Should Gay males apologize?
Posted: 12 April 2005 01:23 PM   [ Ignore ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

I was watching "Scarbourgh country"last night. Since the recent death
of the pontiff,this show among others, seems to consist of little more than
a barrage of conservative catholic rhetoric,last night was no exception.
Two of Joe's guests were the ubiquitous Pat Buchannon and Bill Donahue,the president of the catholic league. Both were spouting their usual tiresome lunancy and I as is my wont,focused on several other things while they were bleating in the background. A few comments did catch my attention and as much as I hate to say this, I felt Donahue and
Buchannon MAY havePOSSIBLY had a point for once. They feel homosexual males owe everyone else an apology!?!?!?

Please don't kill me for this folks,I am just tossing the idea around in my head. Basically,Donahue and Buchannon seem to believe Gay men can be blamed for the spread of HIV. While I would never go as far as to say
most gay men are solely to blame, is it POSSIBLE that a disproportionate number of gay men could justly be held accountable for the spread of
HIV? I live in Miami and I know plenty of gay men and converse with
them frequently. From everything I've seen and been told,it would appear
that alot of gay men do not practice safe sex. Gays are most likely as promiscious as heterosexuals and MABYE more so in many instances
(because it is probably easier for a gay male to find a willing partner in an area with a large gay population).I don't know of any reliable statistics here,i'm just kinda guessing,so correct me if i'm wrong. Again,i'm not aware of the exact statistics,but the rate of HIV infection among gays is still very high. THIS IS NOT TO SAY that other groups,including heterosexual people,IV drug users etc… may not share a similiar responsibility.

I HAVE HEARD from several gay men that condom use is
very often frowned upon in the gay community. I HAVE HEARD also from
many gay men and others that there is an alarming number of gay males
who DELIBERATELY try to get infected,especially younger males who have a sense of rejection and feel that being HIV positive will gain them
greater acceptance in the larger gay community. Again,please don't shoot the messenger,i'm not really at all certain about this and I have been somewhat troubled by the fact that I actually MAY agree with two people whose worldview I generally find reprehensible,including their views regarding gays. I guess my fundamental question to all out there is;do you feel gay males bear a special/greater responsibility for the spread of
HIV more so than other groups? In all good conscious,I don't feel I can answer this question with any degree of certitude one way or another.

I certainly do not believe in any way, if there is any validity to this that anti-gay bias or discrimination of ANY kind would now be acceptable. IF there is some truth to this,I would simply encourage gay males,by whatever ethical and kindly means, to engage in safer sexual practices. I know this is a touchy subject in a PC world. I for one, am not at all interested in what's PC or not. I simply seek truth whether it upsets me,a heterosexual,a homosexual or anyone else.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 April 2005 01:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

I guess my fundamental question to all out there is;do you feel gay males bear a special/greater responsibility for the spread of
HIV more so than other groups?

If in fact it is true that the gay community practices the most “unsafe sex”, then I would think they would indeed bear a greater responsibility for the spread of HIV. Why wouldn’t they? They key is proving it. My guess is that it either can’t or won’t be done. Therefore, I feel that the responsibility of the spread of HIV by the gay community remains the same as every other group, or induvidual for that matter.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 April 2005 02:14 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

Well now I don’t feel so stupid for not being certain in regards to whether the gay community practices the most “unsafe sex” or not. I am entirely sure that proof cannot be, or even will not be forthcoming. Overall,I agree that it is basically a question of individual responsibility. On the other hand,I feel if it was proven that ANY group bears more responsibility for the spread of HIV,I do think the group,subculture,etc…would atleast have somewhat of an obligation
to try and change the behavior of a disproportionate, irresponsible number
within the group.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 April 2005 02:58 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

[quote author=“Anonymous”]Well now I don’t feel so stupid for not being certain in regards to whether the gay community practices the most “unsafe sex” or not.

LOL  Yes I was quite compelled to try hard to sound very far from certain so as not to be accused of having any degree of certainty in light of heightened sensitivity towards discrimination against the gay and lesbian community. And yes, I remain uncertain.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 April 2005 04:30 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  277
Joined  2005-01-27

Guest wrote:

I guess my fundamental question to all out there is;do you feel gay males bear a special/greater responsibility for the spread of
HIV more so than other groups?

I’m even more confused than you guys about this idea.  I have no actual numbers to quote for you, but isn’t the AIDS epidemic spreading at a much higher rate among heterosexuals in Africa than it is among homosexuals in the US?  I would guess the president of the Catholic league is trying to switch the focus off of the vatican and the Pope, who officially restated (recently, in the last year or two?) that the Church does not condone, read it is a sin, to wear a condom, as they are in large part responsible for its continued spread among Catholic Africans.

Even if the gay community is not practicing safe sex why would they owe the rest of us an apology?  Since HIV is a sexually transmitted virus, what kind of risk are they to ‘the rest of us?’  If one of ‘us’ has sex with one of ‘them,’ we are no longer a part of us, but automatically a part of the gay community, no?  They might owe an apology to each other, but to ‘us?’  I don’t get it.

My vote would be for the vatican and new pope.  They definitely owe an apology.  First to Catholics worldwide and then to the rest of us as we are much more likely to end up in bed (by some freak accident of course ...) with a Catholic than a gay guy.  The Catholic Church is once again looking for a scapegoat.  Does the gay community owe us an apology ...  I say nope.

To Guest ... You say, “I have been somewhat troubled by the fact that I actually MAY agree with two people whose worldview I generally find reprehensible.”  I would hazard a guess that somewhere inside, you sense their line of thought/motives are based on hatred rather than anything good.  Follow your instinct ...  smile

Susan

 Signature 

“Believe those who seek the truth, doubt those who find it.”  Andre Gide

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 April 2005 04:54 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

I wholly agree that the motives of people like Bill Donahue,Buchannon and others are certainly far from pure. If AIDS did not exist,people like them would find another reason to demonize homosexuals. As for anything else,I just really don’t know and i’m to tired to think about it
tonight.Anyway, since you mentioned AIDS in Africa, Donahue also had a
few things to say about that. He claimed that in Southern Africa (or South Africa proper,I can’t remember which) where condom use is prevalent,the
rate of HIV infection is high. He also said that in Uganda and Senegal,where more people follow the church’s teaching regarding abstinance have a much lower rate of infection. I am wondering if his facts
correct and even if they are,do they tell the whole story? Personally, I trust “evidence” in the hands of people like Donahue as much as trust
some Catholic priests with adolescent boys.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 April 2005 02:42 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  280
Joined  2005-02-24

I can’t help wondering how many of those pedophile priests who molested little boys are infected with AIDS and wore condoms?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 April 2005 08:46 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  901
Joined  2005-02-23

This is absurd.

None of the “official” messages coming out of the gay community have advocated unsafe sexual practices or purposeful contraction of the HIV/AIDS virus/sickness.  If some sectors of the gay community are cavalier about unsafe practices, then shame on them, but to suggest that the rest of the gay community should have to apologize for them is irrational in the extreme.

I am white, and have blue eyes.  Should I start apologizing for what the Aryan nation has done?  I don’t think so.

Let’s be clear about something:  HIV, to the best of our knowledge, is spread by certain unsafe practices which allow the infection to spread.  None of the groups that are vilified (gays, IV drug users, etc.) have to be unsafe to practice their lifestyles.

Once again, we have people trying to lump large numbers of people into a group and put a label on it to make sweeping generalizations seem rational.  I call BS.  People are individually responsible for their actions, including the billions of religious wackos that oppose helping people to stop the spread of HIV.

-Matt

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 April 2005 09:38 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  291
Joined  2005-04-02

People of faith are disproportionately responsible for the spread of another HIV in the world. That is hatred, intolerance and violence.
I say they owe the rest of us an apology.

- Bulldog

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 April 2005 02:34 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  277
Joined  2005-01-27

Bulldog wrote:

People of faith are disproportionately responsible for the spread of another HIV in the world. That is hatred, intolerance and violence.

Nice shift of focus !  That’s a good anti-religion slogan:  “Christianity is HIV Positive.”  I like it ...

Susan

 Signature 

“Believe those who seek the truth, doubt those who find it.”  Andre Gide

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 April 2005 06:20 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

But I don’t think anybody should apologize. All have come short of the glory of God. We’ve all sinned. Each and every person should ask forgiveness of God.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 April 2005 01:19 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  69
Joined  2005-04-12

One of the largest contributors are among blacks, many of whom do not believe they are gay. I would say anyone contributing to the AIDs problem should apologize profusely, and ‘sin no more’...

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2004-02-11-aids-students_x.htm

The high rate of HIV infection among U.S. blacks has been one of the most striking difficulties of AIDS prevention.

Blacks are 11 times more likely than white Americans to get AIDS. Even though they make up 12% of the population, they account for 39% of AIDS cases and 54% of new HIV infections.

Among black men, like whites, the leading cause of infection is sex with other men. Experts have long lamented the high rate of risky sex among gay black men. Poverty is often listed as a strong contributor, so the new findings among relatively well-off college students were unexpected….

When the students were questioned, three-quarters said they thought they were not at high risk of HIV, despite frequent anal intercourse without condoms with different male partners.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 April 2005 05:18 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  128
Joined  2005-02-23

It’s obvious to me that, as MJ suggests, the Roman Catholic leadership (and of course, their followers) are responsible for the spread of AIDS more than any other “group.”

The condom is a revolutionary invention in many ways. One of them is the prevention of disease. To ignore this simple fact is, in their words, a mortal sin, and therefore we should bow our heads and pray for the soul of the deceased John Paul II, since he more than anyone else in history has caused pain, anguish, and death.

I’ll stop here before I start to sound like the radically insightful Professor Churchill.

Dave

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 April 2005 06:14 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2957
Joined  2004-12-02

Hello my adversarial friend. I see you are alive and well on this forum.

I fundamentally disagree with you on this issue. Here is why, should we change the doctrine of the church to fit to the modern world? Even if the doctrine is sound, if followed? I say that the modern world should fit itself into the doctrine.

The condom has allowed sexual freedom to exist. But with this sexual freedom comes destroyed lives, marriages, broken families, etc. You see, we teach that God made sex wonderful (won’t you agree), yet so powerful that is should only be expressed within the confines of holy matrimony. Before the condom became popular, there was risk of pregnancy and disease. Now, sadly, that risk is removed and people use sex for uses that it was not intended for. This has led to the break down of the family and moral values.

So, ultimately, you can say the Catholic Church is outdated or old fashioned, but the fact is, if you follow its teachings, you will live a better quality life.

Forgive me tyhts , but it sounds like you are blaming others for the scourge of AIDs. Are we all not responsible for our behavior?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 18 April 2005 07:03 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  128
Joined  2005-02-23

[quote author=“TheChampion”]Hello my adversarial friend. I see you are alive and well on this forum.

I fundamentally disagree with you on this issue. Here is why, should we change the doctrine of the church to fit to the modern world? Even if the doctrine is sound, if followed? I say that the modern world should fit itself into the doctrine.

The condom has allowed sexual freedom to exist. But with this sexual freedom comes destroyed lives, marriages, broken families, etc. You see, we teach that God made sex wonderful (won’t you agree), yet so powerful that is should only be expressed within the confines of holy matrimony. Before the condom became popular, there was risk of pregnancy and disease. Now, sadly, that risk is removed and people use sex for uses that it was not intended for. This has led to the break down of the family and moral values.

So, ultimately, you can say the Catholic Church is outdated or old fashioned, but the fact is, if you follow its teachings, you will live a better quality life.

Forgive me tyhts , but it sounds like you are blaming others for the scourge of AIDs. Are we all not responsible for our behavior?

Champion, I can understand your goal here, and it’s a worthy one. The family is key to human existence, and it provides us with more life meaning than anything else. I don’t and can’t argue that.

The argument I would present you with is that humanity benefits by condoms. Consider the physical pain alone of the diseases that condoms prevent. The admittedly horrible pain of romantic rejection is of course very real. But people for the most part are able to learn lessons, and recover from severe disappointment unless they’re indoctrinated into unrealistically heroic and romantic expectations via fairy tales of one sort or another.

Also, condoms save human lives—or they would have, had many millions of people been allowed to use them within their moral frameworks, as dictated, unfortunately, by Rome.

One last point—

. . . should we change the doctrine of the church to fit to the modern world? Even if the doctrine is sound, if followed? I say that the modern world should fit itself into the doctrine.

The pope has the power to do so if he chooses to admit that his church is less than fallible. As a kid, we couldn’t eat meat on Fridays. That was an example of morality that changed for a proper reason. Present day popes can also decide to reject the infallibility proposition any time they want to.

Please respond with your own voice, Champion.

Dave

Profile
 
 
Posted: 19 April 2005 04:09 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 15 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  69
Joined  2005-04-12

These two sites are educational:

http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/sexuality/se0001.html

http://www.winkola.com/writings/math-aids.html

With the ideal use of condoms, a person can expect a high rate of protection. It seems there are a number of variables which lower that rate in the ‘real world’. Of course, thats certainly not an argument against the use of condoms.

Profile
 
 
   
 
 
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed