AIDS is a gay disease just as cancer is a smoker's disease

[Flipper]

Have you heard of mononucleosis?
It's called the kissing disease.
Can you guess why?

Now you've heard of AIDS.
It's called the homosexual disease.
Can you guess why?

I don't think it's called the homosexual disease. My copy of the Evolution of Infectious Disease pegs it as HIV, and the statistics that have been posted over and over still show the highest rate of infection in the heterosexual population. And lots of people get mono without kissing anyone.

I think what your statement actually suggests is that diseases are opportunistic in spreading to new hosts, so any situation that involves close contact and vector exchanges is an ideal transmission mechanism. It's part of what makes a rather good example of evolutionary biology in action, as it it happens.

Are you prepared to start calling SARS the "traveller's disease"? Or Cholera the "poor sewage treatment disease"? I'm interested in knowing why STDs bend you out of shape so particularly. After all, they're the only ones directly linked with a specific sin, but they're generally not the biggest killers. Even HIV isn't yet as big a killer as influenza, nor is it ever likely to be.

As far as sins go, I can't but help notice that when I have visited 3rd world countries, I still see tobacco ads for products like Marlboro that don't have any health warnings, but looking over the duty free counter at Heathrow yesterday the UK versions were plastered in dire threats printed as boldly as you like.

Four million deaths world wide due to smoking, if I recall rightly and If the WHO forecasts are correct, smoking could become the world's biggest killer over the next 20 years, causing more deaths than HIV, tuberculosis, road accidents, murder and suicide put together. .

So how about it Tye? We know that the Board of Philip Morris are fully aware of the lethality and addictiveness of their product. Check it out on their own site if you like:

Cigarette Smoking and Disease in Smokers
Philip Morris USA agrees with the overwhelming medical and scientific consensus that cigarette smoking causes lung cancer, heart disease, emphysema and other serious diseases in smokers. Smokers are far more likely to develop serious diseases, like lung cancer, than non-smokers. There is no safe cigarette.

Addiction
Philip Morris USA agrees with the overwhelming medical and scientific consensus that cigarette smoking is addictive. It can be very difficult to quit smoking, but this should not deter smokers who want to quit from trying to do so.

Nevertheless, they are selling it to South Americans, Africans, and Indians as a stylish lifestyle choice while neglecting to mention to them what they readily admit to us.

Isn't that a sin, Tye? Doesn't that make them criminals? Aren't they deliberately killing million people overseas? Why aren't you all bent out of shape about that?

 

[Pierre]

The men in Africa are getting AIDS primarily from female sex trade workers.

Please outline the specific problems you have the W.H.O. statisitics.

It's part of the UN. The UN is an extremely pro-homosexual organization. So what's your reason for expecting unbiased facts from them? Or do you just believe everything written like most folks?

The bulk of the second half of your first paragraph indicates you do not understand how to use epidemiology to identify the features of the disease.

Me disagreeing with you doesn't make me ignorant. We weren't discussing what AIDS really is, we're discussing that homos mostly get it because of their perverse life style. If you want to start a new thread feel free to do so.

Bob Enyart, to my knowledge, is not an epidemiologist so he should probably try to refrain from describing diseases. Further to my knowledge, he is not involved in the diagnosis or treatment of infectious diseases. How a lay person chooses to think about disease is fine with me. However when they begin to make proclamations about the nature of a disease that are incorrect or maybe harmful then they should be accountable for their words.

He doesn't need to practice any form of medicine to read you statistics or deaths rates of homos. When he quotes doctors or organizations, he doesn't need to wave his certifications. He's not as egotistical as some doctors I know(looking in your direction). That's not a basis for dismissing the argument. You don't agree, fine, but I'd like to see some reason you disagree and not "I'm a doctor, the WHO says this and so there" garbage. Women don't transmit the disease to men on any level comparing to what men transmit it to other men at. So you need to address that point with some real evidence. It would be interesting for you to show us all some evidence that women have to be the cause.

AIDS is a syndrome characterized severe immune deficiency. It is caused by a virus. This virus can be transmitted through intimate contact with body fluids, including blood, saliva and semen.

We know that and no one is debating that. Stick to the topic.

Many human behaviours carry significant risk of acquisition (including occupational behaviours-- I'm a surgeon) because of the resultant bodily fluid exposure. Certainly homosexual behaviour is a risky behaviour, but worldwide epidemiology suggests that calling AIDS a homosexual disease is naive. ( I have already posted the statistics)

You know very well that certain behaivours are more at risk than others. A whore isn't likely to transmit it to a guy as a guy is to transmit it to another guy. I think you're just too afraid to admit that AIDS seems to be killing off far more homos per capita than normal men.

 

[Tye Porter]

Why aren't you all bent out of shape about that?

If you'd like to broaden our focus to include smoking on this thread, sure, I'll get bent out of shape with you.

Smoking is not listed as a sin, unless I've missed:

"Thou shalt not inhale tar and nicotine as thoust inhale nitrogen and oxygen.
It is an abomination unto the Lord."

Homosexuality and it's ensuing infectious agents are far more perverse and raunchy.
It is a sin and it is the topic of this thread.

 

[Flipper]

No, but deliberately selling someone an addictive poison without telling them what they're really buying seems like it might just fall under "thou shalt not kill", which I believe is part of something important in your faith. What was it again? The ten... the ten.. somethings. Well, you might remember what it is I'm talking about, I'm sure I can't.

But well dodged though. Very relativistic. I hope those who read this take note and draw their own conclusions.

 

[servent101]

Flipper

But well dodged though. Very relativistic. I hope those who read this take note and draw their own conclusions.

The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life - Some people really do believe smoking is not a sin - because there is no mention of it in the Bible - that is the way some people live their lives - by the letter, not by the Spirit.

With Christ's Love

Servent101

 

[Flipper]

The issue here is less whether smoking is a sin and more whether telling someone your product enhances their life when actually you know for a fact that it might kill them is sinful or not.

It's not about choosing to smoke. It's about withholding information that will save lives because you want to make money. This, incidentally, is relevant to the AIDs debate because:

a) like HIV, cigarettes are a pathway to a variety of diseases
b) cigarette-related disease will kill more people across the world than HIV
c) I am arguing that this is as much an issue of sin (in the Christian sense) as the lust that helps propagate HIV.

I doubt Tye's ever going to lose much sleep over either. I'm interested as to why sexual sin is so particularly enraging to him.

And Tye? Your new font color looks like pea-soup. You'll attract Freak's attention if you're not careful.

 

[Flipper]

After some thought, let me phrase this question differently to Tye in a way that he will probably consider more on-topic.

Tye, what is it that bothers you the most about AIDS? Why do gays and (as you added after some prompting) prostitutes irritate you so much? It's clearly not the number of deaths that unsafe sex with these groups contribute to because then, presumably, you'd have to be much angrier with bisexual males and family men who secretly see prostitutes for introducing it so effectively into the heterosexual population.

As I have demonstrated (I think), greed and the lust for money is going to kill far more people than AIDS, but that's something you seem to discount. Okay, so presumably its not the casualty rolls that affect you deeply.

Is it because sexual sinners are dying in a state of sin? What?

 

[Zakath]

...And Tye? Your new font color looks like pea-soup. You'll attract Freak's attention if you're not careful.

I wasn't going to say anything, being somewhat colorblind... but Flipper's got a point.

 

[Tye Porter]

Originally posted by Flipper

• 1) The issue here is less whether smoking is a sin and more whether telling someone your product enhances their life when actually you know for a fact that it might kill them is sinful or not.
  
• 2) It's not about choosing to smoke. It's about withholding information that will save lives because you want to make money. This, incidentally, is relevant to the AIDs debate because:
  
• 3) And Tye? Your new font color looks like pea-soup. You'll attract Freak's attention if you're not careful.

• 1) The issue is homosexuality, but you have a point.
  Knowing that homosexuality is a sin, a perversion and that it may kill them, but telling them the inverse is a sin.
  
• 2) It's not about choosing to be a homo, it's about not telling them that they'll burn in hell for it; withholding that information which may save their lives because you want to make friends.
  
• 3) My new colour, as Beobebob pointed out, is "pissgreen".
  Although actually typing in that colour name gets me blue.

 

[Tye Porter]

Originally posted by Flipper
Tye, what is it that bothers you the most about AIDS? Why do gays and (as you added after some prompting) prostitutes irritate you so much? It's clearly not the number of deaths that unsafe sex with these groups contribute to because then, presumably, you'd have to be much angrier with bisexual males and family men who secretly see prostitutes for introducing it so effectively into the heterosexual population.

It is because it can be prevented.
It is because they are lied to and told that it is ok to be that way.
It is because they look God in the face and blame Him for their lifestyle choice.
Bisexual is homosexual.
Label it what you will, they are all perverts.
Even those men who are adulterous and risk their wives lives by sleeping with whores then bring it home to them.
Perverts.
It could simply be prevented if they were not lied to and told it was O.K.

 

[Zakath]

If bisexual is homosexual, it is also heterosexual. :think:

 

[Lighthouse]

I'm getting in on this. AIDS is a disease that afflicts sexually immoral people, whether homosexual or heterosexual. And it is not spread through saliva. It also afflicts those who get blood from someone else who is infected. Whether by sharing needles, being born to people with it or blood transfusions. the latter two are innocent victims affected by the sins of other people. But AIDS is not a homosexual disease, it is a sexual disease. That is why monogamy, within the confines of marriage, is the best way to live. Promiscuity is not only slutty, but idiotic/moronic/stupid

Well, the virus itself is asexual.

 

[allsmiles]

this one smells gay too:think:

 

[beanieboy]

*bump*