Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

FIRST-PERSON: HIV 'is a gay disease' [Treat gay sex like smoking]
Baptist Press ^ | 6-20-08 | Kelly Boggs

Posted on 06/21/2008 8:04:54 AM PDT by DeweyCA

How should society deal with a behavior -– a lifestyle choice -- that places those who engage in the behavior at a high risk for poor health and grave disease?

If the behavior in question is smoking, American society does everything in its power to discourage the behavior to the point of passing laws that make it illegal to puff in public places, even if the public venue is privately owned.

However, if the behavior that results in probable poor health and potentially fatal disease is promiscuous sex, particularly homosexual sex, society only encourages those who engage in the behavior to do so safely.

The result of America's collective attack on smoking is that the rate of those who smoke has decreased dramatically in the United States. Additionally, the attitude toward smokers has shifted from tolerant acceptance to intolerant disgust.

What has society's "safe" approach to immoral and aberrant sex produced? Sexually transmitted diseases that are rampant and common-place, so much so that drugs designed to deal with them are now routinely advertised on television.

Additionally, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has adopted new counting methods that have revealed an HIV rate in America that is 25 percent higher than originally thought.

The CDC estimates there are 50,000 new cases of HIV infection reported each year. Currently 1.1 million people in the United States are believed to be infected with HIV.

All HIV infections are a result of someone's behavior. According to the CDC, in 2006 59 percent of new HIV infections were caused solely by male-to-male sexual contact, and 7 percent by both male-to-male contact and drug use. That means that homosexual men, who comprise approximately 2 percent of the population, accounted for 66 percent of new HIV cases two years ago. Of the remaining HIV cases, 17 percent were transmitted by high-risk heterosexual contact and 16 percent solely by drug use.

The one thing that all the HIV infections have in common is they are a direct result of behavior.

For years homosexual activists insisted that HIV was not a homosexual disease. That has changed. Matt Foreman, executive director of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, told the organization national conference in February that HIV is "a gay disease."

"Folks, with 70 percent of the people in this country living with HIV being gay or bisexual," Foreman said, "we cannot deny that HIV is a gay disease. We have to own that and face up to that."

Foreman acknowledged what many of us have known for decades: HIV and its companion disease AIDS is dramatically disproportionate among male homosexuals.

The safe-sex message in relation to HIV has been neither wise nor helpful. A report released in 2001 by the CDC concluded that condom use reduces the risk of contracting HIV by only 85 percent -- and then only when used "correctly and consistently."

In a "game" of Russian roulette there is an 83.4 percent chance of firing an empty chamber. However, no one encourages participation in the dangerous game even though the odds of getting a bullet are relatively low. Why? The stakes are simply too high. The same is true for condoms and HIV.

What I find utterly amazing is that while STDs, including HIV, are spread solely on the basis of behavior, society continues to send a message of safety rather than abstinence. And homosexual sex continues to be portrayed as some civil right rather than an incubator for a deadly disease.

It seems that a majority in American culture have surrendered to the idea that sexual desire is so overwhelming, so part of our nature, that it simply cannot be restrained.

In the classic movie "The African Queen" these is a scene where Charlie Allnut, played by Humphrey Bogart, is justifying his propensity to imbibe alcohol. He says to Rose Sayer, a missionary played by Katharine Hepburn, "A man takes a drop too much once in a while, it's only human nature." To which Rose replies, "Nature, Mr. Allnut, is what we are put in this world to rise above."

Man can rise above any and all negative aspects of human nature -- whether it is a desire to light up a cigarette or engage in risky promiscuous sex.

Given the fact that promiscuous sex, and homosexual sex in particular, is so fraught with negative health consequences and the potential for dread disease, it would seem that society would embrace the same message that it directs toward smokers: Just say no!

Kelly Boggs, whose column appears each week in Baptist Press, is editor of the Baptist Message, the newspaper of the Louisiana Baptist Convention, which is online at

TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: aids; gays; hiv; homosexualagenda; riskybehavior; smoking
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last
Treat gay sex like smoking. Lot of common sense in that approach, so obviously the Libs won't even consider it. The Libs just want their perverted sex more than they want life.
1 posted on 06/21/2008 8:04:55 AM PDT by DeweyCA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DeweyCA

[Treat gay sex like smoking]

Tax it? Make them do it 25 feet from the door to a public place? Make them show ID before they do it?

2 posted on 06/21/2008 8:06:47 AM PDT by Grunthor (Gonna vote for the candidate that is for drilling for oil, Juan McJerk. Maybe.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeweyCA

Forgot one;

Do we look for “truth” commericals about the “magical amount?”

3 posted on 06/21/2008 8:07:35 AM PDT by Grunthor (Gonna vote for the candidate that is for drilling for oil, Juan McJerk. Maybe.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeweyCA

Of course this guy is right — but we are living in the age of insanity.

4 posted on 06/21/2008 8:08:46 AM PDT by BenLurkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeweyCA

Classify it as a ‘pre-existing condition’ so insurance co.’s don’t have to cover/pay for treatment.

5 posted on 06/21/2008 8:09:07 AM PDT by realdifferent1 (They've finally said it:; 'Socialize the oil industry'; IT IS NOW TIME TO LOCK & LOAD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeweyCA

Lawrence v. Texas needs to be overturned and states can then reinstate sodomy laws. The Federal Government has no business setting policy for HIV or any other disease (in fact we need to dismantle the Dept of HHS), so leave it to the states to deal with. If a state, or a local community, wants to make homosexual acts criminal it is well within their rights to do so.

6 posted on 06/21/2008 8:14:51 AM PDT by PastorTony
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeweyCA

“Treat gay sex like smoking. Lot of common sense in that approach, so obviously the Libs won’t even consider it. The Libs just want their perverted sex more than they want life.”

More than they want life, or a political career! Obviously Obama wanted it!

Lary Sinclair’s Press Conference:

Donald Young: News of his death:

Larry Bland,Donald Young,Nate Spencer: Connection?

7 posted on 06/21/2008 8:18:57 AM PDT by seekthetruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #8 Removed by Moderator

To: DeweyCA

I prefer to treat it like cancer ... or rabies

9 posted on 06/21/2008 8:21:39 AM PDT by clamper1797 (GWB was shock and awe ... Nobama is shuck and jive)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeweyCA

This would be unfair to intraveinous drug users too poor to afford clean needles

10 posted on 06/21/2008 8:33:08 AM PDT by Soliton (Investigate, educate, then opinionate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeweyCA

How about surgeon general warnings and advertisements. Something like these:

Warning! Queer sex can lead to HIV, AIDS, and other diseases that will KILL YOU.

Warning! Sodomy is a sin. God doesn’t like sin. Entire cities have been destroyed because of such sin.

Sodomy is dangerous - just ask the former inhabitants of Sodom and Gamorrah!

11 posted on 06/21/2008 8:37:25 AM PDT by TheBattman (Vote your conscience, or don't complain about RINOs!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: realdifferent1

Or make the health insurance rates and life insurance rates for homosexuality proportional to the risk, as it is for smokers today. If you can’t get health insurance because of the bad behavior, would the proportion of bad behavior go down, as was seen with smoking?

12 posted on 06/21/2008 8:41:21 AM PDT by tbw2 ("Sirat: Through the Fires of Hell" by Tamara Wilhite - on
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: DeweyCA

My health insuror sends me surveys and they always ask if and how much I smoke, they never ask if I’m queer. I wonder which is the cheaper disease to die from, AIDS or cancer?

13 posted on 06/21/2008 8:47:31 AM PDT by Graybeard58 (McCain, my penultimate choice in the primary and only choice in the general)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Morgana

“We knew this way back in 1980!!!”

Exactly, that’s why it was called Gay-related immune deficiency (GRID) until the homosexuals lobbied to change the name. It spread from homosexuals to IV drug users through ta-da! homosexual sex.

Homosexuals can’t be “wiped out”, it’s a mental illness not a genetic condition. They deserve our compassion and love. Which means we should try to stop them from abusing themselves. Good luck with that. Our society wants to believe all sex can be harmless and inconsequential.

14 posted on 06/21/2008 8:48:21 AM PDT by Varda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Wings-n-Wind


15 posted on 06/21/2008 8:49:27 AM PDT by Wings-n-Wind (The main things are the plain things!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeweyCA

I agree. No more gay sex in restaurants, bars and other public places.

16 posted on 06/21/2008 8:50:02 AM PDT by SlapHappyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PastorTony
Homosexuality is defined by behavior, i.e., unless one engages in sexual activity with a member of the same sex, he, or she, is not a homosexual. (The term sexual orientation merely clouds the issue and refers to a “feeling” that is irrelevant to reasoned behavior.)

Any human behavior (not driven by autonomic or instinctual responses) that is not voluntary is, by definition, a psychosis.

Therefore, homosexual behavior is either a voluntary choice or a psychosis.

If homosexual behavior is a voluntary choice, then it is subject to the same types of societal regulations as is any other sexual behavior such as pedophilia, prostitution, polygamy, etc.

On the other hand, if homosexual behavior is a psychosis, then it is validly subject to treatment and possible cure.

Homosexual individuals are incapable of reproduction if they are exclusively homosexual. (If these individuals do not practice exclusively homosexual activity, then, by definition, they can choose not to be homosexual.) By the principles of genetics, exclusively homosexual practitioners would cause such types of individuals to appear in the population at no greater rate than that of other genetic disorders, e.g., Hutchinson-Gilford Progeria syndrom, which prevent their victims from procreating, not the currently observed proportion of the population.

No society, free or otherwise, continuously allows behavior that is excessively detrimental to its citizens or threatens the continued existence of that society. Homosexual practitioners are responsible, either directly or indirectly, for the vast majority of this country’s AIDS infections as well as a huge STD rate. Beyond these negative impacts is the disruption to society of thousands of years of marital tradition and the stability of the basic building block of society, the family.

The Supreme Court grievous erred in Lawrence v. Texas. The principle outlined in this decision essentially is that government has no authority to regulate private, consensual sexual behavior. From a libertarian viewpoint, this seems like a good thing. However, it completely ignores that incest can fit the same criteria as could prostitution. Furthermore, it ignores the Tenth Amendment. Finally, and most importantly, it imporudently allows a behavior to threaten our society.
17 posted on 06/21/2008 9:05:39 AM PDT by Lucky Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: seekthetruth

great post

18 posted on 06/21/2008 9:07:45 AM PDT by spanalot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: DeweyCA
Until the recent cabinet shuffle,
the Minister for Health here in Ontario, Canada was a homosexual.
We heard immense amounts about the dangers of smoking
but nary a peep on the dangers of homosexual behavior.
19 posted on 06/21/2008 9:09:42 AM PDT by kanawa (Don't go where you're looking, look where you're going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DeweyCA
Very well-written treatment of society's double standard regarding communal behavior.

We're told that the government has the right to require us to wear seat belts, even though we're adults capable of making our own decisions, because the greater injuries that statistically come from not wearing seat belts is a burden to society. Then the same people tell us that regulating homosexual behavior is unconstitutional, that sex between consenting adults is none of our business and the cost to society does not give it the right to regulate behavior.

20 posted on 06/21/2008 9:12:19 AM PDT by IronJack (=)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson