Quote :

"committing a homosexual act with someone under eighteen."

So statutory rape is ok if it is man on man contact?

12/6/2009 10:39:03 PM

Aliens like cream cheese on toast?

12/6/2009 10:42:36 PM

you two are so disillusioned that you will mistate the facts about what is going on in Uganda to try to make a point. The legislation is most definitely over HIV.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/africa/article6935558.ece

Quote :

"According to Clause 2 of the Bill, a person who is convicted of gay sex is liable to life imprisonment. But if that person is also HIV positive the penalty — under the heading “aggravated homosexuality” — is death"

You're either deeply confused, Optimum and GoldenViper, or attempting to hide your heterophobia behind a veil of lies and feel-good arguments. Have you even read the new bill? It specifically mentions HIV as one of the main problems with homosexual sex. Uganda has gone to great lengths to reduce their HIV infection rate, and this is just another continuation of those efforts.


I have nothing against gay people, but I'm sick and tired of seeing gay people try to claim that AIDS / HIV isn't predominantly spread through the gay community. Optimum personally tried to deny that issue earlier in this thread, and when you realized that wouldn't work you try to attack me by claiming that I'm supporting genocide. No where in this thread did I endorse what they are doing. I merely showed what the current problems are in Uganda and what would happen if they carried forward with this legislature. You're so jaded about this issue that you can't even look at the other side of the argument without getting your blood boiling.

a lot of people in this country would have no problem with executing gay pedophiles, and that's the only other offense punishable by death beside HIV. Haven't we handed out murder sentences in this country for people with HIV that knowingly gave the disease to other people?

[Edited on December 6, 2009 at 11:01 PM. Reason : more]

12/6/2009 10:56:24 PM

Maybe that's because you're trying to tell two gay people that they're what's wrong with the world. You accuse us of hiding behind "feel good" this and "feel good" that, but you're the one that's causing us to defend ourselves in the most personal of terms.

Just admit that you support state-sponsored genocide of gay people. You've already said that it would have been best in the 1980s, why stop there? Go ahead, make the final logical step. All you have to offer here is statistics that say HIV = gay. You're so sure of yourself, so go ahead and take that next step.

[Edited on December 6, 2009 at 11:03 PM. Reason : fuck you.]

12/6/2009 11:01:25 PM

just stating the facts. many cases of HIV in the eighties that were attributed to heterosexual sex and drug use were misreported, because it was more socially acceptable to admit to sex with a hooker or getting high than to admit to homosexuality. When you take that into consideration, the prevalence of HIV transmission through homosexual sex is astonishing.

12/6/2009 11:04:25 PM

Quote :

"the US never had 25% of it's population infected with HIV, so it's never been the crisis here that it was in Uganda."

Quote :

"You're either deeply confused, Optimum and GoldenViper, or attempting to hide your heterophobia"

Quote :

"You're so jaded about this issue that you can't even look at the other side of the argument without getting your blood boiling."

Dudes, I think this guy has a point, you aren't even seriously considering killing/jailing 25% of a country's population as a viable option. Stop being so unreasonable.

12/6/2009 11:05:18 PM

it was 25% in the eighties, and they've gotten it down to 5%. they're trying to make sure if never gets back to 25% like it still is in some parts of Africa.

[Edited on December 6, 2009 at 11:10 PM. Reason : HIV / AIDS has a way of taking care of the infected on its own, so it doesn't take long to reduce]

12/6/2009 11:09:05 PM

Fine. We'll have some fun with logic.

You believe that because HIV is transmitted by homosexuals (and for the purpose of this example, I'll let you say that they're the majority reason), and therefore homosexuals should be removed from society and persecuted or killed. They need to be removed even if they have committed no acts that harm another person.

I believe that the majority of murders and rapes committed in this country are committed by heterosexuals. Therefore, heterosexuals should be removed from society and persecuted or killed. They need to be removed even if they have committed no acts that harm another person.

12/6/2009 11:11:24 PM

^^where is the cut off line between 5% and 25% that makes it okay to kill or incarcerate a swath of a countries population as a solution to a problem?

12/6/2009 11:14:52 PM

Read the actual bill and stop lying, eleusis:

http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2009/10/15/15609

As far as heterophobia goes, I'll admit I'm scared of folks promoting and accepting criminal penalties against homosexual acts.

Characterizing HIV as a gay problem both completely erases queer women and grossly simplifies male homosexual practices. Unprotected receptive anal, oral, or vaginal sex with a man carries the highest risk of HIV transmissions. Such sex acts stretch beyond the gay male community.

For maximum safety, all men should be abstinent and women be lesbians. If you're determined to reduce HIV rates, advocate that.

12/6/2009 11:25:34 PM

Quote :

"and for the purpose of this example, I'll let you say that they're the majority reason"

you don't have to "let" me say it. the WHO says it, and they overtrump anything you'll ever try to use to as a rebuttal.

Quote :

"Unprotected receptive anal, oral, or vaginal sex with a man carries the highest risk of HIV transmissions. Such sex acts stretch beyond the gay male community"

anal sex is extremely higher than the other two. oral sex is extremely difficult to get HIV through, and anal sex is several magnitudes more likely to transmit HIV than vaginal sex. don't sugar coat the facts to try to make a point.

12/6/2009 11:41:50 PM

Receptive anal intercourse is the most risky, being five times more likely to transmit than receptive vaginal intercourse. Insertive anal intercourse, on the other hand, is only slightly more risky than insertive vaginal intercourse.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIV

12/6/2009 11:48:52 PM

so is it common for gay men to only pitch and not catch?

12/6/2009 11:54:39 PM

jesus christ. you don't reduce a disease by criminalizing people with high risk factors for a disease. you do it through education and access to condoms, clean needles etc. i can't believe that anyone could be arguing for this atrocity of a law.

12/7/2009 12:56:32 AM

Quote :

"women be lesbians."

you wish!

12/7/2009 1:25:12 AM

Gencide advcation ITT.

(no appropriate smiley to express my disgust)

12/7/2009 5:10:55 AM

Quote :

"you don't have to "let" me say it. the WHO says it, and they overtrump anything you'll ever try to use to as a rebuttal."

Oh NO! Now who's got nothing to come back with? You really are a sick fuck for thinking it's a good idea to murder people because they're gay or because they have a disease. You're trying your best to hide your homophobia behind a veil of statistics and population control measures.

So I'll pose a question. If you caught something incurable, oh I dunno, we'll say ebola. Should the federal government immediately arrest and/or murder you?

If your answer is anything other than yes, you're a hypocrite. If your answer is yes, then you're a fucking idiot. You pick.

12/7/2009 8:49:34 AM

12/7/2009 3:46:20 PM

Quote :

"If you caught something incurable, oh I dunno, we'll say ebola. Should the federal government immediately arrest and/or murder you? "

are you talking about based on current conditions in this country, or based on this country having a very serious ebola epidemic that was being spread through irresponsible lifestyle choices and was responsible for killing off nearly a quarter of this country's population only a few years ago?

12/7/2009 8:20:47 PM

Can you not answer a question? I couldn't have made it more plain.

12/7/2009 8:26:38 PM

Quote :

"being spread through irresponsible lifestyle choices"

Remember, queers don't necessarily engage in riskier sexual practices than straights. The association of HIV with gay men comes out of particular historical circumstances.

12/7/2009 8:46:12 PM

Quote :

"So I'll pose a question. If you caught something incurable, oh I dunno, we'll say ebola. Should the federal government immediately arrest and/or murder you? "

To be fair, and I want to state up front I really don't agree with eleusis, mandatory quarantine is still a tactic used in many countries (including the US) to prevent the spread of disease. Granted with the exception of one person we haven't used it since the 60's, but it's not off the table either.

That said, there is a significant difference between quarantining and arresting those spreading a disease, and arresting anyone who engages in activities that put them at risk.

12/7/2009 9:14:19 PM

putting people in prison is the perfect solution to a problem they perceive to be caused by unprotected gay sex. what a marvelous plan!

12/7/2009 9:26:21 PM

Quote :

"That said, there is a significant difference between quarantining and arresting those spreading a disease, and arresting anyone who engages in activities that put them at risk."

Yeah, and then there's this law, which covers activities that never transmit HIV.

12/7/2009 9:29:20 PM

Quote :

"Remember, queers don't necessarily engage in riskier sexual practices than straights."

LOL

12/7/2009 9:30:32 PM

do you have any evidence to the contrary, eleusis?

12/7/2009 9:37:13 PM

^^yuck it up. because it's true. and just to get the record straight, you're in favor of arresting and/or killing people because of who they're attracted to. . .

[Edited on December 7, 2009 at 9:56 PM. Reason : .]

12/7/2009 9:50:01 PM

of course he doesn't have evidence. all he has are OMG FAGS HAVE TEH AIDS statistics. the problem with statistics about diseases like that is that they're never going to have precision, because they deal with disease and human beings. AIDS and HIV have a stigma. Most cases of most illness are under reported, this is no different.

12/7/2009 10:07:41 PM

I'd like to see some evidence to back up the outrageous claims you are making, because the higher prevalence of HIV, syphillis, hepatitis, herpes, and anal cancer among homosexual men seems to speak to the contrary. They might not be as likely to have the hundred or more partners that the majority of gay men reported having in the late seventies, but the higher risk practices are obviously still there.

12/7/2009 10:19:27 PM

Quote :

"just to get the record straight, you're in favor of arresting and/or killing people because of who they're attracted to. . ."

12/7/2009 10:23:35 PM

post your facts

12/7/2009 10:26:50 PM

Quote :

"just to get the record straight, you're in favor of arresting and/or killing people because of who they're attracted to. . ."

12/7/2009 10:29:49 PM

Quote :

"and just to get the record straight, you're in favor of arresting and/or killing people because of who they're attracted to. . ."

I've said nothing of the sort. ya'll need to reread the thread if you think I've stated even once in this thread that I was in favor of what they're doing. I've stated that I don't give a fuck what happens in Uganda, but that wasn't a vote of support.

[Edited on December 7, 2009 at 10:31 PM. Reason : .]

12/7/2009 10:31:07 PM

you've gone out of your way to advocate that they're doing it as a disease control thing, and that's a factual interpretation of your position.

ergo...

Quote :

""just to get the record straight, you're in favor of arresting and/or killing people because of who they're attracted to. . .""

take your "logic" to its conclusion.

[Edited on December 7, 2009 at 10:32 PM. Reason : ']

12/7/2009 10:32:27 PM

This is begging the question, right here.

I don't think you've convinced us yet that genocide is the appropriate method of handling problematic subsets of society.

12/7/2009 10:33:05 PM

^ Respectfully, HIV-positive gay people are not a "problem sect" of society.

12/7/2009 10:38:08 PM

I mean, certainly not compared to other sects of society.

12/7/2009 10:40:28 PM

interpreting their reasons has absolutely nothing to do with condoning it. I'm just laying out the facts in this thread.

12/7/2009 10:41:09 PM

except that you've stated that their reasons for doing it were disease control. in FACT, that isn't true. it's based on religion-fuel fear, which has been amply backed up with FACT in this thread.

YOUR facts are being used to advocate genocide. you're intellectually dishonest for claiming otherwise.

12/7/2009 10:44:52 PM

^^^^ absolutely, but he's presuming that homosexuals are in sum a problem, and that genocide is an appropriate solution for such a problem.

I think he needs to convince us of the latter before we waste or time arguing the former.

[Edited on December 7, 2009 at 10:46 PM. Reason : ]

12/7/2009 10:45:48 PM

It's outrageous to claim queer men don't have to engage in risky sexual practices? While many do, that's a specific product of the current circumstances. It ain't definitional or universal. Anal sex didn't always dominate man-to-man sexuality. There's a movement away from it in sections of the present queer male community.

12/7/2009 10:47:15 PM

facts, not opinion. show them.

12/7/2009 11:02:11 PM

Quote :

"just to get the record straight, you're in favor of arresting and/or killing people because of who they're attracted to. . ."

12/7/2009 11:04:01 PM

Quote :

"just to set the record straight, you tried to deny that homosexuals spread HIV / AIDS"

12/7/2009 11:05:50 PM

Intellectual honesty, RIP.

12/7/2009 11:10:04 PM

Quote :

"Optimum All American 6541 Posts user info edit post I know you're not accusing homosexuals of spreading HIV/AIDS. "

12/7/2009 11:11:30 PM

Quote :

"facts, not opinion. show them."

http://man2manalliance.org/crw/frot/dictator.html

(Site NSFW if you scroll down too far.)

That's a sample of the movement against anal sex. There's of course also protected anal intercourse, which many advocate. As such, it's ridiculous to claim that queer males always and inherently spread HIV.

12/7/2009 11:13:18 PM

Only an idiot would interpret that as some sort of denial. But, you seem to enjoy playing that role. You got me GOOD, kid! No way my words could mean ANYTHING other than a blanket denial.

12/7/2009 11:14:31 PM

facts about how homosexual men don't engage in riskier behavior as a group than heterosexual people, not what some small group is advocating. That is what you stated earlier, so prove it. there's a mountain of evidence to the contrary, so I'd like to see where you are getting your facts from.

12/7/2009 11:15:05 PM

Quote :

"GoldenViper: Remember, queers don't necessarily engage in riskier sexual practices than straights."

I think you missed a key word.

12/7/2009 11:19:22 PM