Whose Morality?

DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman-Schultz came out swinging today in an interview on Megyn Kelly’s show on Fox News (H/T to Doug Powers for the link). While talking about the Obamacare mandate that all health insurance for women cover birth control, DWS claimed that “there needs to be a balance” between religious employers who object to the use of contraceptives and the employees who don’t agree. Apparently the Democrats believe it is up to them what employers are willing to cover, religious affiliation be damned.

The First Amendment holds no sway any longer.

The argument has been over the healthcare mandate and the requirement that any insurance that covers women also cover contraceptives, regardless of whether that woman is a lesbian not planning to have children or a woman who has had a hysterectomy and is physically incapable of having children. It also does not take religious beliefs into account. Catholics have always considered contraceptives of any kind a sin. The Catholic Church also runs many hospitals and assisted-living facilities all over the country and have never offered health insurance that covers contraceptives. It has never been an issue until now – now that the Democrats have required every single health insurance policy covering women to cover contraceptives. Democrats are refusing to back down.

The most incredible quote from DWS of all, though, is this: “The flip side of this is that religious institutions shouldn’t be imposing their values, necessarily, on their employees who don’t necessarily subscribe to those values.”

Basically, in saying this for the DNC, she’s saying that it’s perfectly okay for them to impose their values on the entire country, but it’s completely unacceptable for anyone else to do that.

It seems we are locked in a never-ending battle between conservatives and liberals. Both sides believe they are correct in their worldview. Both sides have been angry and defensive at some point or another. Although I have experienced a great deal more vitriol from liberals, I’ve certainly heard of vitriol coming from the right (usually from those as closed-minded and uneducated as those on the far left; of course, I’ve never met a person who came to any extreme beliefs through being educated and keeping an open mind, nor have I met an extremist who admitted to being extreme).

The thing that makes me scratch my head is that both sides think they’re right for the same reasons – yet neither has stopped to ponder the reasons. Those reasons are morality and conscience.

One does not need to be religious to recognize some sort of morality; religion has no corner on the moral market. If you have ever said “that was wrong,” or “this is the right thing to do,” you are speaking from your own moral center, whatever that may be. When you claim that moral center, however, and you fail to live by it, you make yourself an absolute hypocrite – religion holds no monopoly on that, either.

I find it interesting when liberals attack me and my friends (interesting in that “I’d like to psychoanalyze you” kind of way). Liberals always, without fail, attack along the same lines: you’re supporting the people who hate us, you’re a traitor, they’re intolerant, they will never respect you, how can you do this to us, you must hate yourself, you’re a self-loathing closet case, you (insert string of profanities here)!

Gay liberals will point to so-called Christians who uniformly quote a handful of out-of-context scriptures and call homosexuality sick, twisted and sinful – then either call them hypocrites or, without knowing anything about Christian scriptures, try to point out what they see as absurdities in those scriptures. They love to point out that these folks are hypocrites by saying, “that’s not very Christ-like!”

At the same time, they demand the very tolerance that they refuse to give. They say that Christians who harp on homosexuality as the ultimate sin create an atmosphere of hostility toward gay people, then turn around and create an atmosphere of hostility toward any person who doesn’t follow their line of thinking. In so doing, they become the very same monster they have made Christians out to be – tragically, for the same reasons.

You see, gay liberals will explain their behavior away by saying, “I don’t have to tolerate people who are intolerant.” I have to ask, though, who decides who is truly intolerant? Since you’re saying that they are definitely wrong, that means you have some sort of moral center. How did you decide that they were wrong? Your own conscience? If so, what is your conscience measured by? Who or what provided your moral compass – was it faith, reason, or emotional convenience?

If it is faith, then I have to know which god would give us the right to commit the very same sin which we condemn in others. If reason, I must know which school of thought confuses a closed mind with an open one. The only thing that makes sense to me is emotional convenience – I’m right, everyone else is wrong, and my best argument is going to be a slew of personal attacks, but that is acceptable for me because I feel that I have the moral high ground.

How is that any different from people who interpret the Bible to say that gay people should be put to death? On a different level, how is saying that you pity me and my conservative values very far removed from Christians who say that they pity us because we’re sick and need to be delivered from homosexuality?

It all boils down to a single question: how do you know that your morality is more right than another person’s?

If your answer is anything other than, “it’s what I believe, and I don’t think anyone should be forced to see it my way,” you are the very animal you accuse them of being.

Advertisements

27 thoughts on “Whose Morality?

  1. Finally, someone with common sense about morality. I think I can help your argument along and build a foundation where you and I could find a common ground on the homosexuality issue.

    Morality is those actions and behaviors that lead to the good health and well-being of individuals and communities.

    Insofar as homosexuality is unchecked and involves unhealthy behavior and causes misery for people, I am against it. In addition, allowing gun ownership without checks and balances pertaining to their use is no different. If a gun is handled correctly and used with restraint it serves a useful purpose.

    My problem with granting homosexual marriage licenses and recognition of homosexuality as an alternative lifestyle is that there was no HIV/AIDS before the 1970s. Rectal cancer and rectal injuries were not a leading cause of death. In 2008, 15 billion dollars was spent on HIV/AIDS research compared to say 1.9 billion dollars on artificial limbs for soldiers. What have the homosexual community given to society to warrant such generosity? And yet, look at how the homosexual mafia tears apart people whose common sense makes them avoid homosexual behavior.

    We regulate other behaviors that cause this kind of burden to society, such as smoking, drinking alcohol, and using drugs. Heterosexual prostitution is regulated in states that allow it. Why are we allowing unchecked homosexual behavior and actively promoting it without giving the Surgeon General’s warning?

    Morality is all about health and happiness and the behaviors that lead to it. You are right, churches do not have a monopoly on morality. Every law, rule, and regulation ever legislated in all of history is a moral legislation. If the homosexual community wants the rights and privileges to practice homosexual behavior, the homosexual community needs to do something about the expensive health care burden they expect the rest of us to pay for, which largely did not exist before the homosexual revolution.

  2. Well, you speak of AIDS as if it is purely an affliction of the gay community. It isn’t. In fact, heterosexual women are the fastest-growing segment of society contracting new cases of HIV. That’s just in the United States, On the continent of Africa, HIV/AIDS is almost purely an affliction of heterosexuals.

    I will agree that any person who engages in dangerous sexual behaviors should pay for their own healthcare, however, I don’t define homosexuality on the whole as a “behavior” in and of itself. Statistics involving injury to genitalia and STD’s are just as high among heterosexuals who engage in dangerous sexual behaviors. That sort of thing isn’t monopolized by the gay community. Any person who engages in dangerous sexual acts is opening the door to health issues that follow. Regardless of orientation every person should deal with their own issues.

    What a person does with their own body – when it does not involve an unborn child, because I believe abortion after the formation of a beating heart to be wrong – should be their decision. Likewise, the consequences should be theirs to bear as well.

  3. Actually, AIDS in women is a homosexual problem. True, more heterosexual women are contracting aids, and it is a very tiny percentage. The population centers for said increases in female infections happens to be in the same communities that are extremely liberal in their acceptance of homosexuality.

    Be careful, you almost sound as if you are bragging about the fact that AIDS has spread from the men to women. We both know that fully two thirds of all new cases are still directly related to homosexual men. Some of those men are bisexual and have seeded the general population. Are we in agreement on this?

    I agree that many heterosexual people engage in unhealthy sex practices. But let’s not devolve to the argument that you can do it because someone else does it. The issue is still that unhealthy behaviors cost the rest of the population lots of money. We need to fix the problems regardless of sexual orientation, and we can do it for everyone at the same time in the name of fairness.

    If you want to propose to lawmakers that all funding for sexually transmitted diseases and sexual injuries be completely stopped, then I would agree with you that it is none of my business what others do. But as long as I have to pay the bill, then I have a say in it. This is true for any communal topic, whether it is motorcyclist wearing helmets on their personal motorcycle, pilots following rules to fly their personal plane, or any other private matter involving risky behaviors and actions by individuals. If I have to pay for someone else’s mistakes, then I have a right to propose a law to make them help fix the problem.

    You might think your sexual behavior is none of my business. But then you would be hypocritical to tell me I have to pay for the consequences of your private business (same argument you made in your blog post). So which is it? Are you going to address the causes of the spiraling costs for treating STDs, or are you going to get legislation that repeals all public funding for STDs?

  4. BTW, Africa does have a serious and out of control HIV/AIDS problem. Unfortunately, I do not have a say in African culture and politics. So let us focus on the country we live in. As you say, their’s is none of our business.

  5. “Actually, AIDS in women is a homosexual problem.”

    No, it isn’t. AIDS may have stricken mostly the homosexual community for a long period of time but that doesn’t make it a homosexual problem – it makes it the problem of those who had unprotected sex and used intravenous narcotics.

    “Be careful, you almost sound as if you are bragging about the fact that AIDS has spread from the men to women.”

    I am a woman. I’m not bragging about anything – I’m stating fact. As I said, you’re talking about AIDS as if it is solely a problem that the gays have to deal with when lesbians are the least likely to contract the disease.

    “We both know that fully two thirds of all new cases are still directly related to homosexual men.”

    No. According to the CDC, just more than half of the cumulative total – meaning all cases diagnosed in the US from 1981 – 2009, the latest year statistics are available – involved male-to-male sexual contact. For the year 2009, fewer than half of all new reported cases involved male-to-male sexual contact.

    “let’s not devolve to the argument that you can do it because someone else does it.”

    I didn’t. I was stating fact. You made a comment that laid the responsibility for paying for HIV/AIDS, other STD’s and sexual injuries almost completely at the feet of the gay community, and I was refuting that argument. Remember, I very specifically said that if a person chooses to engage in that kind of dangerous behavior, both the choice and the ensuing consequences should be theirs to live with. Nobody else should shoulder that burden. I think you missed that part.

    Certain things in life are going to cost society. Just living in a free society costs us in ways that we rarely notice. We have a standing military; that costs us. We have police; that costs us. We have fire/EMS; that costs us. I wouldn’t ride without a helmet, but I know a lot of bikers who do ride without one and that is their choice. Most of them accept the dangers and higher premiums. If we start trying to enforce laws to put a stop to certain personal behaviors, we’ll still be spending money – we’d have to pay for education about the laws and enforcement of them. Either way, we’re paying. It all comes down to whose voice is the loudest one in the room at that point.

    For me, in this argument, the issue isn’t the behavior. It’s the expectation that the government will pour money into treatments and research. That’s not any money they are spending, it’s OUR money they’re spending. I have a problem with my money being used to hand out condoms and start up education programs that private funding could be used for. When charity is forced, it’s no longer charity; it’s socialism.

  6. “No, it isn’t. AIDS may have stricken mostly the homosexual community for a long period of time but that doesn’t make it a homosexual problem” – Yes, it does. It is denial to say otherwise. Look at the science behind the disease. No other behavior gave rise to HIV/AIDS in the human population, other than homosexual behavior.

    “As I said, you’re talking about AIDS as if it is solely a problem that the gays have…” You are trying to make this an absolutist deal. It is not my view that homosexuality is the only issue; it is the predominant issue. Intravenous drug use is also a major contributor to the spread of HIV/AIDS. Statistically speaking, women and children account for less than 5% of the cases. Let us not make a big deal out of a minor side issue. Let’s tackle the major groups, first and see if that gets rid of the problem.

    As for the percentage issue, I got my statistics here: http://www.avert.org/usa-transmission-gender.htm “CDC statistics show that in 2008, 73% of persons living with a diagnosis of HIV infection were male adults or adolescents.”

    Also, notice the trick in language. Women are said to get most infections from heterosexual sex. Technically, they are getting infections from bisexual males, who are technically homosexuals.

    “You made a comment that laid the responsibility for paying for HIV/AIDS, other STD’s and sexual injuries almost completely at the feet of the gay community, and I was refuting that argument.” How can you refute the argument that the homosexual community is responsible? You cannot blame heterosexuals unless you have evidence to support the accusation. When a woman has sex with a bisexual man, the transmission is still generated by homosexual behavior. And then if a lesbian has sex with a woman who had sex with a bisexual man, who had homosexual sex, the infection still had its genesis with homosexual behavior. And if an infected lesbian gives birth to a child, the child’s infection still had its genesis with homosexual sex.

    Consider this. No heterosexual in the general population, either man or woman, gets HIV/AIDS unless they have had sex with someone who somewhere along the line had sex with a homosexual. It has not happened for thousands of years that we know of.

    I do not wish to turn this into a blame game. The fact is, the homosexual community continues to be the primary carriers for very expensive diseases. Granting marriages to homosexuals without acknowledging this serious problem is not going to solve the problem, it will only exacerbate it. I do not wish to deprive people of living a life that has meaning to them. But I am not blind to the fact that we cannot support this out-of-control burden on society. Let us get this under control.

    Let me put it to you this way. If we spent the entire 15 billion dollars a year of AIDS funding on educating the heterosexual population, instead of the homosexual population, would that solve anything? Now, if we could somehow get the homosexual population to stop spreading HIV/AIDS, what do you think that would do to the total number of new AIDS cases?

    You speak in facts. You have lots of common sense. You seem open-minded and genuinely interested in solving problems. How can we both meet in the middle and make a real difference?

  7. David Thompson, first you’re ignoring what Mel has pointed out the lesbians are also part of the “homosexual community” and are also among those at the lowest risk of contracting HIV.

    Second and more improtantly, what on earth does the undeniably higher rate of HIV among homosexual males than the general population (at least among western countries) have to do with granting them the right to marry someone of the same sex? If anything I would say it is an argument for it, as regardless of whatever rhetoric you have swallowed about gay men all being depraved human beings who have no respect for marriage, many of them would marry and take those vows of faithfulness seriously. If it is two men who are HIV- they will be less likely to cheat and contract HIV from another party. If it is two HIV+ men they will be better able to care for each other. Isn’t that sort of seen as a benefit of marriage that young heterosexual men enjoy? This settling down, and spending more time at home with their wives and less time carousing around and engaging in risky sexual practices? You seem to think the reverse will happen and somehow bizarrely granting people of the same sex the right to marry will increase HIV rates rather than have no effect or decrease them, as if HIV just creeps out of nowhere as a result of a monogamous male homosexual relationship.

  8. Hi Luke- The legalization of homosexual marriages is about more than homosexuals getting married. It is a significant change to the broad culture of human beings. The legalization of homosexual marriages becomes a new morality teaching to children, which tells children that homosexual behavior is acceptable and possibly something worth pursuing.

    I am glad you admit that homosexuals need to settle down and stop having wild and unconstrained sex with multiple partners. I agree on this, too. And though homosexual marriages would be good to help men constrain their behavior, we also must balance that with the inherent invitation to young people to enter the world of homosexuality.

    There is no warning attached to the homosexual lifestyle, at this time, about the potential dangers of the behavior. There used to be, although I would agree that it used to be vulgar threats, rather than reasoned advice. We have gotten rid of the vulgar threats (as a society), now we have unconstrained homosexual behavior that is costing a fortune in health care costs. What are we going to do to eliminate this enormous financial burden to society? What are you going to do?

    Do not ask me to support homosexual marriages if you cannot work with your own community to solve this problem. And do not ask me (the heterosexual public) to suggest how you can fix this problem. You would not listen no matter what I would say. This is your problem (your privacy, remember) and you need to fix it if you do not want heterosexuals to fix the problem for you.

    So again, what are YOU going to do to fix the disease and misery brought about from homosexual behavior such that the rest of us will feel comfortable living beside you in public?

  9. David, in asking what we are going to do to fix this it still sounds like you’re operating under the assumption that gays are singularly responsible for the AIDS epidemic. We aren’t. People who engage in any unsafe sex are, be they straight or gay.

    “CDC statistics show that in 2008, 73% of persons living with a diagnosis of HIV infection were male adults or adolescents.”

    That doesn’t say gay, it simply says male. I went directly to the CDC, where the newest statistics showed a different pattern – one that has been slowly showing itself for years.

    “Technically, they are getting infections from bisexual males, who are technically homosexuals.”

    No. Just because a woman contracts HIV does not mean she slept with a bisexual man. There are so many in the population now who are straight and have never engaged in same-sex behaviors that the statement you just made is ignorant at best.

    “How can you refute the argument that the homosexual community is responsible?”

    I just did. You cannot claim that every heterosexual person who has contracted HIV/AIDS got it from a man who is “bisexual”. That is a patently dishonest argument.

    “The fact is, the homosexual community continues to be the primary carriers for very expensive diseases.”

    Nope. As of 2010, young women with new cases of chlamydia outnumbered young men two to one. New gonorrhea cases also saw women in the lead, although not quite as marked. Syphilis saw almost the exact same numbers among young men and young women. Middle-aged women also saw a marked difference with middle-aged men in the same diseases. Syphilis is the only disease so far which men contract in higher numbers. HPV doesn’t cause cervical cancer in men (obviously), and cervical cancer caused by HPV (transmitted through heterosexual sex) is a major problem.

    Let’s take one disease and break down the numbers. According to the CDC, women contracted new cases of chlamydia at a rate of 610.6 per 100,000. Going by the 2000 US Census (which is the number that the CDC used), the population of the US was approximately 281 million. If we say that half of that was women (even though the census showed that there were more women than men), that means there were approximately 857,890 new cases of chlamydia among women in the US in 2009. There were fewer than 18,000 among gay men that year.

    “I do not wish to turn this into a blame game.”

    You already have. Can we at least agree that it is unsafe sexual practices, not sexual orientation, that brings about STD’s and the costs incurred? Personally, I think that the biggest risk factor for STD’s are people who have sex and think of pregnancy as the only big risk. That is only a theory.

    You also bring up another issue that I disagree with you on – the supposed “invitation to young people to enter the world of homosexuality.” I will tell you this: being a lesbian was never a choice. If it were, I would have chosen a long time ago to be straight. My life would have been a hundred times easier. Nobody invited me into a world of sin. I have never in my life had any interest in men. Never. I had a guidance counselor once tell me that I might be a lesbian, and that it would be okay, but I didn’t even know what the word meant when I was in middle school so it became a non-issue to me. I actually learned what it meant in church, believe it or not.

    I was 24 years old when I realized that I was a lesbian and nothing could change it. I went through a severe depression and for six months all I did was read my bible, read literature from both sides of the argument, and hope that I wasn’t going to hell.

    Things are quite a bit different today than they were when I was a kid. Being gay isn’t taboo the way it used to be. When I was in school, you didn’t admit you were gay, even in California. You might be soundly thrashed if you did. Today lesbians are being voted in as prom kings in some of the strangest places (notably Alabama in 2008). While I have a serious problem with gay history being taught in public schools, kindergarteners being asked to sign GLSEN pledge cards and high school freshmen being taken to a gay marriage ceremony (all of those things happened in California), we shouldn’t go back to the way things were when I was a kid. That isn’t acceptable.

    Now that we’ve established that gays are not responsible for the majority of STD’s, let’s get to the real issues.

  10. Mel, you are in complete denial that the homosexual community has anything at all to do with HIV/AIDS. You apparently believe it is a statistical fluke that homosexual males have represented this disease since it was first diagnosed.

    We can make no progress in wiping out this disease as long as the people directly responsible for it maintain their denial.

    If you honestly do not believe homosexuals are responsible and that this is a heterosexual disease, please, offer your solution to rid us of this heterosexual plague. What do heterosexuals need to do to eliminate HIV/AIDS?

  11. No, I’m not in denial – you’re putting words in my mouth. I never said that it was purely a heterosexual disease. Now you’re beginning to sound more like some of the liberals who hate me.

    I said that it is not the fault of one single group of people other than those of ALL orientations who engage in unsafe sex. That has been my point the entire time. I am no more willing to pin sole responsibility on heteros or homos – any person, gay or straight, who has slept around is responsible for the spread of the disease.

    Heterosexuals need to to the same thing everyone else should be doing: stop advocating sexual promiscuity and learn a little self-restraint. To lay the blame completely at the feet of one group is remarkably narrow-minded.

  12. BTW, I reached out to an infection control officer that I have worked with and he gave me a few factoids about HIV/AIDS. It originated in chimpanzees and there are two theories about how it passed to humans (neither involves bestiality). They know that the disease originated either in Cameroon or the Congo, and the earliest diagnosed cases there were actually in the late 60’s (so yes, what occurs in Africa does have bearing here in the US). The most widely-accepted theory is that hunters who killed and sold monkey meat in the region were bitten or handled infected live blood cultures (obviously, since they’re killing the animals) and contracted SIV, the precursor to HIV. The other lesser-held theory is that the use of chimpanzee kidney cells in human medical trials was the cause.

    The ICO I talked to believes the first theory to be the most likely cause. He also said he believes that sexual promiscuity didn’t kick-start the pandemic; he believes it was the repeated use of unsterilized needles infected at first with human-borne SIV spread the disease dramatically and, after many years, the virus mutated (as viruses tend to do in order to survive).

    He also said that it was aroung 1982 that the CDC realized that HIV/AIDS was not a “gay disease”. They had been calling it GRID, or Gay Related Immune Deficiency. When they realized the disease was also prevalent in IV drug users and Haitian immigrants (not a racist comment – it was quite prevalent in Haitians who came to the US), they changed the name of the disease to AIDS.

  13. “It originated in chimpanzees and there are two theories about how it passed to humans (neither involves bestiality).” Then there are three theories. Bestiality is not uncommon in Africa or the United States. I grew up in Vermont and some of the old-timers there bragged about having sex with their sheep. African male humans are very sexually promiscuous (I have had one for a room mate who filled me in on the details).

    I lived and worked among homosexual men during my teens and early twenties. It was at Snow Lake Lodge in Vermont. At that time, the entire serving staff were male only and they migrated between Vermont and Marco Island, Florida every year. I was aware of HIV/AIDS, then, in 1976. I enjoyed their company, worked well together, and lived in the same housing. They made advances, which I politely refused. I was not interested in getting AIDS (the HIV component was unknown to me at that time).

    I have no fear or hatred of homosexuals. However, I do recognize the behavior as being unhealthy. I had an aunt who was an emergency room nurse when I was in puberty, and I heard her talking about all the homosexual injuries she had to deal with in Los Angeles. That was enough for me to realize the dangers of rectal and oral sex.

    My daughter is a public health official, who has already studied and written on the spatial characteristics of HIV/AIDS transmission, particularly in Washington, DC. She has traveled and lived extensively in Africa (and Asia, Europe, South America, and Central America). As her father, I read her work with great interest.

    I was there when HIV/AIDS started taking off. Your view that HIV/AIDS has anything to do with heterosexuals is completely naive. It is true that the homosexual population does infect the heterosexual population, but if everybody today stopped having homosexual sex, the disease would be completely gone in thirty years. Sexual promiscuity among homosexuals spreads the disease, but sexual promiscuity among pure heterosexuals does not spread this disease (it does spread many others, though).

    If it was not for the huge price tag for health expenses, which everyone is now being forced to pay regardless of how healthy they keep themselves, I could care less if homosexuals want to get married, have group sex, or do whatever it is they want to do with their body. Everybody needs to make their own choices and live and die by the consequences. And to put things into perspective, I think homosexual sex is just as immoral as eating at McDonalds. Both activities are equally responsible for spiraling health care costs.

    Talking with you has been an eye-opener for me. I did not realize how self-deluded society has become with respect to understanding the origin and main infection route of HIV/AIDS transmission. The scientific studies clearly show that homosexual men are the primary transmission route and always have been. This is indisputable in a rational discussion. But now it apparently has become politically incorrect to discuss HIV/AIDS in relation to homosexual behavior, which does not bode well for any effort to control the disease. Your ignore-ance and the ignore-ance of people like you concerning the transmission route of HIV/AIDS will insure its propagation throughout the general population. Perhaps the only thing we can do is let karma take its natural course. Already, my old friends from Vermont are dead from AIDS. By the time all your friends die off, a new naive young generation will be in place to perpetuate the disease against your advice.

  14. “if everybody today stopped having homosexual sex, the disease would be completely gone in thirty years.”

    You don’t want to play a blame game, but you make statements like this despite my offering of CDC reports that show the truth? You are incredibly biased and I’m insulted that you would use such an ignorant statement. In case you didn’t actually read the report that I linked, in 1982, five cases of AIDS were identified among gay men in Los Angeles. A whopping 32 were identified among Haitian immigrants in Miami – five of them through autopsy – and not one of the victims in Miami was a homosexual.

    I will repeat what I have said over and over again: it is ALL unsafe sexual practices (along with intravenous drug use) that spreads HIV/AIDS. If you are not willing to accept that fact then I don’t think there’s really much else to say. You cannot deny the well-documented fact that there are tens of thousands of completely straight people walking around with HIV/AIDS today.

  15. What part of “primary” do you not understand? You came at me with an absolutist statement, “You cannot claim that every heterosexual person who has contracted HIV/AIDS got it from a man who is ‘bisexual’.” You were right, I did not claim “every” heterosexual person who has contracted HIV/AIDS got it from a man who is bisexual. I claimed, “No heterosexual in the general population, either man or woman, gets HIV/AIDS unless they have had sex with someone who somewhere along the line had sex with a homosexual.”

    I agree that homosexuals have spread the disease into the heterosexual population. That is quite obvious. And certainly, you must agree that two thirds of all HIV/AIDS cases involve homosexual males (in the US, anyway). Naturally, if the homosexual population is infecting the heterosexual population, not all HIV/AIDS cases will be with homosexuals. The shared use of drug needles, infected dentists working on their patients, bisexual men having sex with women with multiple partners, and heterosexual men having multiple female partners are examples of the natural route for HIV/AIDS to spread beyond the homosexual population. There have even been some documented cases of mosquitoes passing the disease among humans.

    Don’t brag about the increase of HIV/AIDS spreading into the heterosexual population. It is a disgraceful claim, not a claim for homosexuals to be proud of. And it certainly does nothing to contain the disease. Neither does the granting of homosexual marriage licenses, especially when the homosexual community is in denial of their contribution to the spread of a deadly disease into the general population.

    If you want to win people like me over to your side, you cannot be living in denial. You have to take a proactive stand on how your community is going to deal with this problem. As I said before, you cannot ask heterosexuals to solve this problem for you, because you would not accept any heterosexual solution simply because it came from heterosexuals.

    Granting homosexual marriages might work if we could force all homosexuals to get married and stay committed to a single partner, just like we try to do with heterosexuals, but that is not how homosexuals operate in their teens and twenties. The experience of multiple partners is an integral part of homosexuality for people in their teens and twenties; when their hormones are raging.

    Before the sexual revolution of the Sixties, society did manage to keep a large portion of the young sexual population under control with institutions such as churches, youth groups, discipline, and shotgun weddings. Admittedly, these techniques are not allowed today, which is part of today’s problem. The above mentioned methods certainly came with their own problems, but if you are going to change things, you have better hope the new problems are better than the old problems.

    Personally, it did not bother me that so many of today’s youth were dying from a deadly sexual disease. Sometimes the best way to wake people up is to give them what they ask for. And it still may be the best solution. But at some point, when the majority population becomes infected with HIV/AIDS, and the average human lifespan has dropped by forty years, and wise elderly people are necessarily replaced with hormonally motivated young leadership, you will see a new Hitler or a new Constantine rise up and address the problem by force. You must learn to think beyond your sex organs, and appreciate what humanity is over periods of hundreds of years. I know it is difficult when your hormones are raging to think of anything beyond sex, but you have to try.

    For me, I would not be doing my part in life if I did not share my insights and ideas into the general mix of ideas. We need to consider all positions and keep our minds open, even if that means going against the current trend. I would have more hope for humanity if I could see just one homosexual admit responsibility, on behalf of the homosexual community, for the current HIV/AIDS crisis. You are the most open-minded admitted homosexual I have seen online, and you are still not to that point.

  16. “I did not claim “every” heterosexual person who has contracted HIV/AIDS got it from a man who is bisexual.”

    Here’s your exact wording:

    “Also, notice the trick in language. Women are said to get most infections from heterosexual sex. Technically, they are getting infections from bisexual males, who are technically homosexuals.”

    You actually did make that claim. Try again.

    “I agree that homosexuals have spread the disease into the heterosexual population. That is quite obvious.”

    The report I linked is actually just about the shortest CDC report I have ever read, and it is resonatingly clear that you didn’t even pull it up, much less read it. Let me say again: 1982. 5 homosexual males in LA diagnosed. 32 heterosexual Haitian immigrants diagnosed. Is that clear enough, or should I go find another report?

    “Don’t brag about the increase of HIV/AIDS spreading into the heterosexual population.”

    Again with the accusations of braggadocio? I’m not bragging, I am stating documented fact – AIDS began in what is now the Congo and the first documented cases actually harken back to 1959-1960 with two heterosexual victims. The fact that the first documented victim in the US in 1969 was a male prostitute does not lay responsibility for the disease on homosexuals, and I’m frankly getting pretty tired of that continued claim.

    “As I said before, you cannot ask heterosexuals to solve this problem for you, because you would not accept any heterosexual solution simply because it came from heterosexuals.”

    You must be joking. I’m beginning to feel like I’m beating my head against a brick wall here…I keep hearing the same things over and over again. David, if you want this disease to be contained, you have to be willing to stop accusing the gay community of singlehandedly giving every person in America HIV/AIDS. You say you don’t want to lay blame, but that is exactly what you’re doing. I’m not asking anyone to solve this problem for the gay community. Do I need to repeat myself for the umpteen jillionth time? I DO NOT AGREE WITH FORCING THE GENERAL POPULACE TO PAY FOR THE UNSAFE SEX PRACTICES OF THOSE WHO HAVE HIV OR OTHER STD’S. This is not a homo vs. hetero issue, and the fact that you’re making it one tells me that you’re living in a state of complete denial.

    “Granting homosexual marriages might work if we could force all homosexuals to get married and stay committed to a single partner, just like we try to do with heterosexuals…”

    Horsefeathers. There’s a billboard about ten minutes down the freeway from where I live that advertises “The Divorce Store”. There is not a single soul in this country trying to force heterosexuals to stay married for life. Of all of the people in my extended family and all of my friends, only a handful haven’t been divorced at least once. Dare I bring up Las Vegas, where you can get trashed and then married at a drive-thru chapel, and annul the drunken decision when you get home? Maybe we should talk about Britney Spears, Kim Kardashian, or Sinead O’Connor, all of whom have had sham marriages that lasted a very short time.

    “I know it is difficult when your hormones are raging to think of anything beyond sex, but you have to try.”

    I do hope that was not directed at me. I’m a grown woman and I’ve dated exactly four women in my whole life. In the meantime I have a close relative who is a straight woman and she has lost track of the number of men she’s slept with. I’m a prude in comparison to most.

    “I would not be doing my part in life if I did not share my insights and ideas into the general mix of ideas.”

    I agree, but while every man is entitled to his own opinion, he is not entitled to his own facts. You keep saying the same thing over and over again as if I’m going to change my mind. I’m a trained medical professional. I deal with stuff like this regularly. I see the reports and statistics and I see the people who are impacted. You may wish to believe that AIDS would disappear if gay men would stop sleeping around, but that is pure fantasy.

    “I would have more hope for humanity if I could see just one homosexual admit responsibility, on behalf of the homosexual community, for the current HIV/AIDS crisis.”

    You are never going to get that from me because it would be dishonest at best and it would be a tacit insult to the straight people I know who have the disease.

  17. > Here’s your exact wording: “Also, notice the trick in language. Women are said to get most infections from heterosexual sex. Technically, they are getting infections from bisexual males, who are technically homosexuals.”

    Read and quote the whole paragraph.

    “The report I linked is actually just about the shortest CDC report I have ever read, and it is resonatingly clear that you didn’t even pull it up, much less read it. Let me say again: 1982. 5 homosexual males in LA diagnosed. 32 heterosexual Haitian immigrants diagnosed. Is that clear enough, or should I go find another report?”

    You know better than that. Los Angeles is not a representative population of the United States and neither were there full scale statistics gathered on HIV/AIDS at that time. Also, most doctors then believed AIDS was a disease of itself, rather than a full blown case of HIV, if they even knew AIDS existed.

    The true picture of the situation developed as more comprehensive data were collected.

    “The fact that the first documented victim in the US in 1969 was a male prostitute does not lay responsibility for the disease on homosexuals, and I’m frankly getting pretty tired of that continued claim.”

    We cannot pick and choose from incomplete data sources to make sweeping conclusions. How many undocumented cases would there likely be if most doctors had no clue the disease even existed in 1969? Reliable information concerning HIV/AIDS did not start developing until the mid 1980s. At that time, it had become exceedingly clear that HIV/AIDS was developing and spreading primarily in the homosexual male community. Would you like to see the present day statistics that support this? Or do you care?

    The main conspiracy theory concerning AIDS the 1980s was that the disease was bioengineered by a group of homophobic secret government white male Christian biologists whose One World strategy was to eliminate homosexuals. At least back then the homosexual community recognized and admitted that HIV/AIDS was a homosexual disease.

    “I keep hearing the same things over and over again. David, if you want this disease to be contained, you have to be willing to stop accusing the gay community of singlehandedly giving every person in America HIV/AIDS. ”

    As long as you perpetuate an absolutist and deniers attitude, we are not going to bridge our differences. IF every person in America contracted HIV/AIDS, then yes, it would be the fault of homosexual behavior. The fact that there are still people who practice good hygiene and avoid risky behaviors means everyone will not get HIV/AIDS and that such a situation can not occur.

    Why should I be expected to support homosexual marriages when the vice of homosexual behavior is clearly associated with the spread of a deadly and costly disease? Why is that financial burden being placed on my shoulders to bear?

    I am certain that if we were talking about smoking cigarettes, you would have no problem with smokers being taxed to pay for the health burden they place on society. And there it is. Maybe we need to tax condoms and drug needles to pay for AIDS research, rather than just give them away? This would apply to all people who engage in unhealthy sexual behavior regardless of their sexual orientation. …Obviously, it would not work.

    Maybe we could increase abortion funding to homosexuals… no, that wouldn’t work, either. How about if we assign a social worker to oversee all people who engage in unsafe sexual behavior? No, that wouldn’t work, either.

    Here is an idea. What if we educated young children and young adults about the dangers of oral and rectal sex? It would clearly reduce the problem. However, those people who are in denial that their behavior is dangerous would object and say we are trying to deprive them of their civil rights and start burning condoms in protest.

    Here is your idea. We could grant marriages to homosexuals and they will all become monogamous and start practicing safe sex and that will solve the problem. Do you really think homosexual marriages are the answer? What about the homosexuals who don’t want to get married, which is most of them. They are still out there spreading diseases.

    And so I am back to the question, what do you propose as a solution to stop the spread of HIV/AIDS? Forget my position and my reasoning if it helps. Just tell me, what is your solution to the problem of HIV/AIDS, rectal cancer, and rectal injuries that are overburdening our health care system and killing millions of people?

    “I see the reports and statistics and I see the people who are impacted. You may wish to believe that AIDS would disappear if gay men would stop sleeping around, but that is pure fantasy.”

    What is the fantasy? That AIDS would disappear, or that homosexuals would give up unhealthy behavior?

    >“I know it is difficult when your hormones are raging to think of anything beyond sex, but you have to try.” I do hope that was not directed at me. I’m a grown woman and I’ve dated exactly four women in my whole life. In the meantime I have a close relative who is a straight woman and she has lost track of the number of men she’s slept with. I’m a prude in comparison to most.

    I am glad to hear you can be both homosexual and prudent. This is what I would like to see more of. For the record, I have only had sex with one person in my whole life, and that was the woman I married. And yes, I can think of many individuals, including family members, who recklessly bragged about how many different people they have had sex with, most of them heterosexuals.

    However, the HIV/AIDS issue remains. If you are a health care worker, you know full well that HIV/AIDS education is specifically promoted to the homosexual male community, and for a specific reason. That you pretend this is not so in your speech is nothing but denial.

  18. Great discussion here. David is definitely missing the mark though on STD’s as a whole. It’s about responsible behavior, period.

    David, nobody knows where AIDS began. Some say it came from Africa and as Mel pointed out, lesbians get it less than any sexual group in the country.

    Further, as Julia Sugarbaker humorously pointed out a long time ago: “If God was handing out sexually transmitted diseases for sin, then you would be at the free clinic all the time!”

    You can be homosexual and prudent. You can also be heterosexual and slutty.

    It gets to a point where an entire group of people are disparaged just because it could make one person feel better about themselves in the cheapest and most puniest way possible and trust me, that kind of gratification never lasts.

    You’re making the assumption that the rapid spread of HIV in the heterosexual community is because of bisexuality. There isn’t much proof of that as Mel has pointed out, much of it has to do with shooting up drugs.

    I think straight people should do what a political party would have to do: if they want to make the world a better place, they should start by cleaning up the nonsense on their side of the aisle. While my support for gar marriage is not as stealth as other members of my community, it has been the straight people who have contributed to the destruction of the family and who’ve risen the divorce rate to a historic measure the last time I checked.

    So work on those issues over there before trying to localize over here. 😉

  19. “Los Angeles is not a representative population of the United States and neither were there full scale statistics gathered on HIV/AIDS at that time.”

    Neither was the Haitian immigrant population in Miami, but that was where all 32 victims were. Right here you’re talking about statistics that didn’t even exist yet – and you’re basing an argument off of something that wasn’t around and has never been what you claim? Gay men may account for a large number of AIDS patients, but not two-thirds. You’ll never get me to agree on that because the statistics don’t.

    “At that time, it had become exceedingly clear that HIV/AIDS was developing and spreading primarily in the homosexual male community.”

    No, it hadn’t, and the CDC has repeatedly refuted this claim – including in the report I linked.

    “Would you like to see the present day statistics that support this? Or do you care?”

    You mean like these numbers? http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/surveillance/basic.htm#exposure

    “At least back then the homosexual community recognized and admitted that HIV/AIDS was a homosexual disease.”

    If that is your way of telling me that I should know my place, it’s irritating.

    “As long as you perpetuate an absolutist and deniers attitude, we are not going to bridge our differences.”

    David, the only person here doing that is you. You keep trying to tell me that the spread of HIV/AIDS in the US is all the fault of gay men, and you’re missing the point entirely. I will repeat myself ad nauseam: IT IS IRRESPONSIBLE SEXUAL BEHAVIOR OF ALL ORIENTATIONS THAT SPREADS STD’S, INCLUDING HIV/AIDS.

    “Why should I be expected to support homosexual marriages when the vice of homosexual behavior is clearly associated with the spread of a deadly and costly disease?”

    Again, I feel like I’m banging my head against a wall. Men in monogamous relationships don’t spread STD’s. Since, as you claim, the aim of marriage is to foster monogamous relationships, I fail to see how gay marriage is going to make the problem worse. Since medical fact tells us that it’s not just gay people spreading the disease, you can’t argue that stopping gay marriage is going to hamper the disease (and since I’m not sure I agree with gay marriage anyway, it’s a moot point).

    “I am certain that if we were talking about smoking cigarettes, you would have no problem with smokers being taxed to pay for the health burden they place on society.”

    Actually, I do have a problem with the outrageous taxes that have been forced on cigarettes. I don’t smoke, but I don’t see why the government has any business dropping an unfair tax burden on a product that people have to make the conscious choice to use. The taxes being paid on cigarettes now are more than twice the actual value of the product itself. That is an overreach I disagree on with all my heart.

    “What if we educated young children and young adults about the dangers of oral and rectal sex?”

    Please tell me you don’t actually believe that heterosexuals don’t engage in those activities. If you’re going to try to have me believe that, then I have beach-front property in Kansas to sell you. You can preach to young people about the dangers all day long…but, like illegal narcotics, there will still be a draw.

    “What is the fantasy? That AIDS would disappear, or that homosexuals would give up unhealthy behavior?”

    You know perfectly well what I’m saying, and your cheekiness is hardly cute. Consider this: there have been 1,108,305 documented cases of AIDS since the beginning of the epidemic. Of that number, the largest community impacted has actually been the African American community – well over 466,000 cases are attributed to black Americans. Do you know which community accounts for the highest rates of abortion in America? Yep…African Americans. Both demographics are almost entirely inner-city projects – which, incidentally, is where the majority of white and Hispanic single-parent homes, teen pregnancies, abortions and HIV/AIDS cases are. Think there’s a link there?

    Do you really still think that stopping all gay male sexual behavior is going to end the spread?

    “…you know full well that HIV/AIDS education is specifically promoted to the homosexual male community…”

    There is a lot of education aimed at the gay community. To some degree, claims like yours – that gay men are the ones who bear sole responsibility for HIV/AIDS – have made it almost a point of pride for gay liberals. You know what their argument is? “You forced us to live in the shadows for so long that all we could do was keep our sex lives a secret.” On one hand, I might agree with that statement because for a long time gays were genuinely hated and lived in very real fear, so they never let on to doctors or anyone else that they were sexually active with men and if they got sick, they didn’t breathe a word of it. On the other hand, I don’t agree with it because irresponsible behavior can’t really be excused. If you’re having a tryst because you’re horny then it’s your issue.

    I know a few people who have HIV/AIDS. Believe it or not, only one is gay. I don’t pass judgment on any of them because they all know full well that their illness came from irresponsible behavior. They live with it every day.

    There is no answer to your question, David. We will never eradicate the disease. In order to do that, we would have to strip every person of their individual liberties and basic rights and police their every move 24/7 – and even then we wouldn’t be able to stop people from having sex whenever they want.

  20. Mel, Do you bother to read the statistics pages you send me to?

    > Mel- “Gay men may account for a large number of AIDS patients, but not two-thirds. You’ll never get me to agree on that because the statistics don’t.”

    >CDC- “In 2009, there were an estimated 48,100 new HIV infections.[1] Most (61%) of these new infections occurred in gay and bisexual men.

    If you have a different interpretation of the CDC’s comments, I would like to hear them.

    >“At least back then the homosexual community recognized and admitted that HIV/AIDS was a homosexual disease.” If that is your way of telling me that I should know my place, it’s irritating.

    Facts have a way of doing that.

    “I don’t smoke, but I don’t see why the government has any business dropping an unfair tax burden on a product that people have to make the conscious choice to use.”

    Using your logic, what business do smokers have using our publicly funded hospital emergency rooms for their smoking related illness, then? If they do not want to pay their proportionate share of the medical costs, they should stay at home and die without our funding. For the record, I think cigarette taxes are fair, especially since it is immoral to turn down people who ask for medical help.

    > “What if we educated young children and young adults about the dangers of oral and rectal sex?” Please tell me you don’t actually believe that heterosexuals don’t engage in those activities.

    There is your absolutist and denial attitude, again. Of course I believe heterosexuals engage in those activities. But presumably, children do not. And before they do, they should know the health consequences of those behaviors. Why do you find honest sex education to be offensive?

    > You keep trying to tell me that the spread of HIV/AIDS in the US is all the fault of gay men, and you’re missing the point entirely. I will repeat myself ad nauseam: IT IS IRRESPONSIBLE SEXUAL BEHAVIOR OF ALL ORIENTATIONS THAT SPREADS STD’S, INCLUDING HIV/AIDS.

    And I will repeat, ad nauseum, I agree that irresponsible behavior of all orientations spread STDs. However, HIV/AIDS is a far deadlier STD than others and its spread is maintained by harsh and promiscuous activity of primarily homosexual men, as the data clearly shows.

    It is in the best interest of humanity to reign in all unhealthy behaviors, including eating at McDonalds and having homosexual sex. At the very least, tax the hell out of those behaviors that are placing the heaviest burdens on our social health care system. Make the people who are recklessly spending our public resources pay the most for their stupidity. You are a conservative. You would normally be supporting these kinds of measures. Of course, when your own personal behavior falls into the category of being taxed, then you fight back. That is reactionary politics, not conservative politics.

    And if the homosexual community is not taking a proactive stance on reducing the spread of HIV/AIDS, rectal cancer, and rectal injuries, then why grant the homosexual community any rights at all, let alone marriage? What rights do we grant to smokers, alcoholics, or drug users.

    >Of that number, the largest community impacted has actually been the African American community

    Being Black is not a behavior. Nobody can change that, and neither should it be a statistical consideration. I cannot think of one good reason to note a sick person’s skin color when discussing the spread of disease.

    > Do you really still think that stopping all gay male sexual behavior is going to end the spread?

    I am not part of the group that lives with HIV/AIDS. It is not up to me to say what should or should not happen to them. I have to have faith that everyone has the same innate ability to be moral, as I do. I trust that people who understand morality is those actions and behaviors that lead to the good health and well-being of individuals and communities will reflect on the consequences of their behaviors and do what is right. I am having this discussion with you because you demonstrated more intelligence and common sense from within the homosexual community than anybody else I have encountered.

    I do not wish to change your mind, you have to make your own choices. This discussion may not amount to anything in the short run, but perhaps it will lead to better discussions in the future. Just focus on the definition of morality I shared. It may be possible for homosexuality to become a healthy practice with careful consideration, and thereby become a moral behavior. If you want society as a whole to accept your behavior, do not shun responsibility for the diseases that have been associated with it, but demonstrate your commitment and ability to reduce or eliminate those diseases within your community.

    >You know what their argument is? “You forced us to live in the shadows for so long that all we could do was keep our sex lives a secret.” On one hand, I might agree with that statement because for a long time gays were genuinely hated and lived in very real fear,

    Of course homosexuals lived in fear. So did the heterosexuals who found them out. Homosexuality has always been associated with disease and misery because of those in the group who mindlessly have sex for the sake of the orgasm, and not as some kind of intelligent lifestyle. Until you can police your own community, others will hate and shun homosexuals. Why would you expect it to be any other way? Why should heterosexuals want to be exposed to dangerous diseases or pay for your medical costs?

    You are posting as a “Gay Conservative,” hence we are talking about homosexuality. I could have this same discussion with someone who fills their arteries with trans fats and numerous other unhealthy behaviors. I am not singling out homosexuality, it just happens to be the topic of this blog.

    >There is no answer to your question, David. We will never eradicate the disease. In order to do that, we would have to strip every person of their individual liberties and basic rights and police their every move 24/7 – and even then we wouldn’t be able to stop people from having sex whenever they want.

    You would finish your demonstration of intelligence with about the stupidest thing you could say. What do you really think is going on in the back rooms of the CDC? Their job is to keep the nation healthy and to find a cure for every disease. If you do not do it, they eventually will. You are undoubtedly aware of the FEMA concentration camps and underground shelters around the country? These shelters are contingency plans in case the human race is threatened. What role do you think they have planned for homosexuals in maintaining the human race in tight quarters? Do you see the folly of your shortsightedness?

    Do you know how close we are to WWIII right now due to the situation in the Middle East and our debt to China? Are you aware of the severe climate change that is presently occurring and the severe change in solar behavior? Are you aware of the increased seismic and volcanic activity that is presently occurring around the planet?

    If you are so naive as to say there is no answer to how homosexuals can clean up their own behavior…

  21. Hi Steve – “Great discussion here. David is definitely missing the mark though on STD’s as a whole. It’s about responsible behavior, period.”

    In case you were not aware, this is a blog on homosexuality. It would be rather odd if the purpose of a homosexual site was to discuss the irresponsible behaviors of other groups, don’t you think? If that was the case, then this blog would meet the definition of a hate site.

    “David, nobody knows where AIDS began.”

    But we do know where it is, today.

    “You can be homosexual and prudent. You can also be heterosexual and slutty.”

    I fully agree. So, how do you propose we can make the homosexual community prudent?

    “It gets to a point where an entire group of people are disparaged just because it could make one person feel better about themselves”

    Here we go with the absolutism, already. It seems this problem would be easy to fix if there truly was just one person who is making disparaging remarks. So, tell me, who is this one person who has disparaged the homosexual community?

    “You’re making the assumption that the rapid spread of HIV in the heterosexual community is because of bisexuality. There isn’t much proof of that as Mel has pointed out, much of it has to do with shooting up drugs.”

    Let’s see. Homosexual men have an average of 100 sex partners. Homosexual men are by far the largest group of HIV/AIDS infected people. Hmmm. If someone were to possess common sense, what conclusion would they likely draw from this?

    “I think straight people should do what a political party would have to do: if they want to make the world a better place, they should start by cleaning up the nonsense on their side of the aisle.”

    Actually, we do. That is why there are laws governing heterosexual prostitution, blood tests for getting marriage licenses, not having sex with minors, having illicit sexual contact with other people’s spouses, raping, and numerous other laws. When there are infractions of these laws, we have police officers who arrest the violators and we have judges who examine the evidence of the case. We also have prison guards who keep the violators in confinement as punishment.

    And it is with this same sense of morality that we now have our eyes on the newly emerging homosexual community, which wants to have equal status with the heterosexual community. Welcome to the world of responsibility.

    What do you think homosexuals can do to reduce their health care burden on the rest of society?

  22. “If you have a different interpretation of the CDC’s comments, I would like to hear them.”

    One year vs. thirty? Oh, and 61% of NEW infections does not mean that “at least two-thirds” (your words, implying “possibly more”) are attributable to gay people. It means exactly what I said – just over half.

    “I think cigarette taxes are fair, especially since it is immoral to turn down people who ask for medical help.” “It is in the best interest of humanity to reign in all unhealthy behaviors, including eating at McDonalds and having homosexual sex. At the very least, tax the hell out of those behaviors that are placing the heaviest burdens on our social health care system. Make the people who are recklessly spending our public resources pay the most for their stupidity. You are a conservative. You would normally be supporting these kinds of measures. Of course, when your own personal behavior falls into the category of being taxed, then you fight back. That is reactionary politics, not conservative politics.”

    Now you’re getting under my skin, and not because you should. Conservative politics, in my view, are simple: limited government, controlled spending, we live in a free country. There is nothing in the Constitution that gives anybody, whether in government or among the people, the power or the right to legislate their version of morality, and that is what the entire original post was about. Don’t kid yourself…I wasn’t just telling gay liberals that they needed to grow up. Both sides are wrong about this. You say you think we should tax the hell out of fast food and cigarettes, but you complain about having to pay for medical care for homosexuals whose behavior led to their medical issues? Talk about hypocritical…

    I believe that socialistic healthcare is wrong. When it is forced at the business end of a gun, it isn’t charity – it’s communism. That sort of thing has no place in a free society. Social healthcare has been an abysmal failure in every country where it has taken hold. They have ALL ended up forming so-called “death panels” where bureaucrats determine what should be treated and who is eligible for major illness or injury care. The government should not be involved in that and has no right to force me to accept it.

    There are some things that are a given and can be explained outside someone’s personal morality: stealing, murdering and raping is wrong. Abusing mind-altering substances that produce dangerous behaviors that put others at immediate risk is wrong. When you start suggesting that we legislate your personal brand of morality (government-forced healthcare, high taxes on supposedly unhealthy products, etc.), you’re not talking about being free anymore. You’re talking about slowly bringing back the Soviet Union.

    “I have to have faith that everyone has the same innate ability to be moral, as I do.”

    The ability may exist, but it isn’t innate. I tend to agree with Niccolo Machiavelli.

    “So did the heterosexuals who found them out. Homosexuality has always been associated with disease and misery…”

    I call bullshit. Are you trying to insult my intelligence, or are you really naive enough to believe that the religious morality aspect had absolutely nothing to do with it? From the founding of this nation until right around the 1960’s, religion drove a lot of the perspective in this country. To a large degree, religion still holds more sway here than it does in other Western countries. People didn’t hate the gays because of diseases – they hated gays because their religion told them that gays were worthy of death. Note, I said religion, not faith.

    “You are undoubtedly aware of the FEMA concentration camps and underground shelters around the country?”

    You just told me everything I needed to know about you. That is a myth, as proven by Popular Mechanics (the private entity that also proved 9/11 conspiracy theorists to be batshit insane): http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military/news/4312850

    “If you are so naive as to say there is no answer to how homosexuals can clean up their own behavior…”

    David, if there was an answer for that, I’d be wealthy and our prisons would be standing empty. Human behavior cannot be legislated nor controlled by force; history has shown us this for millenia. If you really believe it is possible, then the naivete lies with you.

    “Facts have a way of doing that.”

    My captain is the only person in this world who currently has any right to tell me that I should know my place. I’m done. Have a nice day.

  23. “In case you were not aware, this is a blog on homosexuality. It would be rather odd if the purpose of a homosexual site was to discuss the irresponsible behaviors of other groups, don’t you think? If that was the case, then this blog would meet the definition of a hate site.”

    Allow me to put you in your place — outside of the apparent self-righteous bubble you choose to exist in. Yes, I am aware of this blog. I purchased the domain name and began this website more than ten years ago. IF you are misguided as to what it’s about, please feel free to read “About Steve” or “About Mel.”

    As homosexuals, Mel and I are objective enough to understand the hullaballoo which exists in the world of liberalism: I.E. “conservatives hate gays” — “if you’re gay and conservative, are you a Jewish Nazi?” Or of course, we’ve been calling “self-loathing” folk.

    We understand that for all to enjoy a better country, we are all responsible for our actions. Mel isn’t dodging that point and neither am I. But what you’re doing is blaming one group for an entire epidemic which to be fair they contributed to in the early stages of national crisis in the 80’s. However; nobody knows where it came from.

    What spreads HIV? Answer: unprotected and promiscuous vaginal or anal sex. Before HIV, nobody used protection. This includes crack heads, prostitutes, gay men, and straight men and women. We also know shooting up drugs has a huge part to do with it as well.

    If it is your contention that without homosexuality, we’d be HIV-free today, allow me to invite you into a world of reality.

    Homosexual men cannot engage in natural vaginal sex — it’s a matter of biological fact — yet, vaginal sex has contracted the disease. Homosexual men are not the only group of people who engage in anal sex — and yes, anal sex contracts the virus, too.

    Both vaginal and anal sex can be safe — and it can be a show of intimacy to someone you love. But unfortunately, it isn’t anymore. The straight community through porn, through free love, and through Maxim magazine has contributed to the over-sexualization of society which we all have fallen victim to one way or another.

    Since we know also that black women are the ones contracting the virus at a historic rate now through vaginal sex — and we simultaneously know that it’s the same demographic group responsible for the highest rate of illegitimacy in America, that doesn’t mean we target the black community in the same way you want to focus on the gay community.

    Each sector of society contributes to the same positive and negative behaviors which grow the spread of national epidemics. But as objective conservatives, we here know that the best course to take is to promote the personal responsibility of all since true freedom inherits just that.

    Mel and I ARE objective enough to understand this. Nobody is reveling or celebrating in the fact that HIV is now spreading at a scary rate in the heterosexual community. But it is attitudes like yours which want to localize the problem that remove the need for responsible behavior among all.

    “I fully agree. So, how do you propose we can make the homosexual community prudent?”

    If you can get your straight folks to become prudent and not shame the act of marriage as they have, please let us know which trick that worked. We’ll be happy to apply it to all.

    “Actually, we do. That is why there are laws governing heterosexual prostitution”

    The fact that you have to call it “heterosexual” prostitution is pretty much all I have to see to understand where you are coming from. The last time I checked, all prostitution was illegal. Do you have that statute handy which says gay prostitution is A-Okay?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s