Go to Janes Opinion
- Add a comment
- Go to Drug Resistant AIDS . . . "sex with countless male partners over the years"
Thanks, Burly, for noticing and commenting!
I was on vacation for 10 days, and now I've started my new job which is definitely going to consume the bulk of my energies and mental power. I'm debating quitting blogit. We'll see.
Thanks again!
posted by
JanesOpinion
on April 28, 2005 at 5:08 PM
| link to this | reply
Missed you
I've missed your posts. Hope everything is alright.
posted by
Burly
on April 26, 2005 at 10:02 AM
| link to this | reply
oh absolutely-
I meant more of the few comments there that seemed to say it was only those behaviors that could cause anyone to get HIV...
posted by
FactorFiction
on April 19, 2005 at 8:08 PM
| link to this | reply
ForF, I agree with you . . . somewhat!
Virtually anyone can get it. I am thankful that I've never had a needle stick in all of my 10 years of nursing. Thank God! Of course I'm at greater risk for developing HIV with my field; however, I also avoid other risky behaviors that would put me at greater risk of contracting the virus. No matter what you say, it's still the gay men and IV drug users who are developing HIV at the highest rates. Those are behaviors that can be avoided. A gay man can choose to be celibate just as a heterosexual can.
posted by
JanesOpinion
on April 19, 2005 at 4:33 PM
| link to this | reply
Actually, AIDS is a disease everyone should worry about
I don't think you have to "invite it" at all! How many men have brought home a "little present" for the wife when they have been unfaithful? Yeah, it doesn't happen all the time, but did the woman do anything to invite that? I don't think so!
What about the healthcare worker who gets exposed accidentally? Do they invite it because they work in the medical field? Guess we should discourage all from entering any of those jobs...
I have a real problem with people putting their heads in the sand and thinking that anything contagious can't possibly happen to them.Wake up people! There is danger in tunnel vision.
Think about the youthful population... we know what it's like to be young..."nothing bad could happen." Some are going to try drugs, some will be HIV positive. They are straight and maybe they won't be addicts... look it's a straight male who thinks he's just fine... would you like to see your daughter marry him? Even if they wait for marriage...what did she do wrong?? (or the other way around, a girl who experiments but straightens out and marries.)
Okay I am done being aggravated by limited vision and thought processes...
posted by
FactorFiction
on April 19, 2005 at 4:27 PM
| link to this | reply
DM, regarding the HIV and other viruses --
although I don't believe HIV was created by God specifically to wreck havoc in the gay community, I do believe that men having sex with men . . . and anal sex in general. . . puts a person at greater risk for HIV. The mucosal lining of the rectum is paper thin and much less pliable than the rugated mucosa of the vagina. So in other words, small skin tears occur much more easily in the rectum than the vagina. This is not something I've made up -- it's a known fact. It's much easier to transmit HIV to the blood stream via anal sex (because of the tiny skin tears) than vaginal. Ergo, much easier for the gay community to get it.
Please stop the name calling, DM. Civility should extend even to fellow blogit members with whom you disagree.
posted by
JanesOpinion
on April 19, 2005 at 4:05 PM
| link to this | reply
Thanks, amfish, for your reasoned and polite response --
unlike that of your fellow atheist, DM. Promiscuity does play a huge roll. I've treated many an STD in young women who've had multiple heterosexual partners. The grief and frustration could all be avoided, though, with monogamy (at the very least) and sex only within marriage (at most).
posted by
JanesOpinion
on April 19, 2005 at 3:58 PM
| link to this | reply
RSM --
Let me help you out a little bit. THIS is name calling: You're a jackass. THIS is describing your inability to see the larger picture: the depth and breadth of your ignorance simply steals my breath away.
Now that we've cleared that up and you fully understand the difference between a epithet and a description, we can move on to the truly juvenile aspects of this entire discussion. Namely, viruses do not infect immoral or moral people simply because you think they want to indicate some sort of plague brought on by God Himself. Viruses (created by your God) know no difference between the immune system of a black, white, Christian, atheist, homosexual, heterosexual or try-sexual (that's a person who will try anything sexual at least once) person. Viruses simply procreate just like you and me. Assigning any more value to viruses than what they deserve as creatures of the cosmos is akin to mysticism and superstition. And that, bubba, is just ignorant. DM
posted by
Dennison..Mann
on April 18, 2005 at 2:32 PM
| link to this | reply
Continuing
I think the problem lies in promiscuity rather than sexuality. The trouble is, of course, that promiscuity tends to be higher amongst homosexuals, possibly because of it being impossible to result in an enforced commitment in the shape of a child.
My view on sex outside marriage is complex, largely because I am atheist and therefore I see marriage in a different way to someone with a religious outlook. I don't think that people have to get married, if it's not the right thing for them, but I do feel that someone who cannot commit to a single partner has some kind of emotional issue and is unlikely to ever lead a fulfilled life. That said, sexual incompatibility is a not uncommon cause of the breakup of a relationship, which is a major problem with the no sex before marriage approach, but why so much of this sex is unprotected... that I can't understand.
posted by
amfish
on April 18, 2005 at 2:18 PM
| link to this | reply
amfish, you're right . . . to a degree --
I should not have implied that having sex with a gay guy will give a person HIV. Obviously, not all gay men have HIV; however, it is true that a higher percentage of gay men have the virus than heterosexual men. Any one engaging in risky behaviors -- whether doing IV drugs, having promiscuious hetero or homo sex . . . have a greater chance of developing HIV. I personally am for abstinence outside of marriage, but I realize my opinion on this is not popular. Thanks for stopping by.
posted by
JanesOpinion
on April 18, 2005 at 1:55 PM
| link to this | reply
No Choice At All
The statement 'have sex with a gay guy or someone else infected with the virus' is unsound - the implication is that all gay men carry the virus. The problem is not one of sexuality but of promiscuity and of the lack of use of protection.
The trap people always seem to fall into is in thinking that people choose to be gay - this is far from true. Homosexuality is a genetic tendency found in a number of species, not just humans. The combination of genes that lead a man to homosexuality are primarily genes which, when part of a woman, have other effects that are beneficial enough to ensure the gene's transmission generation upon generation. Yes, someone who is born with that genetic difference could make the choice to ignore their genetic programming and to sleep with people of the opposite sex, but that would be about as natural as a sparrow choosing not to fly or a squirrel choosing not to eat nuts.
AIDS has done a lot of damage to the rights of homosexuals because people have chosen to make more of a song and dance about gay sufferers than a straight ones. It's similar to the way in which the US media focus on crimes committed by black youths and usually ignore those committed by whites. Whether AIDS cases are more common in gays or not, they are by no means unique to them and there is no evidence that AIDS has a different effect on a gay person than a straight one. Calling the disease some kind of divine justice for being gay is not only a misrepresentation of the facts, it's also unthinking bigotry.
At the end of the day AIDS is simply a virus, a bundle of selfish genes trying to maximise its use of the Earth's resources. It's resistant to treatment not because it's a super-bug but because we simply aren't smart enough to have found a cure. Fortunately, unlike other diseases such as Spanish Fly, it doesn't have the phenotypic effect of increasing the sufferer's sex-drive, otherwise it could be a much bigger problem than it is.
There is currently a fear that the Black Death was more than just Bubonic Plague and that we are soon to be due for another bout. If that comes to pass and the population is decimated as before, what will the survivors be saying? Will they accept that these things happen or will they look around for a statistical anomaly on which to pin the blame? Will be hearing nonsense about how people are sinners for having blonde hair because, after all, more blonde-haired people died of the plague than any other colour. The brown-haired must be truly righteous.
posted by
amfish
on April 18, 2005 at 5:42 AM
| link to this | reply
Amen, RSM Bro!
Thanks for adding your comments. And I agree that namecalling is very inappropriate. I have done my best to avoid it. . . haven't quite always lived up to my own standards, but I try. Thanks for stopping by!
posted by
JanesOpinion
on April 16, 2005 at 9:47 AM
| link to this | reply
If I Had A Penny Every Time D-Man and Kooka...
called me ignorant or stupid or whatever then I could retire already. So Jethro, just excuse the juvenile name calling that they do. Of course, Jane and Jethro are right. As I stated below AIDS is a disease that you choose to put yourself at risk of catching. Unfortunately, it is just like smoking and cancer. If you smoke, then you increase your chances of cancer .So if you you are homosexual then you increase your chances of contracting AIDS. What's wrong Dennison Mann, I thought all of you liberals were into choices!? Homosexuality is wrong and is a sin the same as any other sin, no more no less. That is what I believe. D-Mann appears to be the ultimate liberal. D-Mann, your profile tells us that you are a "philosopher" with many degrees from accredited colleges and universities. Your liberal responses do not surprise me in the least. However, with all of that knowledge, can't you debate without the juvenile name calling? The argument about breathing and the flu is very lame. I find it true to form from a liberal how you seem to think it is okay for you to promote your agenda and beliefs but when I do, then I hear from you about "your God". True it is my religious belief and opinion. However, your belief or opinion is no greater than mine. Back up your argument with substance not this harry high school calling people names stuff!
posted by
RedStatesMan
on April 14, 2005 at 7:27 PM
| link to this | reply
I see I have some catching up to do. Gee, I leave for a few days, and
people invade my blog and carry on some serious debate. Cool! But I readily must state, DM, that I'm with jethro here, even if you've labeled him a hillbilly. Sure, anyone can get the common cold, the flu, can die because of an attack on the immune system. But AIDS (rather, HIV) is a virus that is almost 100% avoidable. The only way to get HIV is to stick yourself with a tainted needle, have sex with a gay guy or someone else infested with the virus, or use IV drugs. It is a fragile virus that is actually not easily caught unless you have an exchange of blood or semen. So to compare HIV with the influenza virus is a very weak comparison and most improbable.
I can stop going to Walmart, and I might avoid catching the flu. (Or you can do as I do, and carry some alcohol based hand lotion in the car for use when done shopping.) But I don't HAVE TO stop going to Walmart to avoid HIV. Rather, I just avoid certain behaviors (which I believe are wrong anyway) and I am almost 100% guaranteed I will NOT catch HIV.
As well, Jethro mentioned some important stuff such as the fact that our bodies were created for the opposite sex. Not the same sex. It just isn't natural.
posted by
JanesOpinion
on April 14, 2005 at 11:13 AM
| link to this | reply
I Do Okay
...for a halfway house resident. DM
posted by
Dennison..Mann
on April 13, 2005 at 6:29 AM
| link to this | reply
Or Here, Jethro Hillbilly,
Try this choice: 20,000 people die of the common flu every year in the US alone. Some of them contacted that flu because they "chose" to push a cart around the local Wal*Mart and transferred the germ from the handle to their lungs.
By your logic, shopping at Wal*Mart is telling us something! We should all stop shopping completely!
DM
posted by
Dennison..Mann
on April 13, 2005 at 6:17 AM
| link to this | reply
Anytime You Can Decide To Halt Your Breathing With A Pull Of A Trigger
...your continued breathing becomes a choice. My point stands. Try again. DM
posted by
Dennison..Mann
on April 13, 2005 at 6:13 AM
| link to this | reply
Wow, did I just see someone charge suffocating ignorance and then claim breathing was a "choice"???
It never stops coming. I love it.
What I will add is that whether you believe AIDS was created by God for a purpose or was created by the cosmos as a joke you must acknowledge some truths: One of those is that homosexuals can't get a break in nature (can't reproduce, die young, high domestic abuse/drug use/mental instability rates, etc..) and maybe, just maybe, that should be telling us something. If Brad Pitt weren't famous there's a very good chance he couldn't sleep with 10 women in a month. Men and women compliment each other well in this way. Then tack on the fact that male/female traditional sex is much less likely to transmit the HIV virus. What you have here is a strong case that men and women are supposed to be together. Did I mention that baby thing too?
What amazes me is that those on the left who claim to be able to feel pain when a tree dies won't take a hint when nature is breaking down their door on this issue. Were they really concerned about compassion, as so many of them claim to be, they would acknowledge that this behavior is harming everybody in the society and especially those engaging in it. Their activist energies could result in a "March for Men's Lives" or something similar. Sadly we know all too well that the underlying goal is the destruction of even the concept of values or standards. Some gay writers go so far as to call AIDS sufferers martyrs for the gay cause. Such statements leave no doubt as to their true intentions.
Dennison Mann may be at the big people table, but the problem is he's having dinner at the halfway house.
posted by
jethro
on April 13, 2005 at 6:08 AM
| link to this | reply
Red States Man
The depth and breadth of your ignorance simply steals my breath away. Each year more than 20,000 Americans die from the flu virus alone. Do the math, Red, that's almost 400 people each week in the US alone that succumb to the common flu germ. They die from that flu virus as a direct result of their choice to do something (breathing e.g.) that exposes them to the virus. Viruses are life forms (apparently created by your God) with one goal in mind: procreation. Viruses do not care if their host is old, young, black, white, Christian, Hopi Indian, feline, bovine, homosexual, heterosexual, tall, short, fat, skinny, professional, blue-collar, Democrat, Republican, one-legged, two-legged, no-legged, dead or alive. Viruses simply use the life that your God apparently gave them to do one thing: reproduce. That's all they do: reproduce. Viruses do not draw up Mission Plans in their war against immorality. Only people actually plan to kill other people in their absurd desire to spread the word of their "enlightenment." Viruses don't even kill on purpose. A virus would actually prefer that its host lived forever so the virus can have all the sex and babies it could possibly handle in its short lifespan! No, viruses kill the way humanity seems bent on killing its host planet: oblivious.
Folks, let's all pray that Red joins us at the big people's table someday. DM
posted by
Dennison..Mann
on April 13, 2005 at 2:18 AM
| link to this | reply
The whole situation is a very sad one, lifestyle, disease and total waste.
Another good post, JanesO
posted by
Justi
on April 13, 2005 at 1:27 AM
| link to this | reply
Great comments, RSM. I agree 100%.
Thanks for stopping by.
posted by
JanesOpinion
on April 11, 2005 at 8:57 AM
| link to this | reply
Proven Right Once Again!
Once again, now everyone read this carefully: AIDS is not a disease you have to worry about UNLESS YOU INVITE IT! What part of this do people do not understand. AIDS is a disease of choice. If you practice unsafe sex with many partners then you increase your chances. Obviously, if you are a gay male then your chances increase. Interesting isn't it? It brings you to an interesting conclusion about homosexual sex doesn't it? I don't have to elaborate on that. Great post JanesOpinion! As for the patients dying of this horrible disease, I understand that starvation may be a painless and beautiful final experience choice for them. Wouldn't you agree with that, Barney Franks?
posted by
RedStatesMan
on April 10, 2005 at 7:43 PM
| link to this | reply
Sadly, Taps, I think you're probably right.
Thanks for stopping by. . . .
posted by
JanesOpinion
on April 10, 2005 at 5:55 AM
| link to this | reply
JanesO - I think it will get worse before it gets better.
posted by
TAPS.
on April 9, 2005 at 7:38 PM
| link to this | reply
Ha! CP, that's a good one.
Prions -- the next medical battle. I think I'd rather die of my own self destructive habits (i.e. chocolate) than to lose my marbles from an attack of the prions.
posted by
JanesOpinion
on April 9, 2005 at 1:12 PM
| link to this | reply
What?!?!?
Sex with ten separate partners in a month? Where did he find the time and the energy?!?!? And this was cutting down on his usual quota. Sigh. Bring on the chocolate, it's prion free.
posted by
Cherry_Pie
on April 9, 2005 at 12:58 PM
| link to this | reply
Yes Burly, some way more than others.
I have avoided countless affairs as written of in this sad scenario . . . but I do love chocolate!
posted by
JanesOpinion
on April 9, 2005 at 11:20 AM
| link to this | reply
To me, all it says is that we are by nature, self destructive.
posted by
Burly
on April 9, 2005 at 10:40 AM
| link to this | reply