BS: Militant Atheism Threads

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 02:41 PM

Well I'm certainly not going to replay that thread over again.
It's in the archive for anyone to read, I of course stand by everything I said, and I certainly believe Blandriver is associated with another abusive poster on that thread.
To say that Reproduction is at best a random by product of sexual intercourse is extreme foolishness, sex can be used in various unhealthy ways, especially commercially, but reproduction determines the survival of the species.
Jack....I never said the thread was closed because I requested it, what I said was that two posts were kindly removed at my request.

I have kept copies of these.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 02:55 PM

Look at what the imported religions have done to Africa.

Why is it that you god-botherers have no shame?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 02:55 PM

Akenaton, My apologies. I was concerned that you may have been posting in the context of and the title of the thread :-) I, at least, felt obligated to eliminate that possibility.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 03:01 PM

>>From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 02:12 PM

"vilifying others in the name of Darwin"

That's interesting! Give me one example of that. I've never seen it, ever. And stop worrying about me. I'm fine. It's chune and beer night! <<

Why do I see this post where you are clearly upset about what I posted? Enjoy your beer. Don't worry about me.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 04:03 PM

To say that Reproduction is at best a random by product of sexual intercourse is extreme foolishness,

No it isn't. I have two kids and yet I can't count the amount if times I've have sex even in the last twenty years (neither of my children were conceived in that time; I had a Vasectomy in 1993). The same is true of everyone who is sexually active, Gay or Straight - we do it to have mutual joyful fun with someone who turns us on, otherwise, what cultural need of contraception?

To say people fuck to have kids is akin to saying people drive on motorways to die in RTAs.

Accidents will happen.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 05:43 PM

"To say people fuck to have kids is akin to saying people drive on motorways to die in RTAs."

Your analogy but I think you could take it a tad further,

Isn't it more like the reason we have the motorways is so that the ambulances can take us to hospitals to have our kids?

We do have motorways for that reason but that is no reason why we can't use them for recreation.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 06:02 PM

Don't be stupid. Since the 70 limit motorways are unsuitable for recreation - unless you know anywhere there are no cameras or Q-cars. I know a few places there are are no cameras, useful for testing boost adjustments. I also know the two most commonly seen Q-cars round here - a boy racer SEAT Leo Cupra and a HUGE BMW 4WD.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 06:03 PM

Keep your eyes one the road buddy!!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 06:57 PM

"To say people fuck to have kids is akin to saying people drive on motorways to die in RTAs.

Accidents will happen."

That must be one of the most cynical pieces of writing that I have ever seen on these pages.

Sex is used, bought and sold joylessly, as a tool to exploit children, to sell all manner of consumables.
Do you think sex between the prostitute and his/her client......"gives transcendent pleasure to the participants" or "deep instinctive sensual pleasuring to the point of orgasmic delirium (and beyond)?"

Promiscuity is destructive, to health and to society.
The vast majority pick their partners to produce children together, to continue their genetic line, to construct a family. It has always been thus.
A few chose not to have children, or sadly are unable to do so for medical reasons.....they are not lesser people for their choice, or their unfortunate circumstances, but they are none the less a very small minority; and if that minority ever becomes a majority, the human race is really in trouble

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 07:16 PM

All of that is more or less true. But the fact is that most of the time people have sex it is not to have children.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 08:50 PM

Can any sane person believe that Ake and Wacko could really have engaged in the tosh contained in their last few posts? It truly defies belief!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 09:46 PM

>>From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 07 Feb 14 - 08:50 PM

Can any sane person believe that Ake and Wacko could really have engaged in the tosh contained in their last few posts? It truly defies belief! <<



You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 03:25 AM

Sex is used, bought and sold joylessly, as a tool to exploit children, to sell all manner of consumables.

Sex is the core of our existence, and, as with most things in life, the vast majority of our species handle it pretty well, and have done so since the first primate got a hard-on circa 65myr. Since then it's EVOLVED to be all consuming - at least as we Happy Homo Sapiens are concerned. We wouldn't exist without it and it's pretty much the be all & end all of our short existence on this planet that defines our notions of beauty, joy, love, economics, art, music, culture, folklore, spirituality and holy communion. We are driven to fuck and to be fucked by the occult persuasions of a Nature which even now according to the Tabloid Theology of the Catholic Church regards is the work of Lucifer.

It MIGHT be argued that it was discovery of the causal links between Sexual Intercourse & Pregnancy that resulted in extreme patriarchy & the enslavement of women to ensure the purity of male bloodlines - after all, there is never ANY doubt who the mother of a child is, is there? This enslavement leads us to the sort of reactionary piffle that typifies your Average Ake Post (see above) in which his misinformed tabloid sensationalism goes into fevered overdrive on account of his faith in third-hand propagandist bullshit that only exists to sell papers & keep people too frightened to leave their homes.

Bad shit lurks therein, however : I'm sure we're all aware by now that in Russia Homosexuality and Paedophilia are synonymous. In many minds it's that way over here too. Reality (which includes Prostitution) is very different. Perhaps it's something Ake ought to look into (i.e. REALITY) to shine a bit of light into his white-washed tabloid tomb?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 04:27 AM

Jack, I thought we were discussing the original purpose of reproductive organs.....in relation to the species.

I know that most sexual intercourse is not to conceive children, but that is because we have worked out ways of stopping conception taking place.

If we had not worked out how to short circuit our natural functions, promiscuity would be less common.
That is not to say that I am against contraception, the human species has devolved to such an extent that contraception has become an absolute necessity to stop over population in confined areas, but with the benefits come the consequences. As society, and I must say the power of the church disintegrates, huge rates of promiscuity pertain, anything goes, and the most promiscuous sections of society are affected in epidemic proportions.

Blandriver lives in fairyland, or Mills and Boon Land, if he believes
the sort of sex being experienced by very many people today gives transcendental pleasure , or orgasmic delirium. Most of it is deeply exploitative, to say that "sex" is an end in itself, is foolish and
dangerous to individuals and the survival of our society.

Promiscuity is bad for all of us, that should be clear to everyone in this day and age.....Pope Benedict tried to make this very point, only to be howled down by the "liberal" media.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 05:32 AM

Just an observation here. How come these threads, which are ostensibly about religion and atheism, always turn to the subject of homosexuality?

Anyway, addressing Bill D's point. Yes, it is an international forum. So why would you assume 'my old fruit' has the same meaning in the UK as in your neck of the woods? Besides, Google is always to hand and I assume you are capable of using it. Now, I'm just nipping outside to roll a fag...

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Bill D
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 08:37 AM

I didn't assume anything, except that the poster of the terminology regularly does use language designed to be insulting... and I did use Google, as instructed. It gave me several variations which did not totally clarify his intent.... and none of that addressed my concern, which was why certain people feel the need to toss out language which NEEDS to be looked up and interpreted to determine how deeply one has been insulted... or not.


And them fags are bad for you, as is being outside in Winter, don't cha know? (No charge for the medical advice)


(I kinda miss Martin Gibson. Being from Chicago, there was ever any doubt when HE insulted you!)

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 08:56 AM

Be in no doubt about whither or not it was an insult Bill.
It was indeed; it's what we term "condescension".

Not often used on this forum by Steven granted, but always lurking around somewhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 10:15 AM

Bill, I too think it was an insult. It was certainly disrespectful. It was designed to draw you into a favorite game of a few Englishmen on this forum; "The bickering over definitions game."

In my experience, it is easy to tell whether it is an insult or not. Did he apologize for the confusion? If he did it must have been in PM. If he didn't, he is still playing.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,concerened
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 10:28 AM

Oh deary me..after getting two posts closed down the playground gobshites are at it again.

Now look here, i am an everyday sort of a chappess as sweetcheeks will tell you, wink wink, say no more!!

I have got a bit serious here Muskett 'cos of the likes of the unspeakable clown shaw and the like picking on poor old jack.I see the deranged gnome corrector has come out of his winter sleep to harangue the poor old mariner.

I am really with jack on this; why is it some on this site, akkenenton, the muff blandiver, shaw particularly with his "twat features" and "bastard" very low that: and can get away with using apropriose epithets like "fuck" with frequent impunity?

Not that i am really bothered but it does bring into question the rules?

"You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak."

please discuss..I cant be bothered I have e some paint I want to watch dry.....

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 11:58 AM

the deranged gnome corrector

Not seen her yet. I like a bit of correction :-) Where is she?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 12:13 PM

"don't be such a po-faced ol' git" then!

You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak.

"yankee imperialism "

You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak.

"If you don't know what "ol' fruit" means, look it up!"

You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak.

There is no doubt in any member's mind that you intended "ol' fruit" as an insult. This is the same silly game that you play where you take the word out of context to argue.

You used "ol' fruit" to refer to Bill in exactly the same way that you used "whacko" to refer to me. I recall that you tried to tell me "Whacko" was not an insult some time ago. It is my impression that you will take any excuse to bicker and call people names.

But I enjoy pointing out how stupidly you are behaving. But for the good of the forum....

Please read and try to absorb the membership rules posted above.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 02:59 PM

Huge difference between Whacko and ol' fruit. One is similar to Jerk the Sea Cadet, Seaman Stains, Master Bates etc, the other is a friendly term when speaking in the old colloquial. Just out of interest, assuming Jack's interpretation of "rules" for a moment; there is nothing wrong with "Yankee imperialism" as it is in the abstract. Although if the cap fits ....

Fascinated as ever with the "sex for reproduction" nonsense. Viz magazine may he of help for those of that absurd belief.

"Beer! Helping ugly people have sex since 1847".

Anyone with the poster may correct me regarding the arbitrary date.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 07:06 PM

Ah yes, another Wacko-dominated thread that is descending into the ridiculous (but such fun!). Actually, I've never insulted anybody, ever. All I've done is provide sharp riposte to people who are proud of being total idiots - and insulting the rest of us, serially and routinely, by requiring us to consider their utter inanities (we must be mad). If you are not a total idiot you will recognise yourself as not ever having been the recipient of such riposte (and not just from me - I have no ego, you know!). I'm not too keen on the indulging of fools such as pete, Wacko and Ake. If only more of us told these idiots to ditch their stupid bigotry and prejudices, and cut out the defensiveness, in as direct a manner as possible, we wouldn't have these threads (though what fun we'd be denying ourselves thereby!). Saddest of all is to see the likes of Bill, fine fellow though he is, who does everything in his power, possibly unknowingly, to keep these idiots on board, by dint of his indulgence of them (the indulgence is often close to patronising, which is a good thing, but ol' fruit Bill doesn't realise that they're too thick to see it). We need a world in which bullshitters are afforded no quarter. Too many of them hold far too much sway. The Christian militants have been telling us atheists like it is for millennia (and, often, doing us in, violently, in the process). They should cut out the whingeing and fight back - if they can - if they don't like it up 'em!

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,concerened
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 07:14 PM

I never read such unadulterated, self satisfied, self promoting, smug crap shaw.....it is obnoxious even for you..Oh, if only we all had your wisdom and in depth perception..does beg the question though, if you are as good as you boast, why are you infesting these pages with your particular brand of bullshit?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 07:38 PM

"Wacko-"

You are free to be anything you want EXCEPT unkind, impolite, argumentative, snooty, or either FOR or AGAINST that of-what-we-do-not-speak.


Does anyone agree with Mr. Shaw's statement?

" I've never insulted anybody, ever."

He seems to think that by insulting people on this forum who don't care a think about his opinions or grievances, he can right all of the wrongs that "Christian Militants" have been doing to his poor downtrodden people for so so long. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 07:52 PM

"Yankee imperialism" as it is in the abstract. Although if the cap fits"

I think the problem in this case is insisting that the cap fits.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Bill D
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 08:41 PM

I come home from a day at a folk music festival to find myself assured ...twice ... that I HAVE BEEN insulted... but then I read from the source that he has never, ever insulted anyone. Then he proceeds to insult me far worse than name calling by asserting that I indulge and patronize 'idiots' by participating in debate with people whom I know are NOT anything near idiots.

"Be in no doubt about whither or not it was an insult Bill.
It was indeed; it's what we term "condescension"."

Yeah... it does feel a bit like condescension *shrug*... but if no one deducts too many points for my flawed approach... *giggle*... I won't fret over it.

It must be ... nice?.... interesting?....humbling?.. naaawww, not humbling... to be so competent and smug that one can identify and categorize the innate mental capacities of those with whom he disagrees.

I suppose that all I can do as an indulgent 'ol fruit is to shrug and be whatever *I* choose to be and focus on the discussions and not the 'ratings' supplied from the sidelines.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 08 Feb 14 - 08:53 PM

I'm afraid Bill that in Mr. Shaw's universe yer either fer 'm or agin 'm.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 03:03 AM

The scenario.

Someone comes up with pompous shit or weird takes on reality.

The geography and reaction.

Pub - Smile , turn your back and talk to someone else.

Family - Smile, review your Christmas card list.

Interwebby thing - Put them out of their misery by telling them rather publicly what you think of their opinion.



You know, the less diplomatic approach, as seen on these threads is possibly in the long run the best approach after all.



(For the pub scenario, I would add , as I do, that when in the company of odious bigots, you may wish to leave your pint and walk out , wiping your feet as you leave.)

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 07:16 AM

Jack, I thought we were discussing the original purpose of reproductive organs.....in relation to the species.

We are. We operate as a species through sexual pleasure & the joy of our genitalia. Homo, hetero, auto - it makes little difference. Consequently there's little chance of us dying out through contraception or STDs, BUT the ORIGINAL PURPOSE of our sex organs is for nought but PLEASURE. Reproduction is an occult & random consequence, as it is throughout all of nature from pollination to full on humping. I sure ain't heard no HORSE talk about no reproduction.

Homosexuality is not just restricted to the human realm, but we Homosexual Sapiens have made it a fine, noble and glorious art. As someone said, if God was so offended by BUGGERY, why did he put a G-spot up the male arsehole? And even the BIBLE celebrates Anal Sex... (Song o' Solomon 5:4). As someone else said, women are Lesbian by default.

Sex defines our culture & our spirituality; it is our very raison d'etre - all Nature expects of us is to have fun in a random scatter gun fashion & it will do the rest quite nicely.

*

Promiscuity is bad for all of us, that should be clear to everyone in this day and age.....Pope Benedict tried to make this very point, only to be howled down by the "liberal" media.

Pope Benedict covered up for paedophiles - anything else he said is invalid. He also headed an organisation responsible for the death & suffering of countless thousands (2 if you include the Catholic Church, in which case the number is MILLIONS). He also fast-tracked that sadistic old bitch & death fetishist Mother Theresa to becoming a saint. That is BAD.

There are no IDEALS here, just LIFE, what IS, and what has EVOLVED to be in this GODLESS REALM where the only problems are in the foetid imaginations of censorious tabloid tossers (like yourself) who take such offence at it.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 07:57 AM

Interwebby thing - Put them out of their misery by telling them rather publicly what you think of their opinion, but on Mudcat do it without gratuitous abuse in respect for the wishes of the selfless people who provide the service.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 08:03 AM

the ORIGINAL PURPOSE of our sex organs is for nought but PLEASURE.

No.
Reproduction is their original purpose, but if it did not stimulate the pleasure centres of the brain, no-one or thing would use them.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 08:56 AM

Oh, if only we all had your wisdom and in depth perception..does beg the question though, if you are as good as you boast...

No it doesn't. It raises the question. I'm not as "good" as anything. I'm just enjoying meself.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 12:25 PM

I was actually responding to Jack the Sailor Mr Blandriver, I am certainly not about to carry on a debate with some one as abusive as you.

Anyway there is no need to debate you, your frenzied post says everything we need to know about you.

I am amazed though, that there are still people who hold your views on sexual conduct in todays climate.
If you are really a homosexual, as you claim, do the MSM infection rates not give you pause for thought?
If these rates are not caused by extreme promiscuous behaviour, perhaps you can enlighten us as to their actual cause?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 12:38 PM

Ake, I think that people, any people getting AIDS is disturbing to all of us. I've pointed out before that you have not shown a link between that and Gay marriage, yet you use it as an argument against it.

Near my small home town in Canada a man was convicted and jailed for knowingly having unprotected sex with multiple female partners while being infected with the virus. I know for a fact that AIDS is not just a gay problem and the causal factor for the epidemic was promiscuity and recklessness not homosexuality.

If you want to say that MSM infection rates are alarming and that young men are reckless, I doubt you will find many who will argue the point. But the conflation of that and gay marriage is taking the argument beyond the evidence.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 12:45 PM

Oy! Odious worm!

Earlier on in this thread, you moaned about personal abuse. You said I was a poor NHS manager despite the fact I am neither poor, nor an NHS manager. Your beef was, I presume, that The academy of Royal Colleges don't recognise your false and misinterpreted health figures that you use to persecute gay people in a most despicable and awful manner. The NHS deals with reality, not your wish to criminalise people for merely existing.

So.. If you can't take it, stop giving it out.

Here's a fact. More women love it up their arse than men. Factor that into your homophobia you worthless creep.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 01:30 PM

The academy of Royal Colleges don't recognise your false and misinterpreted health figures

They use HPA data, same as Ake.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 01:35 PM

Musket leave out the first and last lines and your post has some credibility. As it is you are just a rule breaking name caller.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 02:31 PM

But the middle bit is misleading.

"British HIV Association (BHIVA), British Association for Sexual Health and HIV
(BASHH)/Royal College of Physicians, Medical Foundation for AIDS & Sexual Health
(MedFASH)
British HIV Association (BHIVA), British Association for Sexual Health and HIV (BASHH)/Royal College of Physicians, Medical Foundation for AIDS & Sexual Health (MedFASH)
Written evidence from The British HIV Association (BHIVA) (HAUK 53)
1. Monitoring
Please also refer to the evidence submission by the 'Halve It Campaign' of which BHIVA is a member
We wish to emphasise the following points:
i)
The quality of HIV surveillance in the UK provided by the Health Protection agency (HPA) is high and internationally recognised. The HPA provides information on the epidemiology of HIV infection across different populations and localities. Reporting of HIV surveillance data is voluntary, but both participation and reporting is high.
ii)
Under the proposed public health reforms it is important the quality and extent of the current surveillance provided by the HPA is maintained and enhanced. It is vital sufficient resources are made available, and that fragmentation of surveillance and monitoring systems does not occur.
iii)
The development of clinical outcome indicators by the HPA in collaboration with the London specialist commissioning group has been a significant initiative in the monitoring of treatment and care outcomes and will help inform the commissioning of services.
iv)"

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 04:11 PM

I don't see any response to the valid point about promiscuity spreading HIV

Jack.... if over 60% of new cases of HIV (70% in the US), are from the MSM demographic, surely that says something about the sexual behaviour of male homosexuals?
I have always deduced from these figures that sexual intercourse between males is dangerous and unhealthy and should not be promoted as "safe and healthy".....the legislation to promote homosexual "marriage" through the church is in my opinion flawed.

The church is supposed to give moral guidance on matters like sexual behaviour....how can they do so without studying and understanding these figures

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 05:16 PM

Ake, You do not have enough data to reach that conclusion.   

What are the infection rates among monogamous couples neither of whom were previously infected?

How about female homosexual couples? Are they to have their rights abridged because of male to male infection?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 05:32 PM

I am referring only to male homosexual infection rates Jack.

The church defines marriage as between a man and a woman exclusively

I suppose the infection rates for totally monogamous male homosexual couples would be nil.....if you could find one.

Various studies have shown male homosexuals to have large numbers of lifetime sexual partners, over 100 is common some give figures of over one thousand.
Even in "committed" relationships monogamy among male homosexuals is not common.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 08:23 PM

I suppose the infection rates for totally monogamous male homosexual couples would be nil.....if you could find one.

Various studies have shown male homosexuals to have large numbers of lifetime sexual partners, over 100 is common some give figures of over one thousand.

These remarks reveal you to be one of the most repugnant, bigoted, lying, prejudiced, vile, sub-human, nasty pieces of work I've ever encountered.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 11:14 PM

>>These remarks reveal you to be one of the most repugnant, bigoted, lying, prejudiced, vile, sub-human, nasty pieces of work I've ever encountered. <<

You say that you have never insulted anyone. I think I might start counting the insults.

1 (7 actually but lets keep it simple and stick to incidences)

Perhaps you are unaware of the rules of this forum.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 11:31 PM

>>From: akenaton - PM
Date: 09 Feb 14 - 05:32 PM

I am referring only to male homosexual infection rates Jack.

The church defines marriage as between a man and a woman exclusively

I suppose the infection rates for totally monogamous male homosexual couples would be nil.....if you could find one.<<

So I guess you are saying that the only reason that women and Gay men who intend to remain faithful is a definition of the church?

I know that not all churches are as rigid in their definition of marriage. So let me ask you this. Would you have an object to two gays getting married if they pledged monogamy (as most couples do) and could find a church to marry them?

I think that if your objection is simply your morals and if you are not insisting that your morals be opposed on others then it is your right to express your opinion. MSM infection is a separate issue. I'm sure that all can agree it is a bad thing. Forcing a legal abridgement of equal rights of a citizen because of the a definition imposed by a church they do not follow does not seen like you Ake. You come across as a lover of liberty and equality to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 04:25 AM

Keith is being literal again. Of course the data supplied by HPA is mostly accurate. After all, it is gleaned largely from NHS data in the first place. As ever, bigots confuse trajectory based on history with trajectory based on meta analysis. The latter being what public Health consultants use when planning local services.

Keith keeps referring to a paper published using HPA data from a one year period as being the definitive data. No. It is a published opinion. Just that. A very good one by the way and most useful, but merely one factor.

The other factors are the excellent take up of screening by male gays, which skew figures, and the appalling late presentations by promiscuous women. Sexual health services are concentrating on the latter. Look for the new adverts just starting up. Unlike our more odious contributors, my comments on this subject do tend to be on the basis of fact. After all, I advise on healthcare planning as a small part of what I do. When I said more women take it up the arse than men, it is based mainly on complication presentation at emergency departments and colo rectal referrals, not gut (or colon..) feeling.... Oh, and the internet funnily enough. The exposure of more people to porn makes anal sex seen more a a norm and is more expected than before. An interesting paper about that the other year in a medical journal I read.

But not worth arguing with Keith or the worm. Keith is just plain ignorant and believes what he wishes to believe, so long as he can google something with a glimmer of fact about it and the worm just hates people who are on the wrong side of his personality disorder.

Sigh....

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 04:43 AM

By the way Keith.

The BHIVA are expressing their wishes in a submission to a consultation in the quote you gave. A very good one, as the epidemiology of sexual health does require trend and incidence analysis, as well as regional variation. Our people do have concerns that HPA data may be less valid if the quango bonfire affects their ability.

But the same people are the first to decry those who dangerously use HPA data to satisfy false assumptions. There is a similar issue on recall for breast screening, where data is being misinterpreted by pressure groups who want screening expanded on other than clinical appropriateness.

If you are a decent man, and your track record hasn't been sparkling it has to be said, you at least should accept that the epidemiology of a health aspect in a population size such as ours is more complicated than looking at history and trajectory and carving the results in stone.

I wish it were. We'd need to spend less on expensive consultant doctors. Public health consultants aren't cheap, but the planning and forecasting they give at a local level helps target services far better than far right groups, priests or politicians could ever do.



Jack. Sorry but Steve Shaw was both accurate and I think constrained in his condemnation of the worm above. To think that anybody could be so sinister and repugnant as to assume gay people, the ones who fought hard to be accepted, allowed to marry, aren't worth the effort because they are all adulterous anyway?

He makes my skin crawl.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 05:09 AM

Keith keeps referring to a paper published using HPA data from a one year period as being the definitive data. No. It is a published opinion. Just that.

The HPA statistics ARE definitive.
Raw data is obviously supplied by clinicians, but HPA/PHE produce the statistics AND NO-ONE ELSE!
That is why you can not produce any others despite repeated requests.

In your position you must know this, but you hope to hide the fact from the forum because the figures undermine your position.
You are a thoroughly dishonest person.

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Musket
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 06:49 AM

You gormless stupid ill informed pillock.

HPA get HRG data from commissioning returns. They then produce statistics and offer scenarios to support trends.

This morning, my first day back at my desk, I am reviewing cancer data from January. It will hit national recipients possibly by April.

PHE don't do anything yet in that regard as they haven't even got their funding yet. My wife was appointed a regional cancer lead back in July and the sessions she is being paid haven't hit her paycheck yet. When they do carry on the work of national and regional planning, they will, as the SHAs did before, use HPA type data to inform planning of services and refine their raw numbers source with other pertinent intelligence. I shouldn't use that last word with you, it might confuse you, sorry. You know, if you were right, I wouldn't have the contract I have, as I am leading long term planning of NHS services for a huge region of England, and am in constant contact with, and use information from the organisations you keep quoting. I think I know a wee bit more than someone who reads two books and thinks he knows everything about anything eh?


I tried. You just can't educate pork.

There again, your agenda is clear Keith. You just don't let the mask slip as often as Akenhateon do you?

Subject: RE: BS: Militant Atheism Threads
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 10 Feb 14 - 07:18 AM

"You gormless stupid ill informed pillock"
HPA have been part of PHE since April last year.
PHE are the "authors" of the last annual HIV report, still on the HPA site.

They supply the definitive statistics.
No-one else.
You are a thoroughly dishonest person.