: I feel that I should say thanx for the kind words in your above post. At the same time I want to point out that charges of 'homophobia' is one of the Left's great bogeymen. To disagree that homosexuality is abnormal is the same as declareing that the sun doesn't rise in the East, that men walk upright and that rain falls. In laboratory tests, 86% of people responded sexually to same-sex stimuli; some to a greater, some to a lesser extent. The large majority of people are capable of responding sexually to either sex; and humanity is one of the 200+ species of vertebrate known to exhibit homosexual behaviour and non-reproductive heterosexual behaviour.
Again, your intolerance has no scientific basis, Frenchy.
: Homosexuals lied about the supposed genetic basis of their proclivity, for obvious political reasons, and when the scientific evidence failed to materialize they switched tactics. Now the mantra is 'consenting adults', another sacred cow being foisted on the public by the Left.
In other words, according to your own words, the right of the consenting individual; and the privacy of the consenting individual are SUBORDINATE to your moral code.
In other words, you retain the right to interfere in the lives of others whilst insisting that the G'mint has no right to interfere in yours.
I'm loath to say this, especially given the aura around the word, but you are a and your comments are .
There is simply no other term that fits the bill.
: Homosexuals have additionally aided in creating the lie that HIV/AIDS is a disease that can strike anyone, patently untrue and in fact strikes those who go out of their way to contract it.
I quote from an older post of mine on the subject;
"The disease we know of as AIDS is one strain of the Primate Lentivirus group of the Lentivirus genus of the family Retroviridae. Different strains attack different groups.
To quote from the "AIDS in Africa" paper (from the World Journal of Microbiology & Biotechnology (1995) 11, 135-143)
"If AIDS in Africa is the same condition with the same cause as anywhere else in the world then AIDS in Africa and AIDS in the West should be identical. This is not the case and what is called AIDS in Africa is almost unrecognizably different from AIDS in the West, so much so that if African patients suddenly switched continents, very few Africans would remain AIDS cases. This is due to the existence of multiple AIDS definitions, one for Africa (the same for adults and children), one for adults in North America, Europe and Australia, one for children in these countries and one for Latin America. "
This may seem like a digression, but the reason the western AIDS is seen as a "gay plague" is that transmission through heterosexual contact is only 7% likely after repeated unprotected heterosexual exposure to the disease.
In Africa, it acts as a regular STD, with 80% transmission rates after a few unprotected heterosexual exposures to the disease. If that strain were to make it over to the West and mutate to attack the Caucasian genotype, the myth of AIDS being a "gay plague" would very quickly become extinct (as would a lot of people who thought themselves "safe").
In other words, your grip on medicine is flaky and not borne out by the evidence. Much like everything else you've posted to the Debating Rooms.
Farinata.
None.
