Is sex ed working? Risky gay sex increasing as well as HIV infections

[Cowman]

'Barebacking,' Or Unsafe Gay Sex, Is On The Rise Along With HIV/AIDS (VIDEO)

So with the acceptance of the gay lifestyle comes the rise in HIV and aids?

How the fuck do you even come to those idiotic conclusions. It's the unprotected sex part, you big dumb idiot.

What, is your solution to stop gay people having sex? How are you going to accomplish that?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Is sex ed working? Risky gay sex increasing as well as HIV infections

Hmmmmmmmmmm.....and, this impacts you, HOW???​

 

[novasteve]

Now that california liberals want to ban smoking in homes, do you think the same nanny govermnet should do something about gay men?

 

[novasteve]

Is sex ed working? Risky gay sex increasing as well as HIV infections

Hmmmmmmmmmm.....and, this impacts you, HOW???​

Monetary costs and opportunity cost. THe money spent treating HIV could be used on illnesses not entirely preventable. And the time spent on AIDs research could be used on other research.

 

[Seawytch]

Is sex ed working? Risky gay sex increasing as well as HIV infections

Hmmmmmmmmmm.....and, this impacts you, HOW???​

Monetary costs and opportunity cost. THe money spent treating HIV could be used on illnesses not entirely preventable. And the time spent on AIDs research could be used on other research.

Why do you single out HIV? All STDs are "preventable". That's a rhetorical question. You're a flaming homophobe, that's why.

 

[novasteve]

Hmmmmmmmmmm.....and, this impacts you, HOW???​

Monetary costs and opportunity cost. THe money spent treating HIV could be used on illnesses not entirely preventable. And the time spent on AIDs research could be used on other research.

Why do you single out HIV? All STDs are "preventable". That's a rhetorical question. You're a flaming homophobe, that's why.

You are completely wrong. YOu can still get HPV and herpes from even using a condom that doesn't break/fail. You're starting to sound like an abstinance only person because that's the ONLY way you could prevent STDS 100%

 

[Seawytch]

Monetary costs and opportunity cost. THe money spent treating HIV could be used on illnesses not entirely preventable. And the time spent on AIDs research could be used on other research.

Why do you single out HIV? All STDs are "preventable". That's a rhetorical question. You're a flaming homophobe, that's why.

You are completely wrong. YOu can still get HPV and herpes from even using a condom that doesn't break/fail. You're starting to sound like an abstinance only person because that's the ONLY way you could prevent STDS 100%

I'm not the one arguing to take away funding for HIV or to prosecute people infected with HIV, you are.

Condoms and STDs: Fact Sheet for Public Health Personnel

Again, why do you single out HIV? All STDs are preventable. Do you believe that all funding for STDs should end, yes or no?

 

[Katzndogz]

Abstinence is not the only way to make STDs 100% preventable. The alternative is even worse and more oppressive. It's called monogamy.

 

[AmyNation]

Rarely... legislate it specifically and go after it aggressively.

It's a very difficult crime to prove, which is why cases are rare. You typically have 2 people with opposing stories and nothing else to go on.

It is not difficult. Someone with diagnosed HIV has a record of that diagnosis- meaning they know they are infectious.

And how do you prove they didnt tell their partner?

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Monetary costs and opportunity cost. THe money spent treating HIV could be used on illnesses not entirely preventable. And the time spent on AIDs research could be used on other research.

Why do you single out HIV? All STDs are "preventable". That's a rhetorical question. You're a flaming homophobe, that's why.

You are completely wrong. YOu can still get HPV and herpes from even using a condom that doesn't break/fail.

Bullshit.

There's no legitimate-source that verifies that.​

 

[novasteve]

Why do you single out HIV? All STDs are "preventable". That's a rhetorical question. You're a flaming homophobe, that's why.

You are completely wrong. YOu can still get HPV and herpes from even using a condom that doesn't break/fail.

Bullshit.

There's no legitimate-source that verifies that.​

https://www.google.com/url?q=http:/...wQFjAC&usg=AFQjCNGN54GBZqLD46F9f_KffT3qFBxemQ

 

[novasteve]

Idiot

Condoms not effective against HPV or herpes - SFGate

 

[Katzndogz]

How many STDs are transmitted by bodily fluids without the vehicle of sex? You don't need to have sex to transmit HIV for instance. An open cut or sore will do.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Is sex ed working? Risky gay sex increasing as well as HIV infections

Hmmmmmmmmmm.....and, this impacts you, HOW???​

Monetary costs and opportunity cost. THe money spent treating HIV could be used on illnesses not entirely preventable. And the time spent on AIDs research could be used on other research.

Stand-down, Skippy.​

March 3, 2013

Baby Born With HIV; Cured??​

"A baby born with the AIDS virus two years ago in Mississippi who was put on antiretroviral therapy within hours of birth appears to have been cured of the infection, researchers said Sunday at a scientific conference in Atlanta.

Whether the cure is complete and permanent, or only partial and long-lasting, is not certain. Either way, the highly unusual case raises hope for the more than 300,000 babies born with the infection around the world each year."

.

.

.

.

 

[novasteve]

Hmmmmmmmmmm.....and, this impacts you, HOW???​

Monetary costs and opportunity cost. THe money spent treating HIV could be used on illnesses not entirely preventable. And the time spent on AIDs research could be used on other research.

Stand-down, Skippy.​

March 3, 2013

Baby Born With HIV; Cured??​

"A baby born with the AIDS virus two years ago in Mississippi who was put on antiretroviral therapy within hours of birth appears to have been cured of the infection, researchers said Sunday at a scientific conference in Atlanta.

Whether the cure is complete and permanent, or only partial and long-lasting, is not certain. Either way, the highly unusual case raises hope for the more than 300,000 babies born with the infection around the world each year."

.

.

.

.

Noticed you ignored my link about condoms

 

[clevergirl]

It's a very difficult crime to prove, which is why cases are rare. You typically have 2 people with opposing stories and nothing else to go on.

It is not difficult. Someone with diagnosed HIV has a record of that diagnosis- meaning they know they are infectious.

And how do you prove they didnt tell their partner?

Would you willingly have unprotected sex with an HIV infected person? But I digress, it shouldn't matter. The law should just exist. And it should be criminally prosecuted.

 

[Katzndogz]

Finding a cure that works once every million or so times, makes spreading the disease acceptable. Why bother changing behavior so that the disease isn't spread to others. It's not responsibility. Finding a cure is the responsibility of others so as to make the licentious lifestyle safe.

 

[AmyNation]

It is not difficult. Someone with diagnosed HIV has a record of that diagnosis- meaning they know they are infectious.

And how do you prove they didnt tell their partner?

Would you willingly have unprotected sex with an HIV infected person? But I digress, it shouldn't matter. The law should just exist. And it should be criminally prosecuted.

Would I? No. But it's not against the law to have sex with someone who has HIV/AIDS.

As I've repeatedly said, it IS agaisnt the law, and it has been prosecuted before. Making a new specific "HIV" law won't change how often its prosecuted.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Not one of the above posts asks the obvious question: Why?

It could be that many gay men live in the moment because a large sement of the population hates them (without knowing them) and Jefferson's words don't apply to them - We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness

 

[clevergirl]

And how do you prove they didnt tell their partner?

Would you willingly have unprotected sex with an HIV infected person? But I digress, it shouldn't matter. The law should just exist. And it should be criminally prosecuted.

Would I? No. But it's not against the law to have sex with someone who has HIV/AIDS.

As I've repeatedly said, it IS agaisnt the law, and it has been prosecuted before. Making a new specific "HIV" law won't change how often its prosecuted.

Wrong- it would make a difference. Law enforcement is often frustrated by jurisdictional differences in laws that prevent prosecutions.

Without a law there is no "against the law". There are a few areas in the country that do have specific laws that help prosecute- but I am talking about legislation that can get signed in each state- period.