my opinion but an observation."

Would you care to explain that, Keith?

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 02:32 AM

I have described how the scourge of AIDS in UK infects MSMs in numbers comparable to The Great Plague.
The situation for UK heteros could not be more different.
To be classed as a rare disease, it should infect only 0.07% every year.
0.09% of heteros have it IN TOTAL, after 40 years, even including the newly arrived Africans!
It is the rarest of rare diseases.

Why? There are ample numbers with the disease to start an epidemic, and have been from the start.
If an epidemic could start, it would have started decades ago.
We observe that it has not started.

There is an epidemic in Africa.
Africans have come here which affects our statistics.
There have always been a few hundred heteros infected per year.
We still see that plus the extra African cases.

There are thousands of heteros with AIDS. A few thousand more African cases will make no difference, and Royston found out for us that the Africans' strain is even LESS virulent than the strain that has ALREADY FAILED to cause a hetero epidemic in UK.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 03:13 AM

0.09% of heterosexuals, 1.6% of homosexuals.

Every single case is a tragedy, HIV is a minority experience for both groups.

Don, let it go, with every masturbatory post Keith just settles deeper in his mire.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 03:57 AM

1.6 to 0.09 is 18 times worse, BUT where did you get 1.6% from anyway??

5.6% as an average over the age span 15 to 44, according to HPA.
Even higher above 44years except that death removes thousands from the statistics.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 04:37 AM

Don is just trying to establish the truth.
Why don't you want him to do that Royston?
Why do you fear the truth?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 05:06 AM

It appears that we have at last established and to a certain extent accepted what I have been saying all along, that homosexual practice and its associated lifestyles are dangerous and unhealthy....perhaps more unhealthy than other sexual minority practice which is illegal and whose participants have no "rights" whatsoever.

So much time and effort could have been saved here if certain members were not so constrained by a lunatic political agenda.

Many lives could also be saved, if this fact was taken on board by governments and an attempt made to target "at risk" groups as recommended in the UNAIDS conclusions.

The problem of course lies in that such targeting blows the crazy "liberal" equality agenda, straight out of the water.

This world is not "equal"....will never be "equal" and in some cases equality is not in the interests of society.

The targeting of "at risk" groups would also mean that immigration control would require to be reviewed, to bring the UK into line with the US. This of course would be another victory for common sense over "liberalism".

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 10 Mar 10 - 10:44 AM

Blah blah blah....liberals...blah blatter blah...fascists.....blah blah gays blah promiscuous.....blah blah.........


And on, and on, and on..............

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 03:24 AM

Akeneaton says that targeted intervention and testing of at risk groups is advocated by UNAIDS.
In the course of this debate I have looked at the sites of all the government and official health agencies, and the AIDS and British African organisations and charities.

Every site that expresses an opinion advocates such intervention.
The consensus is that MSMs should be tested for STIs incuding AIDS every 6 months. (It would probably take 10 years to test the whole population!)

The only opinion I have found to the contrary is Royston, who opposes it on ideological grounds.
As you are once again at odds with all expert opinion, will you reconsider your stance on this Royston?
After all, you have been wrong about everything else.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 04:07 AM

Akenaton is suggesting that MSMs should be singled out as the only group to be forced to accept compulsory testing.

I don't know whether the news has reached Hertford and Scotland, but Britain is still a free nation.

Offering a screening service is perfectly acceptable, but dragging people in and performing tests or treatments "Will he, Nil he" is, in point of fact, illegal, and would require an act of parliament.

Royston and I are not advocating that MSMs should not be tested, if they so choose. We are also advocating that the screening program must include heterosexuals.

Influenza kills more people each year than AIDS, but we don't force Flu jabs on the public at large. People are allowed to make up their own minds.

By the reckoning of you and Ake, we should be hauling 'em in for the jab, because they are much more likely to cause an epidemic.

But neither of you are commenting on that, or other highly infectious diseases. It would seem that your criterion for taking an interest owes more to their sexual orientation, than to their, or anybody else's, health.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 04:34 AM

Flu is rarely fatal in otherwise healthy people.
AIDS always is.
All the experts in the field advocate targeted, not general intervention.
Do you think they are right about that Don, or do you and Royston have a better understanding?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 03:39 PM

Flu is pretty hard to avoid when an epidemic is under way. Get on an elevator with someone who has it (and who may not even know it at the time), be near someone who sneezes, touch a door knob shortly after someone with incipient flu has, or shake hands with them, and bingo! You've got it!

Flu gets easily passed from one person to another, often just by being in the same room at the same time as an infected person—or even shortly thereafter. Someone sneezes and you happen to walk through the aerosol cloud they left behind and there you are.

But even so. It can often be avoided by taking a few sensible precautions (avoid crowds if possible, wash your hands often). Several decades worth of flu epidemics have gone by and I haven't had the flu in all that time (knock on wood).

HIV/AIDs is a whole different matter. It is not anywhere near that easily transmitted. It requires the transfer of bodily fluids through such things as sex—either homosexual or heterosexual sex—or, say, a blood transfusion. Or, for that matter, druggies sharing needles. It is an "equal opportunity" infection. And it's easily avoided by taking a few intelligent precautions.

Also, if you check the figures, I think you'll find that flu affects a vastly larger number of people than does HIV/AIDs.

Apples and oranges.

Don Firth

P. S. By the way, AIDs is not always fatal. It can be handled by drugs, and there are many people (homo and hetero) who are surviving despite being infected.

One really needs to get one's ducks in a row.

P. P. S. Also by the way:   Flu can be passed between heterosexual couples. This is hardly a reason to ban heterosexual marriage. . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 05:18 PM

The opinion of all the experts, Keith, is that at-risk groups should be educated, reached out to, encouraged, supported to come forward and be tested.

The experts say that this should be achieved by advocating acceptance, tolerance, compassion, equality, reducing stigma.

I agree totally.

I have said that plainly on many occasions in the course of this dialogue.

Bigots like you and Ake support rounding folks up and dragging them to the clinic. That is not supported by any expert opinion.

The experts say that you are part of the problem, part of the hindrance to effective outreach to at-risk groups.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 05:25 PM

Oh, and Keith, there was a time - when my life was more interesting in that way - that I myself attended quite diligently for an MOT at the GUM clinic. I am responsible and well educated. I know what I'm taling about But I understand how difficult that is for many. You neither understand nor know what you talk about.

There is presently a general education campaign - on buses, tubes, TV, radio, appealing for heterosexuals to get tested for the diseases that are prevalent amongst their sexually active demographic groups.

I think there should be a similar general education and appeal towards gay men - because not all gay men receive the deluge of materials and outreach directed at the gay ghetto.

By the way, Keith, I am properly delighted to see your prejudices still oozing out. I don't even need to pull your strings anymore, do I?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 05:57 PM

UNAIDS official policy on HIV testing

http://data.unaids.org/una-docs/hivtestingpolicy_en.pdf

Read it, weep then piss off Keith.


World AIDS day 2009:

Statement by UNAIDS and the European Union
World AIDS Day ─ 1 December 2009
The Presidency of the European Union (EU) and the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) welcome South Africa's strong focus on HIV prevention and HIV testing.

The EU and UNAIDS stress the need for the full respect of all human rights -- that no man,woman, boy or girl must be subject to stigma and discrimination due to his or her HIV status,sexual orientation, age, or gender.

The rights of women, young people and key populations must be protected. Their voices must be heard and their needs must be met. An effective AIDS response requires gender equality. Women's and girls' rights must be respected, including the right to sexual and reproductive health. All forms of gender-based violence must come to an end.

Evidence-based and comprehensive HIV prevention policies and programmes must be scaled up, and access to the full range of HIV services must be secured. HIV must be part of the broad health and development agenda.

HIV services must be integrated into other comprehensive health services; sexual and reproductive health and rights must be recognised as an essential component in the HIV response. The EU and
UNAIDS reiterate their commitment to and support for the continued response to the epidemic.

Today in Pretoria, South Africa, the Swedish Minister for International Development Cooperation, Ms Gunilla Carlsson, on behalf of the European Union, and Mr Michel Sidibé, UNAIDS Executive Director, warmly welcomed the renewed South African focus on HIV and
AIDS. They strongly supported the focus on prevention and South Africa's call for all people to get to know their HIV status. Ms Carlsson and Mr Sidibé emphasized that HIV testing is crucial for en effective response to HIV and AIDS. They also recognized that testing must build on the full respect for human rights, the absolute need of not being forced to disclose your HIV status and that counselling and other support activities must be provided.

In welcoming this renewed South African focus, Ms Carlsson and Mr Sidibé noted that not only Africa but also the rest of the world needs this clear message from South Africa. They stressed that the South African leadership is necessary for a continued effective response to the pandemic.

Ms Carlsson and Mr Sidibé stressed the need for the full respect and adherence to all human rights. The right not to be subject to stigma and discrimination must be guaranteed. They noted that this is relevant for all men and women, children and young people, regardless of HIV status, sexual orientation, age, or gender.

They emphasized that an effective response to HIV and AIDS requires increased gender equality. Women's and girls' rights must be protected, including the right to sexual and reproductive health. All forms of gender-based violence must come to an end. Gender norms must be changed, traditional roles of women and men and the relationship between them must be addressed. Both the beliefs and behaviour of many men and boys must be changed.

Ms Carlsson and Mr Sidibe stressed that evidence-based and comprehensive HIV prevention policies and programmes must be scaled up. Access to the full range of services and commodities must be secured, including life skills and sex education for adolescents, male
and female condoms and HIV harm reduction programmes, based on relevant UN recommendations.

They emphasized that HIV and AIDS must be part of the broad health and development agenda. HIV services must be integrated into other comprehensive health services; sexual and reproductive health and rights must be recognised as an essential component of HIV and AIDS programmes and prevention. They noted that the real challenge in the response to the pandemic is to translate principles, declarations and agreements into reality on the ground.

Ms Carlsson and Mr Sidibé recognized the important role to be played by international partners in the response to HIV and AIDS. They emphasized that such support must be based on harmonised projects and programmes, aligned to national priorities, plans, budgets and systems. They reiterated the strong commitment and support by the European Union, the 27 member states and the EU Commission, and UNAIDS in the further response to the epidemic.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 05:57 PM

From the UNAIDS website:

The term "men who have sex with men" - frequently shortened to MSM - describes a behaviour rather than a specific group of people. It includes self-identified gay, bisexual, or heterosexual men, many of whom may not consider themselves gay or bisexual. HIV responses for transgender populations are also often considered alongside MSM initiatives.

MSM are often married, particularly where discriminatory laws or social stigma of male sexual relations exist. Largely because of the taboo, the female partners of men who have sex with men are often unaware of their partner's other liaisons, and may therefore be exposed to additional HIV risks. Forced sex among men is not uncommon, especially in men-only environments such as prison settings.

Sex between men occurs in every culture and society, though its extent and public acknowledgement vary from place to place. Sex between men is thought to account for between 5 and 10% of global HIV infections, although the proportion of cases attributed to this mode of transmission varies considerably between countries. It is the predominant mode of HIV transmission in much of the developed world.

There is the potential for rapid HIV transmission within populations of men who have sex with men, especially if the rate of unprotected anal intercourse is high. There is also high potential of prevention benefit of the programmes among men who have sex with men. However the coverage of the prevention has been low: where countries report on coverage, only around 40% of men who have sex with men have access to the HIV prevention and care services they need. Many factors contribute to this situation including denial by society and communities, stigma and discrimination, and human rights abuse. Also where prevention programmes are in place, potential increase in risk behaviours due to prevention fatigue should be taken into consideration on the programming.

Vulnerability to HIV infection is increased where sex between men is criminalized, as men are either excluded from, or exclude themselves from, sexual health and welfare agencies out of fear. The essential HIV prevention measures for men who have sex with men include consistent and proper use of condoms, including access to condoms and water-based lubricants, must be promoted. High quality HIV-related services like voluntary counseling and testing and specialized clinics must be made available as well as specific and targeted information on prevention and risk reduction strategies designed to appeal to and meet the needs of men who have sex with men. Further quality treatment for sexually transmitted infections with referral for HIV services must be made available.

Specific policy measures are crucial for making prevention, care and support available to men who have sex with men. First and foremost, they must be included in national HIV programming and funding priorities. Gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender communities must be empowered to participate equally in the social and political life of their communities and countries.

Legal and policy reforms to promote human rights and access to health services of men who have sex with men and transgendered people, should be undertaken, where barriers exist. There is need to respect, protect and fulfill the rights of men who have sex with men and transgendered people and address stigma and discrimination by amending laws prohibiting sexual acts between consenting adults in private; enforcing anti-discrimination; providing legal aid services, and promoting campaigns that address homophobia.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 11 Mar 10 - 06:00 PM

So, Keith, there is just a small example of the expert opinions I have supported consistently.

What is your point?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 02:30 AM

Don Firth, we agree.
It was Don T who made the false comparison with flu, and I pointed out that they were not comparable.
We do provide flu vaccination here but only for people more at risk.
Improved treatment has extended lives of AIDS victims, but there is no cure.
They get the best treatment free of charge here, but the median age of death is about 40.

Royston, we all know that the situation in S.Africa is totally different. Heteros are high risk there.
All your cut and paste is irrelevant.
You are irrelevant.
(Your second paste says "Specific policy measures are crucial for making prevention, care and support available to men who have sex with men. ")

You say I show prejudice, but I have not even expressed an opinion.
I have merely reported what the experts say, e.g. The National African HIV Prevention Programme, Department of Health, Health Protection Agency, National Aids Trust, Avert, Terence Higgins Trust,etc.
Can you find a single expert who agrees with you?
If not, why should we take any notice of you?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 03:18 AM

Don T....I'm sorry to say it, but you are lying.

I did not say only Homosexuals should be tested and contacts traced.

What I said was that "at risk" groups should be tested including male homosexuals, sex workers, intravenous drug users and some immigrants.

As far as Homosexuals are concerned, the message has been out for over twenty years about the use of condoms and the dangers of promiscuity.......They are simply not responding voluntarily, the figures continue to worsen in an already high demographic.

Time to stop viewing this as a political issue.
Lets try a bit of humanitarian thought and start trying to save lives.

Royston, for a "well educated person", you display disappointingly poor understanding of the stance taken here by myself, Keith and Sanity. The debate has become heated from time to time, but your continued use of the B word to describe anyone who does not agree with your views, undermines your complete stance .....which is unfortunate.
You do appear to have a good grasp of the issues involved, unlike your supporters. Just relax, and stop getting so paranoid and we may begin to make some progress.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 07:18 AM

Royston, I have been looking at your posts.
Sometimes you seem to be in favour of intervention targeted at high risk groups.
If you are, you do agree with the experts and I have no problem.
They advocate that MSMs and black Africans should be tested every 6 months.
Happy with that?
No suggestion that other sexually active people need testing as often, or even at all.
Happy with that?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 10:32 AM

You need to be clear, Kaith, about what is meant by intervention.

I am totally in favour of targeted education, outreach, support, empowerment, encouragement aimed at getting at-risk people to be savvy and tested. Regularly tested.

I have said it many times. It is the view of all experts in the field. The other prerequisite for makind headway with this disease is the promotion of tolerance and acceptance both of each other's lifestyles and of people who are HIV+. All the experts are clear that at risk people need to be respected, valued, de-marginalised. That their human and civil rights must be valued and protected.

Testing must be a freely made choice, and HIV-status must remain confidential.

If you agree with the expert's on that broad definition of 'intervention' then you and I are in agreement. Is that what you are saying? Just be clear?

Because your opening post allied your views with Ake's - and he is not thinking in the same way as the experts. He believes something quite different.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 11:13 AM

Your opening posts asserted that non African heteros had become a high risk group and needed targeted intervention and testing.
We now have established that that is not true.
I see no need for compulsory testing, as no one knowingly at risk would be likely to refuse.
Confidentiality, but it must remain a notifiable disease.
Happy with that?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 11:37 AM

Yes, indeed. I would not disagree with those assertions.

I just still wonder why you cannot sign up to the unabridged views and recommendations of all the experts.

"as no one knowingly at risk would be likely to refuse

That is the most important issue here. People are in denial, people do refuse. Because they don't self-identify as being at risk because they fear prejudice and judgement. Both for *being* at risk and then for *being* HIV+.

So some prefer to live in ignorance and hope for the best.

Everyone has the same tendency. Example: the mass-media campaigns to get folks to face up to the other STI's.

If there were less stigma, less fear, more understanding and acceptance of lifestyles and of HIV status, then the epidemic can be managed better. It is the same message for Africa, America, Germany, UK...

Any attitudes or social pressures that keep people underground or on the margins, makes them hard to reach and keeps them from taking the support and treatment they need.

Do you understand that? It is the expert view, not just something that Liberal Royston dreamed up. Prejudice and stigma is killing people. Not just in Africa, in Europe as well. Those statements by the EU and UNAIDS and other bodies are not aimed at any one country or demographic, they are universal statements.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 12:34 PM

I think there is a case for compulsory testing of immigrants from places where AIDS is endemic.
I accept all expert recomendations.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 01:31 PM

Royston, I don't believe that "stigma" causes homosexuals to reject testing.

As far as I can see homosexuality is more tolerated now than it has ever been, yet the hiv and promiscuity figures continue to rise and has been said many times, the hiv figures in percentage terms are horrific.

I think this has to do with the lifestyle of many, not all, of homosexual men, who seem to see hedonism, risk taking and promiscuity as defining their sexuality.....a symptom of psychiatric problems.

Homosexuals have had ample time to put their sexual practices in order but are unwilling or unable to do so.
The article I linked to on homosexual marriage details how many homosexuals favour "open marriage" with multiple sexual partners, which would lead to another re-definition of traditional marriage.
Same sex and multiple partners?    Where are we going, if we find this acceptable?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 02:52 PM

Ake, we all know what you think and didn't really need reminding of it.

You are entitled to your thoughts.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 03:06 PM

Yes...but are you prepared to settle for what is happening right now?

If homosexuals will not help themselves...what do you propose?

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 03:28 PM

Ake, I repeat: you don't know diddly-squat about homosexuals and their "lifestyle." You have your own little fiction cooked up and you keep dipping into that same rancid pot.

I know a fair number of homosexual men, and most of them are in stable, monogamous relationships, whether the law recognizes those relationships or not. They do want those relationships to be legally recognized so they, too, can have the same legal advantages that heterosexual couples enjoy, hence the gay-marriage movement.

There is no more promiscuity among this group than their is among heterosexuals. And what they want is for ignorant and prejudiced people to stop butting into their lives, harassing them, insisting that they are "perverts," and basically treating them like lepers when what they are and do in the privacy of their own homes simply does not affect anyone else.

Even if there are individual homosexual males who do not want to form stable relationships and prefer a life of promiscuity, the same holds true for a lot of heterosexual males as well! Anyone who is not aware of this hasn't been paying attention to the world around them!

What these men (and women) want are the same rights that heterosexuals have, and this is what makes it a civil rights issue.

It's really very simple.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: akenaton
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 03:44 PM

Don.....With the greatest respect, your friends do not sound as if they are representative of the homosexual lifestyle, as shown in the health and promiscuity figures.

You simply cannot construct an argument based on the way a couple of your friends behave and ignore studies by respected organisations.

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don Firth
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 03:58 PM

It's considerably more than just a couple of friends, Ake. I've been acquainted with this issue for a long time and I've kept my eyes open.

When I knew nothing about homosexuals and what they do, I had the usual prejudices. But I have since learned that those prejudices (which, incidentally, means "to pre-judge") are not true in most cases. I revised my ideas accordingly.

And when the church I attend adopted the "Affirmation of Welcome," I learned a great deal more about the matter. So what I am saying comes from actual knowledge of people, not just faceless (and I might add, edited) statistics.

What your keep saying is that because some members of a group do something, ALL of them do it. Ake, that's what is known as bigotry.

Sorry, but that's what it is!

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 04:11 PM

""I did not say only Homosexuals should be tested and contacts traced.

What I said was that "at risk" groups should be tested including male homosexuals, sex workers, intravenous drug users and some immigrants.""

Yes indeed Ake, my mistake.

You did include those other two groups you despise and blame for the existence of HIV/AIDS.

Gays, Junkies and Africans.

No prejudice there then!

No comment then about Gay Junkies, Gay Africans, and African Junkies?

The permutations are there for you to tie your argument in knots.

Bottom line, I didn't lie. I simply forgot about the number of groups you discriminate against.

Funny though, you haven't mentioned Gay Travellers, Traveller Junkies , or for that matter African Travellers.

You're not slipping,........are you?

Don T

Subject: RE: BS: Death penalty for homosexuality?
From: Royston
Date: 12 Mar 10 - 04:13 PM

Thanks, Don. F.

Ake, hedonism does not spread HIV. Promsicuity does not spread HIV.

Having sex without a condom spreads HIV.

Whatever the cause of HIV spreading, the prevalence amongst gay men overall is only 1.6%

98.4% of gay men are not hedonistic/promiscuous/unsafe. Delete as appropriate.

Take the most sexually active, highest risk demographic of 15-44 year-olds and you have 5.6% prevalence.

So 94.4% of the statstically riskiest gay men are, errm, NOT hedonistic/promiscuous/unsafe.

So you are just a relentlessly fucking stupid bigot.