Skip to comments.
AIDS No Longer a Deterrent for Homosexuals (Walk on the Wild Side!!)
CNS.com ^
| October 29, 2001
| Melanie Hunter
Posted on 10/29/2001 8:14:04 PM PST by FresnoDA
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
To: Valin
My cousin died of AIDS - he lived a long life as homosexuals go - 42. I'm surprised he lasted that long given that he had sex with thousands of men, drank hard, and did lots of drugs. There was nothing "gay" about his life, though he tried to convince people he was happy. When he died he looked 20 years older than his age, died a slow painful death, and never did admit his choices to his parents. So sad to see such a talented guy waste himself with his deathly choices.
Comment #42 Removed by Moderator
To: HiTech RedNeck
I thought I heard this kind of anonymous alley catting was even WORSE among those in "domestic partnerships" than those living alone.
Really? Where did you hear this?
43
posted on
10/30/2001 5:45:14 AM PST
by
Dimensio
Comment #44 Removed by Moderator
To: NotTheDevil
Interesting choice of research material, Hustler??????????? I guess you needed to utilize this disgusting piece of media perversion to support your incongruous comparison.
Garbage in...garbage out.
45
posted on
10/30/2001 6:06:14 AM PST
by
EODGUY
To: ImaGraftedBranch
I'm with you on this one. If I were a business owner I'd shut down before providing benefits for homosexual partners.
To: FresnoDA
THE SHOCKING NEWS ABOUT THE RED RIBBON!!!!
I recently read something truly shocking about the red AIDS ribbon:
It's not working!!!
/sarcasm
47
posted on
10/30/2001 6:13:36 AM PST
by
Silly
To: NotTheDevil
A young man on his deathbed who cannot seek comfort from his own parents must really fear their disapproval.Are you saying the young man's destructive lifestyle that killed him at age 42 was the parents fault?
Sounds like Psychobabble 101. If the homosexual man in question believed that being 'gay' was 'who he really was' and that there was nothing morally wrong with it, he would have eventually 'come out' to his parents, but he chose not to. That's telling and indicates his unwillingness to face the truth about his choices.
It's obvious that he was very unhappy in 'the life' and knew it was wrong as well as soul-deadening and his heavy use of drugs and alcohol would seem to verify this. By 40, very few people are afraid of parental disapproval and have made their life choices, anyway. It's my guess that the man simply hated himself for what he had become and attempted to hide the truth from his parents out of rightful shame. That's sad but he made that choice, not his parents. Projecting his mistakes back on the parents is transparently false.
He was 42, not 16. Let's lay responsibility where it belongs. Every dumb and destructive thing we do in our lives is not mommy and daddy's fault.
To: FresnoDA
A barf alert would have been nice. I feel sick. Did you hear that AIDS is spreading in China? Maybe the gay folks feel like Armageddon is right around the corner so they may as well go hog wild while they still can. I thought that very thing about chocolate covered peanuts (double dipped) just yesterday but I decided not to eat any in case we survive the week. For victory & freedom!!!
To: FresnoDA
Between bin Laden and the Homosexuals, we are under a Frontal and a Rear Assault!! Yuck!!!Their practices are the basis for such popular sayings such as "kiss my a$$" and being a "brown-noser" or "C_cks_ck_r". These core practices of the gay lifestyle are what the gays do not want people to think about in regard to them. Gays do not want the truth of their lifestyle to be known because they know that regular people will be disgusted with them, and then will not be sympathetic to their demands for more acceptance.
50
posted on
10/30/2001 7:14:26 AM PST
by
DeweyCA
To: Saundra Duffy
Now that medical science has come up with a cocktail of drugs to extend the lives of AIDS patients, there is less fear of the disease. Consequently, it's back to bonking as usual.
To: Plummz
I don't know, but the implication is that HIV rate will increase. I would guess the difference is the incubation period. Syphillus is noticable pretty quickly, couple of days I think. AIDS may take a few years to make its presence known.
52
posted on
10/30/2001 7:35:08 AM PST
by
lafroste
To: lafroste
But wouldn't it have been SOP to test these syphillis patients (esp. the 93 with the 92% anonymous 1,225 sexual partners) for HIV also?
53
posted on
10/30/2001 8:18:14 AM PST
by
Plummz
To: FresnoDA
Go get'em girls!!!
54
posted on
10/30/2001 8:20:57 AM PST
by
WhiteGuy
To: NotTheDevil
Sorry, when I'm wrong I admit it.
55
posted on
10/30/2001 8:33:13 AM PST
by
Outrance
To: Kaj
Pardon me for being stupid
56
posted on
10/30/2001 8:34:09 AM PST
by
Outrance
To: DeweyCA; FresnoDA; FormerLib; NotTheDevil; Manny Festo
"These core practices of the gay lifestyle are what the gays do not want people to think about in regard to them. Gays do not want the truth of their lifestyle to be known because they know that regular people will be disgusted with them, and then will not be sympathetic to their demands for more acceptance."
That is what the leaders of the homosexual community actually admit. Here's what they wrote in "The Overhauling of Straight America":
"The first order of business is desensitization of the American public concerning gays and gay rights. To desensitize the public is to help it view homosexuality with indifference instead of with keen emotion... At least in the beginning, we are seeking public desensitization and nothing more. We do not need and cannot expect a full appreciation or understanding of homosexuality from the average American. You can forget about trying to persuade the masses that homosexuality is a good thing. But if only you can get them to think that it is just another thing, with a shrug of their shoulders, then your battle for legal and social rights is virtually won.
The way to benumb raw sensitivities about homosexuality is to have a lot of people talk a great deal about the subject in a neutral or supportive way. Open and frank talk makes the subject seem less furtive, alien, and sinful, more above-board. Constant talk builds the impression that the public opinion is at least divided on the subject, and that a sizable segment accepts or even practices homosexuality. Even rancorous debates between opponents and defenders serve the purpose of desensitization so long as respectable gays are front and center to make their own pitch. The main thing is to talk about gayness until the issue becomes thoroughly tiresome.
And when we say talk about homosexuality, we mean just that. In the early stages of any campaign to reach straight America, the masses should not be shocked and repelled by premature exposure to homosexual behavior itself. Instead, the imagery of sex should be downplayed and gay rights should be reduced to an abstract social question as much as possible. First let the camel get his nose inside the tent -- and only later his unsightly derriere!"
57
posted on
10/30/2001 8:35:47 AM PST
by
EdReform
To: NotTheDevil; Outrance
...I was shocked--I say shocked to learn what all you heterosexuals are really doing!Devil, believe me when I tell you that I wish we could have talked your Mom out of heterosexuality!
To: FresnoDA
"Anyone can catch AIDS" is the familiar refrain from the '80's. Yet, all those in the hypocritical, heartless, middle-class, straight majority have had 2 decades to achieve AIDS parity with active gay males and IV drug users. With no success. A defining moment of the late '80's for me was when a sufferer on Donahue was whining about "how the government was doing nothing about it." They did. It was called Sodomy Laws.
Activists who rallied against government indifference ("they were more responsive to Legionaire's Disease") also fought the sensible and rational policies that have alway helped contain and evaluate new epidemics (like Legionaires) and STDs.
When those whose demand for a "right" to a lifestyle override everyone else's simple right to stay alive, than there is hell to pay. Promisciuos gay subcultures, misguided activists and AIDS politics must shoulder the blame for the spread of AIDS, moreso than all the other culprits they have implicated.
To: concerned about politics
What if that next Homosexual happends to develop cure for Cancer or Anthrax... and that person who had the cancer was either you, your wife, or your mother. I know it's his fault of getting AIDS but I do not think we should enjoy anyone else suffering from any disease. Yes, homosexuals do things that you don't approve of but I am sure you do many things that many people don't approve of. I am sure that people who disapprove of your behavior does not enjoy you suffering from some sort of diseases unless you want that. People can do whatever they want to do unless it does not cost others some thing. I would say Medicare patients, homeless, HUD homes, social security recipients, and other handout recipents cost more than homosexuals having sex. I would rather like to see Medicare, mediaid, and social security wipe out.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson