BS: Real Non-belief/not militant

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 11:15 AM

No reason?
Do you even know that you called someone "worm."
No-one cares what you views are. You will never be deleted for that.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 12:22 PM

It must be that those who leave room for promiscuous allowances in their behavior cannot fathom why those who feel closer to LIFE, and its processes of bringing forth LIFE with a loved, monogamous spouse, cannot understand why it is NOT hate or bigotry of any sort, to not buy into either homosexuality or any form of reckless promiscuity.
There IS a difference in the minds of those who engage on procreating, and nurturing that child, with the same love, that he has for his spouse, than getting their jollies off with anyone who lets him or her, and then pretending that it's the same thing...because it 'FEELS like their in heat'...or was that 'love'? To some, they can't tell the difference.
It reminds me of the great line, "What do you mean, she's not a whore, she fell in love with all of them!!"
...and they just don't get it.....and will probably go to their graves, being unsatisfied.....in more than one way!
Meanwhile, they get to spread fatal diseases, and emotional immaturity with complete abandon, of the whack-job ideologues, who seem to confuse 'allowing' them with 'helping' them, and the rest of society....which still, is trying to survive and reproduce, like the rest of the living!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 03:22 PM

Good gracious, Ake. Do you REALLY believe that anything that is not used for it's original purpose is a perversion? If that is the case there is just no point in continuing the discussion. As to a 'high proportion' of male homosexuals having a large number of partners leading to the proposition that male homosexuals are promiscuous, I point you in the direction of people that believe Jews are tight with money, the Irish are stupid and black men are rapists. Stereotyping at it's worse. Something useful has come of your ridiculous claims anyway. Everyone now knows what you think of male homosexuals and anyone can see why you will never answer the question as to how you propose to enforce this register and testing you promote so vigourously.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 03:48 PM

Dave....there have been very large and respected studies done on the numbers of sexual life partners of various sections of society.

I printed the results of these studies further up the thread.

If male homosexuals in general, are no more promiscuous than other demographics, could you please explain the massive rates of infection which affect them?......I really think it is about time YOU were answering a few questions?

Your last post was just abusive rhetoric, why on earth do you accuse me of racism, when I have been injured on demonstrations AGAINST racism?

Homosexuality is a behaviour, and it is quite valid to criticise aspects of any behaviour which appears to be bad for the participants ...and society at large.
Please try to concentrate.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 04:27 PM

Homosexuality is a behaviour, and it is quite valid to criticise aspects of any behaviour which appears to be bad for the participants

Nasty, sick little pervert.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 05:45 PM

Mr./Mrs. Shaw:"'Homosexuality is a behaviour, and it is quite valid to criticise aspects of any behaviour which appears to be bad for the participants'.
Nasty, sick little pervert."

Akenaton, It appears that the Shaws, are trying to tell you that its not perverted to have, '...any behaviour which appears to be bad for the participants'.

He must be quite a drooling alcoholic and addict to want to see past that pain or hurt his friend's feelings.!

Regards,
GfS

P.S. Hey, I know...Let's see if they start a 'movement'.......call it the 'Chicken of Life Party'....they can have an egg for a mascot!

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 07:04 PM

"By the way, I've been thinking about the op."

Well, Musket, you'd better be absolutely sure before you go ahead with it, because it can't really be undone!

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 08:52 PM

He must be quite a drooling alcoholic and addict

Nice one, guffers. Take an A-star for debating quality! :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 23 Feb 14 - 08:59 PM

Thank you, Steve....'Speed is a bi-product of accuracy!'

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 03:14 AM

why on earth do you accuse me of racism

I didn't. I accused you of stereotyping. Which you are doing.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 06:03 AM

Yes Dave, but your examples were all of "racial stereotypes"

Sex between males is behavioural......Jews, Irish, Blacks, could all be homosexual. I don't see how my opinions on any sort of behaviour, could possibly be described as "stereotyping"?

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 06:17 AM

I don't see how my opinions on any sort of behaviour, could possibly be described as "stereotyping"?

You state quite categorically that male homosexuals are promiscuous. That is stereotyping. The examples I quoted are also stereotyping. I do not see any difference between any of the stereotypes. It is wrong to use any of them.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 06:19 AM

Nothing funny about misrepresenting incidence and risk of HIV in order to advance hatred though
No indeed, and not for any other reason either.

Neither of us has done that though Musket.
The figures we produced were the actual, definitive figures.
How could they mislead anyone?
You have failed to produce any non-misleading figures Musket.
Is that because there are no other figures, and all your claims are delusional, deceitful and dishonest?
Yes.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 06:28 AM

Dave, my views on male homosexual health rates are based on official figures, not on an irrational hatred of homosexuals.
How can that be stereotyping, unless you think the health agencies are guilty also?

So you think, that the transmission rates are not caused by promiscuity, well what is the REAL cause?
Why will you never answer a question?

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 07:04 AM

Dave, my views on male homosexual health rates are based on official figures

Health rates have nothing to do with stereotyping. Stereotyping is saying that a whole demographic has certain characteristics based on the actions of a few. Which is exactly what you are doing.

Why will you never answer a question?

I have answered lots of questions. Any one in particular?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 11:11 AM

Akenaton: "Dave, my views on male homosexual health rates are based on official figures, not on an irrational hatred of homosexuals.
How can that be stereotyping, unless you think the health agencies are guilty also?
So you think, that the transmission rates are not caused by promiscuity, well what is the REAL cause?"

The real cause doesn't matter to ideologues. Given the choices of hard data, verses a political agenda, the ideologues, both sides, will favor their agendas, and toss the hard data out the window....and then try to crucify any attempt to bring hard data, or real science to the table. They turn their 'issues' into emotionally based attacks.
It is IGNORANCE(as in 'ignoring' the truth) of the highest order, and pandering to people's FEELINGS. It serves NO ONE....except the wannabe activists bullshit egos!
The facts ARE the FACTS...the rest of the nonsense is just nonsense. The numbers don't lie....they are not emotional!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 11:31 AM

That's pretty well "it" Sanity.

Dave. so, if I say that smokers are the demographic most likely to develop cancer,.....I am stereotyping?

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 11:53 AM

Of course it is! Propaganda is designed to 'get in' by misinformation, disinformation, or omission of the truth. That way they can distort reality and exploit people emotionally....That might help explain when the victims of propaganda run out of bad info, they rely on name calling, and denigrations of those to whom they cannot sensibly refute!!

BTW, Ake, Good Morning, at least on this side of the puddle!

Regards,

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 11:56 AM

"Dave. so, if I say that smokers are the demographic most likely to develop cancer,.....I am stereotyping? "

If you don't specify lung cancer, you probably are.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 12:14 PM

Dave. so, if I say that smokers are the demographic most likely to develop cancer,.....I am stereotyping?

I don't know if you are being purposely thick or you really do lack the power of thought. Either way, let me explain. Again. It has nothing to do with health statistics. You are stereotyping when you say that male homosexuals are promiscuous. When you add that to your ludicrous explanation of perverted we begin to see the bigoted views that you so thinly disguise as 'care'.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 12:27 PM

Sorry Jack...inaccurate post.

Dave, So you don't think that male homosexuals are promiscuous? Well why do the health agencies say that sexual risk taking and large numbers of sexual partners amongst male homosexuals, increase the transmission rates?

Why do YOU think that transmission rates are so high?

Come on, use some of that "thought power", which you imply you have in abundance, but of which I have seen little sign   :0)

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 12:36 PM

Dave the Gnome: "'Dave. so, if I say that smokers are the demographic most likely to develop cancer,.....I am stereotyping?'
I don't know if you are being purposely thick or you really do lack the power of thought. Either way, let me explain. Again. It has nothing to do with health statistics."

"...if I say that smokers are the demographic most likely to develop cancer,.....I am stereotyping?'.....Either way, let me explain. Again. It has nothing to do with health statistics."

Now some how, Dave is trying to make sense out of that!!!!
A definite victim of propaganda. Dave, what then does it have to do with?
Smokers developing cancer and AIDS/HIV have nothing to do with health statistics????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Here's a piece you probably loved!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 12:38 PM

"Dave, So you don't think that male homosexuals are promiscuous?"

I KNOW that all of them are not. You are generalizing the behavior of some to all. That is called stereotyping.

You can make your case with out stereotyping.
But maybe it would not be as strong.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 12:44 PM

Cappy Jack: "I KNOW that all of them are not. You are generalizing the behavior of some to all."

Another dizzying post....."I KNOW that all of them are not", IS a generalization!!.....unless you've tested them all out.....while not being promiscuous....


gfS

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 01:07 PM

Maybe 'stereo-typing is typing with both hands..you know, like 'stereo politicians speaking out of both sides of their mouths'!!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: GUEST,Not Musket so don't delete please
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 01:45 PM

What's the point of posting when you can say disgusting disgraceful odious comments about a section of society complete with solutions that would have made Himmler blush but tackle it and your posts get deleted.

Pathetic

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: frogprince
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 01:46 PM

Step one: jts begins a sentence by saying something that is slightly misworded.

Step two: jts completes the sentence in a way that makes his actual intention perfectly clear.

Step three: Gfs demonstrates either a lack of normal reading comprehension, or his total indifference to legitimate discussion, by taking the first part of jts's statement to be the only meaningful part of the post.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 03:16 PM

What I see most from the people non-musket accuses of bigotry, are arguments designed to make musket look dumb.

I observe that same calling and unjustified NAZI references never make a a person seem smarter.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 04:18 PM

"Step one: jts begins a sentence by saying something that is slightly misworded."

Naw..he got it right....it's just a dumb rap.


Musket: "What's the point of posting when you can say disgusting disgraceful odious comments about a section of society complete with solutions that would have made Himmler blush but tackle it and your posts get deleted."

What Himmler said in a speech.......was he wrong?....Look what happened. Germany was defeated, but not Fascism.

Cappy Jack: "What I see most from the people non-musket accuses of bigotry, are arguments designed to make musket look dumb."

Naw..He does that without any help...that's what happens when your 'logic' is based on emotions, and not reality.....(P.S. What's a 'non musket'?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 04:29 PM

"He does that without any help"

I agree with that.

"...that's what happens when your 'logic' is based on emotions, and not reality"

Its what happens when you are so angry with someone that you lose perspective.

IMHO

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 05:09 PM

Interesting article from the Economist, somewhat a counter to the original post.

Scientists are not as secular as people think

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 05:15 PM

Why do YOU think that transmission rates are so high?


Ahhh, so that is the question you are on about is it? Well, I don't know. Just like you have no answer to how to your register and testing would be enforced, I have no answer to why the rates are so high. Tell you what. You tell me how the register and testing will be enforced and I will have an educated guess at why rate are so high. You first, seeing as I asked first.

GfS. It was Ake who started likening homosexuals with AIDS to smokers with cancer. Blame him for that whole stupid argument. Don't expect me to answer for him.

And Jack, once again we are in agreement. This time about stereotyping. There is hope for you yet, even if I am a lost cause :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 05:26 PM

Don't flatter yourself DtG. Your opinions were not a factor in my analysis. My agreement is only with Mr. Webster! And of course the good folks at the OED.

:-D

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 05:40 PM

Dave...."you don't know", but do you care?

If so would you not be better to try to find out?
Try reading some data and don't put words in my mouth. I was of course referring to the MSM demographic, which was the subject of the study.
No one suggests that ALL male homosexuals are promiscuous, that would be irrational.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 06:03 PM

"Dave, So you don't think that male homosexuals are promiscuous?"

I KNOW that all of them are not. You are generalizing the behavior of some to all. That is called stereotyping.

You can make your case with out stereotyping.
But maybe it would not be as strong.

Indeed, Jack (hope you don't mind if I call you Jack). I know gay blokes who are celibate from choice. I know at least one gay bloke who is mutually faithful with a long-term partner. "Male homosexuals are promiscuous" is a disgraceful statement and those who make or support such statements are scurrilous, homophobic bastards. Of course, we already know that about Hate Tony and Refugee from Sanity, don't we.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 06:21 PM

Steve...Can't you be bothered reading?
" I was of course referring to the MSM demographic, which was the subject of the study.
No one suggests that ALL male homosexuals are promiscuous, that would be irrational."

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 06:33 PM

>> I know gay blokes who are celibate from choice. I know at least one gay bloke who is mutually faithful with a long-term partner. "

I know that Steve, that was the point I was making.

>>"Male homosexuals are promiscuous" is a disgraceful statement and those who make or support such statements are scurrilous, homophobic bastards. << I was quoting that to point out that Akenaton seemed to be stereotyping.

OTOH it is a known fact, that SOME "Male homosexuals are promiscuous. I know some who are. You probably do to.

But that is NOT an argument against same sex marriage or for registers of Gay men. Akenton is right to have sympathy for these people but IMHO wrong to conflate unrelated issues and wrong to suggest measures that punish all for the recklessness of a few.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: GUEST
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 08:30 PM

My this thread has taken interesting tangents.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 Feb 14 - 11:36 PM

Cappy Jack: ""...that's what happens when your 'logic' is based on emotions, and not reality"
Its what happens when you are so angry with someone that you lose perspective.""

Same thing. Logic, based on emotions, of which 'anger' is but one, can certainly bring around a loss of perspective...Two roads leading to the same destination....(Propaganda plays on that very thing....which I've pointed out numerous times).

Dave the Gnome: "GfS. It was Ake who started likening homosexuals with AIDS to smokers with cancer. Blame him for that whole stupid argument. Don't expect me to answer for him."

Higher lung cancer rates, certainly CAN be linked to smoking, no problem there...HIV/AIDS CAN be linked to either homosexual behavior, OR heterosexual behavior, which ever promiscuity goes thoughtlessly. It would be absolutely foolish to discard the numbers of the transmission rates between homosexuals, just based on a political notion! The rates are higher, percentage wise, amongst homosexuals. THAT is not a bias, nor should a bias be construed from that, that is a FACT!(Remember those??)

Mr./Mrs. Shaw: "I know gay blokes who are celibate from choice."

Hmmm...That's interesting. Are they celibate or homosexual?

The Shaws: ""Male homosexuals are promiscuous" is a disgraceful statement and those who make or support such statements are scurrilous, homophobic bastards. Of course, we already know that about Hate Tony and Refugee from Sanity, don't we."

See above.....better yet, read it again, without bias, one way or another. here, I'll copy it for you.....:
"...HIV/AIDS CAN be linked to either homosexual behavior, OR heterosexual behavior, which ever promiscuity goes thoughtlessly. It would be absolutely foolish to discard the numbers of the transmission rates between homosexuals, just based on a political notion! The rates are higher, percentage wise, amongst homosexuals. THAT is not a bias, nor should a bias be construed from that...that is a FACT!(Remember those??)

Cappy Jack: "OTOH it is a known fact, that SOME "Male homosexuals are promiscuous. I know some who are. You probably do to."

The Shaws: ""Male homosexuals are promiscuous" is a disgraceful statement and those who make or support such statements are scurrilous, homophobic bastards.""

...and how many homosexuals, do you know, who settled down with their first 'lover'?...or do you think that there was some 'playing the field' before they settled?...I mean, didn't they have to find out if they liked it or not???....and you know, some guys might not like it with 'one', as much as the 'other'......They certainly didn't get into it thinking, "I think I want Bruce to have my baby..."

The Shaws: ""Male homosexuals are promiscuous" is a disgraceful statement and those who make or support such statements are scurrilous, homophobic bastards. Of course, we already know that about Hate Tony and Refugee from Sanity, don't we."

Spoken like a true hetero-phobic bastard!!

Just food for thought....don't get indigestion.

Regards,

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 03:10 AM

...and how many homosexuals, do you know, who settled down with their first 'lover'?

What a stupidly loaded question. How many PEOPLE do you know who settled down with their first lover? Why put lover in quotes BTW?

Ah, ok, Ake. So you do not believe male homosexuals are promiscuous? So when you said that male homosexuals need testing more because they have more partners you were, how shall we put it, exaggerating?

Dave...."you don't know", but do you care?

Where on earth does that come from? What makes you think I care less about the welfare of one demographic compared to another?

If so would you not be better to try to find out?

Better try and find out what? If I care or not? I am already trying to find out how you propose to enforce registration and testing but not getting very far I'm afraid.

Try reading some data and don't put words in my mouth.

I have put no words in your mouth. I have just asked relevant questions and the words come flowing out all by themselves.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 06:06 AM

Dave, I said that "ALL male homosexuals are not promiscuous", the figures suggest that a large majority ARE. Male homosexuals are a recognised demographic by health agencies in the UK and the US, known as MSM. This demographic accounts for over 70% of all new cases of HIV and Syphilis...... as well as higher rates of STD infections in every country in the the world. This demographic accounts for under 2% of the population (lesbians are not affected)

Why are these transmission rates so much higher than those for heteros?......I would think it obvious that promiscuity, risk taking, and addiction to anonymous relationships may play a part....wouldn't you.

Of course, there may be another reason associated with the physical practice of male to male sex......is that what you had in mind?

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 06:12 AM

Regarding a solution to the epidemic, I have se down what I think should be done......and it involves much input from homosexuals themselves, but how it should be enforced, if enforcement is needed is not up to me. I am not a "law maker"

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 06:58 AM

Why are these transmission rates so much higher than those for heteros?......I would think it obvious that promiscuity, risk taking, and addiction to anonymous relationships may play a part....wouldn't you.

I am not a doctor, scientist or statistician so I will stay away from conjecture on what causes higher transmission rates if you don't mind.

Of course, there may be another reason associated with the physical practice of male to male sex......is that what you had in mind?

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about so, no, whatever 'that' is, is not what I had in mind. Would you care to explain?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 07:36 AM

Don't think you need to be a doctor, scientist or statistician to believe the evidence presented by such organisations Dave, these reports are compiled for public consumption.

When you say that there is no promiscuity link to the figures, I thought you must have some alternative view? These rates don't just happen by accident?

To be perfectly honest, you don't seem to know very much about the issue at all, hence the advice to do a bit of reading to bring yourself up to speed.
Simply being obstructive isn't much good, how about a little positive input into the discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 09:14 AM

Don't think you need to be a doctor, scientist or statistician to believe the evidence presented by such organisations Dave

Link please. Where did I say I do not believe the evidence? I said will stay away from conjecture as I am not qualified to make a valued judgement based an the evidence available. Are you?

When you say that there is no promiscuity link to the figures

Link please. Again, when did I say that? I did say I do not know if there is a link. Again I am not qualified to make an informed decision. Anyone doing so without access to ALL the facts is just speculating.

Who is putting words in who's mouth?

Before you ask just what am I qualified to do and why am I joining in the discussion I will tell you. I fully understand that making people register and forcing them to take tests 4 times a year, on the basis of their sexual preference, is an abuse of human rights. It can, and will, lead to more abuses and anyone who can learn from history will see the parallels. I also know that someone who suggests such a thing, without detailing the possible consequences, is ether very stupid or is trying to mislead someone else. I know that branding a whole section of society as promiscuous perverts is wrong and such attitudes belong in the past. And how am I qualified to know this? Because I do read and I do learn. Because I have learned, first hand, what an abuse of power can lead to. Because I have learned how to filter headline grabbing generalisations from the truth.

Now, your turn. How are you qualified to pass judgement on your fellow man? What makes you believe that your declarations are more positive than the dozens of others that disagree? What gives you the right to decide what is and is not perverted? And finally, why bring your arguments to threads about atheism and religion?

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 09:45 AM

Akenaton

I do not believe that you are reading the statistics correctly.

2 million gay men

6,300 cases of aids in the UK in a year

70% of 6,300 is 4400 70% is your figure of the % of new cases which are Gay men.

2,000,000 / 4400 =

One case of aids per 450 gay men.

1/450 is not a majority.
You cannot use HIV infection rates which currently apply to one in 450 to infer the behavior of the whole "demographic" You are stereotyping. Lets put it down to bad math, but please, lets move on.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: GUEST,Troubadour
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 09:58 AM

"I don't know if you are being purposely thick or you really do lack the power of thought. Either way, let me explain. Again. It has nothing to do with health statistics. You are stereotyping when you say that male homosexuals are promiscuous. When you add that to your ludicrous explanation of perverted we begin to see the bigoted views that you so thinly disguise as 'care'."

I'm with you on that Dave, but you are wasting your time talking to a hard wired homophobe who has already stated that, even if there were no health risk to homosexuality, there are "other issues".

To that bigotry he adds his indifference to female homosexuality and his deep rooted opposition to a measure which would reduce promiscuity among gay men, namely marriage.

Knowing, as he undoubtedly does, that sex plays a comparatively small part in heterosexual marriage relationships, he nonetheless believes that any homosexual relationship is one hundred percent about sex.

You will note also that he refers to "behavioural" lifestyle, in the hope that, if he repeats it often enough, it will miraculously become true.

As the Hassidic Jew at the Wailing Wall said, when asked how it made him feel "I feel like I'm talking to the bloody wall".

That's what you get talking to Ake.

The difference between him and a Rotweiler is that if you wait long enough the dog will let go.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 10:09 AM

The similarity is that the more you poke the dog the harder it will bite.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 10:17 AM

Jack, from your link, 41 000 MSM are living with HIV, or 4.7%.
1 in 450 would be those newly diagnosed.

Subject: RE: BS: Real Non-belief/not militant
From: akenaton
Date: 25 Feb 14 - 10:21 AM

Jack your maths are wrong.

From HPA website
"The number of gay and bisexual men being diagnosed with HIV in the UK reached an "all-time high" in 2011, according to the Health Protection Agency (HPA).

It said there had been a "worrying" trend since 2007, with more and more new cases each year.

Nearly half of the 6,280 people diagnosed last year were men who had sex with other men (MSM).

Overall, one in 20 MSM are infected with HIV.
In London the figure is 1 in 12.

Of those diagnosed in 2011, nearly two-thirds had not been to a sexual health clinic in the previous three years.


The HPA said the figures showed there was "room for improvement" in testing people in at-risk groups."

CDC in the US say that in some inner city areas, MSM infection rates are 1 in 5.