All right , call it "marrage" and be gay monogamous

[Plane]

http://mobile.wnd.com/2013/04/anotherkiller-disease-striking-homosexuals/

Promiscuity kills, I don't think that gay marriage is real marriage at all , but would there be less transmission of disease with gay marriage having full recognition than there is now?


Oh wait,...."Los Angeles and New York."

    So the new "gay plague" disease is happening where full recognition of homosexual marriage is already accomplished.

     Never mind, back to the disapproval and opprobrium I had before.


      By the way , I am curious to see whether President Obama spring into action and take effective measures, in exactly the way that President Reagan did not in the early part of the AIDS pandemic.

   Reagan got a lot of criticism for acting as if AIDS was not the end of the world.

[Plane]

Wait a minute???

If you hit question mark three times you get a smiley with a raised eyebrow???


   


??  ??

Hmmmmm.   ?


Sometimes you do and sometimes you don't, there must be a rule I don't know.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Reagan should clearly have paid more heed to AIDS.
It would have been a minimal cost, and lives would have been saved.
I do not think that gay marriage would have any significant effect on the transmission of AIDS.

[Plane]

http://mobile.wnd.com/2014/06/fox-news-star-jumps-into-gay-christianity/


Well if Jesus tells me in person that gay marriage is a good idea , that would be different.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Jesus is mute. He be lak' de tarbaby. He doan' say nuttin'

[Plane]

Jesus is mute. He be lak' de tarbaby. He doan' say nuttin'

Are you sure you have been listening?

[kimba1]

the issue about these gay illnesses is not all these people are gay and us straight folks will mistakenly believe we`re immune to it. it`s an issue of promiscuity and orientation. that third orientation which both sides refuse to acknowledge is a factor of risk.

[Xavier_Onassis]

I don't think anyone who knows anything about AIDS thinks they are immune, whether they are gay or straight. It is not promiscuity that breeds diseases, it is promiscuity with people who are infected. Being married is not in itself something that affects staying healthy or being infected, though the way people might behave differently if they are married could make a difference. Science and morality are not all that connected, after all.

I imagine that if Jesus had something to say and made a public appearance once in a while ti would make a major difference. But for a prophet/messiah, he was not all that communicative. He could have written the Gospel According the Jesus Christ and it would surely have been better than what we do have in the New Testament. People who hear voices others do not hear are, well, hearing voices.

[Plane]

Reagan should clearly have paid more heed to AIDS.
It would have been a minimal cost, and lives would have been saved.
I do not think that gay marriage would have any significant effect on the transmission of AIDS.

  Really?

Like President Obama is about to do?

I don't think it will make the difference you imagine it will.

You don't think that gay marriage is serious marriage?

[kimba1]

I believe this illness has a much easier transmission vector(kissing) so straight men simply gonna not makeout with unknown women from now on. How difficult can that posdibly be??

[Xavier_Onassis]

I don't think it will make the difference you imagine it will.

Reagan did not address AIDS at all. Following governments have done more, including funding research. I understand that AIDS is no longer a death sentence, and people with AIDS are living decades longer. I had no idea at the time what would be possible, but it turns out that there has been a huge difference, and had Reagan paid attention sooner, probably lives would have been saved.

You don't think that gay marriage is serious marriage?

I don't have a great opinion of marriage for gay or straight people. Any marriage is a serious as the couple can make it, whether they are gay or straight. The biggest obstacle to a permanent marriage is that people change throughout their lives, and much oif the time each member of the couple changes in a way that makes living together quite difficult or even impossible.

 I have no idea whether gay married people are more or less faithful or careful with protection against AIDS than straight people. I just think that couple who wishes to marry should have the legal right to do so.  I can't imagine what I said that caused you to think that I consider gay marriages "less serious". I have noticed that Rick Scott, aka Governor Skeletor, was once rabidly anti gay marriage and now his ads say nothing about it. His campaign ads accusing Charlie Crist of corruption are so silly  and false that he refuses to comment on them. 

[Plane]

I believe this illness has a much easier transmission vector(kissing) so straight men simply gonna not makeout with unknown women from now on. How difficult can that posdibly be??

  I don't have any information on why this outbreak is picking gay persons .

   Possibly just the circle of friends that it has hit first and no one is any more or less vulnerable.

    In the US AIDS seems to like gay males best, but this might be different , I don't know.

    But keeping men from kissing strange women is one of the things wives do, I don't know if husbands keep their husband so in check , I guess my interest isn't all that serious.

[kimba1]

It's more and issue of percieved threat. Putting the gay label will make people act more careless believing thier  somewhat immune becuse thier not gay.  I remember many christain groups who are against condom by saying the virus is smaller than the microholes on a condom. This fact is true but they tend forget the fact it does not mean the virus can go throught those holes infect people which it cant.  Ex. Water molecules are smaller than viruses and condoms are waterproof.

[Xavier_Onassis]

AIDS has affected a greater number of gays in the US because the disease entered this country through the gay male community. The percentage of gay men who were infected was many times greater than the percentage of hetero men. Gay women were far less likely to become infected because gay women are not into anal sex except perhaps with dildos. Gay men do not have sex with hetero women all that often. In Africa, AIDS is at least as common among hetero men and women as it is among gay men. The men who spread it about in Africa tended to be intercity truck drivers, who infected female prostitutes.

I think a lot of fundie Christians continue to see AIDS as some sort of device that God is using  for punishing gay sex, just as they always though of syphilis and gonorrhea as a device God uses to punish infidelity and reward chastity. The idea that diseases are divine punishments goes way back, but the fact is that microbes, viruses and germs are not into enforcing morality. They are just looking for a home.

Experts claim that one cannot get AIDS from kissing. I suppose that it is technically possible, as it is a blood borne disease, so if you had bleeding gums and kissed a woman with bleeding gums perhaps transmission is possible. But of course, perhaps saliva prevents this. You are far more likely to catch a flu or mononucleosis from kissing.

[Plane]

    In Africa Heterosexuals are suffering a lot of Aids. Once in the bloodstream the virus doesn't care who you are.

     The bible prohibits a lot of stuff, mostly stuff that is a bad idea.

      Supposing there were no scripture , homosexuality and promiscuity would still be a bad idea and the germs that come along with the easy transmission path are only one of several reasons that this is so.

        Ebola is a lot more transmissible than Aids , and a faster killer, several of the infected with Ebola recently have been medical missionaries that came to help. There is a scripture about the rain falling on the just and the unjust alike, but it seems that Christian duty can lead a person to run into the rain sometimes .