The "Gay Agenda"[W:504]

[winston53660]

You have not said that gay men were at greater risk for HIV than straights. In fact, you seem to always be harping on people who use protection versus those who do not, sexual orientation notwithstanding.

Worldwide most infections are heterosexual. The risk is greatest in low income countries.

 

[calamity]

I don't recall arguing against it. You are welcome to point out which post you think I stated such a thing. I won't hold my breath.

quotes like this

This behavior wouldn't infect a straight person?

which obviously cannot be true if so few white hetero men not get HIV that they did not even register on the chart while gay white men led the charge of recent HIV infections.

 

[calamity]

Worldwide most infections are heterosexual. The risk is greatest in low income countries.

Agreed. POC seem to be most susceptible to the disease for one reason or another. Even here in the US, if we combine both the MSM black males with black males claiming to be heterosexual who are newly HIV positive, they outnumber recently infected gay white males.

 

[CLAX1911]

You have not said that gay men were at greater risk for HIV than straights.

Lies

Posts 2237-2238, 2241

 

[Verthaine]

I don't hate gay men. I am indifferent to them.

So you say,but page after page after page after page does not say "indifference". That says hate.

My point in arguing here is to show that the gay agenda exists,

Which you have failed to do so. Now lets talk about YOUR agenda.

one avenue it being to equate homosexual sex with heterosexual sex,

Sex is sex. I sure as hell shouldn't have to explain that to grown person.If my wife gives me a blow job,is she having "hooker sex" with me? Two adults having sex is two adults having sex. No one is required to put on labels you seem to be demanding they do

especially with regards to risk of contracting HIV.

The way you have been going about it,it is as if you are trying to convince everyone here that gays having sex with one another guarantees contracting HIV.

 

[CLAX1911]

quotes like this


which obviously cannot be true if so few white hetero men not get HIV that they did not even register on the chart while gay white men led the charge of recent HIV infections.

I asked a question.

 

[CLAX1911]

Agreed. POC seem to be most susceptible to the disease for one reason or another. Even here in the US, if we combine both the MSM black males with black males claiming to be heterosexual who are newly HIV positive, they outnumber recently infected gay white males.

Well than by your logic it's a black disease.

 

[calamity]

Yes I have, you are lying.
That is the pivotal issue is it not?

No, protection is not the pivotal issue, unless you are telling me all white male heterosexuals are using condoms now, which we both know they are not. The only explanation for why white heterosexuals who do not wear condoms are not getting HIV while white men who have sex with men (who do not wear condoms) are getting the disease is the gay sex. White MSM are being exposed to HIV. Whereas white men having vaginal sex are not being exposed to the disease.

We do not know, at least I have not seen a clear cut reason spelled out yet, as to why back heterosexual men are getting the disease. I suspect it may be due to taboo in the black community which is distorting the self-reporting of bisexual black men. But, there may be other factors involved, of course.

 

[Zinthaniel]

That homosexual men are at just as much risk to get HIV as straight men. But, if I am wrong about you saying that, feel free to admit that gay men are at much higher risk for HIV infection than straights.

You asking Clax to agree to a lie. Gay men who have unprotected sex are at a high risk for the contraction of any std. That high risk does not differ for anybody depending on their sexuality. Especially when it comes to unprotected anal sex.

 

[Zinthaniel]

You should drop the charade and just admit that gay men are at much higher risk of getting HIV than straight men.

No - He definitely should not. It is important that the truth in regards to contraction and risk factors be represented and used as refutation to what is ignorant claims and lies on your part.

 

[calamity]

Well than by your logic it's a black disease.

It did come out of Africa. So, there may be a component of the disease which makes POC more vulnerable. It's being studied.

African-Americans Genetically Prone to HIV, AIDS | Mother Jones

 

[CLAX1911]

So you say,but page after page after page after page does not say "indifference". That says hate.

Which you have failed to do so. Now lets talk about YOUR agenda.



Sex is sex. I sure as hell shouldn't have to explain that to grown person.If my wife gives me a blow job,is she having "hooker sex" with me? Two adults having sex is two adults having sex. No one is required to put on labels you seem to be demanding they do


The way you have been going about it,it is as if you are trying to convince everyone here that gays having sex with one another guarantees contracting HIV.

Agenda | Define Agenda at Dictionary.com

a list, plan, outline, or the like, of things to be done, matters to be acted or voted upon, etc.:

I readily admit there is a list, plan, outline of things to be acted or voted upon in regards to homosexuality. But every church, political committee, boy scout meeting, or mother with a shopping list has an agenda.

 

[calamity]

No - He definitely should not. It is important that the truth in regards to contraction and risk factors be represented and used as refutation to what is ignorant claims and lies on your part.

Stop it. It is a mathematical fact that MSM get HIV at much higher rates than straights. Now quit the BS!

 

[CLAX1911]

It did come out of Africa. So, there may be a component of the disease which makes POC more vulnerable. It's being studied.

African-Americans Genetically Prone to HIV, AIDS | Mother Jones

So it isn't a gay disease it's a black disease and apparently the civil rights movement was a conspiracy to cover this up right? And being black is abnormal because well most white people aren't?

Sorry I am just applying your logic

 

[Zinthaniel]

No, protection is not the pivotal issue

Protection is the pivotal issue. How can you have possibly deluded you self into thinking it is not.

unless you are telling me all white male heterosexuals are using condoms now, which we both know they are not.

Firstly, white men are not the only Heterosexuals. So you argument has shifted from claiming that heterosexuals are not at a equally as high risk of contracting stds during unprotected sex - to now claiming that it is only White men.

White men do contract stds though - including HIV. And they are contracting the disease in the same way homosexuals are. Through unprotected sex.

The only explanation for why white heterosexuals who do not wear condoms are not getting HIV while white men who have sex with men (who do not wear condoms) are getting the disease is the gay sex.

And yet you explanation here is conveniently looking over every other heterosexual who is not a white male but is contracting HIV by the thousands yearly. As is pointed out in your own sources. And they all, these heterosexuals, are contracting the disease through unprotected sex.

White MSM are being exposed to HIV. Whereas white men having vaginal sex are not being exposed to the disease.

Because of unprotected. It has nothing to with them being white or homosexuals.

We do not know, at least I have not seen a clear cut reason spelled out yet, as to why back heterosexual men are getting the disease.

We do know and it has been explained to you thoroughly now. It's called unprotected sex. It is not that complicated.

I suspect it may be due to taboo in the black community which is distorting the self-reporting of bisexual black men.

And as usual your assumption is based entirely on your ignorant bias.

But, there may be other factors involved, of course.

There is but one contributing factor that needs considering and it has nothing to do with sexuality.

 

[CLAX1911]

Stop it. It is a mathematical fact that MSM get HIV at much higher rates than straights. Now quit the BS!

So repeating things that people didn't argue against to avoid having to address the fact that you lied?

 

[Verthaine]

Agenda | Define Agenda at Dictionary.com

a list, plan, outline, or the like, of things to be done, matters to be acted or voted upon, etc.:

I readily admit there is a list, plan, outline of things to be acted or voted upon in regards to homosexuality. But every church, political committee, boy scout meeting, or mother with a shopping list has an agenda.

I am quite aware of what the definition of the word is. What I am also aware of is that the words "sinister" or "evil" does not appear in that definition.
But page after page after page after page you seem to be implying that gays have a "sinister/evil" agenda. Which you have failed to prove.
Now lets discuss whether or not YOU have sinister agenda regarding homosexual men.

 

[calamity]

Agenda | Define Agenda at Dictionary.com

a list, plan, outline, or the like, of things to be done, matters to be acted or voted upon, etc.:

I readily admit there is a list, plan, outline of things to be acted or voted upon in regards to homosexuality. But every church, political committee, boy scout meeting, or mother with a shopping list has an agenda.

I would not argue against this. The debate hinges more on what is being acted on and voted on than whether or not such activities exist.

 

[calamity]

I am quite aware of what the definition of the word is. What I am also aware of is that the words "sinister" or "evil" does not appear in that definition.
But page after page after page after you seem to be implying that gays have a "sinister/evil" agenda. Which you have failed to prove.
Now lets discuss whether or not YOU have sinister agenda regarding homosexual men.

lol, you're so used to arguing against the word agenda, you're confusing posters. You just responded to CLX.

 

[Zinthaniel]

Stop it. It is a mathematical fact that MSM get HIV at much higher rates than straights. Now quit the BS!

Stop what? Telling the truth?

No one has denied that homosexual men are contracting hiv at a high rate.

But you continue to ignore every inconvenient fact that does not support your vitriol.

One, the vast majority of homosexuals are not infected with stds.

And two, those who are contracting the stds, including HIV, are contracting these diseases because of unprotected sex. It has nothing to do with their sexual orientation.

 

[calamity]

So repeating things that people didn't argue against to avoid having to address the fact that you lied?

:roll:

 

[calamity]

Stop what? Telling the truth?

No one has denied that homosexual men are contracting hiv at a high rate.

But you continue to ignore every inconvenient fact that does not support your vitriol.

One, the vast majority of homosexuals are not infected with std.

And two, those who are contracting the stds, including HIV, are contracting these diseases because of unprotected sex. It has nothing to do with their sexual orientation.

1 in 5 MSM have HIV. That is a high rate. Sad is that you choose to downplay that.

 

[Verthaine]

lol, you're so used to arguing against the word agenda, you're confusing posters. You just responded to CLX.

I am aware of that,Having computer problems.Entirely my mistake.That's what I get for trying to multitask. My apologies to CLAX. At least one of us can admit when they are wrong,and it hasn't been you.

 

[calamity]

Protection is the pivotal issue. How can you have possibly deluded youself into thinking it is not.



Firstly, white men are not the only Heterosexuals. So you argument has shifted from claiming that heterosexuals are not at a equally as high risk of contracting stds during unprotected sex - to now claiming that it is only White men.

White men do contract stds though - including HIV. And they are contracting the disease in the same way homosexuals are. Through unprotected sex.



And yet you explanation here is conveniently looking over every other heterosexual who is not a white male but is contracting HIV by the thousands yearly. As is pointed out in your own sources. And they all, these heterosexuals, contracting the disease through unprotected sex.



Because of unprotected. It has nothing to with them being white or homosexuals.



We do know and it has been explained to you thoroughly now. It's called unprotected sex. It is not that complicated.



And as usual your assumption is based entirely on your ignorant bias.




There is but one contributing factor that needs considering and it has nothing to do with sexuality.

I am comparing apples to apples: white MSM versus white heterosexuals. White MSM are being infected at the highest rate of any group listed; white heterosexual males are not even on the chart.

 

[calamity]

I am aware of that,Having computer problems.Entirely my mistake.That's what I get for trying to multitask. My apologies to CLAX. At least one of us can admit when they are wrong,and it hasn't been you.

I am not wrong. You are.