Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

The TRUTH about being gay:Follow

#77 Jun 29 2005 at 3:21 PM Rating: Decent
**
329 posts
Of course I find it disturbing. More sad, really. However, gay people do not alone share blame for the spread of the disease.

Furthermore, the statistics become even more sad when you look at other countries, where the disease is spread mostly through heterosexual contact and drug use.
#78 Jun 29 2005 at 3:23 PM Rating: Excellent
...and more from black people than from white people. Nevermind that I'm not responsible for the behaviour of others, just of my own behaviour. I don't have unprotected sex, I don't shoot up, and I can count on one finger the number of sexual partners I've had THIS YEAR. So, I guess I'm a "natural ***" as opposed to all those disease-carrying "unnatural ****"?

Keep trying Varrus, you almost made sense for a moment.
#79 Jun 29 2005 at 3:23 PM Rating: Excellent
Code Monkey
Avatar
****
7,476 posts
serious question: do gay guys just tend not to use condoms, compared to straight people? Since you can't get anyone pregnant, that removes half the purpose, but the other half of not getting diseases is still sorta important too.
____________________________
Do what now?
#80 Jun 29 2005 at 3:28 PM Rating: Excellent
Well, I always thought that with the pill and the contraceptive injections available, condoms were more for disease prevention than birth control these days anyway. I can't speak for anyone else, but I've never NOT used condoms during sex, at least not until both of us have been tested and a strong degree of trust has developed in our relationship. Meaning, only with one person have I ever had unprotected sex, and we were in a relationship for almost three years before we decided to dispense with condoms.
#81 Jun 29 2005 at 3:30 PM Rating: Excellent
Code Monkey
Avatar
****
7,476 posts
well, I have to use them since my fiancee has reactly badly to all of the birth control stuff she's been given (tend to really mess with her cycle, in sorta nasty ways).

potentially nastier question: is there a higher chance of one breaking the condom in buttsex?
____________________________
Do what now?
#82 Jun 29 2005 at 3:31 PM Rating: Decent
**
329 posts
Dana, at one point, condom use was incredibly high. Unfortunately, the "safe sex" message became diluted (welcome to the world of "abstinence only" sex ed). There were fewer ads, budgets for various AIDS projects were cut, and the availability of condoms at clubs became far more rare. It appears that younger gay men are sensing an invulnerability and not heeding what was learned in the past. Additionally, with the medications available, people are living longer with the disease. Some feel a cure will be found at some point in the near future. Therefore, the pressure to engage in safe sex has lessened. Apparently some think that they'll never get the disease, or if they do, they'll live long enough to participate in a cure.

The closest major city to where I live suffers most from HIV transmission among women who are prostitutes and drug users. Therefore, the focus there is more aimed at drug abuse and the gay folks really aren't getting any message. The AIDSProject group in the city faced major budget cuts and so focused their attention on the group most affected.
#83 Jun 29 2005 at 3:31 PM Rating: Good
Ministry of Silly Cnuts
*****
19,524 posts
Hey Varus. Did you know that 40% is less than most? Who'da thunk, huh!

When those fu[/i]cking baptists get gills they might survive the dunking in the pool of baby jaysus and stop spouting hate-theories.

Sabo you ******. Where the fu[i]
ck did this 'Nobby=Fanboy' come from? Quit eying up the cutesy lawnmower guy and answer me!

Oh, and rate-ups and a communal PottyMouth Rack TM to all those who rose to virus's trolling.
____________________________
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
#84 Jun 29 2005 at 3:35 PM Rating: Excellent
Well, without getting too graphic, that area of the body is much tighter than a ****** so there's a lot more friction. When I was a youth counsellor for gay teens, one of the things we told them was that when you're having **** sex, it's best to wear two condoms so that if one breaks you still have that failsafe. We also had to teach the lesbians how to cut a condom properly for use as a dental dam. I tried to avoid that whole issue though, I never felt comfortable talking about sex with minors. Even when I did, I always had another counsellor around just so I couldn't be accused of saying or doing anything inappropriate.
#85 Jun 29 2005 at 3:35 PM Rating: Decent
**
329 posts
Quote:
is there a higher chance of one breaking the condom in buttsex?


Only if you're exceptionally clumsy and don't use lube. Course, straight folks who engage in **** sex face the same problem...
#86 Jun 29 2005 at 3:36 PM Rating: Excellent
Code Monkey
Avatar
****
7,476 posts
damn, two condoms? trojan really should market to gay men then, double the profits!
____________________________
Do what now?
#87 Jun 29 2005 at 3:36 PM Rating: Excellent
Nobby, (and what's with the new name?) that was just a joke based on the whole "well-thought arguments, latin teacher blah blah blah" thing. =D
#88 Jun 29 2005 at 3:37 PM Rating: Excellent
Code Monkey
Avatar
****
7,476 posts
he was part of the "I hate my name and want a more retarded one" bandwagon, along with gooooooose and twizzler
____________________________
Do what now?
#89 Jun 29 2005 at 3:40 PM Rating: Decent
Potty,

Quote:
Hey Varus. Did you know that 40% is less than most? Who'da thunk, huh!


Did you realize homosexuals comprise less than 1% of the population. Now look at that stat again.

Varus
#90 Jun 29 2005 at 3:45 PM Rating: Excellent
Kinsey said it was 10% (I don't think it's that high myself) and your own Baptist Press thingy grudgingly admitted that it was between 1% and 2%, and now you're saying it's less than 1%? You can't even stick to a simple number, yet you expect people to believe anything else you say?

Ok, I've given you your chance, but clearly you don't have enough working brain cells to rub together to form a cohesive argument. And the lawn guys are finally done mowing (bastards), so I'm done with this conversation, at least until I get home from work. Hopefully someone will have posed a more serious and logical argument by then. I do love a proper debate.
#91 Jun 29 2005 at 3:49 PM Rating: Decent
Quote:
yet you expect people to believe anything else you say?


I expect nothing of the sort. What I do hope for is that each of you seriously question that which you hold to be true, despite evidence to the contrary.

Varus
#92 Jun 29 2005 at 3:53 PM Rating: Good
*****
12,735 posts
(Little late, but...)


Smiley: laugh!!!!


+ 1 Kakar

+ 1 Sabo


(...stupid job!)
#93 Jun 29 2005 at 3:54 PM Rating: Excellent
Code Monkey
Avatar
****
7,476 posts
What evidence? Even if you say that AIDS is specifically targetting gay people, how is that saying that's unnatural? That's like saying being black is unnatural since sickle cell is almost completely confined to people of African descent. Hell, even looking at the AIDS statistics, you could say that being black is unnatural because they get AIDS more often even though they're a much smaller population segment.

So other than diseases, do you have anything to offer, that constitutes actual evidence and not just statements of faith?
____________________________
Do what now?
#94 Jun 29 2005 at 3:55 PM Rating: Default
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
varrussword wrote:
Quote:
yet you expect people to believe anything else you say?


I expect nothing of the sort. What I do hope for is that each of you seriously question that which you hold to be true, despite evidence to the contrary.

Smiley: laugh Oh, the irony!
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#95 Jun 29 2005 at 3:55 PM Rating: Excellent
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,659 posts
Very good post, Sabo, but it's all for naught. Remember, God hates ****!
____________________________
Jophiel wrote:
I managed to be both retarded and entertaining.

#96 Jun 29 2005 at 4:07 PM Rating: Good
Official Shrubbery Waterer
*****
14,659 posts
Quote:
he was part of the "I hate my name and want a more retarded one" bandwagon, along with gooooooose and twizzler
Pfft, I started that bandwagon. I can't help it if I'm a trend-setter.
____________________________
Jophiel wrote:
I managed to be both retarded and entertaining.

#97 Jun 29 2005 at 4:13 PM Rating: Decent
Quote:
That's like saying being black is unnatural since sickle cell is almost completely confined to people of African descent.


I see we've returned to the nature vs. nurture arguement. Homosexuals have a choice people predisposed to certain ailments don't. Is that a difficult concept for you to grasp?

Varus
#98 Jun 29 2005 at 4:20 PM Rating: Decent
**
329 posts
Quote:
I see we've returned to the nature vs. nurture arguement. Homosexuals have a choice people predisposed to certain ailments don't. Is that a difficult concept for you to grasp?


I see you've not read ANY of the studies about the genetic connection and homosexuality.
#99 Jun 29 2005 at 4:21 PM Rating: Excellent
Code Monkey
Avatar
****
7,476 posts
varrussword wrote:
I see we've returned to the nature vs. nurture arguement. Homosexuals have a choice people predisposed to certain ailments don't. Is that a difficult concept for you to grasp?


I see we've returned to the issue of faith vs facts. You can't prove that it's nurture and not nature, so it's not a fact, it's faith. Is that a difficult concept for you to grasp?
____________________________
Do what now?
#100 Jun 29 2005 at 4:31 PM Rating: Decent
Quote:
You can't prove that it's nurture and not nature, so it's not a fact, it's faith. Is that a difficult concept for you to grasp?


And you can't prove that it's nature, so it's not a fact.

Varus
#101 Jun 29 2005 at 4:32 PM Rating: Excellent
Code Monkey
Avatar
****
7,476 posts
varrussword wrote:
Quote:
You can't prove that it's nurture and not nature, so it's not a fact, it's faith. Is that a difficult concept for you to grasp?


And you can't prove that it's nature, so it's not a fact.

Varus


Umm... that's exactly my point. It's not a fact, so you can't show me any facts, making you statement about showing us facts totally void.
____________________________
Do what now?
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 270 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (270)