 sj |
||
|
||
BS: 'Gay marriage' question
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Steve Shaw Date: 21 Dec 12 - 07:28 AM Right, "high risk groups." This is a rather crafty way, and quite an artificial one (as a very large number of people are rather flexible in their sex lives), of producing a category of people who you can then declare open season on. What you should be talking about instead is high-risk activities. Because of lousy sex education in this country, millions of people don't know the difference between relatively safe sexual activity and high-risk sexual activity. Everyone who gets involved in sexual relationships of any kind should know about the possibility of infections and how they are passed on and how you can minimise risk. That should be one of the main aims of good sex education. Avoiding unwanted pregnancy is another. An important part of it, not the whole thing. Sex is a joyful thing and there's a fine line between giving sensible, practical information and being seen to be moralising, and there's no point in scaring people to death either. If that is done effectively, rates of infection (and unwanted pregnancies) would plummet. It would be far more effective in reducing infection (which is what we all want...isn't it?) than the kind of thinly-veiled gay-bashing that we see in this discussion from certain persons who seem to be frightened of something or other, I'm not sure what. Something as bad as bubonic plague or incest, perhaps. Or even cannibalism, though I haven't had any takers for that one as yet. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 21 Dec 12 - 07:23 AM According to HPA In 2007, 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%) By 2007, 32% of all MSM seen for HIV care were aged over 45, and 17% were over 50. http://www.hpa.org.uk/web/HPAweb&HPAwebStandard/HPAweb_C/1203928687610 So well over 10% of MSMs are infected. Probably 12% to 15% or even 20% For comparison, the great flu pandemic of 1918 killed 3% of population, and the Great Plague of 1665 killed 15% |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Steve Shaw Date: 21 Dec 12 - 07:09 AM You made the point that HIV is rare. I made the point that it is in epidemic proportions in high risk groups, specifically MSMs. Fewer than one person in 600 is HIV-positive. Fewer than half of those will go on to develop Aids. That makes HIV infection pretty rare. Not that it isn't serious and should be downplayed. Now every year in the UK around 450,000 people are infected with other STIs. In round figures that's four people in every 600, and that's every year, not the overall one-in-600 represented by HIV-positive people. About a third of those are chlamydia infections, a serious disease that has the potential to cause long-term chronic pain and sterility in women, much more frequently occurring, by a factor of five or six, than HIV infection. Then there's gonorrhoea, increasing at an alarming rate, and HPV, passed to women by men, which kills almost three times as many women each year by developing into cervical cancer (which is nearly always caused by HPV infection) as the number of people who die from Aids. Anyone can hype up particular statistics by narrowing severely the groups you apply them to. You could make gonorrhoea look like a terrible epidemic if you apply it just to 18-25s. You can make chickenpox look like a terrible epidemic if you apply it just to kids between five and ten. The thing is, you have a rather awkward question to answer. Why, among all the STIs you could be discussing, and instead of talking about education for safe sex, do you choose to focus obsessively on the one infection which, in spite of its relatively low incidence, is the one you perceive to be mostly associated with homosexuals? Frankly, that says more about you and your illiberal prejudices than it says about any "concern" you might want us to think you have about the sufferers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 21 Dec 12 - 07:03 AM Yes. Normally an epidemic runs its course as the proportion of resistant people increases. There is no resistance to HIV and it has become endemic within high risk groups, but not in the general population. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Musket Date: 21 Dec 12 - 06:57 AM Ah.. As such shall ye judge them. Thanks Keith, the fog is lifting. Epidemic. mmm. Instead of using the term in the strict sense I see it used, (after all NHS public health definitions do not always translate to other countries and their definitions, and WHO have a definition of their own...) I like the one found at www.dictionary.com which says (of a disease) affecting many persons at the same time, and spreading from person to person in a locality where the disease is not permanently prevalent. It would be silly if I took that as meaning that those who bandy the word epidemic around accept that the disease is not permanently prevalent. Wouldn't it? Sadly, HIV+ is a state and whilst controllable, is not curable. AIDS can only be treated palliatively. So.. before both sides use words like epidemic, bear in mind that words have meanings. Anything permanently within a locality cannot be an epidemic. By accepting epidemic, you accept that we are not all going to hell in a hand cart. Oh, Akenaton. You don't have to join UKIP you know. Most people here seem to recognise you as a clown without you having to wear a red nose to prove it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 21 Dec 12 - 06:28 AM The UK Independence Party has many in its ranks who are gay men or women who have, without fuss or ostentation, taken advantage of the new arrangements. As a libertarian party, we are entirely at ease with their choice and wish all of them well. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 21 Dec 12 - 06:27 AM Why is it that our Keith always espouses the most ignorant, nasty, inhuman causes? Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 21 Dec 12 - 06:26 AM Has UKIP become a far right party Don? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 21 Dec 12 - 06:23 AM ""Think I'll start voting for UKIP!!"" That says it all. So far to the right that Hubble can't see them. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 21 Dec 12 - 06:22 AM It can and does qualify as an epidemic within that community Don. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 21 Dec 12 - 06:20 AM ""How many people do you think know that HIV/aids has reached epidemic levels in the UK?"" That has to be the biggest stretch yet! If every male homosexual in the country were HIV positive (which would statistically mean possibly half developing full blown AIDS) it wouldn't qualify as an epidemic. There simply aren't enough cases in a 65 million population to warrant that definition, unless of course there is massive infection in the heterosexual majority. The worst you can say with any credibility is that HIV is endemic, but that wouldn't suit Ake's agenda because it would also be true of almost every country in the world, and overall, as one might expect, a fifty fifty split Homo to Hetero. That is definitely NOT what Ake wants to hear. I'm afraid he was born 7 decades too late and in the wrong country. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 21 Dec 12 - 06:17 AM No Steve. You put that interpretation on it. You made the point that HIV is rare. I made the point that it is in epidemic proportions in high risk groups, specifically MSMs. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Steve Shaw Date: 21 Dec 12 - 06:09 AM The prevalence among MSMs is comparable to that of The Great Plague of 1666. Nice one, Keith. So we are now aligning that great evil gay sex with the great evil bubonic plague as well as with the great evil incest. Any more offers? Anyone like to align gay sex with cannibalism? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Steve Shaw Date: 21 Dec 12 - 06:04 AM Well, the annual rate of newly-diagnosed STIs in the UK is not far short of half a million. Almost 150,000 new cases of chlamydia per annum, for example. Kind of puts the relatively tiny number of new HIV diagnoses in the shade, eh, ake? Never mind banning gay sex. Let's just ban sex! This context makes your unhealthy focus on homosexual activity all the more worrying. Don't you think that a good, effective programme of education for relationships and safe sex, free from moralising, free from clergymen, and not just at school either, would do a damn sight more good than all this thinly-disguised homophobia? That what we do not currently have? I do have to keep asking, you know. How many people do you think know that HIV/aids has reached epidemic levels in the UK? Hmm, dark and scary talk. I await your evidence. Please include a definition of "epidemic". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 21 Dec 12 - 06:00 AM ""Same shit, different day. 600+ posts? Intolerance and ignorance cannot be stomped out with logic and a plea for compassion for fellow humans. I base this on empirical analysis, which is... 600+ posts here and countless others over the years can't do it so why bother?"" What do you suggest we do, Gnu, bow out and let the internet world get the impression that this all embracing international folk music forum is actually a racist, misogynist, homophobic and religious fundamentalist cesspit? Not if it takes 6,000 posts or 60,000, or........... Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 21 Dec 12 - 05:52 AM ""Male homosexual practice and the promiscuity associated with it is more dangerous and unhealthy than incest or many other types of sexual behaviour and as such should not be promoted by legislation like same sex "marriage""" Homophobic nonsense. Why does HIV infect more men in one place and more women in another? PURE CHANCE! The demographic in which the virus first made itself known depends entirely upon the gender of the index cases. And since homo and hetero sexuals rarely intermix, it remains disproportionately in that gender in which it was first identified, since, once it is identified people start to take precautions against it, so the opposite gender doesn't, as a rule, catch up. Don T. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Megan L Date: 21 Dec 12 - 05:37 AM From looking at last years STD figures single sex couplings are far from the problem aparently hetrosexual young men should get a condom welded on at pubertyand be taught that there are certain things one should not share with the entire world. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: akenaton Date: 21 Dec 12 - 04:05 AM Steve....Of course i am trying to illustrate the issue, the facts are being deliberately concealed from the UK public. How many people do you think know that HIV/aids has reached epidemic levels in the UK? The leaflet I mentioned earlier is a typical example of concealment. The whole sorry mess is a symptom of the idiocy of many parts of the Human Rights Act. We have been deprived of our voice and our motivation.......Think I'll start voting for UKIP!! :0) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Musket Date: 21 Dec 12 - 04:00 AM You all seem to be missing the point. The only way to get Akenaton to justify his conclusions is to wrap them in a request for data from his huge database he edits before publishing.. Hey Queer basher! Yes you! It's Name the Year Time. From the documents you are quoting from, have a look and tell us the last time somebody in The UK who was diagnosed HIV + and under NHS care developed AIDS. If you really want, you might wish to draw a conclusion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: akenaton Date: 21 Dec 12 - 03:56 AM Tia...There seems to be no heath problem amongst lesbians, but there are other grounds for opposing the legislation which I have detailed above. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 21 Dec 12 - 03:51 AM err, 1665. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Keith A of Hertford Date: 21 Dec 12 - 03:34 AM Steve, HIV is rare in Britain taken as a single population. The prevalence among MSMs is comparable to that of The Great Plague of 1666. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: GUEST Date: 21 Dec 12 - 01:56 AM Aw, cripe, get off Steve's case! Not EVERYONE has heard that the acronym "MSM," as it is being used here, stands for "Men having Sex with Men." Considering that "MSM" also stands for Marine Safety Manualand some 80 other designations, there are lots of people in the REAL world who are not INSTANTANEOUSLY aware that "MSM" also, in THESE discussions, designates a type of sexual relationship. SHEESH!! Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 21 Dec 12 - 01:12 AM Steve Shaw: "And, for clarity, I haven't concerned my self with statistics for "MSM" which I hadn't even heard of 'til last week." Responsibility at work! Thank you, Akenaton, for attempting to enlighten, those who don't care anyway. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: GUEST,TIA Date: 20 Dec 12 - 11:40 PM I have waited years (literally) for simple answers to simple questions. Do not hold your breath. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Don Firth Date: 20 Dec 12 - 09:46 PM I've wondered. . . . Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: gnu Date: 20 Dec 12 - 08:32 PM "I have answered that question several times on this and other threads." So... you took the time to type all of that when you could have typed "Yes" or "No"? I think you are queer. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Steve Shaw Date: 20 Dec 12 - 08:27 PM myself even |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Steve Shaw Date: 20 Dec 12 - 08:26 PM And, for clarity, I haven't concerned my self with statistics for "MSM" which I hadn't even heard of 'til last week. What I said the first time I mentioned figures was simply: And we have now had HIV/Aids with us for well over 30 years that we know of, yet the number of HIV-positive people in the UK is under 100,000, fewer than one in 600 of the population (and by no means all will develop Aids). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Steve Shaw Date: 20 Dec 12 - 08:19 PM There are 96000 people in the UK who are HIV-positive. The population of the UK is over 60 million. 60 million divided by 96000 yields less than one in 600. 599 Brits in every 600 are HIV-negative. Rough numbers, of course, but that doesn't alter the obstinate fact that HIV is quite rare here, unlike in many African nations, in which it is massively more common, and in which infections among heterosexual vs infections in homosexual people wouldn't raise much of an eyebrow. You like to piddle around with numbers, so here's another bit. 375 died from Aids in a year. So you have less chance of dying from Aids in any given year than you have of becoming a lottery millionaire. I suppose that, given good education in safe sex, your chances would be even more remote. Would you like to tell us how many gay men never get HIV? I'm not trying to play down what is a clear issue, but you are definitely trying to play it up. Going from your history on the topic of homosexuality, it isn't difficult to work out why. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Bill D Date: 20 Dec 12 - 07:39 PM "I have answered that question several times on this and other threads." We seem to carelessly forget... a one word reminder will do. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: GUEST,TIA Date: 20 Dec 12 - 07:26 PM Still no answer to this one: akenaton - the lowest HIV rates in the world are amongst lesbians. Do you oppose same sex marriage for lesbians? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: akenaton Date: 20 Dec 12 - 07:12 PM Bobad.....I have answered that question several times on this and other threads. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: bobad Date: 20 Dec 12 - 07:02 PM Ake, if a cure for AIDS was found would you then be OK with "gay marriage"? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: akenaton Date: 20 Dec 12 - 06:56 PM Steve....Could you please show me where you got the figure of less than one MSM in six hundred carry the virus? The HPA figures which I quoted say 40000 in just over half a million are living with hiv/aids. Over 3200 is being added to this figure annually as new infections are logged. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: akenaton Date: 20 Dec 12 - 06:45 PM I did not like the leaflet because it attempted to conceal the facts. Facts, as you rightly say, it had in its posession. It makes no sense to say that the largest number of hiv cases worldwide are among heteros, when over 60% of cases in the NHS area are amongst a small sexual minority. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: akenaton Date: 20 Dec 12 - 06:35 PM Musket....Here are the correct hiv figures for the UK. Of course, as they are supplied by your organisation of choice and you profess to work in the field, feel free to misrepresent them as you have done in the past. News Archives Volume 6 No 16; 20 April 2012 HPR Home | Archives | 2011 news New HIV and AIDS diagnoses and deaths in the United Kingdom in 2011 Expanded HIV testing in high prevalence areas: HPA resource published Public consultation on the role of the health workforce in tackling health inequalities New HIV and AIDS diagnoses and deaths in the United Kingdom in 2011 New data – based on surveillance reports received as at end-December 2011 – indicate that a total of 5,600 people (4,050 men and 1,550 women) were diagnosed with HIV in the United Kingdom in 2011 [1]. This provisional figure is likely to rise to 6,150 after adjustment for reporting delays (see table). The 2011 total is a slight decrease on 2010 and continues the year-on-year decline from the peak of 7,820 diagnoses reported in 2005. For the first time since 1998, the number of new HIV diagnoses in men who have sex with men (MSM) has surpassed new diagnoses in heterosexuals. Half of those diagnosed in 2011 (48%, 3,000) probably acquired their infection through sex between men and 47% (2,890) through heterosexual contact (data adjusted for undetermined risk) (see figure). The overall decline in new diagnoses is largely due to fewer reported cases among heterosexuals who probably acquired their infection abroad. The number of new diagnoses among MSM in 2011 (2,475) is expected to reach 3,000 when all reports are received. This continues the slow but steady increase observed over the past decade. The majority of MSM diagnosed in 2011 are white (84%) and acquired their infection within the UK (84%). Analysis of data from each of the related surveillance systems strongly suggest that the continuing high annual numbers of new HIV diagnoses in MSM have been driven by an underlying high and unchanged HIV incidence. The number of new diagnoses among those infected heterosexually within the UK has remained steady at around 1,100 per year since 2008. In contrast, the number of new diagnoses among heterosexuals infected abroad has halved since 2006, from 3,530 in 2008 to 1,850 in 2011. This is largely due to a decrease in new diagnoses among persons from sub-Saharan Africa. Continued low numbers of HIV diagnoses were made in people who inject drugs (PWID) (140) and persons infected through other exposures (120), such as mother to child transmission and recipients of blood/tissue products. All infections acquired through receipt of blood/tissue products diagnosed since 2002 were acquired outside of the UK, including the 21 diagnosed in 2011. A total of 375 deaths and 350 AIDS diagnoses among HIV-infected persons in 2011 were reported, and this number is likely to increase as further reports are received. New HIV diagnoses by exposure group and year of diagnosis: United Kingdom, 2002 – 2011 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011** Probable exposure group * Sex between men Adjusted 1980 2170 2460 2640 2650 2880 2770 2800 2880 3000 Observed 1955 2137 2421 2609 2598 2811 2640 2612 2681 2475 Hetero-sexual - likely country of infection All Adjusted 4050 4800 4900 4830 4430 4110 4120 3470 3180 2890 Observed 4004 4723 4829 4763 4347 4004 3919 3240 2952 2350 In the UK Adjusted 530 640 760 830 900 1010 1080 1070 1040 1040 Observed 402 490 595 660 701 733 774 766 744 572 Abroad Adjusted 3530 4160 4140 4000 3530 3100 3040 2400 2140 1850 Observed 3526 4150 4072 3906 3396 2887 2644 2157 1814 1244 Injecting drug use Adjusted 140 170 160 190 200 180 190 160 150 140 Observed 133 167 153 185 195 178 183 147 140 102 Other exposure groups Adjusted 170 200 200 160 180 160 140 170 150 120 Observed 168 197 192 162 178 157 131 154 135 86 Not reported 77 110 110 105 134 182 347 431 448 581 Total 6337 7334 7705 7824 7452 7332 7220 6584 6356 6150 * Adjusted by distributing proportionally those reports for which exposure group is not reported. ** Adjusted for reporting delay. Note: The table shows actual numbers for the observed values. Numbers presented in the text are rounded. Over 3000 new cases amongst MSM represents an epidemic, an epidemic caused by either homosexual practice or extreme promiscuity. According to HPA, there are approx 422000 MSM between 15 and 45 in the UK male population.....There are regional variations to the rate, 7.2 in London, 3.6 ENG and Wales, 1.9 Scotland.....this converts to an overall rate of just over 4% There are over 40000 MSM living with hiv/aids in the UK. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Steve Shaw Date: 20 Dec 12 - 06:20 PM To baldly state that 50% of people with hiv worldwide are women, is meaningless, when over 60% of new infections in UK/US are among male homosexuals. You yourself are a positive mine of misinformation. You neglect to tell us that HIV/Aids is massively more prevalent in certain third world countries, especially in Africa, than here, where fewer than one in 600 are HIV-positive. It is not possible to view correctly the figures you choose to selectively provide unless they are set in that context. Male homosexual practice and the promiscuity associated with it is more dangerous and unhealthy than incest or many other types of sexual behaviour and as such should not be promoted by legislation like same sex "marriage" God, where does one begin. First, and most disgracefully, you reveal your homophobic instincts by tendentiously juxtaposing homosexual activity unfavourably with incest. I suggest that you cannot provide statistical support for your claim and that you typed what you did to cast homosexuality in as bad a light as possible short of actually saying that homosexuals eat people's babies. Second, promoting gay marriage will not make homosexuals have sex more often. That's clearly what you intend to convey when you say that homosexual practice should not be promoted by legislation. Third, well let's have some suggested solutions from you. You didn't like that leaflet, eh, even though it was giving out essential information. Well doesn't that just remind me of the Catholic church being opposed to contraception and abortion and at the same time being opposed to proper sex education. You would like to ban certain kinds of behaviour you disapprove of whilst limiting information about its potential consequences. It all smacks of closet moralising, and that is a damn sight more unhealthy than any of those practices you're so fond of condemning. You want evidence? Ban contraception in Africa and keep people ignorant in Africa, a la Catholic church, and you get a massive Aids epidemic and a massive abortion rate and massive infant/mother mortality, just to add spice to the endemic poverty. Don't you think that good education for relationships and sexual health would solve the problem you think we have? Some good, no-nonsense, non-moralising practical advice? I do, but I keep coming up against attitudes like yours which mix faux-morality with the quest for ignorance. Well, I suppose it does work, and you can always say that you told us so. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: gnu Date: 20 Dec 12 - 05:47 PM Same shit, different day. 600+ posts? Intolerance and ignorance cannot be stomped out with logic and a plea for compassion for fellow humans. I base this on empirical analysis, which is... 600+ posts here and countless others over the years can't do it so why bother? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: GUEST,Eliza Date: 20 Dec 12 - 05:33 PM bubblyrat, minority groups fighting for equality and parity often do become strident and, understandably form a Crusade. It happened with women's struggle for Suffrage, black people's plea to end racism in USA, the fight against apartheid in S Africa and Women's Liberation. Without putting themselves in front of the media their causes wouldn't be heard. I have a struggle in my house with my Muslim husband's attitude to gay people. He cannot accept their rights to live their lives as they wish. He's basically homophobic and very condemnatory. I'm very glad to hear that some Imams are becoming more enlightened. It will all take time, but I hope attitudes will eventually turn around and tolerance and acceptance win in the end. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: GUEST,Musket sans cookie Date: 20 Dec 12 - 03:45 PM Mmmm NHS figures based on public health data from HPA and WHO or Akenaton's irrational fears boiled down into stringing random words together? Tricky one that. Bubblyrat. You can pre judge all you like. Nobody stops you in your own home. However a licenced business is open to all regardless of Creed, gender, race or choice of partner. If you think Muslims get preferential treatment I suggest reading The Daily M*il? They pander to your illogical claptrap so you might make lots of new friends there. Fact 1. The percentage of Muslim offenders in prison is far higher than the increase in numbers in the general population. So special treatment seems to be more custodial sentences.. Many gay Muslims are oppressed for their faith but as many find, here in The UK there are Imams who will bless them at their civil partnership events. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: frogprince Date: 20 Dec 12 - 03:33 PM "Male homosexual practice and the promiscuity associated with it... should not be promoted by legislation like same sex "marriage"" Tell me that you don't realize that this implies that significantly more men will engage in homosexual promiscuity if same sex marriage is legalized. "Hey, dude, they just legalized same sex marriage; that gives me an idea; let's get married, and then mess around with other guys a lot; I bet it will be more fun than this heterosexual stuff!" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: akenaton Date: 20 Dec 12 - 01:42 PM I stopped posting on this thread a couple of days ago, but just loooked back to see if anything interesting or informative had been added on the subject. Of course nothing had, but what a disgusting spectacle to see half a dozen members resort to name calling and bullying in the short time I have been away......and you have the affrontery to call yourselves liberal? You are nothing short of a playground gang.....grow up. While visiting a relative in hospital, i picked up an "information" leaflet produced bt the UK National Health Service, a masterpiece of the misinformation which I referred to further up the thread. It takes the form of a quiz, supposedly to boost awareness and give the facts.You have to answer the following questions, the answers being supplied at the bottom. 1 you can get hiv from sharing a cup.(true or false) 2there is no cure for hiv.(true or false) 3hiv only effects gay men.(true or false) 4there is no specific symptom for hiv (true or false) 5if you are under the age of consent you must have your parents permission to use a condom.(true or false) 6 50% of people affected by hiv are women.(true or false) 7 over 40 million people worldwide are living with hiv.(true or false) 8 hiv is the virus that causes aids. (true or false) 9 hiv is mostly transmitted by heterosexual sex. (true or false) 10 SE Asia has the second most cases of hiv. (true or false) Answers 1-f 2-t 3-f 4-t 5-f 6-t 7-t 8-t 9-t 10-t Leaflets like these and the simplistic message they contain, are the reason that so many people in the UK and the US are in such complete ignorance of the true dangers of aids and the demographics which carry the highest rates of infection. To baldly state that 50% of people with hiv worldwide are women, is meaningless, when over 60% of new infections in UK/US are among male homosexuals. Male homosexual practice and the promiscuity associated with it is more dangerous and unhealthy than incest or many other types of sexual behaviour and as such should not be promoted by legislation like same sex "marriage" |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Amos Date: 20 Dec 12 - 11:25 AM Consummation is a non-issue here, I believe. It is an issue, of course, to the individuals if they enter marriage without having sex, expecting to have it, and find they cannot. But the reasonable thing is to dissolve the marriage by common consent. It becomes an issue when marriage is devised as some other kind of mechanism, such as social control of reproduction, but this is really a legacy of the medieval Church and should be washed out of our social policies. Marriage is no thing other than a postulated relationship, generated by two individuals sharing an agreement. If they are wise, the agreement continues to be generated despite the vicissitudes of life and living, and the marriage survives. This is a Good Thing especially if we are talking about child-rearing marriages, because growing up is confusing enough in our madcap world. But if the agreement dries up and cannot be regenerated mutually, it doesn't make a lot of sense to encumber the dissolution with arbitrary categories and weird definitions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: bubblyrat Date: 20 Dec 12 - 08:38 AM The problem is , Eliza , that Gay people are are trampling on peoples' Human Rights to the extent that they seem to be on some sort of Crusade . If I ran a guesthouse , B&B, or small hotel,and I felt uncomfortable with the idea of two gay men (or women) sleeping together ,then I would make plain my feelings on the subject . As the law now stands ,sadly ,I would be prosecuted for that reaction ,even if it was on religious grounds . However, if I were a MUSLIM , then the British Government would bend over backwards ( no comedians please ) to UPHOLD the sanctity and validity of my religious objections . Not fair really , is it ?? And can gay MUSLIMS get married ?? I don't think so ! So why are you all not protesting about THAT , then ?? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Steve Shaw Date: 20 Dec 12 - 06:26 AM ...and..the fact is...everything I said was the truth... You write terrible English. Your pronouncements are utterly imprecise and inaccurate most of the time. Your attitude to the knowledge base underlying your alleged medical discipline is cavalier in the extreme, often reeking of received wisdom and half-knowledge. I don't know that there is no God but I haven't seen any evidence for one, and I can muster plenty of evidence that suggests he probably doesn't exist. I don't know whether you've written screenplays, are a good mathematician or have practised psychology, but I've seen no evidence for your ability to manage any of them. Just your say-so. And you yourself provide abundant evidence that you could well be making it all up as you go along. Entertaining, but sad in a way. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Musket Date: 20 Dec 12 - 03:58 AM I doubt the Gay marriage question gets resolved elsewhere either, including in those places charged with looking at it. After all, if Mudcat can be derailed into this (interesting nonetheless) Goofus versus sanity debate, politicians should have no problem filibustering the actual debate... Sad really. Exposing Goofus's absurd ramblings is too easy, and not even sport. Methinks the real issue is those who hide behind a cloak (vestment) of pious respectability in order to spew their bigoted ranting and use their "I work for God" status to inflict their twisted take on life on others? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 19 Dec 12 - 09:53 PM Well, I didn't catch who it was...do I have to?..to shut you up?..and if I pull it up, will you shut up?? Steve, I wouldn't be too quick to call anyone a 'liar' with your track record!...and..the fact is...everything I said was the truth...which tells me all three of your discernment sucks...which is why you believe and promote the horseshit that you do.... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Steve Shaw Date: 19 Dec 12 - 06:19 PM The great thing, Guffster, is that your entertaining stupidity has managed to unite a bunch of people who have until now been prowling warily around reach other. At last, we have a common purpose in that we all enjoy, with equal relish, your status as a complete bloody laughing stock. Howya, Don?! :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: 'Gay marriage' question From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Date: 19 Dec 12 - 05:45 PM I never knew that Walter Mitty was a real person, but here he is, alive and well and posting his pseudo life story on the Cat under his alter ego name Guest from Sanity. Actually, that wouldn't be early onset, because, if you've done half of what you claim, you're at least 120 years old. Don T. |