More proof that Aids is primarily a homosexual disease

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/28/us-usa-hiv-infections-idUSBRE8AQ0XA20121128
All that needs to be said has been said.

 

from your link................

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/28/us-usa-hiv-infections-idUSBRE8AQ0XA20121128

all that needs to be said has been said.

 

Doesn't change the facts that Homosexuals spread aids more so than heterosexuals.

 

Homosexuals, just as with users of prostitutes, tend to screw a lot but within a small social group.
That means, one gets it and they all get it.

Following the rules in Islam would have saved you.

 

because..............

 

Would you agree that HIV is a sexually transmitted disease?

If you do, it should be obvious to you that it tends to stay spread to people with similar sexual preferences of the current carriers of the disease. In the US and other western countries, those people are often homosexuals. In Africa, where AIDS is much more common, it's mostly heterosexuals. In my humble opinion, there are no surprises here and it's just a disease like any other and not some form of divine punishment.

If you strongly favor heterosexuality, you should avoid convincing homosexuals that heterosexuality is the only way to go in the US. Otherwise, you risk to spread the disease among heterosexuals.

 

Everyone, in virtually any category... whether it be by race, career choice, hobbies, or culture can have different risks of injury, disease and psychological problems.

In the case of HIV, the OP is only half-right about this one. HIV is a substantial problem for homosexual men, not for homosexual women, so it's not a "homosexual disease".

And while the OP points out the obvious, the more important point is exactly as Rahl stated: We should be combating homophobia and the stigma against homosexuality as one of the primary causes of unsafe sexual practices among homosexual youth. Gay-friendly countries such a those in Europe have HIV rates a fraction of the size that they are at here in the USA. A homosexual in a long-term, monogamous relationship is no more likely to contract HIV than anyone else, it is important that we be encouraging and support long-term relationships among gay youth and combat the stigma that often forces homosexual behaviors to be practiced casually, in secret, and without guidance from parents and society.

 

If you know gay people it will be easy to understand why : men are pursuing sexual conduct more than women and they are much more liberal over who they have sex with because for males sex involves little or no emotions . Now think an environment where all the sex pursuing people are all men.

I am doing prostitutes since i was 14 , this is almost 30 years and i am HIV free , i wouldn't call my group "small" .
Getting HIV from professional prostitutes is next to impossible because use of condom is mandatory , at the other hand when you are porking your new girlfriend you are also porking all the men she has slept with and you know nothing about.

 

choose any excuse you want.... still doesn't change that gays is a risky lifestyle choice

 

homophobia sadly has caused many to stay in the closest and they are more likely not to mention their previous partners when it is discovered they have Aids, which means the risk is not addressed

proof homophobia is harming people

 

proof Marriage is good for same sex couples too, as if you only have one partner, your odds of getting Aids is greatly reduced

.

 

Maybe the OP should take a look at Africa. Their heterosexual population is dying off in droves because of AIDS.

Why? Because of unprotected sex.

Moreover, the main group infected and spread AIDS is injectable drug users. They are without doubt of debate the most likely infected and most likely to spread the disease.

 

What is a gay lifestyle choice?

And the majority if aids cases worldwide are among heterosexuals, so i guess straights is a more risky lifestyle choice(whatever that means)

 

how does someone with a deathly fear of gay people cause a gay person to have unprotected sex? I can't see the linkage at all.

 

what if bullfrogs had wings.... they wouldn't bump their butts when they hopped....

Sorry the FACTS don't meet with your agenda.

A car insurance company bases coverage rates on stuff like risks.... Teenage single male drivers of red sportscars are more risky than a 42 y.o. married father with no accidents or tickets in the past 7 years..... Who do you think Allstate charges a higher premium to? It's no garantee that 42 y.o. doesn't wreck tomorrow or that the teenager won't be safe..... but evidence shows who the more risky policy holder is. We could debate reasons all day as to why the 42 y.o. is a safer bet behind the wheel, but it's not important.... numbers say, teenager is more risk.

However.... try and suggest gays pay higher for their health care (because of the added risks..... for whatever reason since reason is not important) and it's "unconstitutional" or you are a bigot for suggesting it.

You want to live a risky lifestyle.... your call..... you want healthcare though..... pay for that increased risk

 

A virus does what does where it can. It doesn't choose how it's transmitted, or to whom. You may feel safe in a monogamous relationship, but your partner may stray, they may inject drugs, or your dentist might not clean his instruments properly...

 

AIDS is not primarily a homosexual disease. Globally, there are far more people infected through unprotected heterosexual sex or other causes (intravenous drug injection) than through unprotected homosexual sex.

And sure, you can say it's because there are more heterosexuals than homosexuals worldwide, but you would be missing the point.

Most people of same-sex orientation are not infected. Most people of same-sex orientation are unlikely to become infected. Because it's not a gay disease; it's a disease that affects only a subset of any population - gay or straight.

The subset of the population most likely to become infected isn't gay people - it's people who engage in risky behaviors. Not everyone has the same exposure to risk.

So why then are gay men disproportionately represented in US statistics? Because of factors that contribute to the likelihood that young gay men, as compared to other groups, will engage in behaviors that put them at risk. As has already been identified, societal stigmatization of same-sex orientation and behavior is a factor. No, it doesn't force people to engage in risky behaviors. It does, however, discourage them from seeking out the information they need to learn in order to protect themselves, or prevents educators from providing that information. (as in abstinence only sex education).

Being gay doesn't cause HIV infection/AIDS. Using HIV/AIDS as a club to beat up on people for being gay won't save lives. It will instead damage people's self-esteem; if you're constantly being fed the message that your life is worth nothing - which is very much the message that young gay men receive from society - then why bother protecting yourself from disease? Why not have as much "fun" as you can, expecting that you're going to get sick and die anyway?

That's what you're telling people when you say crap like "AIDS is a gay disease". You're telling them that being gay = disease and early death. What you don't seem to get is that this doesn't make people not be gay. It just makes them feel bad about themselves, which in turn makes them not give a crap about protecting themselves. They figure they're doomed anyway, so why practice abstinence? Why practice safer sex? So you can live longer, and thereby have to endure more of society's hate?

Let me emphasize that: Living longer is not viewed as a worthy goal by people who have internalized societal hatred and who view themselves as having no value to society. It's why there are "bug chasers" - people who figure they're going to get infected anyway, so they might as well hurry up and get it over with.

Seriously, the idiots who spout stuff like "aids is a gay disease" seemingly have no concept of how damaging that is to gay youth bombarded with that message daily. Or maybe they do understand the damage their doing, and engage in that hateful behavior in hopes it will encourage some gay kid to off themselves, or get sick and die, and thereby decrease the gay population.

 

what are you disputing? the majority of aids cases worldwide are among heterosexuals.

this has nothing to do with my post.

correct.

but it's established already that the riskier lifestyle is heterosexuals, since the majority of aids cases are among them. but you want gays to pay more for health insurance? that's pretty dumb.

 

I will re-iterate: Being gay doesn't mean a person is at greater risk of becoming infected with HIV. Risk is determined by actual lifestyle choices, such as choosing to have unprotected sex with multiple partners. <- Those are lifestyle choices, but not necessarily a "gay lifestyle choice". Gay people are a diverse bunch who make diverse lifestyle choices. Those of us who are monogamous and refrain from engaging in risky behaviors don't deserve to be bludgeoned with "AIDS is a gay disease" resulting from "gay lifestyle choices". No part of that statement is true.

Pretty much the rest of what I would say in response to this BS would likely get me banned, so the haters and bigots can use their imaginations in determining what I think they should do with their bad attitudes and their lousy opinions.

 

it increases the spread if one is afraid to list their previous partners for fear a homophobe will try to ruin their life

to stop a disease those infected need to know they are infected

using protections helps, but same sex couples need to be educated that even though no pregnancy risk, protection is still important

.

 

So?

Seriously- Taysachs is a disease that primarily occurs in Jewish populations.....and so what?

And if you were one of the 28% of people who caught AIDS from heterosexual intercourse....would comfort you?

What bizarre point are you trying to make?

 

Amen to that!!

 

a gay is more at risk than a straight.... just like a 16 yo driver is more at risk of dieing in a car wreck than a 42 y.o.

I was not a risk as a 16 y.o. and I know plenty of people in their 30's I wouldn't ride with. Point is..... OVERALL (yes, I'm generalizing since generalizations don't just happen out of the blue) gays are a riskier subgroup of the human species