"HIV is a Gay Disease. Own It" !

I though this was a discussion about homosexual organizations admitting and advertising that HIV is a male homosexual disease....are you trying to hijack the thread into a homosexual marriage thread? Seems so illogical as to border on lunacy.

 

All I can say is if you put your penis in what amounts to a sewer you'd better be pretty careful. Human feces has human pathogens. Since homosexuals almost all have sex that way, chances are they at least spread it. that being said, it is a disease and we need to find a cure. I'm pretty sure it can be controlled if caught early now because vast amounts of $$$$ and research have gone into finding a cure.

 

Agreed, but unfortunately, just another in a long list of thousands of how what homosexuals do affects others, normal heterosexual society, of which there are 98 times more of than homosexuals, are forced by homosexuals to subsidize the extreme health care costs of male homosexuals and their bewildering array of opportunistic disgusting diseases. The way the powerful homosexual lobby discriminates, and economically bullies and terrorizes heterosexuals is by forcing them to subsidize homosexual sex diseases by passing "anti-discrimination" laws that reach directly into the pockets of normal heterosexuals to pay for the chosen homosexual sex diseases lifestyle.

 

Since you are unable to post a single source from the CDC implicitly affirming your statement that "AIDS (or HIV) is a gay (or homosexual) disease" there is no thread to hijack.

 

Does anyone doubt that if a cure for AIDs were discovered tomorrow- there is a significant segment of the population that would
a) be disappointed and
b) argue that resources should not be allocated to promoting that cure because it is 'only a gay disease'?

 

How much does it cost you?

Specifically.

 

Why not ask your own insurance company and see what they say?

 

As a "heterosexualist," I find your "dropping like flies" comment is disgusting and self-hating.

Your assertion that HIV is only a gay disease is dangerous.

Your username is ironic.

 

Actually, far more people are killed by cancer, and most of it is not because of a chosen acts lifestyle. I support allocating resources based upon percentages, with less going to smokers because they deliberately smoke, and less goes to male homosexuals, because they choose to engage in homosexual sex. Whatever is left over can be allocated to homosexuals. There will always be a spinoff value where research to prevent or cure GRIDS will spinoff and be of value to normal people, so I still support AIDS research. While male homosexuals only have themselves to blame, I don't wish a hideous wasting disease upon them or their grieing parents and siblings no matter how much they attack, bash, terrorize and bully normal heterosexuals by trying to impose their fiery brand of homo-sharia.

To the homosexuals who live and let live, and oppose the gaystapo, and who tolerate the diversity that normal heterosexual conservative people of faith bring as long as their peculiar sex acts and politics do not affect others, I wish them all the best and the government should stay out of their lives, as homosexuals should stay out of others.

 

Assertions are contained within the article and the homosexual organizations that created the campaign. Are their assertions and the CDC's wrong? Next straw argument?

 

As a "heterosexualist," I find your "dropping like flies" comment is disgusting and self-hating.

Your assertion that HIV is only a gay disease is dangerous.

Your username is ironic.

 

Things may be going south on that hunt. There is a new treatment resistant strain of HIV-1 that has jumped the pre-exposure prophylaxis wall that was being built. Truvada held out a lot of promise, but now people need to start going back to using condoms and better practices to reduce their risk of contracting HIV. Many won't so we may be looking at another surge in cases inside a decade similar to the original outbreak on the 80's.

 

The serial denier showed up in post #1.

 

I could have sworn the CDC and homosexual organizations cited were not the serial deniers, the poster in # 38 is though.

 

Four pages later and we are still waiting for a single quote from the CDC that states "AIDS is a homosexual disease" as per your claim. Also feel free to clear up how heterosexuals are the primary vector in many nations. Thanks!

 

Agreed- frankly every person having sex outside a monogamous relationship should be using condoms- those who are very promiscuous and engage in unprotected sex are endangering many others.

 

Exactly.

If every gay person in American disappeared tomorrow- there would still be AIDs in America- and AIDs would still spread.

Telling people that AIDs is a gay disease tells other people that they can have unprotected sex- just so long as they are not having sex with a known homosexual- which is a deadly fallacy.

- - - Updated - - -

You are the one making the claim- not me.

Meanwhile who has the higher rate of HIV infections?

Heterosexual women? Or
Homosexual women?

 

So, who infected gay men? I doubt any gay man intentionally gets aids either.

Not necessarily, or perhaps that depends on your idea of what a behavior problem is.

It's acquired by exchanging bodily fluids with another person. I don't think that it's always a behavior problem. Certain practices can reduce your chances of getting it drastically. Even if you are homosexual. So it would be important fur those practices to be understood right?

 

Here is a lesson in the language of Voc. When he says "serial denier" he is referring to a person who uses logic to point out holes in his argument.

When he says "extreme obsessive heterophobic bigotry, therophobic..." Again he is referring to a person that uses logic to point out holes in his argument.

It's rather silly of him to do that. It's a personal attack. He makes that comment in nearly every post. It's an ad hominem repeated ad nauseam. It's a fallacy within a fallacy.

 

I think that homosexual women have a lower rate of HIV infection that any other group, be they say, straight, male or female.

 

Which always undercuts the homophobes claim of how "unhealthy" homosexuality is...and the reason they never mention lesbianism.

It seems "God's curses upon gays"....doesn't effect gay women. Guess The Big Guy has a soft spot for lesbians, huh?





BTW, you'll notice this is the SECOND of these such posts by the same OP in as many days......seems we have another PF poster obsessed with attacking homosexuals.

 

The heterophobic homosexual lobbyists never mention that the homosexual organizations don't reference female homosexuals and HIV because AIDS in fact does discriminate according to these homosexual organizations referenced. While female homosexual relationships are far more violent than heterosexual relationships.

The Advocate, a homosexaulist lobby publication has an excellent article evidencing just how remarkably more violent homosexual relationships are.

http://www.advocate.com/crime/2014/09/04/2-studies-prove-domestic-violence-lgbt-issue

By that measure and flawed logic, since you have made at least two posts in as many days, we must also conclude that you are obsessed with bashing homosexual organizations, their public service announcements and all the medical establishments, physicians, researchers and their published findings.

 

Well there is a complete lack of rational thought. Perhaps argument is a folks errand.

The only thing left to do is mockery. I've seen it drive of several posters. One I recall insisting the supreme court would never rule ssm legal. He disappeared right after that. Others have vanished.


All there is in this particular rhetoric is emotional pleading and false cause. It's devoid if logic.

It's say it's rational people's duty to mock such absurdity lest these absurdities today become the morality of tomorrow.

All you have to really do is ask them questions. They will gnash teeth and spit fire but they don't dare answer those questions. They will go as far too call you every name they can think of. But they won't touch your argument.

I'd say that is a very persuasive way to debate. But you have to point out when they are calling you names and avoiding argument.

 

Have any proof and citations of your unmeritorious claims and unsubstantiated hyperbole?

 

Deleting a name from a post is extremely dishonest.

It's really telling that you are attempting to pass of dishonesty as truth.

Nobody is buying it. I don't believe you are as well.