PDA

View Full Version : Redefining Normal Is Bad for Your Health



Rockntractor
08-18-2012, 09:18 PM
By Jeffrey J. Ventrella

In a quest to redefine normal, The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights has submitted a letter to the Institute for Minority Health and Health Disparities seeking recognition of certain classes of people who engage in homosexual behavior as "a health disparity population." In other words, the letter contains a list of health problems, mental and physical, common to people who have chosen to engage in this type of behavior, and then uses those problems to justify special categorizations for them that would result in federal monies and subsided medicines and treatments.

Yet what this letter essentially does is admit the truthfulness of an argument that has been made for decades by those concerned for the well-being of their fellow humans: namely, that the practice of homosexual behavior carries with it profound risks not only to one's body, but also to one's mind and emotions as well.

For example, in the letter, the LCCHR draws on various sources to show that "the LGBT population experiences significant disparities in health indicators such as smoking, obesity, experiences of abuse and violence, mental health concerns such as suicide, and HIV infection."

Sadly, the LCCHR does not confront the behavioral aspects of these health problems, but only looks for scapegoats upon which to pin causes: "the report emphasizes that these disparities are frequently exacerbated by other discriminatory social forces, such as racism."

So instead of addressing the cause of these health issues, the LCCHR wants the federal government to:

Develop a robust and diverse research agenda in LGBT health.
Expand researcher training programs to include researchers who are currently working with or who want to work with LGBT populations.
Encourage National Institute of Health grant applicants to explicitly address how and why their proposed research includes or excludes LGBT individuals.
Develop standardized "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" measures for federally supported surveys.

The report actually admits that these steps "would support and strengthen existing initiatives ... such as research into HIV/AIDS prevention for young gay, bisexual, and other men of color who have sex with other men."

Might not the millions of dollars that would be spent in these programs be better used to counsel and encourage these men to actually consider ending the risky behavior itself, as the government all too easily does with other risky behaviors that have an impact upon the nation's health? (Aren't certain political figures already taking similar steps to curb perceived health threats to other segments of our population by banning Big Gulp drinks and eliminating smoking and "junk food"?)

There is a price to be paid for ignoring the fixed natural order of things. And all the money, along with every program the LCCHR is seeking, cannot change the fact that those who practice homosexual behavior face the consequences of living a life that runs counter to that order. Sticking one's head in the sand for the sake of not assessing the dangers of one's sexual or political preferences won't actually change how the natural order works.

Those choosing these behaviors should turn from them to regain for their own sakes the healthfulness and longevity that comes with living life in the real world.

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/08/redefining_normal_is_bad_for_your_health.html#ixzz 23x03TW8P

Hubie
08-18-2012, 10:38 PM
If the gays and their supporters got everything they wanted -- marriage, full support from every person on the planet, the abolition of evangelical Christianity, etc. -- they would still have these problems. What do you think their excuse would be then?

Novaheart
08-18-2012, 11:22 PM
By Jeffrey J. Ventrella

In a quest to redefine normal, The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights has submitted a letter to the Institute for Minority Health and Health Disparities seeking recognition of certain classes of people who engage in homosexual behavior as "a health disparity population." In other words, the letter contains a list of health problems, mental and physical, common to people who have chosen to engage in this type of behavior, and then uses those problems to justify special categorizations for them that would result in federal monies and subsided medicines and treatments..............

For example, in the letter, the LCCHR draws on various sources to show that "the LGBT population experiences significant disparities in health indicators such as smoking, obesity, experiences of abuse and violence, mental health concerns such as suicide, and HIV infection."

Sadly, the LCCHR does not confront the behavioral aspects of these health problems, but only looks for scapegoats upon which to pin causes: "the report emphasizes that these disparities are frequently exacerbated by other discriminatory social forces, such as racism."

So instead of addressing the cause of these health issues, the LCCHR wants the federal government to:

Develop a robust and diverse research agenda in LGBT health.
Expand researcher training programs to include researchers who are currently working with or who want to work with LGBT populations.
Encourage National Institute of Health grant applicants to explicitly address how and why their proposed research includes or excludes LGBT individuals.
Develop standardized "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" measures for federally supported surveys.

The report actually admits that these steps "would support and strengthen existing initiatives ... such as research into HIV/AIDS prevention for young gay, bisexual, and other men of color who have sex with other men."

Might not the millions of dollars that would be spent in these programs be better used to counsel and encourage these men to actually consider ending the risky behavior itself,...............

There is a price to be paid for ignoring the fixed natural order of things.

I'm really surprised that American Thinker printed this stupidity. Seriously.

First off, understand that the mechanism is already in place. This letter does not seek some new special status, it seeks inclusion in an existing structure of minority communities and their issues which differ from the general population from their access to medical care and other factors. A list which might include the fact that black women are reluctant to get certain kinds of medical treatment, some Asians are hinky about mental health problems, latinos are less likely to have health insurance, etc...

The focus of this letter appears to be young men of color, who have been hard hit by disease and difficult to reach as well as being more likely to be uninsured. Homosexuality has nothing to do with HIV, if it did, then lesbians would be included and they aren't in that aspect. Male homosexuality spreads HIV faster because females don't control the sex supply- in short, men are men. They have more sex, they don't have to ask females for permission, and they tend to be more mobile. HIV did not spread at one speed through the gay male community and at another speed for all other communities. It spread quickly in the Western gay male community, and at varying speeds elsewhere.

However, gay men are not the only subgroup to have higher than average infection rates. As you probably know, VD rates amongst blacks has traditionally been higher than amongst whites. Should they stop being black?

IN 2009 blacks had chlamydia at 8.7 times the rate of whites.

In 2009 blacks had gonorrhea at 20.5 times the rate of whites.

In 2009 black had syphilis at 9.1 times the rate of whites.



Every demographic has some aspect of health and medical needs which sets it apart.

Rockntractor
08-18-2012, 11:29 PM
I'm really surprised that American Thinker printed this stupidity. Seriously.

First off, understand that the mechanism i.................:blah::blah::blah::blah::blah::b lah::blah::blah::blah::blah::blah::blah::blah::bla h::blah::blah::blah::blah::blah::blah::blah::blah: :blah::blah::blah::blah::blah::blah::blah::blah::b lah::blah::blah::blah::blah::blah::blah::blah::bla h::blah::blah::blah::blah::blah:



http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv230/upyourstruly/piggy-1.gif

Retread
08-18-2012, 11:40 PM
http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv230/upyourstruly/piggy-1.gif http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv230/upyourstruly/piggy-1.gif

Move over Porky...

Novaheart
08-18-2012, 11:42 PM
http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv230/upyourstruly/piggy-1.gif

And you wonder why I don't bother sometimes. You are a juvenile jackass, you know that?

Apache
08-19-2012, 12:53 AM
The focus of this letter appears to be young men of color, who have been hard hit by disease and difficult to reach as well as being more likely to be uninsured. Homosexuality has nothing to do with HIV, if it did, then lesbians would be included and they aren't in that aspect. Male homosexuality spreads HIV faster because females don't control the sex supply- in short, men are men. They have more sex, they don't have to ask females for permission, and they tend to be more mobile. HIV did not spread at one speed through the gay male community and at another speed for all other communities. It spread quickly in the Western gay male community, and at varying speeds elsewhere.

.

Thank you for FINALLY saying it! You gays are MENTALLY defective.... Now sing it sister, sing it!

Apache
08-19-2012, 01:06 AM
And you wonder why I don't bother sometimes. You are a juvenile jackass, you know that?

No, the reason you don't respond is because you are a coward. Ody has spanked you so much, with facts, that you, turned to dust, would feel it for centuries afterward. You try and try to defend your lifestyle. You belittle us ( in general), and come on as an elitist fuck who knows... NOTHING! Ody does it with words, education and logic. Rock, not so much, just words. Me, just words. Yet we all say the same thing... y :cold:u're wrong, just in different ways

Zathras
08-19-2012, 09:41 AM
I'm really surprised that American Thinker printed this stupidity. Seriously.

First off, understand that the mechanism is already in place. This letter does not seek some new special status, it seeks inclusion in an existing structure of minority communities and their issues which differ from the general population from their access to medical care and other factors. A list which might include the fact that black women are reluctant to get certain kinds of medical treatment, some Asians are hinky about mental health problems, latinos are less likely to have health insurance, etc...

The focus of this letter appears to be young men of color, who have been hard hit by disease and difficult to reach as well as being more likely to be uninsured. Homosexuality has nothing to do with HIV, if it did, then lesbians would be included and they aren't in that aspect. Male homosexuality spreads HIV faster because females don't control the sex supply- in short, men are men. They have more sex, they don't have to ask females for permission, and they tend to be more mobile. HIV did not spread at one speed through the gay male community and at another speed for all other communities. It spread quickly in the Western gay male community, and at varying speeds elsewhere.

However, gay men are not the only subgroup to have higher than average infection rates. As you probably know, VD rates amongst blacks has traditionally been higher than amongst whites. Should they stop being black?

IN 2009 blacks had chlamydia at 8.7 times the rate of whites.

In 2009 blacks had gonorrhea at 20.5 times the rate of whites.

In 2009 black had syphilis at 9.1 times the rate of whites.



Every demographic has some aspect of health and medical needs which sets it apart.

Wow, I can't believe that you'd post a rant without a link to back up the numbers you use in it....oh, wait, yes I can since that's what you always do Nova.

Zathras
08-19-2012, 09:43 AM
No, the reason you don't respond is because you are a coward. Ody has spanked you so much, with facts, that you, turned to dust, would feel it for centuries afterward. You try and try to defend your lifestyle. You belittle us ( in general), and come on as an elitist fuck who knows... NOTHING! Ody does it with words, education and logic. Rock, not so much, just words. Me, just words. Yet we all say the same thing... you're wrong, just in different ways

He knows it Apache and just can't stand it when we point it out.

Novaheart
08-19-2012, 10:32 AM
Wow, I can't believe that you'd post a rant without a link to back up the numbers you use in it....oh, wait, yes I can since that's what you always do Nova.

cdc

Novaheart
08-19-2012, 10:55 AM
Ody has spanked you so much, with facts ....

Yeah, like that page of garbage he printed the other day? Any intelligent person with or without a computer should have known that was a pile, but nope guys like you and he just swallow it whole because you allow your bias to override what intellect you actually have.

Rockntractor
08-19-2012, 11:01 AM
Ybut nope guys like you and he just swallow it whole because you allow your bias to override what intellect you actually have.

Like the natural order of things.

Wibbins
08-19-2012, 11:40 AM
Like the natural order of things.

DIdn't you hear? homosexuality has a gene just like race does and is just as natural! Oh, wait :evil-grin:

Zathras
08-19-2012, 12:02 PM
cdc

And? Posting "cdc" and leaving it at that isn't good enough Nova.

Zathras
08-19-2012, 12:07 PM
Yeah, like that page of garbage he printed the other day? Any intelligent person with or without a computer should have known that was a pile, but nope guys like you and he just swallow it whole because you allow your bias to override what intellect you actually have.

Wow, project much Nova? Because what you're accusing us of doing is what you do every time when someone post something that shows just what the homosexual lifestyle and agenda is truly all about.

Gina
08-19-2012, 03:13 PM
Homosexuality has nothing to do with HIV
Then you (Nova) go on to explain why HIV spread faster in the male homosexual community than any other.

Do I need more coffee or are you just messing with my mind?

Zeus
08-19-2012, 04:27 PM
Then you (Nova) go on to explain why HIV spread faster in the male homosexual community than any other.

Do I need more coffee or are you just messing with my mind?

When HIV/Aids was first discovered it was exclusively in the Gay and intravenous drug use culture. Because of the PC encompassing the handling the treatment and educating of the public in general about the disease it spread amongst the heterosexual community through blood transfusions and infidelity.

m00
08-19-2012, 06:56 PM
When HIV/Aids was first discovered it was exclusively in the Gay and intravenous drug use culture. Because of the PC encompassing the handling the treatment and educating of the public in general about the disease it spread amongst the heterosexual community through blood transfusions and infidelity.

I thought it spread because sex education in the 1980s was piss-poor. And I don't just mean at school.

Novaheart
08-20-2012, 11:11 AM
And? Posting "cdc" and leaving it at that isn't good enough Nova.

How about GFY?

Novaheart
08-20-2012, 11:21 AM
When HIV/Aids was first discovered it was exclusively in the Gay and intravenous drug use culture. Because of the PC encompassing the handling the treatment and educating of the public in general about the disease it spread amongst the heterosexual community through blood transfusions and infidelity.

Diseases travel. Now they travel quickly. Syphilis and the Black Plague were attributed to one nationality or another, but whether it was the Portuguese or the French, the real culprit was traveling to Africa and/or having close interaction (let's be kind) with afflicted Africans.

Gay people did not invent HIV nor did we bring it to the US. "Patient zero" has been theorized to be a flight attendant or some troll from Germany making it with male prostitutes (who may well have been heterosexual) in Haiti or some other godforsaken Caribbean dump. You don't need a crystal ball to know that with the population drift and travel between Americans and Afro-caribbeans AIDS was already on its way. The excess of the 1970's simply accelerated it.

Zeus
08-20-2012, 11:48 AM
Diseases travel. Now they travel quickly. Syphilis and the Black Plague were attributed to one nationality or another, but whether it was the Portuguese or the French, the real culprit was traveling to Africa and/or having close interaction (let's be kind) with afflicted Africans.

Gay people did not invent HIV nor did we bring it to the US. "Patient zero" has been theorized to be a flight attendant or some troll from Germany making it with male prostitutes (who may well have been heterosexual) in Haiti or some other godforsaken Caribbean dump. You don't need a crystal ball to know that with the population drift and travel between Americans and Afro-caribbeans AIDS was already on its way. The excess of the 1970's simply accelerated it.


No one is saying Gays invented HIV/Aids. But in it's inception it spread mainly from activities amongst the two before mentioned cultures. The PC handling of the disease in the beginning is what allowed the scourge to infiltrate the nations blood supply and also migrate to heterosexuals through needle sharing and infidelity.

Sometimes tolerance and the attitude of If it don't affect me go for it is a killer.

Zathras
08-20-2012, 11:52 AM
How about GFY?

Translation: I pulled those numbers out of my ass and can't back them up.

Thanks for admitting defeat and conceeding the argument.

Novaheart
08-20-2012, 02:42 PM
Translation: I pulled those numbers out of my ass and can't back them up.

Thanks for admitting defeat and conceeding the argument.

Oh gosh, why don't you double dare me and I might play your game?

Zathras
08-21-2012, 12:59 AM
Oh gosh, why don't you double dare me and I might play your game?

Why would I play your game Nova, that of the 2 year old brat throwing a temper tantrum when he doesn't get what they want for Christmas. Face it, everytime you get owned by Ody or anyone else here in an argument, you stick your fingers in your ears and go "lalalalalala" instead of responding like an adult every time your pathetic little arguments get trashed with verifiable facts provided by the person doing it. The above quote only reinforces this fact.

NJCardFan
08-21-2012, 01:08 AM
Diseases travel. Now they travel quickly. Syphilis and the Black Plague were attributed to one nationality or another, but whether it was the Portuguese or the French, the real culprit was traveling to Africa and/or having close interaction (let's be kind) with afflicted Africans.

Gay people did not invent HIV nor did we bring it to the US. "Patient zero" has been theorized to be a flight attendant or some troll from Germany making it with male prostitutes (who may well have been heterosexual) in Haiti or some other godforsaken Caribbean dump. You don't need a crystal ball to know that with the population drift and travel between Americans and Afro-caribbeans AIDS was already on its way. The excess of the 1970's simply accelerated it.
Heterosexual men do not have sex with other men.

RobJohnson
08-21-2012, 02:04 AM
As you probably know, VD rates amongst blacks has traditionally been higher than amongst whites. Should they stop being black?



Yes. Only if you quit being so fucking stupid. Good thing we know both are not possible.

RobJohnson
08-21-2012, 02:07 AM
Translation: I pulled those numbers out of my ass and can't back them up.

.



I hope he did not harm the gerbil by pulling the numbers out of his ass.

Zathras
08-21-2012, 02:21 AM
I hope he did not harm the gerbil by pulling the numbers out of his ass.

Probably not but he did have to be careful pulling them out around his head.

txradioguy
08-21-2012, 05:28 AM
"Patient zero" has been theorized to be a flight attendant or some troll from Germany making it with male prostitutes (who may well have been heterosexual) in Haiti or some other godforsaken Caribbean dump.

It's no theory you lying sack of crap. It's been confirmed...11 years ago. You're just spinning a myth to deny the truth.


Zero, says Author Randy Shilts, was Gaetan Dugas, a handsome blond steward for Air Canada, who used to survey the men on offer in gay bars and announce with satisfaction, "I'm the prettiest one." Using airline passes, he traveled extensively and picked up men wherever he went. Dugas developed Kaposi's sarcoma, a form of skin cancer common to AIDS victims, in June 1980, before the epidemic had been perceived by physicians. Told later he was endangering anyone he slept with, Dugas unrepentantly carried on -- by his estimate, with 250 partners a year -- until his death in March 1984, adding countless direct and indirect victims. At least one man indignantly hunted him down. Dugas' charm proved unfailing: he sweet-talked the man into having sex again.

Dugas' identity as the peripatetic Patient Zero was confirmed last week by Professor Marcus Conant of the University of California at San Francisco, a pioneer AIDS researcher. But, Conant adds, "if it hadn't been this man, it would have been some other." Dugas' escapades are just one of many vivid and shocking stories in Shilts' impressively researched and richly detailed narrative. The author has been covering AIDS full time for the San Francisco Chronicle since 1983. Most of his tales underscore a theme that is painfully ; familiar to AIDS researchers: both the Federal Government and the gay community squandered lives and let the disease rage out of control by focusing on ideological preaching instead of public health.


http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,145257,00.html



Go ahead and keep trying to convince yourself that it wasn't a gay man who purposely spread the disease. Postulate that it's some straight guy who looked for male prostitutes. If that helps you sleep better at night...hey that's on you.

But what you're telling yourself couldn't be farther from the truth.

Zathras
08-21-2012, 10:12 AM
It's no theory you lying sack of crap. It's been confirmed...11 years ago. You're just spinning a myth to deny the truth.



http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,145257,00.html



Go ahead and keep trying to convince yourself that it wasn't a gay man who purposely spread the disease. Postulate that it's some straight guy who looked for male prostitutes. If that helps you sleep better at night...hey that's on you.

But what you're telling yourself couldn't be farther from the truth.

Well, when you're used to getting away with pulling crap out of your ass and calling it fact and never backing it up with source material, I can see why Nova would think this.

Novaheart
08-21-2012, 10:38 AM
Well, you never disappoint. I didn't say that it was "some straight guy who looked for male prostitutes" I said that it was thought to be some German troll (ie older gay man cruising in gay bars) who picked it up from a male prostitute who may well have been heterosexual as is commonplace in such places as Haiti.

As for "patient zero" being confirmed - what horseshit. In the first place, you can no more pin down AIDS to one person than you can any other communicable disease. In the second place, it's a tad racist to refer to a white person as "patient zero" as if the AIDS epidemic only became important when a white person got infected. If some flight slut got AIDS in Haiti, it was already in this hemisphere and spreading.

The most you can confidently say about the patient-zero you named is that he appears to have infected a lot of people. You cannot declare that he was the sole vehicle of AIDS into the US.


It's no theory you lying sack of crap. It's been confirmed...11 years ago. You're just spinning a myth to deny the truth.



http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,145257,00.html



Go ahead and keep trying to convince yourself that it wasn't a gay man who purposely spread the disease. Postulate that it's some straight guy who looked for male prostitutes. If that helps you sleep better at night...hey that's on you.

But what you're telling yourself couldn't be farther from the truth.

Gina
08-21-2012, 10:59 AM
In the second place, it's a tad racist to refer to a white person as "patient zero" as if the AIDS epidemic only became important when a white person got infected.
Sensitive much? Lots of posters on CU refer to Obama as Captain Zero. Are they being racist to his white side or his black side?


If some flight slut got AIDS in Haiti, it was already in this hemisphere and spreading.
If I was a liberal I'd be all... DONT DISRESPECT WOMEN YOU BIG JERK. Or something like that.

Galatians 6:8 The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.

Novaheart
08-21-2012, 11:29 AM
Galatians 6:8 The one who sows to please his sinful nature, from that nature will reap destruction; the one who sows to please the Spirit, from the Spirit will reap eternal life.

Spare me your bullshit.

Gina
08-21-2012, 11:46 AM
Spare me your bullshit.

I'm flattered, but I have to admit I'm not St. Paul. I've seen you throw Bible verses around, hypocrite.

Zathras
08-21-2012, 12:21 PM
Spare me your bullshit.

You first Princess...of course that would mean stopping about 95% of your posts.

txradioguy
08-21-2012, 01:05 PM
Spare me your bullshit.

Do ALL of us a favor and spare us yours.

txradioguy
08-21-2012, 01:10 PM
Well, you never disappoint. I didn't say that it was "some straight guy who looked for male prostitutes" I said that it was thought to be some German troll (ie older gay man cruising in gay bars) who picked it up from a male prostitute who may well have been heterosexual as is commonplace in such places as Haiti.

Except either way you slice it...you're wrong.


As for "patient zero" being confirmed - what horseshit. In the first place, you can no more pin down AIDS to one person than you can any other communicable disease. In the second place, it's a tad racist to refer to a white person as "patient zero" as if the AIDS epidemic only became important when a white person got infected. If some flight slut got AIDS in Haiti, it was already in this hemisphere and spreading.

Except that it wasn't some woman in Hati. And people way smarter than you have confirmed...as I noted earlier from the Time Magazine article...Patient Zero WAS a gay flight attendant from Canada. Like a wire diagram the CDC can trace everything that spread in the U.S. when it was still called the "monkey virus" back to that one person.

What you're trying to convince us of...is that your propaganda and denial of reality...is more factual than years of research by a doctor who actually knows what he's talking about.

Sorry Princess...that's not gonna fly.

quote]The most you can confidently say about the patient-zero you named is that he appears to have infected a lot of people. You cannot declare that he was the sole vehicle of AIDS into the US.[/QUOTE]

I didn't say anything...Professor Marcus Conant of the University of California at San Francisco, a pioneer AIDS researcher...said it and confirmed it.

You on the other hand...sound like the early deniers in the gay community that the bath houses in San Francisco were helping to spread AIDS...just do you didn't have to give up your little gay play pens.

Rockntractor
08-21-2012, 01:24 PM
just do you didn't have to give up your little gay play pens.

Brownie pans

Novaheart
08-21-2012, 02:56 PM
Except either way you slice it...you're wrong.



Except that it wasn't some woman in Hati.

I didn't say that it was.IS there something wrong with your reading ability? A "flight slut" was referring to Randy Shilts' patient zero.



And people way smarter than you have confirmed...

Oh please, one professor (who probably has a book to sell) in San Francisco says he's pinpointed patient zero , who conveniently is exactly the person suspected of being patient zero as far back as the 1980's, and it's gospel to you. As you will not, your "smarter than you" sources also say it doesn't matter, that if not him it would have been someone else.




I didn't say anything...Professor Marcus Conant of the University of California at San Francisco, a pioneer AIDS researcher...said it and confirmed it.

You on the other hand...sound like the early deniers in the gay community that the bath houses in San Francisco were helping to spread AIDS...just do you didn't have to give up your little gay play pens.

Well golly gee, by your standard we should accept history as told by professors at Howard University, shouldn't we?





You on the other hand...sound like the early deniers in the gay community that the bath houses in San Francisco were helping to spread AIDS...just do you didn't have to give up your little gay play pens.

Actually, I lived in SF from `1980 to 1986 and I supported quarantine. I was diagnosed with AIDS (they didn't call it that yet) , wrongly, and when they found out that it was a wrong diagnosis then they studied me to find out why I didn't have AIDS. My doctor had begun a theory about certain inbred people of English ancestry being immune to AIDS. He died in an auto accident and the idea that some people were immune was deemed to be potentially dangerous in having people deciding that they were immune and misbehaving.

txradioguy
08-21-2012, 03:21 PM
I didn't say that it was.IS there something wrong with your reading ability? A "flight slut" was referring to Randy Shilts' patient zero.

Doesn't change a thing. And nothing is wrong with my reading ability. You're getting your ass handed to you on this and you're beginning to parse words tro try and save face.

Pathetic.





Oh please, one professor (who probably has a book to sell) in San Francisco says he's pinpointed patient zero , who conveniently is exactly the person suspected of being patient zero as far back as the 1980's, and it's gospel to you. As you will not, your "smarter than you" sources also say it doesn't matter, that if not him it would have been someone else.




Well golly gee, by your standard we should accept history as told by professors at Howard University, shouldn't we?

Ladies and gentlemen...proof positive denial isn't just a river in Egypt.




Actually, I lived in SF from `1980 to 1986 and I supported quarantine. I was diagnosed with AIDS (they didn't call it that yet) , wrongly, and when they found out that it was a wrong diagnosis then they studied me to find out why I didn't have AIDS. My doctor had begun a theory about certain inbred people of English ancestry being immune to AIDS. He died in an auto accident and the idea that some people were immune was deemed to be potentially dangerous in having people deciding that they were immune and misbehaving.

Straw man...has absolutely nothing to do with the subject...or the fact you're wrong...and can't back up your alleged theory.

Try again next time princess.

wasp69
08-21-2012, 04:19 PM
I'm really surprised that American Thinker printed this stupidity. Seriously.
As you probably know, VD rates amongst blacks has traditionally been higher than amongst whites.


Fuckin' racist...

Odysseus
08-21-2012, 05:21 PM
Yeah, like that page of garbage he printed the other day? Any intelligent person with or without a computer should have known that was a pile, but nope guys like you and he just swallow it whole because you allow your bias to override what intellect you actually have.
Funny, but you keep claiming that it's easy to refute, yet you never refute it. Please, why don't you show me exactly which data is wrong in that set of citations? It ought to be easy for you, since you claim to be far more intelligent and unbiased than the rest of us.

Oh gosh, why don't you double dare me and I might play your game?
How about if I double dog dare you? Anything to get you to actually try to present facts.

As for "patient zero" being confirmed - what horseshit. In the first place, you can no more pin down AIDS to one person than you can any other communicable disease.

Tell that to Typhoid Mary.

Any disease that is spread via person-to-person contact can be traced. It's the basis of modern epidemiology. In the case of Typhoid Mary, it was determined that she was the common contact for over fifty persons who developed full-blown typhoid fever. This is basic history-of-science stuff.

In the case of AIDS, which is spread from fairly intimate contact, it's relatively easy to trace the contacts back to an initial carrier. It just requires a certain amount of honesty among those infected and a willingness to walk back the trail of infections. We've seen it done with literally every other venereal disease since the concept of germs was first advanced.


In the second place, it's a tad racist to refer to a white person as "patient zero" as if the AIDS epidemic only became important when a white person got infected. If some flight slut got AIDS in Haiti, it was already in this hemisphere and spreading.

The most you can confidently say about the patient-zero you named is that he appears to have infected a lot of people. You cannot declare that he was the sole vehicle of AIDS into the US.

Given the timelines and the genetic testing, it's pretty likely that Gaëtan Dugas was the cause of the breakout of the disease, as he was linked by the CDCwith 40 of the first 248 reported cases of AIDS in the U.S., which makes him responsible for almost 20% of the initial infections. However, we now know that the first actual death from AIDS in North America was a teenager named Robert Rayford, who died in 1969.


BOY'S 1969 DEATH SUGGESTS AIDS INVADED U.S. SEVERAL TIMES

By GINA KOLATA
Published: October 28, 1987


New evidence that a St. Louis teen-ager died of AIDS in 1969 suggests that the AIDS virus may have been introduced into the United States several times before touching off the current epidemic, according to experts in disease transmission.


Until now, many experts have assumed that the virus that causes acquired immune deficiency syndrome first appeared in the country sometime in the mid-1970's. Evidence indicates to many experts that the disease originated before then in Africa, although this has not been proved.


The patient, identified only as Robert R., died in 1969 of an illness that baffled his doctors at Washington University in St. Louis. They published a paper in 1984 suggesting that, with hindsight, his symptoms resembled those of AIDS. About two months ago, molecular biologists at Tulane University in New Orleans examined stored specimens of Robert R.'s tissues for signs of the AIDS virus and found that the 15-year-old was apparently infected with it.


''Our diagnostic tests confirmed the presence of the AIDS virus,'' said Dr. Robert Garry of Tulane. ''We're pretty confident about this case now.'' Speculation on Significance




http://nytimes.perfectmarket.com/pm/images/pixel.gif
Press accounts last weekend about the finding led AIDS experts to speculate on its implications.
The evidence that Robert R. died of AIDS in 1969, nearly a decade before what had been the country's first known AIDS cases, indicates that the virus may have been introduced and re-introduced into the American population on several occasions, but that it may have died out for lack of a large, very sexually active population to transmit it, said Dr. Richard Rothenberg, an epidemiologist at the Federal Centers for Disease Control in Atlanta.


The virus spreads through sexual intercourse or infected blood's entry into the body. Since it is not transmitted in every act of intercourse by a virus carrier, experts said, the disease might not spread widely from a small number of carriers unless they engaged in frequent intercourse with a large number of partners, a condition that was met among male homosexual populations in some cities in the 1970's.


When the virus became entrenched among addict populations - exactly when this happened is also unknown -sharing of needles was an even more efficient means of spread.


Dr. Robert May, a mathematician at Princeton University who has studied the spread of AIDS, remarked, ''It wouldn't be surprising if AIDS appeared once, twice, three times before it finally took.''

Origin of Virus
Dr. Robert C. Gallo of the National Cancer Institute, an expert on the disease, said he felt certain that ''the AIDS virus didn't come in one bout at one time.'' Cases like that of Robert R. are to be expected, said Dr. Gallo, who said he was convinced the virus originated in Africa.


Robert R.'s former doctors suspected that he had engaged in homosexual intercourse. But none of the experts had any idea where he could have become infected.


''It seems odd to me that it was in St. Louis to begin with,'' said Dr. Harold Jaffe, chief AIDS epidemiologist at the Centers for Disease Control. He noted that St. Louis was not one of the first cities to be hit by the AIDS epidemic, which was first detected in New York and California.


In 1968 Robert R. appeared at a clinic associated with Washington University suffering from an assortment of illnesses. Most striking, said Dr. William Drake, a St. Louis pathologist who is now retired, were swollen lymph nodes in Robert R.'s neck and ''swelling of the legs, lower torso and genitalia for no apparent reason.''


Dr. Drake said Robert R.'s physicians tried unsuccessfuly to treat him by surgically draining his lymph nodes.
Although the St. Louis doctors tried for 15 months to help Robert R., his disease followed an unremittingly downhill course. He was exhausted, he lost weight, and he was plagued with a severe infection with chlamydia, a bacteria that frequently infects gay men and that is sexually transmitted. His physicians treated him with a battery of antibiotics, but the youth died in 1969 after a bout with bronchial pneumonia, Dr. Drake said.

AIDS-Linked Cancer Found

An autopsy showed that the Robert R. had Kaposi's sarcoma, a skin cancer that is almost a hallmark of AIDS infections in gay men. The youth had just one outward sign of the cancer, a tiny purple spot on his thigh, Dr. Drake said. But when Dr. Drake performed an autopsy, he found other Kaposi sarcoma lesions throughout the soft tissues of the youth's body.


Dr. Memory Elvin-Lewis, a chlamydia specialist at Washington University, said she was fascinated by Robert R.'s illness and wanted to study his tissues to determine the extent of his chlamydia infection. When the autopsy was done, Dr. Elvin-Lewis requested that tissues from the body be frozen so she could examine them at a later time.
Several of Robert R.'s doctors, who had since moved to the University of Arizona College of Medicine in Tucson, later suspected that the teen-ager had AIDS. Robert R. had admitted to being sexually active, although not to being gay, but his doctors said they thought he was homosexual or bisexual because he had certain rectal lesions and chronic hemorrhoids, which are frequently seen in gay men.


But Robert R. gave no hint of his sexual contacts, according to Dr. Elvin-Lewis. ''He was not communicative,'' she said. ''He barely said boo. He never told us what he was doing.'' His doctors said they doubted that he had ever left the St. Louis area.


When tests for the presence of the AIDS virus became available a few years ago, Dr. Marlys Witte of the University of Arizona, one of Robert R.'s doctors, tried to contact Dr. Elvin-Lewis to ask for the frozen tissue samples. But Dr. Elvin-Lewis said she was out of the country for much of the time that Dr. Witte was trying to reach her.


Finally, about a year ago, Dr. Witte reached Dr. Elvin-Lewis, who supplied the tissue samples. Last spring, Dr. Garry of Tulane agreed to do the tests.


Dr. Garry said he had done Western blot tests on Robert R.'s serum. The procedure is a a highly precise test for AIDS virus antibodies. Dr. Garry has also completed tests for the P24 antigen, a virus protein that gives futher evidence of infection. Both tests were positive for the HIV virus, which causes AIDS. .


While the evidence of AIDS virus infection seems virtually conclusive, Dr. Garry said, he also plans to examine Robert R.'s cells for the actual DNA, the genetic material, of the AIDS virus. But that is an uncertain and difficult procedure, he said.



http://www.nytimes.com/1987/10/28/us/boy-s-1969-death-suggests-aids-invaded-us-several-times.html




This article is from 1987. The tests found antibodies for all of the known HIV proteins in his blood and subsequent tests have confirmed the diagnosis. Rayford was diagnosed with a severe case of chlamydia and was believed to have been a male prostitute.

So, you're both right. AIDS had been seen in North America prior to the advent of patient zero, but patient zero was the vector for the first widespread dissemination of the disease.

Novaheart
08-21-2012, 06:25 PM
Heterosexual men do not have sex with other men.

If you will recall, Odysseus purported to quote Kinsey not too long ago. Actually he was parroting a right wing "source" , but you didn't challenge him on that. So I will use here the actual Kinsey reference, which I assume you also will not question , especially since it's the correct one rather than the one Ody used.

Ody said "Alfred Kinsey was the first to identify a correlation between homosexuality and the sexual abuse of minors. In 1948, he found that 37 percent of all male homosexuals admitted to having sex with children under 17 years old. " (Bill Donohue). This is a misrepresentation of what Kinsey actually wrote.


MONDAY, JULY 26, 2010
Catholic Spokesman Caught Lying
Bruce Garrett, writing at Truth Wins Out made a good catch today. The Washington Post had an op-ed today by the ever-venomous Bill Donohue of the Catholic Defense League.

Here, Bruce can tell you:
The Washington Post dug itself a little deeper into the gutter the other day (I guess that’s still possible), when it allowed Bill Donohue, of the One Man Catholic Defense League, to repeat in its pages one of the older and more enduring lies in the kook pew’s arsenal…
Alfred Kinsey was the first to identify a correlation between homosexuality and the sexual abuse of minors. In 1948, he found that 37 percent of all male homosexuals admitted to having sex with children under 17 years old.

This is why I own a copy of Kinsey’s Sexual Behavior In The Human Male. Nobody but other sex researchers, and those of us with an interest in fact checking the bigots, actually takes the trouble to go through its page after page after page after page of dry, meticulously documented tables. Which makes it an easy book for the bigots to to lie through their teeth about. In fact, Kinsey said no such thing as, happily, some of the comments to that Washington Post column are pointing out. What Kinsey discovered, was that 37 percent of all males had some overt homosexual experience to the point of orgasm, sometime between adolescence and old age.

Notice the difference? It’s not even 37 percent actually had sex when they were teenagers. But never mind that for a moment. If having had gay sex with a teenager, when you yourself were also a teenager makes you a pedophile (and yes, remarkably, some of them will insist even that is so), then tell me what percentage of the heterosexual population are also pedophiles? Is everyone who ever took a roll in the hay with their high school sweetheart a pedophile now? The line to register as a sex offender is going to be a tad long then. Maybe we can all just check a box off during the next census. How The Game Is Played…(continued)

So The Post got caught publishing made-up numbers. You try to imagine the kind of mind that takes the statement "X percent of men have had sex with another man" and turns it into "X percent of all male homosexuals admitted to having sex with children under 17 years old." I think Garrett is right here, it's somebody who doesn't expect their readers to go to the source and look it up.


So unless you think that 37% of the male population is actually gay, then what you (a prison guard) are observing is called "situational sexuality" rather than sexual orientation.

Rockntractor
08-21-2012, 06:36 PM
If you will recall, Odysseus purported to quote Kinsey not too long ago. Actually he was parroting a right wing "source" , but you didn't challenge him on that. So I will use here the actual Kinsey reference, which I assume you also will not question , especially since it's the correct one rather than the one Ody used.

Ody said "Alfred Kinsey was the first to identify a correlation between homosexuality and the sexual abuse of minors. In 1948, he found that 37 percent of all male homosexuals admitted to having sex with children under 17 years old. " (Bill Donohue). This is a misrepresentation of what Kinsey actually wrote.


MONDAY, JULY 26, 2010
Catholic Spokesman Caught Lying
Bruce Garrett, writing at Truth Wins Out made a good catch today. The Washington Post had an op-ed today by the ever-venomous Bill Donohue of the Catholic Defense League.

Here, Bruce can tell you:
The Washington Post dug itself a little deeper into the gutter the other day (I guess that’s still possible), when it allowed Bill Donohue, of the One Man Catholic Defense League, to repeat in its pages one of the older and more enduring lies in the kook pew’s arsenal…
Alfred Kinsey was the first to identify a correlation between homosexuality and the sexual abuse of minors. In 1948, he found that 37 percent of all male homosexuals admitted to having sex with children under 17 years old.

This is why I own a copy of Kinsey’s Sexual Behavior In The Human Male. Nobody but other sex researchers, and those of us with an interest in fact checking the bigots, actually takes the trouble to go through its page after page after page after page of dry, meticulously documented tables. Which makes it an easy book for the bigots to to lie through their teeth about. In fact, Kinsey said no such thing as, happily, some of the comments to that Washington Post column are pointing out. What Kinsey discovered, was that 37 percent of all males had some overt homosexual experience to the point of orgasm, sometime between adolescence and old age.

Notice the difference? It’s not even 37 percent actually had sex when they were teenagers. But never mind that for a moment. If having had gay sex with a teenager, when you yourself were also a teenager makes you a pedophile (and yes, remarkably, some of them will insist even that is so), then tell me what percentage of the heterosexual population are also pedophiles? Is everyone who ever took a roll in the hay with their high school sweetheart a pedophile now? The line to register as a sex offender is going to be a tad long then. Maybe we can all just check a box off during the next census. How The Game Is Played…(continued)

So The Post got caught publishing made-up numbers. You try to imagine the kind of mind that takes the statement "X percent of men have had sex with another man" and turns it into "X percent of all male homosexuals admitted to having sex with children under 17 years old." I think Garrett is right here, it's somebody who doesn't expect their readers to go to the source and look it up.


So unless you think that 37% of the male population is actually gay, then what you (a prison guard) are observing is called "situational sexuality" rather than sexual orientation.

Homosexuality is an activity you chose to participate in, It is not a person.

Odysseus
08-21-2012, 06:40 PM
If you will recall, Odysseus purported to quote Kinsey not too long ago. Actually he was parroting a right wing "source" , but you didn't challenge him on that. So I will use here the actual Kinsey reference, which I assume you also will not question , especially since it's the correct one rather than the one Ody used.

Ody said "Alfred Kinsey was the first to identify a correlation between homosexuality and the sexual abuse of minors. In 1948, he found that 37 percent of all male homosexuals admitted to having sex with children under 17 years old. " (Bill Donohue). This is a misrepresentation of what Kinsey actually wrote.


MONDAY, JULY 26, 2010
Catholic Spokesman Caught Lying
Bruce Garrett, writing at Truth Wins Out made a good catch today. The Washington Post had an op-ed today by the ever-venomous Bill Donohue of the Catholic Defense League.

Here, Bruce can tell you:
The Washington Post dug itself a little deeper into the gutter the other day (I guess that’s still possible), when it allowed Bill Donohue, of the One Man Catholic Defense League, to repeat in its pages one of the older and more enduring lies in the kook pew’s arsenal…
Alfred Kinsey was the first to identify a correlation between homosexuality and the sexual abuse of minors. In 1948, he found that 37 percent of all male homosexuals admitted to having sex with children under 17 years old.

This is why I own a copy of Kinsey’s Sexual Behavior In The Human Male. Nobody but other sex researchers, and those of us with an interest in fact checking the bigots, actually takes the trouble to go through its page after page after page after page of dry, meticulously documented tables. Which makes it an easy book for the bigots to to lie through their teeth about. In fact, Kinsey said no such thing as, happily, some of the comments to that Washington Post column are pointing out. What Kinsey discovered, was that 37 percent of all males had some overt homosexual experience to the point of orgasm, sometime between adolescence and old age.

Notice the difference? It’s not even 37 percent actually had sex when they were teenagers. But never mind that for a moment. If having had gay sex with a teenager, when you yourself were also a teenager makes you a pedophile (and yes, remarkably, some of them will insist even that is so), then tell me what percentage of the heterosexual population are also pedophiles? Is everyone who ever took a roll in the hay with their high school sweetheart a pedophile now? The line to register as a sex offender is going to be a tad long then. Maybe we can all just check a box off during the next census. How The Game Is Played…(continued)

So The Post got caught publishing made-up numbers. You try to imagine the kind of mind that takes the statement "X percent of men have had sex with another man" and turns it into "X percent of all male homosexuals admitted to having sex with children under 17 years old." I think Garrett is right here, it's somebody who doesn't expect their readers to go to the source and look it up.


So unless you think that 37% of the male population is actually gay, then what you (a prison guard) are observing is called "situational sexuality" rather than sexual orientation.

Well done. You have found a source that refutes one source that was cited in the article that I cut and pasted. That leaves, what, ten other studies that had nothing to do with Kinsey? Get cracking.

Oh, and you argued that homosexuality was genetic, rather than environmental, but your source, which argues that Kinsey was observing "situational sexuality" actually supports the argument that there is an environmental factor, as demonstrated in the Calhoun study, which, BTW, I've never seen you address. Why is that?

Novaheart
08-21-2012, 06:45 PM
Then you (Nova) go on to explain why HIV spread faster in the male homosexual community than any other.

Do I need more coffee or are you just messing with my mind?

You answered your own question with the change you made in the parameter. I said that homosexuality has nothing to do with AIDS. You then asked about it spreading in the "male homosexual community."

Lesbians have a very low incidence of AIDS.
Gay men in exclusive relationships have a low incidence of AIDS.
Barring an accidental needle stick or an attack, I have no chance of contracting AIDS.
Being homosexual doesn't cause AIDS. Being sexually active with other people who are having sex with other people (still especially people from AIDS centers, Africa, the Islands, and certain Asian countries) increases the likelihood one will contract AIDS.

Moreover, while no one may have said this in this thread, this tiresome rehash of such things is simply people trying to justify discrimination based in religion. Once the cure for AIDS is found, they'll just go back to other lies which people with no integrity (like Ody) will repeat.

Novaheart
08-21-2012, 06:54 PM
Well done. You have found a source that refutes one source that was cited in the article that I cut and pasted.

Actually it doesn't refute anything. It shows Donohue's willingness (and yours) to lie, but it doesn't refute anything because what should have jumped out at you and caused you to not post this (that which I said did not require a computer to know) is that Kinsey in 1948 did not have the resources to make a "37% of all homosexual males" statement. He simply didn't have the sample. A representative sample is difficult (perhaps still impossible) to get to this day. Which would take into some of your other claims, almost all of which are achieved through minimizing the size of the subject population and maximizing the size of the disorder. That you repeat such things might explain why you have some of the strange ideas you have, but it doesn't excuse you for repeating malicious claims without investigating them. That's a lack of integrity.

Novaheart
08-21-2012, 07:01 PM
Oh, and you argued that homosexuality was genetic, rather than environmental, but your source, which argues that Kinsey was observing "situational sexuality" actually supports the argument that there is an environmental factor, as demonstrated in the Calhoun study, which, BTW, I've never seen you address. Why is that?

Because the one does not disprove the other. Anderson Cooper will probably marry some German princess at some point and make heirs. That doesn't mean that he's straight or bisexual. Vinny Kneecaps might have a prison boyfriend, that doesn't mean he's gay. Sexual behavior and sexual orientation are not synonymous. Stop thinking with your genitals. If you were some guy's prison girlfriend, would you have become gay? No, you would be in a situation where you had the choice of being Vinny's bitch or being his latest dead cellmate. Your sexual orientation didn't change.

Zathras
08-21-2012, 07:03 PM
You answered your own question with the change you made in the parameter. I said that homosexuality has nothing to do with AIDS. You then asked about it spreading in the "male homosexual community."

Lesbians have a very low incidence of AIDS.
Gay men in exclusive relationships have a low incidence of AIDS.
Barring an accidental needle stick or an attack, I have no chance of contracting AIDS.
Being homosexual doesn't cause AIDS. Being sexually active with other people who are having sex with other people (still especially people from AIDS centers, Africa, the Islands, and certain Asian countries) increases the likelihood one will contract AIDS.

Moreover, while no one may have said this in this thread, this tiresome rehash of such things is simply people trying to justify discrimination based in religion. Once the cure for AIDS is found, they'll just go back to other lies which people with no integrity (like Ody) will repeat.

There you go pulling things out of your ass yet again. You must be because I see nothing to back up the statements you just made.

Oh, and one more thing Nova....you, of all people, have no right to accuse other people of having no integrity when you have none yourself.

Novaheart
08-21-2012, 07:08 PM
Fuckin' racist...

What?

Rockntractor
08-21-2012, 07:13 PM
What?

He doesn't realize you don't have sex.

Gina
08-21-2012, 07:42 PM
You answered your own question with the change you made in the parameter. I said that homosexuality has nothing to do with AIDS. You then asked about it spreading in the "male homosexual community."

Lesbians have a very low incidence of AIDS.
Gay men in exclusive relationships have a low incidence of AIDS.
Barring an accidental needle stick or an attack, I have no chance of contracting AIDS.
Being homosexual doesn't cause AIDS. Being sexually active with other people who are having sex with other people (still especially people from AIDS centers, Africa, the Islands, and certain Asian countries) increases the likelihood one will contract AIDS.

Moreover, while no one may have said this in this thread, this tiresome rehash of such things is simply people trying to justify discrimination based in religion. Once the cure for AIDS is found, they'll just go back to other lies which people with no integrity (like Ody) will repeat.

You missed my point. You said:

Homosexuality has nothing to do with HIV, if it did, then lesbians would be included and they aren't in that aspect. Male homosexuality spreads HIV faster because females don't control the sex supply- in short, men are men.
I get it about lesbians. What I was questioning is YOU said "Homosexuality has nothing to do with aids." THEN YOU said Male homosexuality spreads HIV faster. So my original question remains. You were ascribing to me something you said. See?

Odysseus
08-22-2012, 11:45 AM
You answered your own question with the change you made in the parameter. I said that homosexuality has nothing to do with AIDS. You then asked about it spreading in the "male homosexual community."

Lesbians have a very low incidence of AIDS.
Gay men in exclusive relationships have a low incidence of AIDS.
Barring an accidental needle stick or an attack, I have no chance of contracting AIDS.
Being homosexual doesn't cause AIDS. Being sexually active with other people who are having sex with other people (still especially people from AIDS centers, Africa, the Islands, and certain Asian countries) increases the likelihood one will contract AIDS.

Moreover, while no one may have said this in this thread, this tiresome rehash of such things is simply people trying to justify discrimination based in religion. Once the cure for AIDS is found, they'll just go back to other lies which people with no integrity (like Ody) will repeat.

No one said that homosexuality causes AIDS. What has been said is that homosexual activities among men provide and extremely efficient means of transmission, second only to needle sharing and blood transfusions, which account for the vast majority of heterosexual cases.


Actually it doesn't refute anything. It shows Donohue's willingness (and yours) to lie, but it doesn't refute anything because what should have jumped out at you and caused you to not post this (that which I said did not require a computer to know) is that Kinsey in 1948 did not have the resources to make a "37% of all homosexual males" statement. He simply didn't have the sample. A representative sample is difficult (perhaps still impossible) to get to this day. Which would take into some of your other claims, almost all of which are achieved through minimizing the size of the subject population and maximizing the size of the disorder. That you repeat such things might explain why you have some of the strange ideas you have, but it doesn't excuse you for repeating malicious claims without investigating them. That's a lack of integrity.

You are fixating on one citation, and ignoring the rest of the post, in order to create a straw man argument and attack my integrity. I stated that I considered Kinsey unreliable, explained why his numbers skewed high (essentially agreeing with you) and asked that you look at the subsequent studies, but you refused. I understand why you don't want to address the other studies, since they go against your arguments, but resorting to namecalling doesn't change the facts.


Because the one does not disprove the other. Anderson Cooper will probably marry some German princess at some point and make heirs. That doesn't mean that he's straight or bisexual. Vinny Kneecaps might have a prison boyfriend, that doesn't mean he's gay. Sexual behavior and sexual orientation are not synonymous. Stop thinking with your genitals. If you were some guy's prison girlfriend, would you have become gay? No, you would be in a situation where you had the choice of being Vinny's bitch or being his latest dead cellmate. Your sexual orientation didn't change.

Actually, if Anderson Cooper marries a woman, and maintains a sexual relationship with her, then that would make him bisexual, wouldn't it? Orientation and behavior are linked. If you behave a certain way voluntarily, then it is volitional, and therefore part of your orientation. If you are unable to behave a certain way, regardless of the circumstances, then you lack that orientation. And if Vinny Kneecaps decided that he was flexible enough to have a prison boyfriend, then he obviously has enough of an orientation towards homosexual activity to conduct himself that way, but if he didn't, he wouldn't. If I were in the position that you described, I'd be Vinny's dead cellmate, or he'd be mine, but my orientation doesn't include "bitch".

txradioguy
08-22-2012, 01:27 PM
You were ascribing to me something you said. See?

That's par for the course with Nova...you'll find that he pulls stunts like that when he's getting his ass handed to him in one of these debates.

Gina
08-22-2012, 02:15 PM
That's par for the course with Nova...you'll find that he pulls stunts like that when he's getting his ass handed to him in one of these debates.

I thought I lost my mind.. I had to page back to see what he originally said. He is messing with my mind I think! :biggrin-new:

FlaGator
08-22-2012, 02:20 PM
I know of no study that verifies the hypothesis that homosexuality is genetic.

Rockntractor
08-22-2012, 02:22 PM
I know of no study that verifies the hypothesis that homosexuality is genetic.

Homosexuality is an activity not a person. It is a substitute for sex.