new new strain of HIV-thanks to our homosexual friends

[nakedemperor]

What do you think?

Yurt; I am of the opinion that the onus is on the gay community to protect themselves (and others). I don't know if you've had a chance to read any of my other posts on the subject of gay rights, but I almost always say something to the tune of: anal sex, practiced with a condom, and with a pre-screened, disease-free partner is the only way to combat the problem of the spread of STDs. I say this not at all judgemental of the gay lifestyle. I support what people want to do in the privacy of their own bedrooms, its their choice. What I do not support is the notion that homosexuality itself is "dangerous and deviant", and society needs to "protect itself" from the "overly promiscuous" spectre of homosexual men who are "more selfish than others". I argue that STDs are a public health problem and not a homosexuality problem for this exact reason. Many people call HIV/AIDS a "gay disease" simply because anal sex is more likely to transmit it. That holds about as much water as me saying its a "straight disease" because more women in the world have it than men.

Imagine if instead of condeming homosexuality we condemn unprotected sex with an unscreened partner. What if homosexual relations weren't more dangerous than heterosexual relations; then we could all live happily, tolerant and appreciative of each other, instead of trying to stamp out and "illegitimize" a phenomenon that just isn't ever going to go away, and nor should it be expected to.

 

[pegwinn]

I believe that Cancer, Alzheimers, and Heart Disease should get a far larger share of R&D monies. Why? Because no matter what your sexual preference is, AIDS is overwhelmingly a lifestyle disease. IOW: You choose to live a lifestyle that ups the odds of getting AIDS. What are the numbers for someone who got AIDS thru no fault of his/her own? Lets see, blood transfusion, cross contamination (EMT workers at the accident scene, things like that), born with it (tragic). Any others. Cancer, Alzheimers, and Heart Disease strike anyone, anywhere, and account for millions every year. And, while you can minimize risk, you cannot effectivily lower it to near zero as you can with AIDS.

 

[nakedemperor]

I believe that Cancer, Alzheimers, and Heart Disease should get a far larger share of R&D monies. Why? Because no matter what your sexual preference is, AIDS is overwhelmingly a lifestyle disease. IOW: You choose to live a lifestyle that ups the odds of getting AIDS. What are the numbers for someone who got AIDS thru no fault of his/her own? Lets see, blood transfusion, cross contamination (EMT workers at the accident scene, things like that), born with it (tragic). Any others. Cancer, Alzheimers, and Heart Disease strike anyone, anywhere, and account for millions every year. And, while you can minimize risk, you cannot effectivily lower it to near zero as you can with AIDS.

To a certain extent many types of cancer and heart disease itself are also lifestyle diseases. Cut the Big Macs and the cigarettes?

 

[musicman]

http://www.yale.edu/yaw/world.html

AIDS-- 3.1 million deaths per year

42 million living with AIDS

5 million new infections per year (vast majority are heterosexual transmissions in sub-Saharan Africa)

And these tragic, heartbreaking statistics don't appear to be telling you ANYTHING! You continue to defend the indefensible; indeed, you seek to mainstream the behavior which has wrought all this suffering.

 

[nakedemperor]

And these tragic, heartbreaking statistics don't appear to be telling you ANYTHING! You continue to defend the indefensible; indeed, you seek to mainstream the behavior which has wrought all this suffering.

Heaven forbid (unfortunate use of this particular euphamism) that the majority of homosexuals (sexually healthy and responsible) should be kept underground by the tragic view that the situation is best remedied by condeming homosexuality in it entirety rather than condeming unprotected, promiscuous sex, which happens ACROSS sexuality lines.

And out of curiosity, what exactly is it you seek to do, sir?

 

[musicman]

And out of curiosity, what exactly is it you seek to do, sir?

Perhaps, appeal to your sense of reason and honesty. Perhaps, inspire you to ask yourself tough questions like, "How did AIDS make its way into the human population to begin with?", or, "Couldn't homosexuals have done the right thing at the outset of the outbreak, instead of being more concerned about their image than public safety?", or, "Isn't homosexuality, then, the initial causitive factor in all this suffering?", or, "Shouldn't the fact that a new, deadlier strain of this killer now ravages the homosexual community, and will doubtless mushroom out to the rest of humanity - AGAIN - while I blithely defend its cause , trouble my conscience just a bit?" Perhaps, give you the germ of an idea.

 

[nakedemperor]

Perhaps, appeal to your sense of reason and honesty. Perhaps, inspire you to ask yourself tough questions like, "How did AIDS make its way into the human population to begin with?", or, "Couldn't homosexuals have done the right thing at the outset of the outbreak, instead of being more concerned about their image than public safety?", or, "Isn't homosexuality, then, the initial causitive factor in all this suffering?", or, "Shouldn't the fact that a new, deadlier strain of this killer now ravages the homosexual community, and will doubtless mushroom out to the rest of humanity - AGAIN - while I blithely defend its cause , trouble my conscience just a bit?" Perhaps, give you the germ of an idea.

1. It was incidental that someone into bestiality was also a homosexual. Unless you have numbers indicating higher bestiality rates among homos than among heteros.

2. The spread of AIDS was not as binarally the result of its introduction into the gay community; in fact the initial carrier spread it into the heterosexual community as well as the gay community.

3. Both of these things are irrelavent; YES there were many gays at fault for the initial spread of AIDS; YES there are many gays nowadays who are STILL irresonsible in their actions...

...however, there are also heterosexuals irresonsible in their actions, and the *random mutation* this thread is about could just as easily have taken place in a hetero carrier. At any rate, now that we're nice and satisfied that we've accounted for proportional blame, I ask again, *what do you seek to do, or, *what, if anything, should be done about the gay community, the cause of so much past and future suffering* and *how does the AIDS crisis get solved*?

None of these things involve arguing about whose fault it was (although the 50+% female carriers of the AIDS virus today make it sound like its not such an overwhelming *gay* problem, even if by chance they happened to spread it into the human population); lets get pragmatic here, eh?

P.S. How factual/conjectural is it that the first and only incidence of the AIDS virus jumping to homosapiens is this one dude on the plane we all hear about?

 

[musicman]

The AIDS crisis will get solved or it won't. The homosexual community will recognize that the lifestyle it advocates and defends with the endless, convoluted torture of language, numbers and reason is killing us all or it won't. For my part, I will live by the credo that, while the truth might sting like a bastard, it's never done anyone any lasting harm.

The pathology of Patient Zero, by the way, is a matter of public record. I first saw the details recounted on that hellish snakepit of hysterical, right-wing homophobia, 20/20.

 

[sitarro]

1. It was incidental that someone into bestiality was also a homosexual. Unless you have numbers indicating higher bestiality rates among homos than among heteros.

2. The spread of AIDS was not as binarally the result of its introduction into the gay community; in fact the initial carrier spread it into the heterosexual community as well as the gay community.

3. Both of these things are irrelavent; YES there were many gays at fault for the initial spread of AIDS; YES there are many gays nowadays who are STILL irresonsible in their actions...

...however, there are also heterosexuals irresonsible in their actions, and the *random mutation* this thread is about could just as easily have taken place in a hetero carrier. At any rate, now that we're nice and satisfied that we've accounted for proportional blame, I ask again, *what do you seek to do, or, *what, if anything, should be done about the gay community, the cause of so much past and future suffering* and *how does the AIDS crisis get solved*?

None of these things involve arguing about whose fault it was (although the 50+% female carriers of the AIDS virus today make it sound like its not such an overwhelming *gay* problem, even if by chance they happened to spread it into the human population); lets get pragmatic here, eh?

P.S. How factual/conjectural is it that the first and only incidence of the AIDS virus jumping to homosapiens is this one dude on the plane we all hear about?

I wouldn't put it past the extremely self serving "gay" community to have purposely spread the virus into the Heterosexual population knowing that it would then have to be addressed by the world at large as an epidemic among all people straight and crooked .
As any designer will tell you . . . nature (God to Us believers) designed our reproductive organs to fit perfectly , a sword in a sheeth . The "gay " population wants us to believe that any hole will do and is somehow natural . . . a knot in a tree , a ground hog hole , a dog's ass , where do you draw the line ? What you practice is not natural by any "stretch" of the imagination . The stretching that takes place in an area that isn't designed to do so is one of the prime reasons "gay" sex has spread HIV . . . tears in that region are more likely to ease in the transfer of viruses and assorted bacterias into the blood stream causing numerous problems . It doesn't take an Ivy League education to figure that out .

 

[nakedemperor]

I wouldn't put it past the extremely self serving "gay" community to have purposely spread the virus into the Heterosexual population knowing that it would then have to be addressed by the world at large as an epidemic among all people straight and crooked .

Not that it probably irks you too much, but this kind of statement will permanently stain your credibility with many people, myself including. Happy Valentine's Day to all slanderous conspiracy theorists!

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Not that it probably irks you too much, but this kind of statement will permanently stain your credibility with many people, myself including. Happy Valentine's Day to all slanderous conspiracy theorists!

What do you think of the fact that early on in the spread of aids in america it was overwhelmingly limited to the gay community? The gay pr machine fought publication of this fact, or any methods of addressing the disease which would have linked it with gayness. They would not close public sex brothels, even temporarily, because that would have been a drag.

 

[sitarro]

Not that it probably irks you too much, but this kind of statement will permanently stain your credibility with many people, myself including. Happy Valentine's Day to all slanderous conspiracy theorists!

Are you that naive naked? I knew guys back in the day that weren't that radical that mentioned it in conversations . Are you going to pretend that the lowlife type doesn't exist . How about the HIV infected that have spit on police when they were getting arrested . Are you going to pretend that doesn't happen . I am old enough to remember the world before AIDS and what happened when it first became evident that it was a deadly disease spread almost exclusively in the homosexual community . The denial was huge and the cries to not do any of the things that would normally be done to contain such a deadly disease were very loud and only coming from a self serving crowd that happened to be homosexual . Movies were made and excuses were spread and now we see what the results are . . . billions spent in research and yet it is as if nothing has been done .
My credibility is stained with you ? . . . ouch , I didn't think you gave me any credibility anyway . After all I am a straight , normal , white male . . . what could I possibly know? The fact that you endanger your female partners by practicing abnormal acts on other boys kills any credibility you have with me .
I guess we're even.

 

[nakedemperor]

Are you that naive naked? I knew guys back in the day that weren't that radical that mentioned it in conversations . Are you going to pretend that the lowlife type doesn't exist . How about the HIV infected that have spit on police when they were getting arrested . Are you going to pretend that doesn't happen .

No, I won't pretend it doesn't happen, but I will point out that in your last post you said the "gay community" was guilty of the 'let's spread it to heterosexuals on a large scale' conspiracy (as opposed to a very tiny minority of lowlifes). Its a vast, slanderous, conspiratorial generalization that you've mad.

I am old enough to remember the world before AIDS and what happened when it first became evident that it was a deadly disease spread almost exclusively in the homosexual community . The denial was huge and the cries to not do any of the things that would normally be done to contain such a deadly disease were very loud and only coming from a self serving crowd that happened to be homosexual . Movies were made and excuses were spread and now we see what the results are . . . billions spent in research and yet it is as if nothing has been done .

Mistakes were made by a vocal minority that was largely unaware of the facts and nature of the HIV/AIDS virus. They made mistakes and they should be held accountable; but they weren't the only ones making mistakes and spreading the disease, so a uniform blanket generalization that its all the gays' fault and therefore homosexuality is wrong and we wish it would just go away is not warranted.

My credibility is stained with you ? . . . ouch , I didn't think you gave me any credibility anyway . After all I am a straight , normal , white male . . . what could I possibly know? The fact that you endanger your female partners by practicing abnormal acts on other boys kills any credibility you have with me .
I guess we're even.

Being a straight, normal, white male gives you as much credibility as anyone else. Saying the "gay community" conspired to infect as many heteros as possible strips you of that credibility.

And don't pretend to know me. Are you aware of whether or not I have ever practiced "abnormal acts on other boys"? Because I haven't, for your own personal edification, so, again, *stop generalizing*!

 

[pegwinn]

I believe that Cancer, Alzheimers, and Heart Disease should get a far larger share of R&D monies. Why? Because no matter what your sexual preference is, AIDS is overwhelmingly a lifestyle disease. IOW: You choose to live a lifestyle that ups the odds of getting AIDS. What are the numbers for someone who got AIDS thru no fault of his/her own? Lets see, blood transfusion, cross contamination (EMT workers at the accident scene, things like that), born with it (tragic). Any others. Cancer, Alzheimers, and Heart Disease strike anyone, anywhere, and account for millions every year. And, while you can minimize risk, you cannot effectivily lower it to near zero as you can with AIDS.

To a certain extent many types of cancer and heart disease itself are also lifestyle diseases. Cut the Big Macs and the cigarettes?

The difference is a matter of huge degrees. Ideally all diseases would be fully R&D funded and we would live in utopia to boot. Reality is that Aids is overwhelmingly lifestyle oriented and politically driven. Reality is that only a few forms of other diseases are linked directly and conclusively to lifestyle. BTW, stopping smoking and regulating calories is an excellent start. Of course so is screening your partners, being monogamous, multiple testings until trust is assured, not doing intravenous drugs, ............

 

[musicman]

What do you think of the fact that early on in the spread of aids in america it was overwhelmingly limited to the gay community? The gay pr machine fought publication of this fact, or any methods of addressing the disease which would have linked it with gayness. They would not close public sex brothels, even temporarily, because that would have been a drag.

LMAO - A DRAG!!!

 

[nakedemperor]

BTW, stopping smoking and regulating calories is an excellent start. Of course so is screening your partners, being monogamous, multiple testings until trust is assured, not doing intravenous drugs, ............

Amen

 

[sitarro]

Wow . . . looks like the New York Times is even admitting the problem of promiscuity in the homosexual community . I have copied only half of it , but it is amazing how frustrated the people quoted in the article are , with the recklessness of the not so straight population . I don't have to say anything else except to tell Naked to use some WD-40 on that shoe to help pry it from your mouth .THIS IS MY 400TH POST . . .Thankyou

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/15/health/15aids.html?ei=5065&en=4f6e4d4582cd7b82&ex

Gays Debate Radical Steps to Curb Unsafe Sex

By ANDREW JACOBS

After all the thousands of AIDS deaths and all the years of "Safe Sex Is Hot Sex" prevention messages, it has come down to this: many gay men who know the rules of engagement in the age of AIDS are not using condoms. As news of a potentially virulent strain of H.I.V. settles in, gay activists and AIDS prevention workers say they are dismayed and angry that the 25-year-old battle against the disease might have to begin all over again.
While many are calling for a renewed commitment to prevention efforts and free condoms, some veterans of the war on AIDS are advocating an entirely new approach to the spread of unsafe sex, much of which is fueled by a surge in methamphetamine abuse. They want to track down those who knowingly engage in risky behavior and try to stop them before they can infect others.
It is a radical idea, born of desperation, that has been gaining ground in recent months as a growing number of gay men become infected despite warnings about unsafe sex.
Although gay advocates and health care workers are just beginning to talk about how this might be done, it could involve showing up at places where impromptu sex parties happen and confronting the participants. Or it might mean infiltrating Web sites that promote gay hookups and thwarting liaisons involving crystal meth.
Other ideas include collaborating with health officials in tracking down the partners of those newly infected with H.I.V. At the very least, these advocates say, gay men must start taking responsibility for their own, before a resurgent epidemic draws government officials who could use even more aggressive tactics.
"Gay men do not have the right to spread a debilitating and often fatal disease," said Charles Kaiser, a historian and author of "The Gay Metropolis." "A person who is H.I.V.-positive has no more right to unprotected intercourse than he has the right to put a bullet through another person's head," he said.
While not endorsing specific strategies, even mainstream organizations like the Gay Men's Health Crisis support the idea of trying methods that would have been anathema a few years ago. "It makes a community stronger when we take care of ourselves," said Ana Oliveira, the organization's executive director, "and if that means that we have to be much more present and intervene with people who are doing this to themselves and others, then so be it."
For many others, however, even talk of such steps provokes hand-wringing. "We don't want public health vigilantes going out and taking matters into their own hands, particularly if it means breaching the confidentially and civil rights of people with H.I.V.," said Jon Givner, the director of the H.I.V. Project at the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund. "Frankly, I find it pretty scary."
Whether such ideas gain acceptance, the fact that activists are even thinking about curbing gay sexual freedom is a huge shift.
In the early years of the AIDS epidemic, gay men protested attempts to close down bathhouses and strenuously opposed efforts by health officials to trace those infected with the virus. Until now, those advocates, driven by concerns about privacy and the stigma associated with the disease, have successfully fought off efforts to impose a traditional public-health model for tackling the spread of the virus.
"You have to remember that was the era when Jesse Helms and others were saying that gay people got what they deserved, and that the government shouldn't spend any money to help them," said David Evans, an H.I.V. treatment advocate who writes about prevention. "There was a time when people thought, 'Oh my god, they're going to put us in camps.' "
Such fears have faded in recent years, thanks in part to laws that protect people with AIDS against discrimination. Although the number of AIDS-related deaths has plummeted since the advent of a more potent class of drugs in the mid-90's, the rate of new infections has remained unchanged at about 40,000 cases a year, frustrating many advocates.
That frustration has been ratcheted up by the growing popularity of crystal meth in New York, which many say has led to an abrupt increase in unsafe behavior and a spate of infections. Although exact figures are difficult to determine, a recent survey of gay men found that 25 percent had tried crystal meth in the last few months.
Those frustrations were given voice in November by Larry Kramer, the playwright and activist who himself has AIDS, in a widely discussed speech at Cooper Union in which he criticized gay men for their behavior. "You are still murdering each other," he said then. "Please stop with all the generalizations and avoidance excuses gays have used since the beginning to ditch this responsibility for this fact."aids.html?ei=5065&en=4f6e4d4582cd7b82&ex=1109048400&partner=MYWAY&p

 

[HorhayAtAMD]

Couple things to say about this whole ugly topic:

1. The suggestion has been thrown about that some gays are promiscuous, don't practice safe sex, wish death upon those that are different, are selfish, want their desires put ahead of others, etc. etc. etc. Yes, you are right, there are many gays that fit those descriptions. On the other hand, there are complete assholes in the heterosexual community that kill nuns in Brazil, that commit armed robbery, that cheat on their spouses, that lie to get what they want, that distrust anyone who isn't like them, etc. etc. etc. The point is that ALL human groups have segments of ugliness. I can't even honestly say that MOST heterosexual people are "good" people that I would want to spend any time with, just like I don't want to spend any time with MOST homosexuals. I've seen good and bad in both camps.

2. I wish that those who were so against gay marriage would know just 1 truly loving gay couple who loved each other, didn't cheat, didn't throw their homosexuality in anybody's face and then tell them to their face that their relationship is meaningless and that they should suppress their feelings. Percentage wise, I probably know as many happy, "good" gay couples as I do happy, "good" heterosexual couples. In other words, not many. They are rare on both sides of the fence but we don't let all the heterosexual cheaters, liars, beaters, or users make us want to abandon heterosexual marriage. Why would we let the same selfish, ugly behaviour by some percentage of the gay community cause us to hurt the truly good gay couples?

In the end, there are many things I wish the gay "community" didn't do because they end up giving gay people who aren't in the "community" a bad name. However, next time you open the paper and you see story after story of muggings, beatings, child molestations, rapes, divorce, single parent families, etc., try to imagine what it would be like if gay people said "Ewww, see what the heterosexual 'community' is up to? They are really sick, horrible people." Do you want to be represented by the heterosexuals you read about in the paper? I certainly don't associate myself with that behaviour even though I just happen share the same sexual orientation.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

That's fine horhay, but the gay lobby is willing to distort reality and jeopardize public health to avoid "stigmatizing" the gay community. Watch the movie "..and the band played on.." for the full story.

 

[OCA]

It was found today that one of the querrs infected with this new strain had rode bareback 6 times in the 4 days before he was diagnosed. But we will hear that no this is not a problem in the HLCP community(out of control promiscuity), we wil hear that this was inevitable, that it just as soon as could've happened to a heterosexual. Its 1980 all over again, the queers will deny culpability in order to protect their wild lifestyle and to try and keep whatever semblance of normalcy they think they have and the rest of the world be damned. It happened before it will happen again.