Posted on 09/01/2017 7:09:05 AM PDT by rightwingintelligentsia
Is the writer claiming that one in two black men or one in two black gay men will get HIV? The difference is huge.
****
I believe the answer is “black gay men” but the article is quoted correctly. Ambiguity is not your friend. The writer should be fired for incompetence.
OTOH, why is this a problem? They have been attacking this little virus as a cure for AIDS for well over 30 years. I mean how long is it going to take?
Actually I believe I know the answer: They will NEVER cure AIDS by chasing their tail with HIV. They will make a ton of money but 30 years from now they will still be unsuccessfully looking for that cure.
May I suggest that men stop buggering one other?
Thank you, I’ll be here all week. Please tip your server!
and bananas. you 4got bananas are racist too.
Yes - How could I forget such a blatantly racist item? Thanks for reminding me.
Yes but how much does it cost us? I’m sick to death of subsidizing gay men’s obsessive and disgusting sex lives. Meanwhile, they could have come up with a cure for women’s breast cancer years ago!
“cited non-acceptance from religion and family, and living a life of hiding a secret as the reason why — despite education and advocacy efforts among gay black men in Atlanta — numbers are not declining”
Horsesh**. Its entirely preventable irresponsible behavior.
Leave it to the left to ignore the elephant in the room and somehow blame society at large. AGAIN.
which stated in 2016 that one in two black GAY men would contract the disease.
Keep telling yourself that and those numbers will get worse.
You and they have been given over and the numbers that explain this situation are those of Romans 1:18-32.
Well, perhaps not.
Before they get significantly worse a portion if black queers will die thus reducing the subcultural population.
I make the argument that penicillin, while having saved millions, was the single biggest cause of sexual immorality on the planet. Things that used to be a death sentence were no longer a threat. I don’t believe the behavior rampant during the 60’s and 70’s would have happened if it didn’t exist.
Then HIV emerged in the 80’s. This was during my teenage years. It was terrifying, thinking that sex could kill you - while, historically, it had always been the case. The culture that surrounded you encouraged sex at every turn. While initially understood as a largely a ‘gay mans disease’ it was quickly repeated as ‘not so, anyone can get it’. While true, the statistics reveal the larger truth. When a small percentage of the population has very risky sex with many people from the same small population, infections will spread like wildfire. They do not behave, sexually, the same as the heterosexual population (in general). Now that the HIV virus can be controlled with new drugs, as penicillin did for bacteria based infections, they’re no longer afraid and transmission will skyrocket, being ‘safe’ is no longer a concern.
They are a petri dish for virus mutation. It is inevitable that a new virus will emerge that will be immune to current drugs. It is not an ‘if’ but a ‘when’. Every time a virus mutates you have a chance of it happening, their lifestyle is providing the environment for it to occur.
This isn’t ‘hate’, this is science. I only wish they would realize this. There are consequences to behavior, yet the only message they hear is that you’re a bigot to not affirm their lifestyle. There can only be one outcome.
AIDS, by Region
New AIDS diagnoses: In 2015, the South accounted for 52% (9,601) of the 18,303 new AIDS diagnoses in the United States, followed by the Northeast (18%, 3,328), the West (17%, 3,096), and the Midwest (12%, 2,278).
In 2015, the rate of new AIDS diagnoses was 7.9 in the South, 5.9 in the Northeast, 4.1 in the West, and 3.4 in the Midwest.
AIDS deaths: Of the 6,721 deaths attributed directly to HIV or AIDS in 2014, 3,570 (53%) were in the South, 1,279 (19%) were in the Northeast, 1,136 (17%) were in the West, and 736 (11%) were in the Midwest.
https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/overview/geographicdistribution.html
Are they still blaming “homophobia” in the South for the fact that homosexuals are so disease prone through their willful behavior?
I have never bought into the HIV causes AIDS theory.
You apparently have. Maybe it’s time for me take a fresh look at the issue. The last time I really looked closely at the issue all I found was a loose correlation between men with AIDS and the presence of HIV in their blood.
That wasn’t/isn’t good enough for me. It doesn’t satisfy Koch’s Posulates.
I’m sure things have progressed in 30 years.
What would you cite as the best evidence that HIV is the direct cause of AIDS?
No and yes. It's still a very difficult, complicated maze to navigate, with the risk of viral drug-resistance development, serious long-term side effects (some which don't manifest for years), and the unmentioned acrimonious ostracizing even within "gay" society. I'm convinced that many of the "gay"-on-"gay" murders are a result of either the transmission of the virus or putting a partner at unknown risk.
Despite what the "correct" science news of the day says, there are still many fatal health hazards related to HIV/AIDS, either directly or indirectly.
If only there were some way to stop the spread of HIV/AIDS!
Yep, and Islam doesn’t cause Terrorism.
Are there cases of AIDS without HIV present? Not ‘similar’ conditions, but AIDS.
Pretty good post. Well reasoned and compelling. I can see you have at least a sixth grade education. Rationally explaining things even Jethro Bodean could understand.
You are obviously a racist. Off with your head!
Go back even farther and note the progression.
Homosexuality as a behavior was almost universally condemned by society, science, religion and law prior to the late 60’s. When the first bulwark fell, in the APA which was politically BULLIED into de-pathologizing homosexuality, the problems really started. This happened in 1973, and only a few short years later, HIV made its appearance on the scene. It has only gotten worse in the intervening years.
Ironically, and against the orthodox PC narrative, homosexuals as a whole were never healthier than when homosexual behavior was universally condemned.
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.