"Homophobia Is..." IS NOT TOLERATED !
Pete
john...@cisnet.com
said:
" ... Wake up, America!!! We ned to lobby Congress to pass a
law which will require quarantine of GRIDS (AIDS) patients."
(his full message is at the end)
----------------------------------------
The FACTS are:
America IS awake. AIDS is at least a 10 year old disease and
thank God,
America is becoming more compassionate and informed - not less.
Spreading fear because you do not understand, approve of or simply
refuse to tolerate the "behavior" of others is an action that has
already proved to get you right wing radicals absolutely NOWHERE!
America is awake and we're keeping our eye on people like you. There's
preliminary proof that homosexuality is decided at the genetic level.
Something most gay people have known all along.
Homosexuality, gays, FAGS, homos, queers, sissies, etc. are all
terms
conjured up by the ill-informed to help them deal with their fear of
those that are different from themselves. Similar to retard, kike,
nigger, jap, chink etc. Having fear or instilling fear in others is
simply not an effective way to achieve your objectives. The world is
already too well-informed and eager to protect itself from the fringe to
let this behavior thrive.
And finally, AIDS is a disease cause by unsafe sexual practices.
I've
been married to the same man for 6 years and we DO NOT engage in any
unsafe sex. Period. The gay community are not the folks you should be
worrying about. The transmission rate among gays is by far the lowest of
any group. It IS highest among young straight people.
So get the facts, and then take the proper actions. You are not
going
to stop anybody from doing something that you personally don't approve
of by trying to get people to turn on one another. One of the very few
benfits of AIDS to the gay community is that is has forced us to wake up
and take notice of those that would do us harm. You're too late - too
much time has passed and we're to well educated, affluent, well-informed
and in general, too powerful to let your sick vision come to pass. Now,
the right wing is forced to try to divide people and get them to fight
among themselves: The Defense of Marriage Act. They had moderate success
getting some gays riled up, but most saw right through the tactic. Even
the President said that it's not like there are throngs of same-sex
couples lining up at City Halls demanding marriage. But we'll fight and
we'll eventually get what we want. Its the only way it's going to happen
with people like you around!
I encourage those who can't stand intolerant people send a
message to
john...@cisnet.com
thank you
ZooMan
Here, here....
Bigots' WILL learn the hard way...unfortunately...
HIVhometest
Pete wrote:
>
> john...@cisnet.com
> said:
> " ... Wake up, America!!! We ned to lobby Congress to pass a
> law which will require quarantine of GRIDS (AIDS) patients."
> (his full message is at the end)
> ----------------------------------------
>
> The FACTS are:
> America IS awake. AIDS is at least a 10 year old disease and
> thank God,
> America is becoming more compassionate and informed - not less.
> Spreading fear because you do not understand, approve of or simply
> refuse to tolerate the "behavior" of others is an action that has
> already proved to get you right wing radicals absolutely NOWHERE!
> America is awake and we're keeping our eye on people like you.
<Snip>
Good for you Pete! This john...@cisnet.com person is obviously very
intolerant, bigotted and SICK!
Patty
--
_______________________________________________________________________
You owe it to yourself to find out... visit http://www.hivhometest.com
No Blood! Result in 5 minutes! Saliva based,Fast,Easy,Accurate,Private
******* HIVhometest - For more info, email in...@hivhometest.com *******
Bill Bonde
dion...@infinet.com wrote in article <56veuv$3...@news1.infinet.com>...
> Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
>
> }Are you in Africa?
>
> No. Are you on Pluto? (If so, dismount. He's a cartoon.)
So, then why should we be debating African AIDS problems when we are
talking about the sexual behaviour of people in the United States, most of
the people in this newsgroup?
> }Why would understanding AIDS in America cause us to want
> }to ignore AIDS in America and look at other countries?
>
> No one said anything about ignoring anything. That's your little straw
> man argument, not anybody else's. Please stick to the topic. As last I
> recall it had something to do with who had the highest infection rate.
> Presently that is heterosexuals.
In the United States, where we live and have sex, or in Africa where most
of us have never even visited?
> It is counterproductive to limit discussion of this disease to a mere
> political border: AIDS doesn't respect political borders. It's world-wide
> and needs to be treated as such. Presently the largest vector of
infection
> is heterosexual in origin. Don't like that? Tough.
You are IGNORING the problem in the United States.
> }What
> }point does it serve to tell male homosexuals that they don't have the
> }highest rate of HIV infection in Africa when we know that they still
have
> }the highest rate in the United States where most of the homosexuals in
> }queston live.
>
> Hmm... Go back to the CDC. Talk to the people there. You'll find that
> homosexual infection is not the demon that you think it is anymore. It is
> quite true that homosexuality was THE major risk factor in getting AIDS
> when it was new to the scene, but take a look at the figures now. (And
> keep in mind that they are delayed by a period of time ranging from years
> to almost a decade, so you will be looking at the results of the
> educational campaigns waged anywhere from the recent past all the way
back
> to 1986 or so.)
HIV shows up much faster with new testing procedures and they have numbers
for 1996. I posted numbers for 1995 since they were in text format and I
didn't want to view it with Acrobat.
> If it weren't for the International nature of the blood supply, tourists
> coming into America, and Americans touring other countries (sometimes for
> the express purpose of sex and nothing else) then yes, we might be
> somewhat justified in looking only to our own borders in regards to this
> disease. Alas, that's not the case.
Wouldn't you agree that MOST of what we should look at should be where we
are and not somewhere else? We should not ignore other places, but if you
want to talk about the problem in country X, the first and most important
country X is the country that we are most all in.
> }> Apparently people who don't live in this country just don't matter...
> }> Sort of like the dead Native Americans...
> }It seems that people who do live in this country don't matter.
>
> I warn you now: Get existential and I may reach through this monitor and
> slap you.
Tell me if it is male homosexuals or heterosexuals who are having a higher
rate of infection of HIV today in the United States from sexual means.
erikc
dion...@infinet.com ()
in message <56vfln$3...@news1.infinet.com>
dated 20 Nov 1996 17:37:59 GMT
wrote to alt.atheism, among others:
|Fisher (fis...@hcpd.com) said:
|}The point is he can't. Statistically speaking, homosexual males are by far
|}the most promiscuious of all sexually active groups in the United States.
[snip]
|Incidentally, the record for promiscuity goes to heterosexuals:
|Date: Tue, 11 Apr 1995 16:49:17 -0500
|Organization: Washington University, St. Louis
|[ May 1995 issue of Details ]
|There is a brief story about a 22 year old woman in LA who set a new world
|record for the most "sexual partners taken in a day."
Her name is Annabelle Chong.
|Her "attempt in L.A. in January ended with a final result of 251 --
|doubling the previous record of 120 set in 1991 by a sex worker in
|Amsterdam. Participants were culled from men who responded to ads on
|videos and in magazines, and porn industry pros were on hand with advice."
She was shooting for 300. They made a four-hour video of the event.
|There is a photo of her on her hands and knees, her nude body mosaiced,
|with a bunch of guys around with video and still cameras, and a sign board
|with flip numbers to show the tally.
She also made it to the "Jerry Springer" show. She is one of the ugliest
bitches ever to step in front of a camera. Based on the comments she made on
that shoe, I'd say she was a classical case of sex addiction.
|}Transmission rates remain the highest in the United States for homosexual
|}males and IV drug users. Undisputed.
|And AIDS is a mere US disease...
Annabelle was born in Singapore, I belielve.
[snip]
Erikc.
Fundamentalism -- a disease whose symptoms include
diarrhea of the mouth and constipation of the brain.
http://www.christiangallery.com/ (home page)
http://www.christiangallery.com/sick1.html#bugger
/* Finest Christian porn on the 'Net */
Bill Bonde
erikc <firew...@insync.net> wrote in article
<570lq3$r...@synthemesc.insync.net>...
(Everything else clipped)
> She also made it to the "Jerry Springer" show.
You watch the Jerry Springer show? Now you really are scaring the hell out
of me.
Aardvark
Well! Aren't we the all loving one. This is a perfect example of a
'Pablum-puking-letter'.
If AIDS is transmitted by heteros, why are they not dyeing like the
homos?
Lady get a life, and only speak the truth--or do not speak at all!!
ZooMan
Here, here to all the FACTS..... even tho' they are a bit old now.
Bigot's will learn the hard way...unfortunately.
On Wed, 13 Nov 1996 13:32:45 +0000, Pete <pr...@sirius.com> wrote:
>john...@cisnet.com
> said:
> " ... Wake up, America!!! We ned to lobby Congress to pass a
> law which will require quarantine of GRIDS (AIDS) patients."
> (his full message is at the end)
>----------------------------------------
>
>The FACTS are:
> America IS awake. AIDS is at least a 10 year old disease and
>thank God,
>America is becoming more compassionate and informed - not less.
>Spreading fear because you do not understand, approve of or simply
>refuse to tolerate the "behavior" of others is an action that has
>already proved to get you right wing radicals absolutely NOWHERE!
John Simpson
On 21 Nov 1996 01:19:08 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>dion...@infinet.com wrote in article <56veuv$3...@news1.infinet.com>...
>> Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
>>
>> }Are you in Africa?
>>
>> No. Are you on Pluto? (If so, dismount. He's a cartoon.)
>
>So, then why should we be debating African AIDS problems when we are
>talking about the sexual behaviour of people in the United States, most of
>the people in this newsgroup?
YOU seem to be the only one calling for limiting the discussion
in this way. It's easier, I suppose, to imagine an electrified fence
surrounding the US, and much more fun for those who wish to view AIDS
as an affliction of only gay people.
AIDS didn't start here, and we're not going to wipe it out by
ignoring whole continents.
>> }Why would understanding AIDS in America cause us to want
>> }to ignore AIDS in America and look at other countries?
>>
>> No one said anything about ignoring anything.
Actually, you said:
>...why should we be debating African AIDS problems when we are
>talking about the sexual behaviour of people in the United States...?
which I believe is a call to ignore the "African AIDS problem,"
as though it should not be part of a discussion among Americans (and
whoever else reads this thread).
>In the United States, where we live and have sex, or in Africa where most
>of us have never even visited?
Again you insist on an artificial dichotomy. Why would you want
to ignore a continent from which American cases apparently sprang, and
from which who-knows-how-many new cases are imported every day?
>You are IGNORING the problem in the United States.
You keep insisting that there is a problem in the US that is
separate from the rest of the world. Why do you want to do this? Is
it ANYTHING more than an attempt to blame AIDS on homosexual men?
>We should not ignore other places, but if you
>want to talk about the problem in country X, the first and most important
>country X is the country that we are most all in.
There we go--a slightly more relaxed and realistic view. Next,
you should describe why we should talk about AIDS as a problem only in
country X.
>Tell me if it is male homosexuals or heterosexuals who are having a higher
>rate of infection of HIV today in the United States from sexual means.
Why is this point so important to you? (I know, I know, you don't
like to answer questions about your motives, but you ARE the only one
in this thread insisting on such a narrow look at the problem.)
Peace,
John Simpson
fe...@mindspring.com
http://www.mindspring.com/~feste
-----------------------------------------------------------------
"We are men of action. Lies do not become us."
--The Dread Pirate Roberts
Rachel Westmoreland
In article <329522...@cola.com>,
Aardvark <Hebrew, Nat'l, Hot, Dogs> wrote:
>If AIDS is transmitted by heteros, why are they not dyeing like the
>homos?
actually, the group with the fastest-rising rate of aids transmission is
*heterosexual* teenagers. the rate of aids transmission among gay men is
falling. and the rate of aids transmission among lesbians, of course, is
nearly nonexistant.
--
-------------------------- rwes...@sophia.smith.edu -------------------------
"I need backup, I need company, I need to be inspired." -- Ani Difranco
mry...@snet.net
Facts?? What are on fuckn DOPE??
Bill Bonde
John Simpson <fe...@mindspring.com> wrote in article
<329e5277...@news.mindspring.com>...
> On 21 Nov 1996 01:19:08 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>
> >dion...@infinet.com wrote in article <56veuv$3...@news1.infinet.com>...
> >> Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
> >>
> >> }Are you in Africa?
> >>
> >> No. Are you on Pluto? (If so, dismount. He's a cartoon.)
> >
> >So, then why should we be debating African AIDS problems when we are
> >talking about the sexual behaviour of people in the United States, most
of
> >the people in this newsgroup?
>
> YOU seem to be the only one calling for limiting the discussion
> in this way. It's easier, I suppose, to imagine an electrified fence
> surrounding the US, and much more fun for those who wish to view AIDS
> as an affliction of only gay people.
> AIDS didn't start here, and we're not going to wipe it out by
> ignoring whole continents.
I don't want to ignore Africa. I want to pay attention to the problem right
here where it seems almost all of us live.
>
>
> >> }Why would understanding AIDS in America cause us to want
> >> }to ignore AIDS in America and look at other countries?
> >>
> >> No one said anything about ignoring anything.
>
> Actually, you said:
>
> >...why should we be debating African AIDS problems when we are
> >talking about the sexual behaviour of people in the United States...?
>
> which I believe is a call to ignore the "African AIDS problem,"
> as though it should not be part of a discussion among Americans (and
> whoever else reads this thread).
It is not the issue within the US. If people were dying of typhoid fever
because of the water in Africa and they were dying of cryptosporidium in
the US, don't you think that people in the US should pay more attention to
the cryptosporidium?
>
> >In the United States, where we live and have sex, or in Africa where
most
> >of us have never even visited?
>
> Again you insist on an artificial dichotomy. Why would you want
> to ignore a continent from which American cases apparently sprang, and
> from which who-knows-how-many new cases are imported every day?
The ISSUE was whether homosexuals in the United States where we all seem to
live are responsible for most of the sexually transmitted cases of HIV.
This is the case. It is obvious that bringing up Africa is intended to
obfuscate this fact. If you would like to admit the situation in the United
States and talk about Africa and what to do about that, that is fine with
me.
> >You are IGNORING the problem in the United States.
>
> You keep insisting that there is a problem in the US that is
> separate from the rest of the world. Why do you want to do this? Is
> it ANYTHING more than an attempt to blame AIDS on homosexual men?
Homosexual males are most of the cases in the United States.
> >We should not ignore other places, but if you
> >want to talk about the problem in country X, the first and most
important
> >country X is the country that we are most all in.
>
> There we go--a slightly more relaxed and realistic view. Next,
> you should describe why we should talk about AIDS as a problem only in
> country X.
We can talk about AIDS in any country you want, just admit first that in
the United States most sexually transmitted cases of AIDS are from male
homosexual and male bisexuals.
>
>
> >Tell me if it is male homosexuals or heterosexuals who are having a
higher
> >rate of infection of HIV today in the United States from sexual means.
>
> Why is this point so important to you? (I know, I know, you don't
> like to answer questions about your motives, but you ARE the only one
> in this thread insisting on such a narrow look at the problem.)
>
It is important to me because you refuse to admit it and it is the Truth.
Bill Bonde
Rachel Westmoreland <rwes...@sophia.smith.edu> wrote in article
<574hk7$7...@sylvia.smith.edu>...
> In article <329522...@cola.com>,
> Aardvark <Hebrew, Nat'l, Hot, Dogs> wrote:
>
> >If AIDS is transmitted by heteros, why are they not dyeing like the
> >homos?
>
> actually, the group with the fastest-rising rate of aids transmission is
> *heterosexual* teenagers. the rate of aids transmission among gay men is
> falling. and the rate of aids transmission among lesbians, of course, is
> nearly nonexistant.
>
This is the sort of thing that was claimed earlier before we got on the
African AIDS is Heterosexual Kick. The only way that heterosexual teenager
transmission rates could be increasing faster than homosexual transmission
rates is if homosexual transmission rates were already very high and the
other rates were so low that any upward change will seem huge
percentage-wise. Is this what you are claiming?
John A. Stanley
In article <329522...@cola.com>, Aardvark <pe...@cola.com> wrote:
>Well! Aren't we the all loving one. This is a perfect example of a
>'Pablum-puking-letter'.
>
>homos?
In Asia and Africa AIDS is a predominantly heterosexually transmitted
disease, and that particular strain of HIV was detected on American
shores a few months ago. Str8-folk HIV infection rates are rising in
the West, and it is only a matter of time before complacent breeders
in dangerous denial start dropping like flies.
--
John A. Stanley jsta...@gate.net
"Hey! You got your razor in my wager!"
Ward Stewart
"Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>> AIDS didn't start here, and we're not going to wipe it out by
>> ignoring whole continents.
>I don't want to ignore Africa. I want to pay attention to the problem right
>here where it seems almost all of us live.
Once again disingenuous -- (that is a fancy word for lying
in your stinking teeth!)
You have no wish to pay attention to the probelms and issues
of AIDS anywhere -- your transparent wish is to find
something, anything that you can, in your hatefulness, blame
on homosexuals.
ward
/////////////////////////////////////////////////
"When I hear them praying extra loud, I always
go out and check the lock on the smokehouse."
Harry Truman
/////////////////////////////////////////////
Bill Bonde
Ward Stewart <wste...@hi.net> wrote in article <577vmo$5...@news.hi.net>...
> "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >> AIDS didn't start here, and we're not going to wipe it out by
> >> ignoring whole continents.
>
> >I don't want to ignore Africa. I want to pay attention to the problem
right
> >here where it seems almost all of us live.
>
> Once again disingenuous -- (that is a fancy word for lying
> in your stinking teeth!)
>
> You have no wish to pay attention to the probelms and issues
> of AIDS anywhere -- your transparent wish is to find
> something, anything that you can, in your hatefulness, blame
> on homosexuals.
>
Don't be silly. AIDS can't be blamed in any way on female homosexuals. At
it can't be blamed on male homosexuals who aren't having more than one
partner, so since you all are so keen on homosexual marriage, I figure you
are either female homosexuals or male homosexuals with only one partner and
therefore aren't responsible for the AIDS problem.
KiiLA
Bill Bonde wrote:
> Don't be silly. AIDS can't be blamed in any way on female homosexuals. At
> it can't be blamed on male homosexuals who aren't having more than one
> partner, so since you all are so keen on homosexual marriage, I figure you
> are either female homosexuals or male homosexuals with only one partner and
> therefore aren't responsible for the AIDS problem.
If male homosexuals with more than one partner are the reason for the
AID's problem, then what are you so worried for jackass? Are you a
closet queer or something? Besides, what makes homosexuals so damn
different from the rest of us? Are you one of those IDIOTIC bigots that
tried to keep black students from your school b/c they were different?
Think about it for change. Racism is wrong, so why then is homophobia
right? I'd really like to know why you've carried your head up your ass
for all of these years b/c you and the rest of the bigots on this group
can't seem to link racism and homophobia (anti-homosexual) together.
They are one in the same, HATE. PEACE.
PS: I'll mail you some money so you can buy yourself a clue.
--
|
\|/
-o- KiiLA
/|\ email: lav...@rpi.edu
| www: http://www.rpi.edu/~lavind/index.html
Bill Bonde
KiiLA <lav...@rpi.edu> wrote in article <3297E2...@rpi.edu>...
> Bill Bonde wrote:
> > Don't be silly. AIDS can't be blamed in any way on female homosexuals.
At
> > it can't be blamed on male homosexuals who aren't having more than one
> > partner, so since you all are so keen on homosexual marriage, I figure
you
> > are either female homosexuals or male homosexuals with only one partner
and
> > therefore aren't responsible for the AIDS problem.
>
> If male homosexuals with more than one partner are the reason for the
> AID's problem, then what are you so worried for jackass? Are you a
Did I say that I was worried? I think you change the subject.
> closet queer or something? Besides, what makes homosexuals so damn
This is a strange passtime for people on this group. Calling anyone who
disagrees a closeted homosexual.
> different from the rest of us? Are you one of those IDIOTIC bigots that
> tried to keep black students from your school b/c they were different?
I don't run a school.
> Think about it for change. Racism is wrong, so why then is homophobia
> right?
Discriminating against someone based on race is wrong so therefore
discrimination based on anything is wrong? That is a gigantic leap.
>I'd really like to know why you've carried your head up your ass
> for all of these years b/c you and the rest of the bigots on this group
> can't seem to link racism and homophobia (anti-homosexual) together.
> They are one in the same, HATE. PEACE.
Prove that.
> PS: I'll mail you some money so you can buy yourself a clue.
How much money?
dion...@infinet.com
Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
}So, then why should we be debating African AIDS problems when we are
}talking about the sexual behaviour of people in the United States, most of
}the people in this newsgroup?
And why aren't we just talking of the epidemic as it relates to the
populations of Ohio and your own particular state? <wanders off as he waits
for clue to sink in...> <returns: 2/31/4581>
}You are IGNORING the problem in the United States.
Oh? How can one ignore an international problem by treating it in the same
fashion domestically as abroad? Are you saying that emphasis should not be
going towards condoms, abstinence, testing and just plain common sense?
}Wouldn't you agree that MOST of what we should look at should be where we
}are and not somewhere else? We should not ignore other places, but if you
}want to talk about the problem in country X, the first and most important
}country X is the country that we are most all in.
Geopolitical borders matter not when it comes to treatment. If they did,
then we might have flights to Antarctica as part of AIDS treatment
regimins.
}Tell me if it is male homosexuals or heterosexuals who are having a higher
}rate of infection of HIV today in the United States from sexual means.
I can't. You know very well that those results will not be quantifiable
for another 5 years, at least. But one questions why you are limiting AIDS
infection rates to men only, are women somehow not important?
--
<a href="http://www.infinet.com/~dionisio">Finger</a> for PGP public key
And the Thought of the Moment (tm) is...
...a valuable coupon! Use a sledgehammer to break the protective glass
covering on your monitor, then clip the coupon off the phosphors and save
it for a rainy day.
____________________________________________________
|,---. ) ALT.PEEVES of USENET ( ,---.|
|) 1 ( `====--- _ ---====' ) 1 (|
| \ / | | \ / |
| V ,-. |-| V |
| ( D ) _|-|_ good for |
| `-' _(_) (_) O N E |
| (_) | | L_. c-l-u-e |
| M21141815E ' (_ \ |
| / \ ( / / / \ |
|( 1 ) ( 1 )|
| \ / ---==< E L E C T R O D O L L A R >==--- \ / |
|____________________________________________________|
dion...@infinet.com
Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
}The only way that heterosexual teenager
}transmission rates could be increasing faster than homosexual transmission
}rates is if homosexual transmission rates were already very high and the
}other rates were so low that any upward change will seem huge
}percentage-wise.
Which would mean that the hetero population's "infection percentage"
would still be low, yes? Please explain something if you will: How come
AIDS is ranked as one of the top 10 killers of people aged 20-30 if the
percentage of infected heterosexuals is so low? Furthermore, wouldn't
that ranking cause more of a problem for your logic the closer it got to
being the #1 cause?
--
<a href="http://www.infinet.com/~dionisio">Finger</a> for PGP public key
And the Thought of the Moment (tm) is...
Tua mater caligas gerit.
(Your mother wears combat boots.)
dion...@infinet.com
Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
}I don't want to ignore Africa. I want to pay attention to the problem right
}here where it seems almost all of us live.
Actually, statistically speaking, "almost all of us" reside in China.
}It is not the issue within the US. If people were dying of typhoid fever
}because of the water in Africa and they were dying of cryptosporidium in
}the US, don't you think that people in the US should pay more attention to
}the cryptosporidium?
Yes. Is that the situation? No. We're talking of *one* disease, which
happens to be world-wide. The treatment, detection, and educational
methods for the disease remain the same whether that disease if typhoid,
AIDS, or stupidity.
}The ISSUE was whether homosexuals in the United States where we all seem to
}live are responsible for most of the sexually transmitted cases of HIV.
Oh. So this is a "blame thing". *Now* I understand.
--
<a href="http://www.infinet.com/~dionisio">Finger</a> for PGP public key
And the Thought of the Moment (tm) is...
The bathtub was strange. It was right out in the open, next to the bed,
with a view of the phone screen and the picture window. It wasn't long,
but it stood four feet high, with a rim that curved inward, and the back
rose six feet before curving over. The overflow drain was only halfway up.
I started the water running, then watched, fascinated. The water looked
like it was actively trying to escape.
-- Gil "The Arm" Hamilton discovers a lunar bathtub
(_Flatlander_, by Larry Niven)
Bill DeWitt
Boy Bill!
They sure come out of the wood work don't they?
I think we can sum up KiiLA (is that pronounced Kill-uh? HoW KeWl!) like
this:
If a White man does it...it is BAD
If a White man dislikes it...it is GOOD
If a White man says it...It is HATE
If a White man gets stepped on...it is PEACE
He supports Gays because he thinks that all White men dislike them.
Don't bother telling him that some Gays are White men. It's a racist
thing, we aren't required to understand it.
Bill Bonde
dion...@infinet.com wrote in article <57a1rr$g...@news1.infinet.com>...
> Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
>
> }The only way that heterosexual teenager
> }transmission rates could be increasing faster than homosexual
transmission
> }rates is if homosexual transmission rates were already very high and the
> }other rates were so low that any upward change will seem huge
> }percentage-wise.
>
> Which would mean that the hetero population's "infection percentage"
> would still be low, yes? Please explain something if you will: How come
> AIDS is ranked as one of the top 10 killers of people aged 20-30 if the
> percentage of infected heterosexuals is so low? Furthermore, wouldn't
> that ranking cause more of a problem for your logic the closer it got to
> being the #1 cause?
>
People who are 20 to 30 are not teenagers. There are homosexuals in the
group 20 to 30 or in the group teenagers.
Bill Bonde
dion...@infinet.com wrote in article <57a0tk$g...@news1.infinet.com>...
> Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
>
> }So, then why should we be debating African AIDS problems when we are
> }talking about the sexual behaviour of people in the United States, most
of
> }the people in this newsgroup?
>
> And why aren't we just talking of the epidemic as it relates to the
> populations of Ohio and your own particular state? <wanders off as he
waits
> for clue to sink in...> <returns: 2/31/4581>
Because we are not all in the same state. And because if you look at the
CDC numbers, while they aren't exactly the same in all states, they are
basically the same. This means that about the same situation exists in all
the United States so the same sort of reaction makes sense in all of the
United States. The situation is claimed to be different in Africa which
means that the reaction there should be different.
> }You are IGNORING the problem in the United States.
>
> Oh? How can one ignore an international problem by treating it in the
same
> fashion domestically as abroad?
If you are not treating the issue as it relates to a certain place, then
you are not treating it correctly.
>Are you saying that emphasis should not be
> going towards condoms, abstinence, testing and just plain common sense?
This mini-debate is about male homosexuals in the United States claiming
that AIDS is not mainly transfered sexually in the United States by male
homosexuals. They constantly bring up Africa to skew the numbers and make
it seem like homosexual males in the United States are no more involved
than heterosexual males in the United States. Of course I support
abstinence, reducing number of partners and the use of condoms.
>
> }Wouldn't you agree that MOST of what we should look at should be where
we
> }are and not somewhere else? We should not ignore other places, but if
you
> }want to talk about the problem in country X, the first and most
important
> }country X is the country that we are most all in.
>
> Geopolitical borders matter not when it comes to treatment. If they did,
> then we might have flights to Antarctica as part of AIDS treatment
> regimins.
They have come up with some alternative treatments for AIDS that are
equally as hard to understand.
>
> }Tell me if it is male homosexuals or heterosexuals who are having a
higher
> }rate of infection of HIV today in the United States from sexual means.
>
> I can't. You know very well that those results will not be quantifiable
> for another 5 years, at least. But one questions why you are limiting
AIDS
> infection rates to men only, are women somehow not important?
>
Men were the example used because they were seperated in the CDC report and
because we were talking about them. In 1995 the number of infections total
was 73380. Of those 8093 were from heterosexual means. Many of these were
women who could've gotten it from bisexual males.
Ward Stewart
KiiLA <lav...@rpi.edu> wrote:
>Bill Bonde wrote:
>> Don't be silly. AIDS can't be blamed in any way on female homosexuals. At
>> it can't be blamed on male homosexuals who aren't having more than one
>> partner, so since you all are so keen on homosexual marriage, I figure you
>> are either female homosexuals or male homosexuals with only one partner and
>> therefore aren't responsible for the AIDS problem.
>If male homosexuals with more than one partner are the reason for the
>AID's problem, then what are you so worried for jackass? Are you a
>closet queer or something? Besides, what makes homosexuals so damn
>different from the rest of us? Are you one of those IDIOTIC bigots that
>tried to keep black students from your school b/c they were different?
>Think about it for change. Racism is wrong, so why then is homophobia
>right? I'd really like to know why you've carried your head up your ass
>for all of these years b/c you and the rest of the bigots on this group
>can't seem to link racism and homophobia (anti-homosexual) together.
>They are one in the same, HATE. PEACE.
>PS: I'll mail you some money so you can buy yourself a clue.
Aloha Kii ?
You have missed out on the depths of his depravity -- HE
thinks that racism IS right -- he thinks that racial
discrimination is a basic right. He is a poly-math of
prejudice and includes Indians along with Gays and Blacks in
the ranks of the inferior. Are there others on his little
list? you betcha -- just keep watching.
He insists on buying Texaco Gas and sees nothing wrong with
that little episode --
ward
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"It aint the bus, its us!"
Jesse Jackson
satyr
hEY!!!!!! WOULD YOU PEOPLE CUT THIS FUCKNG HOMOPHOBIA CRAP AND GO PREACH
SOMEWHERE ELSE?????
SATYR
John A. Stanley <jsta...@gate.net> a écrit dans l'article
<OUFmycGU...@gate.net>...
begin 600 ME_TOO.jpg
<uuencoded_portion_removed>
!V8QY
`
end
Alan Miles
Bill Bonde wrote:
> We can talk about AIDS in any country you want, just admit first that in the United States most sexually transmitted cases of AIDS are from male homosexual and male bisexuals.
Just explain first why this is important or relevant.
Alan Miles
Bill Bonde wrote:
> This mini-debate is about male homosexuals in the United States > claiming that AIDS is not mainly transfered sexually in the United > States by male homosexuals.
Gay men have made a huge effort to prevent HIV transmission and our
efforts have paid off in the form of lower infection rates. I find the
information about the epidemic to be pretty balanced. Would you prefer
that we tell straight teenagers that they can't get HIV because it's a
gay disease? What changes from the status quo are you advocating?
Bill Bonde
Ward Stewart <wste...@hi.net> wrote in article <57akqr$6...@news.hi.net>...
> KiiLA <lav...@rpi.edu> wrote:
>
> >Bill Bonde wrote:
> >> Don't be silly. AIDS can't be blamed in any way on female homosexuals.
At
> >> it can't be blamed on male homosexuals who aren't having more than one
> >> partner, so since you all are so keen on homosexual marriage, I figure
you
> >> are either female homosexuals or male homosexuals with only one
partner and
> >> therefore aren't responsible for the AIDS problem.
>
> >If male homosexuals with more than one partner are the reason for the
> >AID's problem, then what are you so worried for jackass? Are you a
> >closet queer or something? Besides, what makes homosexuals so damn
> >different from the rest of us? Are you one of those IDIOTIC bigots that
> >tried to keep black students from your school b/c they were different?
> >Think about it for change. Racism is wrong, so why then is homophobia
> >right? I'd really like to know why you've carried your head up your ass
> >for all of these years b/c you and the rest of the bigots on this group
> >can't seem to link racism and homophobia (anti-homosexual) together.
> >They are one in the same, HATE. PEACE.
>
> >PS: I'll mail you some money so you can buy yourself a clue.
>
> Aloha Kii ?
>
> You have missed out on the depths of his depravity -- HE
> thinks that racism IS right -- he thinks that racial
I never said that racism was right. Stop telling lies.
> discrimination is a basic right. He is a poly-math of
> prejudice and includes Indians along with Gays and Blacks in
> the ranks of the inferior. Are there others on his little
> list? you betcha -- just keep watching.
You seem to have gotten this somehow from my statement that homosexual
unions were inferior to heterosexual unions. That is a pretty big twist.
> He insists on buying Texaco Gas and sees nothing wrong with
> that little episode --
Arco is cheaper but Texaco has diesel and takes credit cards. I certainly
see no reason to boycott them. They have settled a racial suit for an
insane amount of money and still people want more. It is crazy.
Bill Bonde
dion...@infinet.com wrote in article <57a1ha$g...@news1.infinet.com>...
> Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
>
> }I don't want to ignore Africa. I want to pay attention to the problem
right
> }here where it seems almost all of us live.
>
> Actually, statistically speaking, "almost all of us" reside in China.
Can we find even one person in this newsgroup posting from China? Please,
if you are reading this and currently live in China, help dionisio out
here.
>
> }It is not the issue within the US. If people were dying of typhoid fever
> }because of the water in Africa and they were dying of cryptosporidium in
> }the US, don't you think that people in the US should pay more attention
to
> }the cryptosporidium?
>
> Yes. Is that the situation? No. We're talking of *one* disease, which
> happens to be world-wide. The treatment, detection, and educational
> methods for the disease remain the same whether that disease if typhoid,
> AIDS, or stupidity.
If we are talking about typhoid, for example, the situation is different in
China than in the United States. The disease exists in both places. The
places where it is caught and the demographic group that tends to get it
are different in both countries. Using the same precautions in China that
you use in the US or the other way around are not the best. Sort of like,
well, geez, HIV and AIDS.
> }The ISSUE was whether homosexuals in the United States where we all seem
to
> }live are responsible for most of the sexually transmitted cases of HIV.
>
> Oh. So this is a "blame thing". *Now* I understand.
>
No, this was a specific issue. I don't go around 'blaming' AIDS on male
homosexuals. I am willing to point out that it is primarily a problem in
the United States for male homosexuals and IV drug users and those who have
sex or share needles with same.
Bill Bonde
Alan Miles <ami...@interport.net> wrote in article
<32991A...@interport.net>...
It is important because it shows that more effort getting male homosexuals
to change behaviour is in order.
Bill Bonde
Alan Miles <ami...@interport.net> wrote in article
I think that male homosexuals should stop claiming that they have the
problem covered. A look at the CDC male HIV+ numbers suggests that the rate
of infection is nowhere near that of the heterosexual male population or
any other population other than IV drug users.
There is an attempt here and elsewhere to pretend that since male
homosexuals are attempted to use condoms and reduce the number of partners,
they are as likely to aquire HIV as anyone else. By saying that rates for
male homosexuals have gone down and rates for teenagers have gone up,
people are attempting to get others to infer that those rates are close to
the same or the same without actually saying that.
If this was a group where a lot of people were saying that heterosexual sex
with many partners is fine, I would be arguing against that. I certainly
don't believe that that is moral or safe.
GdDoggie (Patrick)
On 24 Nov 1996 08:24:55 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>KiiLA <lav...@rpi.edu> wrote in article <3297E2...@rpi.edu>...
>> If male homosexuals with more than one partner are the reason for the
>> AID's problem, then what are you so worried for jackass? Are you a
>Did I say that I was worried? I think you change the subject.
>
>
>> closet queer or something? Besides, what makes homosexuals so damn
>This is a strange passtime for people on this group. Calling anyone who
>disagrees a closeted homosexual.
>
>
>> different from the rest of us? Are you one of those IDIOTIC bigots that
>> tried to keep black students from your school b/c they were different?
>I don't run a school.
You don't to have to run a school, a business, or any other entity to
be a bigot, Bill. So...are you a bigot or not? To borrow one of YOUR
pet phrases, "Stop obfuscating."
>> Think about it for change. Racism is wrong, so why then is homophobia
>> right?
>Discriminating against someone based on race is wrong so therefore
>discrimination based on anything is wrong? That is a gigantic leap.
discrimination - noun - the act, practice, or an instance of
discriminating categorically rather than individually; prejudiced or
prejudicial outlook, action, or treatment
Doesn't sound like a GOOD thing, does it?
GdDoggie (Patrick)
On 24 Nov 1996 03:32:36 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>
>
>Ward Stewart <wste...@hi.net> wrote in article <577vmo$5...@news.hi.net>...
>> "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >> AIDS didn't start here, and we're not going to wipe it out by
>> >> ignoring whole continents.
>>
>> >I don't want to ignore Africa. I want to pay attention to the problem
>right
>> >here where it seems almost all of us live.
>>
>> Once again disingenuous -- (that is a fancy word for lying
>> in your stinking teeth!)
>>
>> You have no wish to pay attention to the probelms and issues
>> of AIDS anywhere -- your transparent wish is to find
>> something, anything that you can, in your hatefulness, blame
>> on homosexuals.
>>
>Don't be silly. AIDS can't be blamed in any way on female homosexuals. At
>it can't be blamed on male homosexuals who aren't having more than one
>partner, so since you all are so keen on homosexual marriage, I figure you
>are either female homosexuals or male homosexuals with only one partner and
>therefore aren't responsible for the AIDS problem.
Huh? Did someone say something about lesbians? Did someone say
lesbians were responsible for the AIDS pandemic? Did you bother to
read what you attempt to respond to?
Tony Quirke
> > YOU seem to be the only one calling for limiting the discussion
> > in this way. It's easier, I suppose, to imagine an electrified fence
> > surrounding the US, and much more fun for those who wish to view AIDS
> > as an affliction of only gay people.
> > AIDS didn't start here, and we're not going to wipe it out by
> > ignoring whole continents.
> I don't want to ignore Africa. I want to pay attention to the problem right
> here where it seems almost all of us live.
You mean Planet Earth, yes ?
Bill, dear heart, Americans are vulnerable to AIDS from all sources. To
concentrate on the one strain currently predominant mainly in the American
gay population and ignore other, more dangerous, strains affecting (for
example) Asian hookers is an act of rank stupidity.
Or do you believe that American heterosexuals never fuck Asian hookers?
> It is not the issue within the US. If people were dying of typhoid fever
> because of the water in Africa and they were dying of cryptosporidium in
> the US, don't you think that people in the US should pay more attention to
> the cryptosporidium?
Dear chap, typhoid fever is not a sexually transmitted disease which is
pandemic in populations Americans have intercourse with. HIV/AIDS is.
> > Again you insist on an artificial dichotomy. Why would you want
> > to ignore a continent from which American cases apparently sprang, and
> > from which who-knows-how-many new cases are imported every day?
> The ISSUE was whether homosexuals in the United States where we all seem to
> live are responsible for most of the sexually transmitted cases of HIV.
And, obviously, they're not. If you want to argue about whether they're
responsible for most of the sexually transmitted cases of HIV in the
UNITED STATES, SO FAR, please explain why this is important. The greatest
threat to the US population is heterosexually transmitted HIV, currently
doing a roaring trade in Africa and Asia. One report has it that perhaps
50% of Thais are infected. 50%.
Jesus Christ almighty. Can you imagine 50% of the populace where you
live having HIV ? And the best way for that to occur is if people keep
telling themselves "AIDS is a homosexual disease".
It isn't.
> > You keep insisting that there is a problem in the US that is
> > separate from the rest of the world. Why do you want to do this? Is
> > it ANYTHING more than an attempt to blame AIDS on homosexual men?
> Homosexual males are most of the cases in the United States.
So ?
Heterosexually spread cases are the majority worldwide, and Americans
fuck non-Americans.
> > Why is this point so important to you? (I know, I know, you don't
> > like to answer questions about your motives, but you ARE the only one
> > in this thread insisting on such a narrow look at the problem.)
> It is important to me because you refuse to admit it and it is the Truth.
But what is the value of this Truth, Bill ?
Does it mean that all faggots are immoral or unclean ?
Does it mean that if you're not a faggot, you won't get AIDS ?
Does it mean that if we concentrate on the faggots, the rest of our
societies are safe from AIDS ?
- Tony Q.
--
"The weapon, like anything else, could only finally be judged by the
effect it had on others, by the consequences it produced in some outside
context, by its place in the rest of the universe. By this measure the
love, or just the appreciation, of weapons was a kind of tragedy." - IB
dande...@aol.com
"Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> writes:
>Alan Miles <ami...@interport.net> wrote:
>> Bill Bonde wrote:
>> > We can talk about AIDS in any country you want, just admit
>> >first that in the United States most sexually transmitted cases
>> >of AIDS are from male homosexual and male bisexuals.
>>
>> Just explain first why this is important or relevant.
>>
>It is important because it shows that more effort getting male
>homosexuals to change behaviour is in order.
We homosexuals and bisexuals have already seen the need and changed
our behavior.
The truth is Billy, Alan's rhetorical question is a valid one. The
redundant information on transmission of the retrovirus that causes AIDS
in the USA is widely acknowledged within the gay community. So what you
provided is old news. The truth is, the Gay community is way ahead of you
and your agenda laden suggestion -- say, about ten years ahead.
Most recent surveys performed in regional gay newspapers have shown
that since the mid to late eighties, the frequency of anal sex has dropped
dramatically among gay males. And when the surveys asked whether the
respondent was within a committed relationship, the frequency was even
less. However, to the best of my knowledge, anal sex NEVER has been
anywhere near the sex behavior of choice among gay males. Besides, all the
distorted sex-surveys of the seventies and early eighties (quoted in many
anti-gay pamphlets) were asked only within Gay Bathhouses of larger
cities. Those infamous areas where anal sex, and especially "competitive"
recreational sex, were far more common.
Although I don't have the latest figures, the last I heard was that
oral sex and mutual masturbation are preferred by up to ninety percent of
current gay and bi males.
And as for myself, I have very little interest in any form of anal
sex any more, and I know of few others who do either. There is really
little doubt (in my mind) that the extremely stupid promiscuous anal
sexual behavior of the seventies among overly competitive males spread
this insanity of AIDS (and also resulted in many forms of sexual
addiction). Nevertheless, it seems the current sexual attitudes and
behaviors within committed gay relationships are far different than they
were back in the seventies and early eighties. (Also the majority of gay
males apparently no longer live in those compacted gay metropolitan
communities either.)
So Alan's point of the irrelevancy of this CDC discussion is valid.
The fact of the matter is that these statistics only highlight the RESULTS
of the ignorance and promiscuity of many years ago. We have already
changed our sexual behavior with our own public education. Those who have
not are younger males and heterosexuals. So the relevant solutions to
AIDS prevention are communication, education, education, education,
condoms, abstaining from anal sex with strangers, condoms and even more
open and honest education for the young.
Oh yes. And the most important: A CURE, or at least a vaccine to
protect against the transmission of the retrovirus(s) that eventually
causes AIDS.
As far as the importance of your opinions Billy; I really don't
think anyone gives a shit!
Dennis Anderson <DAnde...@aol.com>
"[Of Jesus] Among the sayings and discourses imputed to him by his
biographers, I find many passages of fine imagination, correct morality,
and of the most lovely benevolence, and others, again of so much
ignorance, so much absurdity, so much untruth, charlatanism and imposture,
as to pronounce it impossible that such contradictions should have
proceeded from the same being. I separate, therefore, the dross; restore
to him the former and leave the latter to the stupidity of some, the
roguery of others of his disciples. Of this band of dupes and impostors,
Paul was the great Coryphaeus, and first corruptor of the doctrines of
Jesus." --Jefferson's Letter to W. Short, 1820
Bill Bonde
dande...@aol.com wrote in article
<19961125093...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
> "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> writes:
> >Alan Miles <ami...@interport.net> wrote:
> >> Bill Bonde wrote:
> >> > We can talk about AIDS in any country you want, just admit
> >> >first that in the United States most sexually transmitted cases
> >> >of AIDS are from male homosexual and male bisexuals.
> >>
> >> Just explain first why this is important or relevant.
> >>
> >It is important because it shows that more effort getting male
> >homosexuals to change behaviour is in order.
>
>
> We homosexuals and bisexuals have already seen the need and changed
> our behavior.
>
But the infection rates are NOT lower in the male homosexual and bisexual
community than they are in the other groups that I hear people claiming are
in trouble. That has been my point.
It would be homosexuals who were doing that sort of thing who would have
the highest change of having already contracted AIDS. Those who weren't
doing that would be left uninfected. That seems fair. I did see the trailer
for a local news program about some homosexuals who supposedly felt that
getting infected with HIV was a given, so they just did it on purpose. That
is pretty depressing and shows there are still problems.
> So Alan's point of the irrelevancy of this CDC discussion is
valid.
> The fact of the matter is that these statistics only highlight the
RESULTS
> of the ignorance and promiscuity of many years ago. We have already
> changed our sexual behavior with our own public education. Those who have
> not are younger males and heterosexuals. So the relevant solutions to
> AIDS prevention are communication, education, education, education,
> condoms, abstaining from anal sex with strangers, condoms and even more
> open and honest education for the young.
Are you claiming that current male homosexuals are getting the AIDS virus
at rates lower than heterosexuals who don't use IV drugs?
>
> Oh yes. And the most important: A CURE, or at least a vaccine to
> protect against the transmission of the retrovirus(s) that eventually
> causes AIDS.
Would a cure mean a return to the bathehouses of the 70's and early 80's
and the 'competitve sex' you were talking about or have male homosexuals
learned that there is no long term satisfaction in many partners?
> As far as the importance of your opinions Billy; I really don't
> think anyone gives a shit!
I've only stated facts. Obviously I've proved my point.
Bill Bonde
Tony Quirke <qui...@atlantis.actrix.gen.nz> wrote in article
<57bag4$6...@asgard.actrix.gen.nz>...
> Bill Bonde <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
> > John Simpson <fe...@mindspring.com> wrote in article
>
> > > YOU seem to be the only one calling for limiting the discussion
> > > in this way. It's easier, I suppose, to imagine an electrified fence
> > > surrounding the US, and much more fun for those who wish to view AIDS
> > > as an affliction of only gay people.
> > > AIDS didn't start here, and we're not going to wipe it out by
> > > ignoring whole continents.
>
> > I don't want to ignore Africa. I want to pay attention to the problem
right
> > here where it seems almost all of us live.
>
> You mean Planet Earth, yes ?
Why don't you want to talk about the United States? This is amazing. The
willful denial of the situation is just amazing.
> Bill, dear heart, Americans are vulnerable to AIDS from all sources.
To
> concentrate on the one strain currently predominant mainly in the
American
> gay population and ignore other, more dangerous, strains affecting (for
> example) Asian hookers is an act of rank stupidity.
This is a homosexual newsgroup with most people living in the United
States. While we shouldn't ignore anything, it seems obvious that
pretending that the situation in the United States is different from what
it is is counter productive.
> Or do you believe that American heterosexuals never fuck Asian
hookers?
Does anyone in this newsgroup have sex with Asian female prostitutes? Let
me just say publically that I don't. How about anyone else?
> > It is not the issue within the US. If people were dying of typhoid
fever
> > because of the water in Africa and they were dying of cryptosporidium
in
> > the US, don't you think that people in the US should pay more attention
to
> > the cryptosporidium?
>
> Dear chap, typhoid fever is not a sexually transmitted disease which
is
> pandemic in populations Americans have intercourse with. HIV/AIDS is.
You get typhoid fever without having to have sex. It exists in China. It
exists in the US. There are different strains.
> > > Again you insist on an artificial dichotomy. Why would you want
> > > to ignore a continent from which American cases apparently sprang,
and
> > > from which who-knows-how-many new cases are imported every day?
>
> > The ISSUE was whether homosexuals in the United States where we all
seem to
> > live are responsible for most of the sexually transmitted cases of HIV.
>
> And, obviously, they're not. If you want to argue about whether
they're
> responsible for most of the sexually transmitted cases of HIV in the
> UNITED STATES, SO FAR, please explain why this is important. The greatest
Because that is where we live.
> threat to the US population is heterosexually transmitted HIV, currently
> doing a roaring trade in Africa and Asia. One report has it that perhaps
> 50% of Thais are infected. 50%
Of the total population? I haven't heard that in Africa.
> Jesus Christ almighty. Can you imagine 50% of the populace where you
> live having HIV ? And the best way for that to occur is if people keep
> telling themselves "AIDS is a homosexual disease".
I have not encouraged people to behave in an unsafe manner. I have simply
stated the situation in the United States where male homosexuals seem very
ready to claim they are no longer the highest risk group. Well, at least
let the listener infer that.
>
> It isn't.
>
> > > You keep insisting that there is a problem in the US that is
> > > separate from the rest of the world. Why do you want to do this? Is
> > > it ANYTHING more than an attempt to blame AIDS on homosexual men?
>
> > Homosexual males are most of the cases in the United States.
>
> So ?
>
> Heterosexually spread cases are the majority worldwide, and Americans
> fuck non-Americans.
I've never said that we should ignore heterosexually transmitted HIV.
>
> > > Why is this point so important to you? (I know, I know, you don't
> > > like to answer questions about your motives, but you ARE the only one
> > > in this thread insisting on such a narrow look at the problem.)
>
> > It is important to me because you refuse to admit it and it is the
Truth.
>
> But what is the value of this Truth, Bill ?
>
> Does it mean that all faggots are immoral or unclean ?
> Does it mean that if you're not a faggot, you won't get AIDS ?
> Does it mean that if we concentrate on the faggots, the rest of our
> societies are safe from AIDS ?
>
We get into this sort of thing any time I point out incorrectness in the
homosexual position. I never called anyone a 'faggot'. I never said anyone
was 'unclean'. I never said only homosexuals can or could get AIDS. Please
don't invent strawmen unless you know a farmer with a crow problem.
Bill Bonde
GdDoggie (Patrick) <gddo...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<329936fb...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
> On 24 Nov 1996 03:32:36 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Ward Stewart <wste...@hi.net> wrote in article
<577vmo$5...@news.hi.net>...
> >> "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> >> AIDS didn't start here, and we're not going to wipe it out by
> >> >> ignoring whole continents.
> >>
> >> >I don't want to ignore Africa. I want to pay attention to the problem
> >right
> >> >here where it seems almost all of us live.
> >>
> >> Once again disingenuous -- (that is a fancy word for lying
> >> in your stinking teeth!)
> >>
> >> You have no wish to pay attention to the probelms and issues
> >> of AIDS anywhere -- your transparent wish is to find
> >> something, anything that you can, in your hatefulness, blame
> >> on homosexuals.
> >>
> >Don't be silly. AIDS can't be blamed in any way on female homosexuals.
At
> >it can't be blamed on male homosexuals who aren't having more than one
> >partner, so since you all are so keen on homosexual marriage, I figure
you
> >are either female homosexuals or male homosexuals with only one partner
and
> >therefore aren't responsible for the AIDS problem.
>
> Huh? Did someone say something about lesbians? Did someone say
> lesbians were responsible for the AIDS pandemic? Did you bother to
> read what you attempt to respond to?
>
Do you? He said that I was just looking to blame homosexuals for the AIDS
problem to vent my hatefulness. I stated that since female homosexuals were
not responsible for the AIDS situation, I was clearly not just looking to
blame homosexuals for the problem. I was clearly looking to point out that
male homosexual behaviour is what brought out this situation in the United
States. This was then combines with IV drug users behaviour several years
later.
John De Salvio
In article <01bf55ab$caa765c0$10eb...@billb.halcyon.com>, "Bill Bonde"
<bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
> It is important because it shows that more effort getting male homosexuals
> to change behaviour is in order.
While more effort to get male heterosexuals to change their behavior
is not in order???
Homosexuals ARE changing behavior, and HAVE changed behavior.
But we are still trying to teach kids that they are not invincible.
Unfortunately, many gay kids feel not only that they are not invincible,
but also that they are not wanted. Consequently their attitude too
often is "Why bother?"
Ain't reality a bitch?
John
John De Salvio
In article <01bf55ab$92926720$10eb...@billb.halcyon.com>, "Bill Bonde"
<bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
> If this was a group where a lot of people were saying that heterosexual sex
> with many partners is fine, I would be arguing against that. I certainly
> don't believe that that is moral or safe.
The fact of the matter is, heterosexual teenagers ARE having
a LOT of sex with a LOT of partners compared to when we were
children (for me, the '50s). Your belief that it is not moral and not
safe (which most of us also agree) does NOT alter the FACT of
the frequent sex with multiple partners.
Perhaps you should acquire enough confidence with local
teenagers to the point where they discuss this honestly
and openly with you. The babies they are having are not
imaginary. The STDs they are getting are not imaginary.
If it weren't for the fact that most teenagers are using condoms
inspiteof Fundamentalist Christian and Papal opposition to condom
availability, you would see the AIDS epidemic among heterosexuals
racing past the gay population in both rate and in numbers.
I believe it is precisely because of the demand by homosexuals
that ALL people be thoroughly educated about HIV transmission
and prevention that the disease is spreading more slowly among
heterosexuals than it would otherwise.
John
Joseph E. Van Riper III
TheM...@theimagemill.com wrote:
Did you describe yourself as a doctor in another message? I seem to
recall having questioned your credentials... I still do.
- Trey
--
I don't really have a spiffy ending sentence... seems unnecessary.
---- post no ads to my mailbox ----
Stuff : <http://www.cheta.net/FleebWeb/html>
Resume: <http://www.cheta.net/FleebWeb>
JSRT
Bill Bonde wrote:
> I think that male homosexuals should stop claiming that they have the
> problem covered. A look at the CDC male HIV+ numbers suggests that the rate
> of infection is nowhere near that of the heterosexual male population or
> any other population other than IV drug users.
I don't think anyone is making that claim. In fact, a number of gay men
have been very vocal about where prevention $ are going, saying that the
condom ads, etc, need to be targeted to gay men. It is the religious
right who have been opposed to this -- they have pressured the red cross
to omit mention of anal sex from their "prevention education" packets,
and pressured the feds to comit such references in advertising. If the
US had a more frank and honest approach to its AIDS prevention policies
we might all be better off.
> There is an attempt here and elsewhere to pretend that since male
> homosexuals are attempted to use condoms and reduce the number of partners,
> they are as likely to aquire HIV as anyone else. By saying that rates for
> male homosexuals have gone down and rates for teenagers have gone up,
> people are attempting to get others to infer that those rates are close to
> the same or the same without actually saying that.
>
> If this was a group where a lot of people were saying that heterosexual sex
> with many partners is fine, I would be arguing against that. I certainly
> don't believe that that is moral or safe.
That's precisely why you ought to be encouraging gays to marry each
other, Bill.
--Joseph
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~
js...@accessone.com ~ Joseph Sparacio and Richmond Tracy
"...she said it was because I was to have a happy ending,
and it was just like a book; and I wondered what books
she'd been reading." -- M.A.
GdDoggie (Patrick)
On 25 Nov 1996 06:01:08 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>
>
>Alan Miles <ami...@interport.net> wrote in article
><32991A...@interport.net>...
>> Bill Bonde wrote:
>> > We can talk about AIDS in any country you want, just admit first that
>in the United States most sexually transmitted cases of AIDS are from male
>homosexual and male bisexuals.
>>
>> Just explain first why this is important or relevant.
>>
>It is important because it shows that more effort getting male homosexuals
>to change behaviour is in order.
Oh, is that your main concern? Sorry, but I think your real intent
(whether you come out and say so or not) is to show that gay men and
IV drug users constitute the majority of cases in the US, so:
1) heterosexuals (in the US) have little to worry about, and so
shouldn't have to shoulder any of the $ cost of the epidemic or
research to stem the same; and
2) heterosexists like yourself should feel free to use the available
statistics to forward THEIR agenda, and justify continued
discrimination against gay men.
I know...you've never said anything for or against gay men, have you?
The only reason you read/post to this newsgroup is that your
newsreader is broken, right? Well, shit or get off the pot, already.
GdDoggie (Patrick)
On 24 Nov 1996 22:38:33 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>> }Tell me if it is male homosexuals or heterosexuals who are having a higher
>> }rate of infection of HIV today in the United States from sexual means.
>>
>> I can't. You know very well that those results will not be quantifiable
>> for another 5 years, at least. But one questions why you are limiting AIDS
>> infection rates to men only, are women somehow not important?
>>
>Men were the example used because they were seperated in the CDC report and
>because we were talking about them. In 1995 the number of infections total
>was 73380. Of those 8093 were from heterosexual means. Many of these were
>women who could've gotten it from bisexual males.
Again, you're the only one who insists on focusing only on the male,
and US male only, population. And as for the CDC, they have reports
for males, females, adolescents, AND pediatric cases. YOU chose to
post the statistics on male cases only.
P.S. Those figures are for new AIDS cases reported in 1995 (your total
not including pediatric cases), NOT for reported NEW HIV INFECTIONS.
dion...@infinet.com
Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
}Because we are not all in the same state.
Alas, Paranoia -- note the capitalization -- is not a state recognized in
the USA.
}The situation is claimed to be different in Africa which
}means that the reaction there should be different.
And how so? Condoms would work, so would abstinence. Drug education would
work, and so would admonitions against prostitution. Harping on the
dangers of multiple sex partners would work too.
Perhaps the drugs aren't as effective in treating AIDS in Africa as they
are in the States... Do Africans have some sort of "alien biology" that
renders AZT into something akin to sugar water?
Please tell us why the solutions that work in the US are not applicable
in Africa. We're all ears.
}If you are not treating the issue as it relates to a certain place, then
}you are not treating it correctly.
Ahh... All is made clear now. One can't treat AIDS that occurs in spot X
the same as spot Y, even though the spots are located mere inches apart.
Right? They're not "exactly" the same place, are they? Would you stop
trying to practice medicine without a license? Not only are your
connotations of treatment bizarre, but your cranial matter seems to be
malfunctioning as well.
}This mini-debate is about male homosexuals in the United States claiming
}that AIDS is not mainly transfered sexually in the United States by male
}homosexuals.
No, that's your little argument. The rest of us are of a mind that AIDS is
a global disease, which is decimating the human population. (Get that? I
just called it a "human problem". Good golly, Mrs. Molly!)
}Of course I support
}abstinence, reducing number of partners and the use of condoms.
And those treatment methods work at preventing the spread of AIDS; even
if the people in question happen to be hetero. :)
}Men were the example used because they were seperated in the CDC report and
}because we were talking about them.
"We"? You're the one with the fixation. Leave me out of it.
}In 1995 the number of infections total
}was 73380. Of those 8093 were from heterosexual means. Many of these were
}women who could've gotten it from bisexual males.
Ah expanding the range of "blame" are we? Now we get evil bisexuals to go
along with the evil homosexuals and drug fiends. How kind of you to start
diversifying.
Get a clue: People who fool around contribute to the spread of AIDS.
People who inject drugs with dirty needles contribute to the spread of
AIDS. The sex or orientation of those people is not, in and of itself,
what spreads AIDS.
--
<a href="http://www.infinet.com/~dionisio">Finger</a> for PGP public key
And the Thought of the Moment (tm) is...
"A lot of people I know believe in positive thinking, and so do I. I
believe everything positively stinks."
-- Lew Col
dion...@infinet.com
Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
}Can we find even one person in this newsgroup posting from China? Please,
}if you are reading this and currently live in China, help dionisio out
}here.
And if we get some, you'll start trying to limit your discussion to
situations in your particular time zone no doubt. Anything to justify your
stance that AIDS is a queer disease... One wonders what will happen when
you're whittled down to such a small portion of the population that you
are its only member.
}If we are talking about typhoid, for example, the situation is different in
}China than in the United States.
Is the treatment different? No. Are the prevention methods different? No.
See straw man.
See straw man go down.
See flamethrower.
Straw man go "foosh!".
See marshmallows.
See chocolate.
See graham cracker.
See smores.
--
<a href="http://www.infinet.com/~dionisio">Finger</a> for PGP public key
And the Thought of the Moment (tm) is...
God hates me because I'm an Atheist.
dion...@infinet.com
Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
}People who are 20 to 30 are not teenagers. There are homosexuals in the
}group 20 to 30 or in the group teenagers.
<raised eyebrow>
I see. So, a group that makes, at most, 10% -- and some say under 1% -- of
the population is somehow so numerous that they can affect the national
death statistics. How . . . interesting.
Either the homosexual population is MUCH larger than previously thought,
or the heterosexuals have suddenly stopped keeling over. (Or maybe the
homosexuals have injected newbornes with a viral agent that changes their
genetic code to that of homosexuality, thus making "Generation X" the most
queer generation ever to grace the face of a conspiracy theorist's twisted
grey matter... )
Please shed light on this most strange set of curcumstances, if you would
be so kind.
--
<a href="http://www.infinet.com/~dionisio">Finger</a> for PGP public key
And the Thought of the Moment (tm) is...
"Go placidly amid the noise and haste, and remember what peace there may
be in silence."
-- Max Ehrmann, 1927
dion...@infinet.com
Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
}I think that male homosexuals should stop claiming that they have the
}problem covered.
We're not. The problem won't be "covered" until the disease is destroyed.
I've seen no one on here even try to infer that the problem was covered.
}A look at the CDC male HIV+ numbers suggests that the rate
}of infection is nowhere near that of the heterosexual male population or
}any other population other than IV drug users.
Give it five years: Which -- incidentally -- is about the period of time
that it will take for the people infected today to start showing symptoms.
The CDC records are not "snapshots of today's infections" but rather
"pictures of infections that were acquired a few years ago".
}There is an attempt here and elsewhere to pretend that since male
}homosexuals are attempted to use condoms and reduce the number of partners,
Tactics which are working mind you.
}they are as likely to aquire HIV as anyone else. By saying that rates for
}male homosexuals have gone down and rates for teenagers have gone up,
}people are attempting to get others to infer that those rates are close to
}the same or the same without actually saying that.
And just a few years ago, people thought that the only hetero infections
were from blood transfusions... Odd that.
}If this was a group where a lot of people were saying that heterosexual sex
}with many partners is fine, I would be arguing against that. I certainly
}don't believe that that is moral or safe.
Nobody's stopping you from posting to alt.polygamy you know. Not that you
will of course.
--
<a href="http://www.infinet.com/~dionisio">Finger</a> for PGP public key
And the Thought of the Moment (tm) is...
"The best and brightest minds at Ohio State prefer Captain Crunch."
-- E. Gordon Gee, President of The Ohio State University, 9/21/92
dion...@infinet.com
Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
}> > I don't want to ignore Africa. I want to pay attention to the problem right
}> > here where it seems almost all of us live.
}> You mean Planet Earth, yes ?
}Why don't you want to talk about the United States? This is amazing. The
}willful denial of the situation is just amazing.
<Gobi Desert dry> Yes. Do tell.
}Does anyone in this newsgroup have sex with Asian female prostitutes? Let
}me just say publically that I don't. How about anyone else?
How about American prostitutes? <looking innocent... and failing>
}You get typhoid fever without having to have sex. It exists in China. It
}exists in the US. There are different strains.
Yes. So? Cut to the point man.
--
<a href="http://www.infinet.com/~dionisio">Finger</a> for PGP public key
And the Thought of the Moment (tm) is...
On 22 Mar 1995 08:45:22 GMT, dion...@infinet.com () wrote:
}To Hell with it, life's no fun if I'm the only one who's going crazy. So,
}here's something I'm pondering. (And I've gotten some weird looks from
}this one.) What do color-blind people see when on an LSD or acid trip?
}They can't do the "oh, wow! look at all the colors" line. What do they
}see? (A friend pointed out that things would still "melt" for them, but
}what's a "melt" without crimson and silver-on-green highlights?)
}I'll be over there licking 9-volt batteries if anybody needs me...
Royce Buehler
References: <4vr0ql$6...@netnews.hinet.net> <56nm5p$7...@news1.infinet.com> <01bbd4df$ff4db9a0$05eb...@billb.halcyon.com> <56robq$6...@news1.infinet.com> <01bbd697$8615c500$08eb...@billb.halcyon.com> <56veuv$3...@news1.infinet.com> <01bbd749$e3737640$08eb...@billb.halcyon.com> <329e5277...@news.mindspring.com> <01bbd8e6$d01a8fe0$06eb...@billb.halcyon.com> <32991A...@interport.net> <01bf55ab$caa765c0$10eb...@billb.halcyon.com>
Organization: MIT Center for Space Research
Keywords:
In article <01bf55ab$caa765c0$10eb...@billb.halcyon.com>, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> writes:
>
>
> Alan Miles <ami...@interport.net> wrote in article
> > Bill Bonde wrote:
> > > We can talk about AIDS in any country you want, just admit first that
> in the United States most sexually transmitted cases of AIDS are from male
> homosexual and male bisexuals.
> >
> > Just explain first why this is important or relevant.
> >
> It is important because it shows that more effort getting male homosexuals
> to change behaviour is in order.
Male homosexuals have been making a considerable effort, which is why
their infection rates are declining in the U.S. (while heterosexual rates
here are climbing.)
More could of course be done. When I take up a collection to lobby for
the repeal of the "Defense of Marriage" Act, so that male homosexuals
can be encouraged to "change behavior", get married to some nice guy, behave
monogamously, and further cut rates of infection -- how large a donation
shall I put you down for, Bill?
When the Christian Coalition lobbies to have the sex education classes
in your son's high school inform him that he is safe from AIDS because
it is a 'gay disease' - how large a donation shall they put you down for?
When that son begins dying of AIDs, will you
(1) Admit you were wrong about AIDS being a gay disease?
(2) Disown him and let him die alone in the street because he must
be a lousy faggot?
(3) Surprise us all with a sensible reaction?
--
Royce Buehler bue...@space.mit.edu (617)-253-9766
"Comme un fou se croit Dieu, nous nous croyons mortels"
-- Pierre Delalande
Ward Stewart
gddo...@ix.netcom.com (GdDoggie (Patrick)) wrote:
>On 24 Nov 1996 08:24:55 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>>KiiLA <lav...@rpi.edu> wrote in article <3297E2...@rpi.edu>...
>>
>>> different from the rest of us? Are you one of those IDIOTIC bigots that
>>> tried to keep black students from your school b/c they were different?
>>I don't run a school.
>You don't to have to run a school, a business, or any other entity to
>be a bigot, Bill. So...are you a bigot or not? To borrow one of YOUR
>pet phrases, "Stop obfuscating."
He will never admit to anything of the sort - no bigot he as
he continues to drop poison into the ear of the republic
with his ill concealed hostility for almost everyone who is
not Bonde.
He has already claimed that the entire civil-rights decades
did little else than provide jobs for bus drivers.
>>> Think about it for change. Racism is wrong, so why then is homophobia
>>> right?
>>Discriminating against someone based on race is wrong so therefore
>>discrimination based on anything is wrong? That is a gigantic leap.
>discrimination - noun - the act, practice, or an instance of
>discriminating categorically rather than individually; prejudiced or
>prejudicial outlook, action, or treatment
>Doesn't sound like a GOOD thing, does it?
It sure as hell does to a klansman like Bonde! Prejudice
and hatred are mother's milk to HIM!
ward
*************************************************************
"Freedom and justice cannot be parceled out in pieces to suit
political convenience. Like Martin, I don't believe you can
stand for freedom for one group of people and deny it to others."
Coretta Scott King
***********************************************************
Bruce Garrett
dion...@infinet.com () writes...
>> Tell me if it is male homosexuals or heterosexuals who are having a
>> higher rate of infection of HIV today in the United States from sexual
>> means.
D> I can't. You know very well that those results will not be quantifiable
D> for another 5 years, at least. But one questions why you are limiting
D> AIDS infection rates to men only, are women somehow not important?
It allows him to gut the AIDS figures for heterosexuals. If we
limit the AIDS stats to only one sex, what we get are =all= the partners
of homosexual relationships, but only some of the partners in heterosexual
relationships.
So we have a report that only accounts AIDS in males. Let's say we
have a promiscuous homosexual man who became infected by way of another
homosexual man and himself infects a dozen partners. Now we have fourteen
homosexual AIDS cases (the man who was infected, the man he was infected
by, and the men he infected). Let's also say we have a promiscuous
heterosexual man who became infected from a female partner and himself
infects a dozen female partners. Because we are only reporting the
statistics for males, we have here only 1 heterosexual AIDS case.
This nifty little bit of statistical gerrymandering deflates the
figures for heterosexuals profoundly, and allows people like Bill to keep
insisting that AIDS is predominately a homosexual problem. That's why he
does it.
---
-Bruce Garrett \ http://www.access.digex.net/~bruceg
bru...@access.digex.net / \ What the Saw-whet typically does, is toot.
Bill Bonde
dion...@infinet.com wrote in article <57cq16$g...@news1.infinet.com>...
> Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
>
> }Can we find even one person in this newsgroup posting from China?
Please,
> }if you are reading this and currently live in China, help dionisio out
> }here.
>
> And if we get some, you'll start trying to limit your discussion to
> situations in your particular time zone no doubt. Anything to justify
your
> stance that AIDS is a queer disease... One wonders what will happen when
> you're whittled down to such a small portion of the population that you
> are its only member.
I'm offended by the claim that AIDS in the United States is not something
that is largely a homosexual male disease (other than IV drug users).
>
> }If we are talking about typhoid, for example, the situation is different
in
> }China than in the United States.
>
> Is the treatment different? No. Are the prevention methods different? No.
Wrong. The prevention methods are different. The treatments certainly are.
>
> See straw man.
>
> See straw man go down.
>
> See flamethrower.
>
> Straw man go "foosh!".
>
> See marshmallows.
>
> See chocolate.
>
> See graham cracker.
>
> See smores.
>
Too bad, not a strawman. You were wrong. It was an IRONMAN.
Bill Bonde
John De Salvio <desa...@monitor.net> wrote in article
<desalvio-251...@rp15.monitor.net>...
> In article <01bf55ab$92926720$10eb...@billb.halcyon.com>, "Bill Bonde"
> <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>
> > If this was a group where a lot of people were saying that heterosexual
sex
> > with many partners is fine, I would be arguing against that. I
certainly
> > don't believe that that is moral or safe.
>
> The fact of the matter is, heterosexual teenagers ARE having
> a LOT of sex with a LOT of partners compared to when we were
> children (for me, the '50s). Your belief that it is not moral and not
> safe (which most of us also agree) does NOT alter the FACT of
> the frequent sex with multiple partners.
No, it doesn't but the reason it occurs is because children have been
sexualized by our society from the first time they turn on the TV.
>
> Perhaps you should acquire enough confidence with local
> teenagers to the point where they discuss this honestly
> and openly with you. The babies they are having are not
> imaginary. The STDs they are getting are not imaginary.
>
I have never claimed this to be the case.
> If it weren't for the fact that most teenagers are using condoms
> inspiteof Fundamentalist Christian and Papal opposition to condom
> availability, you would see the AIDS epidemic among heterosexuals
> racing past the gay population in both rate and in numbers.
How are they having babies while using condoms? It is easier to get AIDS,
then get pregnant.
>
> I believe it is precisely because of the demand by homosexuals
> that ALL people be thoroughly educated about HIV transmission
> and prevention that the disease is spreading more slowly among
> heterosexuals than it would otherwise.
>
That is your view and I support your right to have your view.
Bill Bonde
JSRT <js...@accessone.com> wrote in article <3299C2...@accessone.com>...
> Bill Bonde wrote:
> > I think that male homosexuals should stop claiming that they have the
> > problem covered. A look at the CDC male HIV+ numbers suggests that the
rate
> > of infection is nowhere near that of the heterosexual male population
or
> > any other population other than IV drug users.
>
> I don't think anyone is making that claim. In fact, a number of gay men
> have been very vocal about where prevention $ are going, saying that the
> condom ads, etc, need to be targeted to gay men. It is the religious
> right who have been opposed to this -- they have pressured the red cross
> to omit mention of anal sex from their "prevention education" packets,
> and pressured the feds to comit such references in advertising. If the
> US had a more frank and honest approach to its AIDS prevention policies
> we might all be better off.
You do have to be pretty slow not to know by now that anal sex is an
excellent method of transmission for many diseases. Education is not
something that is terribly important. At least not the type they put on TV.
> > There is an attempt here and elsewhere to pretend that since male
> > homosexuals are attempted to use condoms and reduce the number of
partners,
> > they are as likely to aquire HIV as anyone else. By saying that rates
for
> > male homosexuals have gone down and rates for teenagers have gone up,
> > people are attempting to get others to infer that those rates are close
to
> > the same or the same without actually saying that.
> >
> > If this was a group where a lot of people were saying that heterosexual
sex
> > with many partners is fine, I would be arguing against that. I
certainly
> > don't believe that that is moral or safe.
>
> That's precisely why you ought to be encouraging gays to marry each
> other, Bill.
>
You don't need marriage to have a long term relationship.
GdDoggie (Patrick)
On 25 Nov 1996 11:42:32 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>GdDoggie (Patrick) <gddo...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
><329936fb...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
>> On 24 Nov 1996 03:32:36 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
<snip>
>> >Ward Stewart <wste...@hi.net> wrote in article
>> >> Once again disingenuous -- (that is a fancy word for lying
>> >> in your stinking teeth!)
>> >>
>> >> You have no wish to pay attention to the probelms and issues
>> >> of AIDS anywhere -- your transparent wish is to find
>> >> something, anything that you can, in your hatefulness, blame
>> >> on homosexuals.
>> >>
>> >Don't be silly. AIDS can't be blamed in any way on female homosexuals. At
>> >it can't be blamed on male homosexuals who aren't having more than one
>> >partner, so since you all are so keen on homosexual marriage, I figure you
>> >are either female homosexuals or male homosexuals with only one partner and
>> >therefore aren't responsible for the AIDS problem.
>>
>> Huh? Did someone say something about lesbians? Did someone say
>> lesbians were responsible for the AIDS pandemic? Did you bother to
>> read what you attempt to respond to?
>>
>Do you? He said that I was just looking to blame homosexuals for the AIDS
>problem to vent my hatefulness. I stated that since female homosexuals were
>not responsible for the AIDS situation, I was clearly not just looking to
>blame homosexuals for the problem. I was clearly looking to point out that
>male homosexual behaviour is what brought out this situation in the United
>States. This was then combines with IV drug users behaviour several years
>later.
So, in other words, he should have been more specific, saying that you
attempt to assign blame to MALE homosexuals for the AIDS problem (in
the US)?
Let's not play word games, Bill. Stop obfuscating, already.
Bill Bonde
GdDoggie (Patrick) <gddo...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<3299d25f...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
> On 24 Nov 1996 22:38:33 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>
> >> }Tell me if it is male homosexuals or heterosexuals who are having a
higher
> >> }rate of infection of HIV today in the United States from sexual
means.
> >>
> >> I can't. You know very well that those results will not be
quantifiable
> >> for another 5 years, at least. But one questions why you are limiting
AIDS
> >> infection rates to men only, are women somehow not important?
> >>
> >Men were the example used because they were seperated in the CDC report
and
> >because we were talking about them. In 1995 the number of infections
total
> >was 73380. Of those 8093 were from heterosexual means. Many of these
were
> >women who could've gotten it from bisexual males.
>
> Again, you're the only one who insists on focusing only on the male,
> and US male only, population. And as for the CDC, they have reports
> for males, females, adolescents, AND pediatric cases. YOU chose to
> post the statistics on male cases only.
>
> P.S. Those figures are for new AIDS cases reported in 1995 (your total
> not including pediatric cases), NOT for reported NEW HIV INFECTIONS.
The new HIV infection rates were not greatly different in the male
population. I thought that worthy of note.
Bill Bonde
GdDoggie (Patrick) <gddo...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<32993739...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
> On 24 Nov 1996 08:24:55 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>
> >KiiLA <lav...@rpi.edu> wrote in article <3297E2...@rpi.edu>...
> >> If male homosexuals with more than one partner are the reason for the
> >> AID's problem, then what are you so worried for jackass? Are you a
> >Did I say that I was worried? I think you change the subject.
> >
> >
> >> closet queer or something? Besides, what makes homosexuals so damn
> >This is a strange passtime for people on this group. Calling anyone who
> >disagrees a closeted homosexual.
> >
> >
> >> different from the rest of us? Are you one of those IDIOTIC bigots
that
> >> tried to keep black students from your school b/c they were different?
> >I don't run a school.
>
> You don't to have to run a school, a business, or any other entity to
> be a bigot,
I was asked if I was one of those IDIOTIC bigots that tried to keep black
students from your school.... I said that I don't run a school. That is the
correct answer to that question.
>Bill. So...are you a bigot or not? To borrow one of YOUR
> pet phrases, "Stop obfuscating."
Bigot is an attack term. It is like homophobe in that it is used by people
who disagree with them as a personal attack. Since bigot doesn't actually
have a meaning, it is impossible for anyone to be a bigot.
> >> Think about it for change. Racism is wrong, so why then is homophobia
> >> right?
> >Discriminating against someone based on race is wrong so therefore
> >discrimination based on anything is wrong? That is a gigantic leap.
>
> discrimination - noun - the act, practice, or an instance of
> discriminating categorically rather than individually; prejudiced or
> prejudicial outlook, action, or treatment
>
> Doesn't sound like a GOOD thing, does it?
It doesn't sound good or bad to me. Where did you get that definition?
Bill Bonde
dion...@infinet.com wrote in article <57co81$g...@news1.infinet.com>...
> Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
>
> }People who are 20 to 30 are not teenagers. There are homosexuals in the
> }group 20 to 30 or in the group teenagers.
>
> <raised eyebrow>
>
> I see. So, a group that makes, at most, 10% -- and some say under 1% --
of
> the population is somehow so numerous that they can affect the national
> death statistics. How . . . interesting.
People from 13 to 30 are only one percent of the population? Do you get
your numbers from the same group that claimes that homosexuals are ten
percent of the population?
Bill Bonde
Royce Buehler <bue...@space.mit.edu> wrote in article
<57d61s$m...@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU>...
It is this claim that I'm bothered with. If male homosexuals haven't gotten
their rates down to those of heterosexual males, how can they claim to have
had real success?
> More could of course be done. When I take up a collection to lobby for
> the repeal of the "Defense of Marriage" Act, so that male homosexuals
> can be encouraged to "change behavior", get married to some nice guy,
behave
> monogamously, and further cut rates of infection -- how large a donation
> shall I put you down for, Bill?
I support the idea of a Life Partner which would get some benefits to
settling down. Of course it is incorrect to suggest that you can't settle
down because you don't have homosexual marriage. Just settle down without
it. Many heterosexual couples never get legally married.
>
> When the Christian Coalition lobbies to have the sex education classes
> in your son's high school inform him that he is safe from AIDS because
> it is a 'gay disease' - how large a donation shall they put you down for?
>
> When that son begins dying of AIDs, will you
> (1) Admit you were wrong about AIDS being a gay disease?
AIDS is not a homosexual only disease. I have never claimed it to be such.
I have no idea what the Christian Coalition is lobbing for and I have not
in the past supported them with any money at all.
> (2) Disown him and let him die alone in the street because he must
> be a lousy faggot?
I wouldn't disown anyone who was my son whether he claimed to be homosexual
or not.
> (3) Surprise us all with a sensible reaction?
>
My reactions are always sensible. They may not agree with your reactions,
but then mine are, as I said, sensible.
Bill Bonde
dion...@infinet.com wrote in article <57cphn$g...@news1.infinet.com>...
> Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
>
> }Because we are not all in the same state.
>
> Alas, Paranoia -- note the capitalization -- is not a state recognized in
> the USA.
I think that capitalization should be used more often, but 'state' in the
context of the 50 we have is not usually capitalized.
>
> }The situation is claimed to be different in Africa which
> }means that the reaction there should be different.
>
> And how so? Condoms would work, so would abstinence. Drug education would
> work, and so would admonitions against prostitution. Harping on the
> dangers of multiple sex partners would work too.
Those things are common to both areas. I don't disagree with that.
>
> Perhaps the drugs aren't as effective in treating AIDS in Africa as they
> are in the States... Do Africans have some sort of "alien biology" that
> renders AZT into something akin to sugar water?
The version of HIV in Africa is supposedly different.
> Please tell us why the solutions that work in the US are not applicable
> in Africa. We're all ears.
>
> }If you are not treating the issue as it relates to a certain place, then
> }you are not treating it correctly.
>
> Ahh... All is made clear now. One can't treat AIDS that occurs in spot X
> the same as spot Y, even though the spots are located mere inches apart.
> Right? They're not "exactly" the same place, are they? Would you stop
> trying to practice medicine without a license? Not only are your
> connotations of treatment bizarre, but your cranial matter seems to be
> malfunctioning as well.
Twist, twist, twist. There is a doctor who supposedly is having success by
treating each patient differently based on how that specific patient reacts
to things.
>
> }This mini-debate is about male homosexuals in the United States claiming
> }that AIDS is not mainly transfered sexually in the United States by male
> }homosexuals.
>
> No, that's your little argument. The rest of us are of a mind that AIDS
is
> a global disease, which is decimating the human population. (Get that? I
> just called it a "human problem". Good golly, Mrs. Molly!)
>
No, the rest of you are trying to pretend that AIDS isn't any greater of an
issue in the United States for male homosexuals as it is for male
heterosexuals.
> }Of course I support
> }abstinence, reducing number of partners and the use of condoms.
>
> And those treatment methods work at preventing the spread of AIDS; even
> if the people in question happen to be hetero. :)
Yes, they do.
>
> }Men were the example used because they were seperated in the CDC report
and
> }because we were talking about them.
>
> "We"? You're the one with the fixation. Leave me out of it.
Fixation on men? I'm heterosexual and male. You are homosexual and male.
Who has the fixation on men?
>
> }In 1995 the number of infections total
> }was 73380. Of those 8093 were from heterosexual means. Many of these
were
> }women who could've gotten it from bisexual males.
>
> Ah expanding the range of "blame" are we? Now we get evil bisexuals to go
> along with the evil homosexuals and drug fiends. How kind of you to start
> diversifying.
I'm talking about what has and is happening. If you want to accept blame
for behaviour, that is up to you.
>
> Get a clue: People who fool around contribute to the spread of AIDS.
> People who inject drugs with dirty needles contribute to the spread of
> AIDS. The sex or orientation of those people is not, in and of itself,
> what spreads AIDS.
>
I've never said that simply being a male homosexual makes you spread AIDS.
You are playing twist, twist, twist again.
Alan Miles
Bill Bonde wrote:
> There is an attempt here and elsewhere to pretend that since male
> homosexuals are attempted to use condoms and reduce the number of partners, they are as likely to aquire HIV as anyone else. By saying that rates for male homosexuals have gone down and rates for teenagers have gone up, people are attempting to get others to infer that those rates are close to the same or the same without actually saying that.
Let me be clearer, then, although I have no idea why you think I claim
gay men in the US have the same risk as "everybody else." *Unprotected*
anal sex is a very effective means of transmitting HIV. People who
enjoy anal sex need to understand how to protect themselves. Lots of
gay men have anal sex. Some number of straight people do too. Few
lesbians do. You repeatedly assert that "anal sex" equals "gay sex"
when it is practiced by all sorts of people. But since a lot of gay men
[not all] enjoy anal sex, most gay men, like me, are committed to
reducing unprotected anal sex. As a result, the infection rate among gay
men has gone down. It isn't zero, where it could be, but it is lower
than it was.
I have said nothing about straight people or about the relative rates of
infection of various demographic groups. I have never claimed that gay
men have the same infection rate as teenagers. How many teens need to
get HIV before it's a problem that needs addressing, Bill? Please
answer this question in public, although you clearly prefer to pose
questions rather than offer solutions.
You have inferred a lot of opinions I, for one, don't espouse. Can we
restrict this thread to facts, please? It's hard to defend stances I
haven't taken.
GdDoggie (Patrick)
On 25 Nov 1996 11:51:48 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>Tony Quirke <qui...@atlantis.actrix.gen.nz> wrote in article
><57bag4$6...@asgard.actrix.gen.nz>...
>> But what is the value of this Truth, Bill ?
>>
>> Does it mean that all faggots are immoral or unclean ?
>> Does it mean that if you're not a faggot, you won't get AIDS ?
>> Does it mean that if we concentrate on the faggots, the rest of our
>> societies are safe from AIDS ?
>>
>We get into this sort of thing any time I point out incorrectness in the
>homosexual position. I never called anyone a 'faggot'. I never said anyone
>was 'unclean'. I never said only homosexuals can or could get AIDS. Please
>don't invent strawmen unless you know a farmer with a crow problem.
Obfuscate, obfuscate, obfuscate.
Do you know HOW to answer a direct question DIRECTLY, Bill, or is it
beyond you?
Alan Miles
Bill Bonde wrote:
>
> Does anyone in this newsgroup have sex with Asian female prostitutes? Let me just say publically that I don't. How about anyone else?
Let me publically state that I'm in a monogamous gay relationship and
have almost zero risk of contracting HIV. You argue over and over and
over like a broken record or a late nite mosquito that gays are the
overwhelming sufferers of HIV. Is it too much to ask you to be precise
instead of making sweeping claims?
Again and again, many people have tried to get you to be less sloppy
with your language. "Gays" are the victims of AIDS you claim. Just
untrue. "People" who have unsafe sex or who share needles are most of
the victims. Most of these people are gay men. Almost none are gay
women. There's a big difference between saying "most gays have HIV" and
"most people with HIV are gay men."
Alan Miles
Bill Bonde wrote:
>
> Are you claiming that current male homosexuals are getting the AIDS > virus at rates lower than heterosexuals who don't use IV drugs?
No, I think most of us are claiming that people who are celibate or who
practice safer sex are less likely to contract HIV that people who
aren't. People like Magic Johnson and Tommy Morrison contracted HIV
because of their behavior. The majority of gays who are HIV- are that
way because of their behavior.
Drop this gay/straight distinction and agree that a gay man who never
has sex has little chance of contracting HIV. People who have anal sex
without a condom are at higher risk.
dion...@infinet.com
Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
}> Alas, Paranoia -- note the capitalization -- is not a state recognized in
}> the USA.
}I think that capitalization should be used more often, but 'state' in the
}context of the 50 we have is not usually capitalized.
I wonder if he'll look closely at that again and notice something...
}The version of HIV in Africa is supposedly different.
Version? Singular? We started at "A". Last I knew, we were up to "I".
There are several strains on both continents.
}Twist, twist, twist. There is a doctor who supposedly is having success by
}treating each patient differently based on how that specific patient reacts
}to things.
And he has AMA recognition? Or is he one of those quack "holistic" chaps
who boost the immune system with psychotherapy in an expensive bottle? Name?
}No, the rest of you are trying to pretend that AIDS isn't any greater of an
}issue in the United States for male homosexuals as it is for male
}heterosexuals.
Well of course it's a greater issue, we were its first victims after all.
Top that off with the fact that we're fewer in number than the hetero
population at large, and of course its somewhat of a problem. No one here
has ever claimed that it isn't a gay problem. What is being taken
exception to is your "it's a gay-only problem".
}> And those treatment methods work at preventing the spread of AIDS; even
}> if the people in question happen to be hetero. :)
}Yes, they do.
(Snipping those words from the phosphors and framing them.)
}> "We"? You're the one with the fixation. Leave me out of it.
}Fixation on men? I'm heterosexual and male. You are homosexual and male.
}Who has the fixation on men?
First: I'm bi. Second, you're the one spending all your time here... And
that time is spent "fixated" on how we're somehow responsible for some
African eating uncooked monkey brains and getting a new disease. What am
I supposedly fixated on? You? Pardon the emesis, I'll go take some Pepto
and be right back.
}I'm talking about what has and is happening. If you want to accept blame
}for behaviour, that is up to you.
<clasping hands joyously> Cool! It's some sort of voluntary prize! Can I
take the blame? Can I? Can I, huh? huh? huh?
'scuse me, more Pepto...
}I've never said that simply being a male homosexual makes you spread AIDS.
True, you've always invoke the word "sex" before.
}You are playing twist, twist, twist again.
The game is called "Twister". And you've have to beg before I'd play it
with you.
--
<a href="http://www.infinet.com/~dionisio">Finger</a> for PGP public key
And the Thought of the Moment (tm) is...
When you're over the hill, you pick up speed.
Alan Miles
Bill Bonde wrote:
>
>I was clearly looking to point out that
> male homosexual behaviour is what brought out this situation in the United States.
Not long ago you were arguing that anal sex was the main spreader of
HIV. Now this.
This homo, for one, has done not a thing to spread HIV. I'd like to
know what exact "male homosexual behavior" you are talking about:
Taste? Wit? Style?
dion...@infinet.com
Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
}People from 13 to 30 are only one percent of the population? Do you get
}your numbers from the same group that claimes that homosexuals are ten
}percent of the population?
"Scotty, this is Kirk. Launch all photon torpedos and fire phasors, not
only is there no intelligent life down here, it actively broadcasts
stupidity. We must destroy it before it takes over the galaxy."
"Cap'n! The phasors are feed'n the beastie! Look Admiral Hightower is on
the screen now! Ock! Its spread to Star Fleet already!!! We're doomed!"
"My. Ship. My. Crew. All being destroyed."
"Jim!"
"Yes Spock?"
"Admiral Hightower has always been as dense as neutronium. That is how he
won the Gold Bonde Award last year."
-------
Anybody else vastly amused with his failure to keep abreast of the topic?
--
<a href="http://www.infinet.com/~dionisio">Finger</a> for PGP public key
And the Thought of the Moment (tm) is...
Pardon me, I seem to have misplaced my three-handled, moss-covered family
gredunza.
dion...@infinet.com
Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
}You don't need marriage to have a long term relationship.
Especially if you're gay! Right, Bill?
--
<a href="http://www.infinet.com/~dionisio">Finger</a> for PGP public key
And the Thought of the Moment (tm) is...
These opinions are shareware.
If you like them, send $10.
Bill Bonde
Alan Miles <ami...@interport.net> wrote in article
> Bill Bonde wrote:
> >
> > Does anyone in this newsgroup have sex with Asian female prostitutes?
Let me just say publically that I don't. How about anyone else?
>
> Let me publically state that I'm in a monogamous gay relationship and
> have almost zero risk of contracting HIV. You argue over and over and
> over like a broken record or a late nite mosquito that gays are the
> overwhelming sufferers of HIV. Is it too much to ask you to be precise
> instead of making sweeping claims?
In the Unitd States, this is the case.
> Again and again, many people have tried to get you to be less sloppy
> with your language. "Gays" are the victims of AIDS you claim. Just
> untrue. "People" who have unsafe sex or who share needles are most of
> the victims. Most of these people are gay men. Almost none are gay
> women. There's a big difference between saying "most gays have HIV" and
> "most people with HIV are gay men."
I know that homosexual women aren't likely to have AIDS because of the lack
of a penis and all that. Also, women tend toward fewer partners. Men tend
toward trying to maximize the number of people that they have sex with
unless they understand that this is morally wrong.
Bill Bonde
dande...@aol.com wrote in article
<19961126084...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
> "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> writes:
>
> >>
> >> }Men were the example used because they were seperated in
> >> }the CDC report and
> >> }because we were talking about them.
> >> [dion...@infinet.com wrote:]
> >> "We"? You're the one with the fixation. Leave me out of it.
>
> >Fixation on men? I'm heterosexual and male. You are homosexual
> >and male. Who has the fixation on men?
>
>
> The fixation is on Gay sex... that being you, Billy. Not just a
> fixation on men, of which you are both guilty, one honestly, one not so
> honestly.
>
> As for who has the greater fixation on male *sex,* then that Oscar
> would go to you. After all, no one would be discussing details if you
> hadn't been so neurotic about them.
>
> Besides, the CDC stats you've posted have been discussed in this
> newsgroup several times before. Very few have claimed they're new, We all
> know the dangers of anal sex... So in the end, you've accomplished very
> little. Yet you must know you've brought up painful memories in many of
> us, and displayed a fixation on gay sex in you. Why is that Billy?
> ...that angry and vindictive fixation of yours?
Damn, I didn't know that. How was I to know that this had been discussed
before? Everyone made it seem that they didn't believe that anal sex was
that big of deal. I haven't been here very long, so I don't know about all
that. Sorry to drum up bad memories.
Bill Bonde
dion...@infinet.com wrote in article <57e8tj$2...@news1.infinet.com>...
> Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
>
> }> Alas, Paranoia -- note the capitalization -- is not a state recognized
in
> }> the USA.
>
> }I think that capitalization should be used more often, but 'state' in
the
> }context of the 50 we have is not usually capitalized.
>
> I wonder if he'll look closely at that again and notice something...
That Paranoia is the fifty first state? I thought that was Canada?
> }The version of HIV in Africa is supposedly different.
>
> Version? Singular? We started at "A". Last I knew, we were up to "I".
> There are several strains on both continents.
I don't know about that many different strains, but than I don't get into
this sort of discussion often. Tell me about it.
> }Twist, twist, twist. There is a doctor who supposedly is having success
by
> }treating each patient differently based on how that specific patient
reacts
> }to things.
>
> And he has AMA recognition? Or is he one of those quack "holistic" chaps
> who boost the immune system with psychotherapy in an expensive bottle?
Name?
I think that he is being attacked right and left by the AMA.
> }No, the rest of you are trying to pretend that AIDS isn't any greater of
an
> }issue in the United States for male homosexuals as it is for male
> }heterosexuals.
>
> Well of course it's a greater issue, we were its first victims after all.
> Top that off with the fact that we're fewer in number than the hetero
> population at large, and of course its somewhat of a problem. No one here
> has ever claimed that it isn't a gay problem. What is being taken
> exception to is your "it's a gay-only problem".
I didn't say that.
>
> }> And those treatment methods work at preventing the spread of AIDS;
even
> }> if the people in question happen to be hetero. :)
>
> }Yes, they do.
>
> (Snipping those words from the phosphors and framing them.)
>
> }> "We"? You're the one with the fixation. Leave me out of it.
>
> }Fixation on men? I'm heterosexual and male. You are homosexual and male.
> }Who has the fixation on men?
>
> First: I'm bi. Second, you're the one spending all your time here... And
Lately I've posted mostly here. I've posted to some christnet.sex and a few
other as well. It is too much to post to a lot at the same time. I used to
post to alt.flame.rushlimbaugh but my newsreader is fucking up on that
group. I blame Bill Gates.
> that time is spent "fixated" on how we're somehow responsible for some
> African eating uncooked monkey brains and getting a new disease. What am
> I supposedly fixated on? You? Pardon the emesis, I'll go take some Pepto
> and be right back.
I don't know. What am I fixated on? Being in a homosexual group?
> }I'm talking about what has and is happening. If you want to accept blame
> }for behaviour, that is up to you.
>
> <clasping hands joyously> Cool! It's some sort of voluntary prize! Can I
> take the blame? Can I? Can I, huh? huh? huh?
Do you have AIDS? ....
>
> 'scuse me, more Pepto...
...or do you just have gas?
> }I've never said that simply being a male homosexual makes you spread
AIDS.
>
> True, you've always invoke the word "sex" before.
I said that anal sex was the method of choice for transmitting the virus
supposedly causing AIDS.
>
> }You are playing twist, twist, twist again.
>
> The game is called "Twister". And you've have to beg before I'd play it
> with you.
No, that's a game I want to play with Helen Hunt.
Bill Bonde
dion...@infinet.com wrote in article <57cqtn$g...@news1.infinet.com>...
> Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
>
> }> > I don't want to ignore Africa. I want to pay attention to the
problem right
> }> > here where it seems almost all of us live.
>
> }> You mean Planet Earth, yes ?
>
> }Why don't you want to talk about the United States? This is amazing. The
> }willful denial of the situation is just amazing.
>
> <Gobi Desert dry> Yes. Do tell.
>
> }Does anyone in this newsgroup have sex with Asian female prostitutes?
Let
> }me just say publically that I don't. How about anyone else?
>
> How about American prostitutes? <looking innocent... and failing>
I have never even considered having sex with anyone in exchange for money.
In my view, it is better to not have sex since for me sex is more than the
exchange of bodilly fluids.
> }You get typhoid fever without having to have sex. It exists in China. It
> }exists in the US. There are different strains.
>
> Yes. So? Cut to the point man.
I was talking about how the precautions against typhoid fever in China and
the US are different. The treatments are different too. The same is true of
malaria. In some cases you take one drug to prevent it and in others you
take another. The places where each drug works best can be pretty close
relative to where most of are right now.
Bill Bonde
Alan Miles <ami...@interport.net> wrote in article
> Bill Bonde wrote:
> >
> >I was clearly looking to point out that
> > male homosexual behaviour is what brought out this situation in the
United States.
>
> Not long ago you were arguing that anal sex was the main spreader of
> HIV. Now this.
It was the male homosexual anal sex with lots of partners that moved the
AIDS problem along in the United States, in case you didn't know.
> This homo, for one, has done not a thing to spread HIV. I'd like to
> know what exact "male homosexual behavior" you are talking about:
> Taste? Wit? Style?
I suppose you've never had anal sex. Well, neither have I. I guess we are
both on the side lines.
Bill Bonde
GdDoggie (Patrick) <gddo...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<3299d2bb...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
> On 25 Nov 1996 06:01:08 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Alan Miles <ami...@interport.net> wrote in article
> ><32991A...@interport.net>...
> >> Bill Bonde wrote:
> >> > We can talk about AIDS in any country you want, just admit first
that
> >in the United States most sexually transmitted cases of AIDS are from
male
> >homosexual and male bisexuals.
> >>
> >> Just explain first why this is important or relevant.
> >>
> >It is important because it shows that more effort getting male
homosexuals
> >to change behaviour is in order.
>
> Oh, is that your main concern? Sorry, but I think your real intent
> (whether you come out and say so or not) is to show that gay men and
> IV drug users constitute the majority of cases in the US, so:
>
> 1) heterosexuals (in the US) have little to worry about, and so
> shouldn't have to shoulder any of the $ cost of the epidemic or
> research to stem the same; and
I support research into the AIDS problem.
>
> 2) heterosexists like yourself should feel free to use the available
> statistics to forward THEIR agenda, and justify continued
> discrimination against gay men.
I can use statistics to forward my agenda. I have that right.
> I know...you've never said anything for or against gay men, have you?
> The only reason you read/post to this newsgroup is that your
> newsreader is broken, right? Well, shit or get off the pot, already.
I fixed the newsreader more or less. It still doesn't let me get more
alt.flame.rushlimbaugh messages.
GdDoggie (Patrick)
On 26 Nov 1996 01:55:28 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
<snip>
>You don't need marriage to have a long term relationship.
And marriage is CERTAINLY no impediment to having multiple sex
partners. Of EITHER sex.
Bill Bonde
dion...@infinet.com wrote in article <57e9g3$2...@news1.infinet.com>...
> Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
>
> }People from 13 to 30 are only one percent of the population? Do you get
> }your numbers from the same group that claimes that homosexuals are ten
> }percent of the population?
>
> "Scotty, this is Kirk. Launch all photon torpedos and fire phasors, not
> only is there no intelligent life down here, it actively broadcasts
> stupidity. We must destroy it before it takes over the galaxy."
>
> "Cap'n! The phasors are feed'n the beastie! Look Admiral Hightower is on
> the screen now! Ock! Its spread to Star Fleet already!!! We're doomed!"
>
> "My. Ship. My. Crew. All being destroyed."
>
> "Jim!"
>
> "Yes Spock?"
>
> "Admiral Hightower has always been as dense as neutronium. That is how he
> won the Gold Bonde Award last year."
>
You defend a statement claiming that people who are 13 to 30 are only one
percent of the population with a silly personal attack. I expect this sort
of thing from you.
Bill Bonde
Alan Miles <ami...@interport.net> wrote in article
> Bill Bonde wrote:
> > There is an attempt here and elsewhere to pretend that since male
> > homosexuals are attempted to use condoms and reduce the number of
partners, they are as likely to aquire HIV as anyone else. By saying that
rates for male homosexuals have gone down and rates for teenagers have gone
up, people are attempting to get others to infer that those rates are close
to the same or the same without actually saying that.
>
> Let me be clearer, then, although I have no idea why you think I claim
> gay men in the US have the same risk as "everybody else." *Unprotected*
> anal sex is a very effective means of transmitting HIV. People who
> enjoy anal sex need to understand how to protect themselves. Lots of
> gay men have anal sex. Some number of straight people do too. Few
> lesbians do. You repeatedly assert that "anal sex" equals "gay sex"
> when it is practiced by all sorts of people. But since a lot of gay men
> [not all] enjoy anal sex, most gay men, like me, are committed to
> reducing unprotected anal sex. As a result, the infection rate among gay
> men has gone down. It isn't zero, where it could be, but it is lower
> than it was.
>
And it is higher than heterosexuals even if it has gone down. That is
something that it appears attempts are constantly made to avoid.
> I have said nothing about straight people or about the relative rates of
> infection of various demographic groups. I have never claimed that gay
> men have the same infection rate as teenagers. How many teens need to
> get HIV before it's a problem that needs addressing, Bill? Please
> answer this question in public, although you clearly prefer to pose
> questions rather than offer solutions.
>
> You have inferred a lot of opinions I, for one, don't espouse. Can we
> restrict this thread to facts, please? It's hard to defend stances I
> haven't taken.
I have inferred only what you have implied.
GdDoggie (Patrick)
On 26 Nov 1996 01:53:09 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
<snip>
>I support research into the AIDS problem.
As far as it forwards your agenda.
>> 2) heterosexists like yourself should feel free to use the available
>> statistics to forward THEIR agenda, and justify continued
>> discrimination against gay men.
>I can use statistics to forward my agenda. I have that right.
So you DON'T deny that the BONDE Agenda is a heterosexist one?
>> I know...you've never said anything for or against gay men, have you?
>> The only reason you read/post to this newsgroup is that your
>> newsreader is broken, right? Well, shit or get off the pot, already.
>I fixed the newsreader more or less. It still doesn't let me get more
>alt.flame.rushlimbaugh messages.
You avoid the issue. Not very well, but you avoid it nonetheless.
GdDoggie (Patrick)
On 26 Nov 1996 02:02:59 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
<snip>
>I was asked if I was one of those IDIOTIC bigots that tried to keep black
>students from your school.... I said that I don't run a school. That is the
>correct answer to that question.
I repeat, Bill: You don't have to RUN a school to be a bigot and/or to
try to keep black students FROM said school. More word games so as to
OBFUSCATE.
>>Bill. So...are you a bigot or not? To borrow one of YOUR
>> pet phrases, "Stop obfuscating."
>Bigot is an attack term. It is like homophobe in that it is used by people
>who disagree with them as a personal attack. Since bigot doesn't actually
>have a meaning, it is impossible for anyone to be a bigot.
bigot - noun - one obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his own
church, party, belief, or opinion
Sounds simple enough a term to me, but let's make this easy on you.
Are you a racist? A sexist? A heterosexist? Are those simple enough
questions for you?
>> >> Think about it for change. Racism is wrong, so why then is homophobia
>> >> right?
>> >Discriminating against someone based on race is wrong so therefore
>> >discrimination based on anything is wrong? That is a gigantic leap.
>>
>> discrimination - noun - the act, practice, or an instance of
>> discriminating categorically rather than individually; prejudiced or
>> prejudicial outlook, action, or treatment
>>
>> Doesn't sound like a GOOD thing, does it?
>It doesn't sound good or bad to me. Where did you get that definition?
Webster's.
GdDoggie (Patrick)
On 26 Nov 1996 01:58:04 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
<snip>
>It is easier to get AIDS,
>then get pregnant.
Really? Where did you get THOSE statistics from, Bill?
Bill Bonde
GdDoggie (Patrick) <gddo...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<329a46c7...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
What question did I not answer?
Bill Bonde
Bruce Garrett <bru...@access.digex.net> wrote in article
<57dapb$e...@krypto.zippo.com>...
> dion...@infinet.com () writes...
>
> >> Tell me if it is male homosexuals or heterosexuals who are having a
> >> higher rate of infection of HIV today in the United States from sexual
> >> means.
>
> D> I can't. You know very well that those results will not be
quantifiable
> D> for another 5 years, at least. But one questions why you are limiting
> D> AIDS infection rates to men only, are women somehow not important?
>
> It allows him to gut the AIDS figures for heterosexuals. If we
> limit the AIDS stats to only one sex, what we get are =all= the partners
> of homosexual relationships, but only some of the partners in
heterosexual
> relationships.
>
> So we have a report that only accounts AIDS in males. Let's say we
> have a promiscuous homosexual man who became infected by way of another
> homosexual man and himself infects a dozen partners. Now we have
fourteen
> homosexual AIDS cases (the man who was infected, the man he was infected
> by, and the men he infected). Let's also say we have a promiscuous
> heterosexual man who became infected from a female partner and himself
> infects a dozen female partners. Because we are only reporting the
> statistics for males, we have here only 1 heterosexual AIDS case.
>
> This nifty little bit of statistical gerrymandering deflates the
> figures for heterosexuals profoundly, and allows people like Bill to keep
> insisting that AIDS is predominately a homosexual problem. That's why he
> does it.
>
The trouble with this claim is that I posted the total numbers for males
and females in 1995 and the heterosexually infected percentage was 11%.
This includes women infected by bisexual males which are still most of the
cases of heterosexually transmitted HIV.
Bill Bonde
dion...@infinet.com wrote in article <57cqgj$g...@news1.infinet.com>...
> Bill Bonde (bi...@halcyom.com) said:
>
> }I think that male homosexuals should stop claiming that they have the
> }problem covered.
>
> We're not. The problem won't be "covered" until the disease is destroyed.
> I've seen no one on here even try to infer that the problem was covered.
That would be a painful use of the word 'infer'.
> }A look at the CDC male HIV+ numbers suggests that the rate
> }of infection is nowhere near that of the heterosexual male population or
> }any other population other than IV drug users.
>
> Give it five years: Which -- incidentally -- is about the period of time
> that it will take for the people infected today to start showing
symptoms.
> The CDC records are not "snapshots of today's infections" but rather
> "pictures of infections that were acquired a few years ago".
I thought that looking at HIV and AIDS would show more heterosexual HIV
than AIDS, but the numbers are not very different. This is not how it was
predicted.
>
> }There is an attempt here and elsewhere to pretend that since male
> }homosexuals are attempted to use condoms and reduce the number of
partners,
>
> Tactics which are working mind you.
Infection rates are not down to that of the general population. Why is
that? If we have male homosexuals intentionally getting HIV by having sex
with AIDS patients, how can we really claim this is working?
> }they are as likely to aquire HIV as anyone else. By saying that rates
for
> }male homosexuals have gone down and rates for teenagers have gone up,
> }people are attempting to get others to infer that those rates are close
to
> }the same or the same without actually saying that.
>
> And just a few years ago, people thought that the only hetero infections
> were from blood transfusions... Odd that.
>
> }If this was a group where a lot of people were saying that heterosexual
sex
> }with many partners is fine, I would be arguing against that. I certainly
> }don't believe that that is moral or safe.
>
> Nobody's stopping you from posting to alt.polygamy you know. Not that you
> will of course.
>
I didn't know there was an alt.polygamy.
GdDoggie (Patrick)
On 26 Nov 1996 10:18:22 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
<snip>
>I know that homosexual women aren't likely to have AIDS because of the lack
>of a penis and all that. Also, women tend toward fewer partners.
Newflash, Bill: you don't have to have a penis or have had contact
with one to have AIDS.
>Men tend
>toward trying to maximize the number of people that they have sex with
>unless they understand that this is morally wrong.
Meaning that GAY men in particular maximize the # of people that they
have sex with because they're INCAPABLE of "understanding" morals of
any sort, right?
Just come out and say what you mean, Bill. It's awful tiring having to
read between the lines in your posts.
Bill Bonde
GdDoggie (Patrick) <gddo...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<329b24a9...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
> On 26 Nov 1996 01:58:04 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >It is easier to get AIDS,
> >then get pregnant.
>
> Really? Where did you get THOSE statistics from, Bill?
>
Certainly this is true if you are having anal sex.
GdDoggie (Patrick)
On 26 Nov 1996 10:16:00 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
<snip>
>It was the male homosexual anal sex with lots of partners that moved the
>AIDS problem along in the United States, in case you didn't know.
Anal sex is not the only activity that contributes to the spread of
HIV, nor is the practice of anal sex, or of having multiple sex
partners, limited to homosexuals, male or female. Anal sex also is
not, and has never been, practiced by every male in the gay community.
As far as moving the 'AIDS problem' along in the US, Bill, I don't
think that you give enough credit to the Government (for the first 8
years of the epidemic run by someone who didn't MENTION AIDS or HIV in
public until he was well into his second term) and various and sundry
religious denominations (which STILL object to any (safe) sex
education other than 'Abstain'), among others.
The feeling was, and still is in many corners, that it was "a gay
disease, so why should we care and why should we bother?"
THAT is what moved the problem along in the US.
Bill Bonde
GdDoggie (Patrick) <gddo...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<329b23be...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
> On 26 Nov 1996 02:02:59 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >I was asked if I was one of those IDIOTIC bigots that tried to keep
black
> >students from your school.... I said that I don't run a school. That is
the
> >correct answer to that question.
>
> I repeat, Bill: You don't have to RUN a school to be a bigot and/or to
> try to keep black students FROM said school. More word games so as to
> OBFUSCATE.
I also don't know where your school is.
> >>Bill. So...are you a bigot or not? To borrow one of YOUR
> >> pet phrases, "Stop obfuscating."
> >Bigot is an attack term. It is like homophobe in that it is used by
people
> >who disagree with them as a personal attack. Since bigot doesn't
actually
> >have a meaning, it is impossible for anyone to be a bigot.
>
> bigot - noun - one obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his own
> church, party, belief, or opinion
>
> Sounds simple enough a term to me, but let's make this easy on you.
It is originally an attack term. It is still used that way. Since you are
not tolerant of me and my views, you must be a bigot.
> Are you a racist?
No.
>A sexist?
I don't know what this means.
> A heterosexist?
I don't know what this means.
>Are those simple enough
> questions for you?
>
No, I need to have some words defined for me.
Bill Bonde
Andrew Hall <ah...@remus.cs.uml.edu> wrote in article
<opd8x08...@remus.cs.uml.edu>...
> >>>>> Bill Bonde writes:
>
> >> If it weren't for the fact that most teenagers are using condoms
> >> inspiteof Fundamentalist Christian and Papal opposition to condom
> >> availability, you would see the AIDS epidemic among heterosexuals
> >> racing past the gay population in both rate and in numbers.
>
> Bill> How are they having babies while using condoms? It is easier to
get AIDS,
> Bill> then get pregnant.
>
> It is much easier to get pregnant than to get HIV.
> Condoms have a very low failure rate with respect
> to HIV transmission. They have a relatively high
> failure rate with respect to pregnancy.
I don't understand how that could be the case. The virus is very, very
small and the sperm are very large. How could one get through and the other
not? Unless the virus needs to be rubbed in in direct contract and the
sperm have their own method of getting where they need to go.
Bill Bonde
GdDoggie (Patrick) <gddo...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<329b5f9f...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
> On 26 Nov 1996 10:16:00 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >It was the male homosexual anal sex with lots of partners that moved the
> >AIDS problem along in the United States, in case you didn't know.
>
> Anal sex is not the only activity that contributes to the spread of
> HIV, nor is the practice of anal sex, or of having multiple sex
> partners, limited to homosexuals, male or female. Anal sex also is
> not, and has never been, practiced by every male in the gay community.
What percentage who didn't practice anal sex have AIDS?
>
> As far as moving the 'AIDS problem' along in the US, Bill, I don't
> think that you give enough credit to the Government (for the first 8
> years of the epidemic run by someone who didn't MENTION AIDS or HIV in
> public until he was well into his second term) and various and sundry
> religious denominations (which STILL object to any (safe) sex
> education other than 'Abstain'), among others.
Abstain never gets any real play and it is important beyond just the AIDS
issue.
Bill Bonde
GdDoggie (Patrick) <gddo...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<329b2461...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
> On 26 Nov 1996 01:55:28 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >You don't need marriage to have a long term relationship.
>
> And marriage is CERTAINLY no impediment to having multiple sex
> partners. Of EITHER sex.
What is your point?
JSRT
Bill Bonde wrote:
>
> Male homosexuals in the United States are responsible for jump starting the
> AIDS problem in the United States. The behaviour of this group of people
> and then the behaviour of the IV drug using community brought this issue
> forth much more quickly than it otherwise would have.
Male homosexuals in the US were the victims of this terrible disease.
That does not make them "responsible" for the disease any more than
victims of theft or burglary are responsible for crimes committed
against them for having all those posessions to begin with. Certainly
even Bill Bonde must realize that no one willfully CHOSE to get this or
any other fatal disease.
Now if we want to talk responsibility let's think about the Reagan white
house which did nothing, nada, zip for AIDS prevention/education, unlike
the leadership of most other WEstern nations.
~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~
js...@accessone.com ~ Joseph Sparacio and Richmond Tracy
"...she said it was because I was to have a happy ending,
and it was just like a book; and I wondered what books
she'd been reading." -- M.A.
Alan Miles
John De Salvio wrote:
> While more effort to get male heterosexuals to change their behavior
> is not in order???
>
> Homosexuals ARE changing behavior, and HAVE changed behavior.
> But we are still trying to teach kids that they are not invincible.
Unfortunately, attitudes like Bill's lead to straight teens thinking
AIDS isn't a problem for them. I'm wondering how many straight teens
have to contract HIV through unsafe sex before it's a problem.
Alan Miles
> On 25 Nov 1996 11:51:48 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>
>We get into this sort of thing any time I point out incorrectness in the homosexual position. I never called anyone a 'faggot'. I never said anyonen was 'unclean'. I never said only homosexuals can or could get AIDS. Please don't invent strawmen unless you know a farmer with a crow problem.
Let me tell you what you HAVE done.
You have said - right above this - that there is a "homosexual
position."
You have claimed that this "position" recklessly ignores the facts in
some sort of underhanded attempt to fool straight people into thinking
that HIV will be a rampant pandemic.
You have claimed that no one gay who is actively fighting HIV is
motivated by the sincere worry that HIV poses a threat to many people.
You admit that "only" 11% of US AIDS victims are heterosexuals yet also
claim that this means that we shouldn't try to protect heterosexuals
from HIV.
You acknowledge that many gay men became infected before anyone knew HIV
existed. You refuse to admit that the 11% number might just be the
result of our successful efforts to get many straight people to protect
themselves.
Finally, you go on and on and on as if there is something about the
suggestion that HIV isn't a "gay male" disease but won't 'fess up.
Alan Miles
Bill Bonde wrote:
> I suppose you've never had anal sex. Well, neither have I. I guess we > are both on the side lines.
For the record I've had anal sex. I've never had it without a condom.
My boyfriend of two years just isn't into it. I'm HIV-. None of this
disqualifies me from being "on the sidelines." You, on the other hand,
seem to argue that anal sex is just uniformly dangerous whether the
participants are HIV- and monogamous or not or whether they use condoms
or not.
We are make careless arguments at times. You don't seem to even aim for
precision when your fingers start attacking your keyboard.
Ward Stewart
"Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>GdDoggie (Patrick) <gddo...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
><32993739...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
>> On 24 Nov 1996 08:24:55 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>>
>> >KiiLA <lav...@rpi.edu> wrote in article <3297E2...@rpi.edu>...
>> >> If male homosexuals with more than one partner are the reason for the
>> >> AID's problem, then what are you so worried for jackass? Are you a
>> >Did I say that I was worried? I think you change the subject.
>> >
>> >
>> >> closet queer or something? Besides, what makes homosexuals so damn
>> >This is a strange passtime for people on this group. Calling anyone who
>> >disagrees a closeted homosexual.
>> >
>> >
>> >> different from the rest of us? Are you one of those IDIOTIC bigots
>that
>> >> tried to keep black students from your school b/c they were different?
>> >I don't run a school.
>>
>> You don't to have to run a school, a business, or any other entity to
>> be a bigot,
>I was asked if I was one of those IDIOTIC bigots that tried to keep black
>students from your school.... I said that I don't run a school. That is the
>correct answer to that question.
No Bill, it is not the "correct answer," it is the evasive
answer --
You have made it abundantly clear that you think that the
civil rights movement was wrong and that your list of those
against whom one should discriminate includes blacks.
>>Bill. So...are you a bigot or not? To borrow one of YOUR
>> pet phrases, "Stop obfuscating."
>Bigot is an attack term. It is like homophobe in that it is used by people
>who disagree with them as a personal attack. Since bigot doesn't actually
>have a meaning, it is impossible for anyone to be a bigot.
Indeed, it does have a meaning, as does homophobe and you
have been utterly clear as to where you stand. \
Indeed, in your case "bigot" may be a mild term to be used
in place of klansman or nazi, each of which might be nearer
the mark.
ward
*************************************************************
"Freedom and justice cannot be parceled out in pieces to suit
political convenience. Like Martin, I don't believe you can
stand for freedom for one group of people and deny it to others."
Coretta Scott King
***********************************************************
Bill Bonde
GdDoggie (Patrick) <gddo...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
<329a469f...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
> On 25 Nov 1996 11:42:32 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>
> >GdDoggie (Patrick) <gddo...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
> ><329936fb...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
> >> On 24 Nov 1996 03:32:36 GMT, "Bill Bonde" <bi...@halcyom.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >> >Ward Stewart <wste...@hi.net> wrote in article
> >> >> Once again disingenuous -- (that is a fancy word for lying
> >> >> in your stinking teeth!)
> >> >>
> >> >> You have no wish to pay attention to the probelms and issues
> >> >> of AIDS anywhere -- your transparent wish is to find
> >> >> something, anything that you can, in your hatefulness, blame
> >> >> on homosexuals.
> >> >>
> >> >Don't be silly. AIDS can't be blamed in any way on female
homosexuals. At
> >> >it can't be blamed on male homosexuals who aren't having more than
one
> >> >partner, so since you all are so keen on homosexual marriage, I
figure you
> >> >are either female homosexuals or male homosexuals with only one
partner and
> >> >therefore aren't responsible for the AIDS problem.
> >>
> >> Huh? Did someone say something about lesbians? Did someone say
> >> lesbians were responsible for the AIDS pandemic? Did you bother to
> >> read what you attempt to respond to?
> >>
> >Do you? He said that I was just looking to blame homosexuals for the
AIDS
> >problem to vent my hatefulness. I stated that since female homosexuals
were
> >not responsible for the AIDS situation, I was clearly not just looking
to
> >blame homosexuals for the problem. I was clearly looking to point out
that
> >male homosexual behaviour is what brought out this situation in the
United
> >States. This was then combines with IV drug users behaviour several
years
> >later.
>
> So, in other words, he should have been more specific, saying that you
> attempt to assign blame to MALE homosexuals for the AIDS problem (in
> the US)?
>
> Let's not play word games, Bill. Stop obfuscating, already.
Ward Stewart
Bill was asked --
>>
>> When that son begins dying of AIDs, will you
>> (1) Admit you were wrong about AIDS being a gay disease?
>AIDS is not a homosexual only disease. I have never claimed it to be such.
>I have no idea what the Christian Coalition is lobbing for . .
Since your positions and theirs overlap almpst perfectly and
since many of the hateful assertions you make were first
heard from the religious fright I must suspect that you are
not being perfectly forthcoming with this answer.
>> (2) Disown him and let him die alone in the street because he must
>> be a lousy faggot?
>I wouldn't disown anyone who was my son whether he claimed
>to be homosexual or not.
In other words, no child of your could possibly actually BE
a homosexual -- he can only "claim " to be one.
>> (3) Surprise us all with a sensible reaction?
>>
>My reactions are always sensible. They may not agree with your reactions,
>but then mine are, as I said, sensible.
Your "reactions" are only sensible when viewed from the
position of a bigot and hatemonger -- from the shore of
decency you are beyond all reason.
ward
************************************************************
"The very purpose of a bill of rights is to withdraw certain
subjects from..political controversy, to place them beyond the
reach of majorities."
Justice Robert Jackson 1943