Daggah

Ah, I see, so if we just become fanatically religious like Saudi Arabia (I know nothing about sex ed in Cuba), that'll fix the problem too, right?

At what cost?

Obviously you evaded the point. Obviously condoms can and DO work. Obviously that doesn't fit with your fundamentalist worldview. So as a result, obviously, you have to resort to weak and pathetic red herrings like the one above to avoid facing that reality.

dk

You're the one touting sex ed as a silver bullet. Human sexuality has proven to be more complex, and social diseases more difficult to indoctrinate than little children.

Dr Rick

The pathogenesis of HIV and everyother infectious agent is the same in Zaire as it is in the US; it's the demographics that differ. You completely sidestep the fact that the primary mode of HIV transmission is through heterosexual sex, but that won't make it go away, and outlawing anal sex won't, either.

What is your point, here? The epidemiologists and infectious disease docs at the NIH and CDC don't claim to be infallible, nor are they hiding anything. From the CDC website:

Current Status of the HIV/AIDS Epidemic in the U.S.

How People Are Becoming Infected

"In 1999, CDC received reports of 21,186 adult and adolescent HIV infections from 32 areas with adult and adolescent name-based HIV reporting (Fig. 3). The states reporting HIV infections did not include some of the areas hardest hit, such as California and New York – clearly, the total numbers reported would rise considerably if all states and territories conducted HIV reporting. And the proportions of cases reported in the chart above might also change. CDC estimates that 70% of all new HIV infections are among men, with MSM accounting for the majority – 60% – of those infections; heterosexual exposure accounting for another 15% and injection drug use for 25% of infections among men. Among women, who account for 30% of new infections, injection drug use also accounts for a quarter of new infections. But the majority of women – 75% – are infected sexually."

HIV Prevention Strategic Plan Through 2005

Current Status of the HIV/AIDS Epidemic in the U.S.

An Ever-Changing Epidemic

The AIDS epidemic continues to evolve, making new inroads in vulnerable populations. Women and young people – particularly those of color – are increasingly at risk, joining the two groups historically hardest hit: men who have sex with men and injection drug users.

People of color are disproportionately at risk, as shown in the pie charts below.

In 1997, HIV prevalence was higher among African Americans than among any other racial or ethnic group surveyed. As Figure 4 below shows, it is estimated that half the men becoming infected are African American and the majority (60%) are MSM.


In 1999, more African Americans were reported with AIDS than any other racial/ethnic group. Approximately two-thirds (63%) of all women and 42% of all men reported with AIDS in 1999 were African American. African American children represented almost two-thirds of all reported pediatric AIDS cases. In addition to suffering disproportionately from AIDS, African American women are also disproportionately infected with HIV. As shown in Figure 4, above, it is estimated that African American women account for 64% of new HIV infections among women.
In 1999, Hispanics represented 13% of the U.S. population, but accounted for 19% of the total number of new AIDS cases reported that year. Hispanic women represent 18% of estimated new HIV infections among women and Hispanic men represent 20% of estimated new infections among men (Figure 4).
Although Asian Pacific Islanders, Native Americans and Alaska Natives represent a small portion of the total number of estimated new infections nationally, the rates of AIDS for those populations demonstrate that HIV/AIDS has made inroads. For example, in 1999, racial breakouts of AIDS incidence among MSM were as follows:
New AIDS Diagnoses Among MSM, 1999

African American 55.5/100,000
Hispanic 26.8/100,000
Native American 10.9/100,000
White 10.9/100,000
Asian Pacific Islander 5.5/100,000


The CDC also believes that:

Stigma Hampers Prevention

"Stigma associated with HIV/AIDS continues to profoundly affect prevention efforts, leading people to deny risk … avoid testing … delay treatment … and suffer needlessly. While stigma’s pernicious effects are perhaps most obvious in countries other than the U.S., where people may be shunned and physically harmed, stigma negatively affects Americans as well. It is found at the structural level, in the form of laws and regulations, as well as more explicitly at community and individual levels."

An assertion begging substantiation, and even if correct, not evidence that oppressing gays and outlawing anal sex is going to make the world a better place or impact HIV transmission. The CDC believes that homophobia is hampering its work and HIV prevention.

How does oppressing homosexuals decrease teen violence, domestic violence, or racism?


uuhh...yeah, whatever.

Man, you completely lost me, here. What are you trying to say, and what is proof/prove of concept?

Rick

dk

dk: The science says you’re wrong, not me. HIV Viruses adapt, mutate and evolve to flourish in the host they infect and to spread in the culture they infest. In Africa HIV microbes have evolved, which in Sub Saharan Africa means primitive health care and promiscuous heterosexual culture, in the US this means multiple drug cocktails and a promiscuous predominantly gay culture. Today HIV comes in many flavors determined by hosts they infect, and culture they infest to become HIV I, II, III... type L, M, N, O..., and will continue to evolve.

Rick: Here’s the story on the US:
[Various statistics demonstrating that predicting the future is not an exact science]
dk: I disagree, statistics are quite reliable predictors of contagious disease. The science has been scrutinized and developed by the best minds of the 20th Century. But health statistics are no better than the data upon which they are based, or garbage in garbage out. In the early 1980s the gay rights movement used hiv/aids as a pretense to gather unto themselves political power to find a seat at the table of public policy. They used their political weight to approach the courts for privacy right. They won the privacy rights that in turn impeded 1) efforts to collect data to effectively plot the course of hiv/aids, 2) prevent an epidemic in the US. By the later half of the 1980s the epidemic came into full bloom. The gay leadership leveraged the suffering of dying gay lovers and the ominous looming pandemic to legitimize gay culture. They followed the tried and true liberal stratagem, “Don’t blame the victim”, to blame the hiv/aids epidemic on the homophobic bigoted white whale. In effect the gay culture found its stride galloping across the bodies of gays lovers. I shouldn’t be so critical of the gay leadership, they pretty much followed the path blazed by the civil rights and feminist movements. A rather ingenious strategy because to unmask the gay rights movement would also jeopardize black and feminists movements. Instead minorities, feminists and gays in locked step became the Rainbow Coalition to paint the Democratic Party into a far left ideological corner.

Rick: (snip)What is your point, here? The epidemiologists and infectious disease docs at the NIH and CDC don't claim to be infallible, nor are they hiding anything. From the CDC website:
(sniop)
"In 1999, CDC received reports of 21,186 adult and adolescent HIV infections from 32 areas with adult and adolescent name-based HIV reporting (Fig. 3). The states reporting HIV infections did not include some of the areas hardest hit, such as California and New York – clearly, the total numbers reported would rise considerably if all states and territories conducted HIV reporting. And the proportions of cases reported in the chart above might also change. CDC estimates that 70% of all new HIV infections are among men, with MSM accounting for the majority – 60% – of those infections; heterosexual exposure accounting for another 15% and injection drug use for 25% of infections among men. Among women, who account for 30% of new infections, injection drug use also accounts for a quarter of new infections. But the majority of women – 75% – are infected sexually."
dk: It has yet to be determined whether the CDC and NIH have been unshackled from the liberal ideological chains that bound them throughout the 1980-90s. Could you please provide the source of your data, I have some more issues to clarify but I’ll delay discussing the rest of the report. .
dk: The CDC has been shackled by an overbearing liberal ideology, to the demise of gay communities. This is a tragic comment, but oppressing homosexuals doesn’t impact anyone but homosexuals. Unfortunately by following on the heels of the Civil Rights and Feminist movements gays have put themselves in a position to disrupt and destroy the legal underpinnings of the nuclear family.

dk:
Problem statement: To make sex safe between consenting adults.
Concept: Put a non-intrusive transparent barrier over the penis to prevent physical contact and exchange of bodily fluids.
Proof of concept: Performed as advertised, with minimal intrusion.

I agree the concept has been proven in control studies. However, in practice over the last 30 years with intense socialization, indoctrination, education, and publication condoms have proven unreliable. People continued to get stds that kill, maim, and disfigure them reproductively, emotionally, physically and mentally with PID, MTCT, infertility, cancer and mental diseases that cost the society $billions/year in health care, with inestimable costs in terms of human resources. If the concept worked, then the problem statement must be flawed. The condom Operation was a success, but the patent died.

Jinto

And here we have you saying that because gay marriage will not completely solve the problem of unadopted children that it's beneficial effects in increasing the number of stable families available, by whatever amount, should be ignored. God, you're insensitive.

Oh by the way, gays do not reproduce through anal intercourse. Straights, however, do reproduce through vaginal intercourse with teenage women. We do not, therefore, ban heterosexual marriage. Your hypocrisy is blatant.

Swift? Why does that name sound familiar? I wonder if this guy is related to Johnathan Swift, you know, the one who wrote "A Modest Proposal." He certainly seems to share the guy's gift for satire. You did realize that this was satire, right? It should have been obvious from the first line: This essay is an outré, madness, a tragic, cruel fantasy, an eruption of inner rage, on how the oppressed desperately dream of being the oppressor.. Link.

Or did you get this off of a RCC website?

Yes, it is.

Well of course gays suffer the highest incidence of hiv/aids from MSM, they're the only ones doing it! I could just as easily say that heterosexuals suffer the highest incidence of hiv/aids from MSW. Judging from the fact that you can't even get your own facts straight (straight. Get it?), let alone form coherent sentences, I'd say that the whole thing is absolutely halarious! O praise be unto dk, the last bastion of bigotry and unreason, that he might save the world from the terrible evil of men who in their perversion have sex with other men, perverting the natural use of their bodies for the sake of their own pleasure. Let this lord of freedom reign victorious in his quest to shackle men into the bonds of holy matrimony, that they may never again defy the laws of nature by experiencing pleasure, for such is an abomination unto the LORD!

Daggah

No, statistics is the one doing that.

Exactly, which is why saying, "umm, sex is bad, mmkay?" obviously doesn't work.

How do you "indoctrinate" a "social disease," what is a "social disease," and how is sex education "indoctrinating" little children? The church is the one doing the indoctrinating, with their dogmatic anti-sex, anti-human nature viewpoint.

dk

dk: Rather, I’ve already made the case that gay/lesbian marriage formally divorces (breaks) and dismembers(amputates) the nuclear family as the basic unit upon which Western Civilization governs itself with moral and legal principles. To which proponents of gay/lesbian marriage (on this thread anyway) responded (best response), homosexual families can serve as a replacement model to formulate a new post modern civilization based upon multicultural ethics (moral relativism) and non-judgmental principles (gay rights). To be honest I’m not quite sure anyone on this thread has comprehended the context, scope, magnitude or implications we’ve been discussing. Nonetheless to be thorough I’m obliged to show that the gay and lesbian families can’t possible succeed as a replacement for the nuclear family in the post modern era of the 21st Century. Perhaps we need to move this to another thread that questions social impacts of multicultural ethics and non-judgmental principles. I’m not sure this thread is the right place for the discussion, but will continue to reply. Again, nobody on this thread has made a substantive reply to challenge my assertions. Calling me a bigoted homophobiac isn’t substantive, but represents a form of denial thrown up as a defense in response to realities that are offensive to us all.

Jinto:
Oh by the way, gays do not reproduce through anal intercourse. Straights, however, do reproduce through vaginal intercourse with teenage women. We do not, therefore, ban heterosexual marriage. Your hypocrisy is blatant.
dk: Pardon me, but if you closely examine the identity of gay culture with respect to anal sex the proposition of reproduction becomes both symbolically valid and self defined. I suspect that’s why you’re so sensitive about it, even though in the context of this thread I only mentioned it in passing, not analogically. I would honestly prefer to avoid the symbolism if possible because as proposition it is so emotionally charged.
dk: There are many highly credible Catholic Universities, and I have found the History Sourcebook at Fordham’s web site very insightful. You can justify hate speech from now till doomsday but Swift and the Gay Community News are both widely acclaimed in the best gay circles, and speak for the gay community. The gay community responded positively to Swift’s article by all the accounts I’ve read, most in gay publications. Many even defend Swift’s hate speech with endless sometimes eloquently written rationalizations. Reminds me of T. Jefferson’s eloquent attempts to rationalize the participation of the Southern Aristocracy in the slave trade. All of which only serves to validate my judgment on this matter.
dk: If you think that’s funny, then you’re sick by any civilized standard.

Daggah

dk, have you been reading any of the threads Ed has participated in? You're using Ed-tactics, claiming you've shown your argument to be true in the past when you've done nothing of the sort.

Don't you ever ask yourself, dk, "hmm, just how valid is my judgment on this matter when it's partly based on satire?" Did you read nothing of what was said?

dk

Hi Daggah,
dk: One thing doing that “what...”?
dk: I’ve never said sex was bad You’ve been conditioned to believe that anyone who recognizes... “gay culture is laden with promiscuous values and pornographic landscapes” must be a homophobic. All this proves is that you’ve been programmed by nonsensical doctrines. You just acted out a program, to rationalize a doctrine you were taught constructed a scientific good, or in PC speak, a positive propositional attitude. Again, I’ve never said sex was bad, so you couldn’t have gotten the idea from me.
dk: My statement was a sarcastic parody on words. People are inoculated for protection against “social diseases”, not indoctrinated. Its public schools that indoctrinate children against social diseases.

Daggah: The church is the one doing the indoctrinating, with their dogmatic anti-sex, anti-human nature viewpoint.
dk: Catholic School are obliged to teach Catholic Dogma and Doctrine, and were built by Catholics to teach it. Its secular public schools that teach doctrine protect children against social diseases, the secular doctrine of safe sex.. What distinguishes Catholic Parochial Schools from their Secular counterparts? Answer: Catholic schools are upfront with both their dogma and doctrine, while secular public schools (K1-k16) teach secular doctrines under the auspices of social science, sexology, scientific history, and positive truth. There’s nothing at all wrong with secular doctrine, but it is wrong for public schools to mask it behind systematic curriculums determined to make children believe secular doctrines are science.

You might then ask why do “rank and file” educators and parents tolerate the charade? Answer: Many don’t but national organizations wield a lot of political power. The educracy and media (for different reasons) became vested in social reforms set in motion 50 years ago. To capitulate now would undermine their careers and beliefs, they would be pigeonholed as racists, sexist or homophobic by their colleagues, peers and the media. University social scientists, sexologists and psychiatrists marketed the sexual revolution, divorce reform, radical feminsim, and recreational drugs/sex reforms back in the 50s under the authority of science, then marketed the doctrines with “adolescent themes” to immature students from middle class nuclear families as “Win the Peace, save the world” dogma. In the 1960-70s they succeeded with slogans and hails for 1) peace not war 2) safe free sex and 3) dope for hope. Today the doctrines and principles derived thereof have been firmly entrenched into the laws, curriculum and educational institutions built by the Great Society. The educaracy has been irreconcilably committed by vested interests 50 years old, and their personal commitments overwhelm reason. That’s what caused Political Correctness to develop on college campuses. Vested in social reforms ivory towered pin heads and media elites that grew up rationalizing a positively infantile doctrine can’t stand to see their vested interests exposed and trashed. So on college campuses it normal to uphold “party riots, promiscuous sex, and doing dope” in the greater tradition good old college fun, but nobody dares say “Gay culture promulgates values destructive to society.” Truth stranger than fiction.

dk

No, sorry but you've got to read the thread to verify whether any substinative responses have been presented to support gay and lesbian marriage. If you disagree, please bring the issue up, and I'll be happy to respond. If you want to call it a tactic, I'm guilty but simply see no viable alternative. Its simply impossible for me to rehash the same old ratinalizations, misnomers and fallacies again and again.
I use satire because I find the subject matter tragic and difficult and yes, I read what was said.