April 19, 2006
POLITICAL CORRECTNESS = DEATH:
Decades of Denial About AIDS (Jacob Laksin, April 22, 2006, FrontPageMagazine.com)
[M]ore than one out of every four gay males living in San Francisco--nearly 26 percent--is infected with the HIV virus. Of the estimated 63,577 gay males over the age of 15 who call the city home, a total of 16,401 test positive for HIV. Those findings accord with years of research showing that HIV, far from an “equal opportunity virus,” targets specific groups, especially homosexual men and intravenous drug users.Yet, even with this evidence at his disposal, McFarland admitted that he had difficulty calculating the number of gay men infected with HIV because of what he termed “sensitivities over the issue.” Those “sensitivities” have a long and tragic history. [...]
What made the resurgence all the more regrettable is the fact that common-sense measures -- like mandatory testing for HIV -- could have prevented many of the new cases. A 2001 report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), for instance, found that 40 percent of AIDS sufferers did not discover that they had the virus until ten years after their infection. For many, that was ten years too late.
Yet many on the doctrinaire left declared against testing. David Webber, the editor of the treatise AIDS and the Law and a contributor to The Nation, assured his readers that “proponents of mandatory testing for HIV appear to have been motivated merely by a desire to inflict harm or punishment on those infected.” Webber found a prominent ally in the ACLU, which insisted that mandatory testing would lead to “discrimination and personal turmoil.” Anti-testing activists in California and New York, the states with some of the highest rate of AIDS cases, succeeded in passing legislation banning testing.
Ignored by its opponents were the deadly consequences of failing to mandate the test. At the end of 2003, the CDC reported that there were 462,792 people living with HIV/AIDS in the 35 areas with a history of confidential name-based HIV reporting. But it placed the total number of people infected with HIV-AIDS at between 1,039,000 and 1,185,000, with as many as 27 percent undiagnosed and unaware of their HIV infection. In a recent column, Robert Bazell, a Science and Health Correspondent for NBC News, pointed out that “The failure to test as widely as possible is a big reason why 40,000 Americans still get infected with HIV every year and 14,000 die from AIDS.”
For homosexual men especially, the numbers add up to disaster. And, as Dr. Stuart Brody, now a professor of Psychology at the University of Paisley, Scotland, notes, much of the responsibility must be attributed to those continue to put politics above public health. “The traditional means of countering sexually transmitted diseases (contact tracing, involving contacting the sexual contacts of infected persons, and if they are infected, contacting their sexual contacts, etc.) has been deliberately avoided in the case of HIV, because the political goal of avoiding ‘stigma’ took precedence over saving the lives of homosexual men,” Brody told FrontPageMag.com. As a result, “resources have been squandered on frightening persons at little or near-zero risk.” The grim irony, as Brody observes, is that “political ideologues have often touted the idea of ‘the people’, but may have little or no regard for the suffering or death of actual people.”
Looked at from a distance, you'd be hard put to say that it wasn't the intent of gay activists to decimate their own population.
There's someone collecting for some AIDS foundation every day along the main street where I work. The callow youth or girl varies, the bucket is the same. I used to throw a few coins into his/her bucket on passing, why not? Then it started to irritate me. I walk up there every day, it started to feel like a toll. They deliberately stand in front of the supermarket, you can't claim to have no change walking out of there, so if you're not donating its because you're a heatless swine.
Put a condom on and don't share needles. It's not rocket science. There are poor little kids in the children's hospital with cancer through no fault of their own, why are these self-righteous little leftist do-gooder twerps not collecting for them? Kids with cancer? THEY could have my spare change every day.
I started to get sick of the expectant eye-contact from bucket boy every day as I went about my business, and started to return it with a hard, hostile stare, "The f*ck you lookin' at, retard?" They quickly learned to look away.
Put a condom on. Don't share a needle. If you're too stupid to do that, you deserve to die.
Mr. Judd. Perhaps it's the same magical thinking that makes Leftists believe that putting the guilty in prison doesn't lower the crime rate. Their ranks can't be decimated because formerly straight people will flip to fill the vacuum?
Posted by: Robert Mitchell Jr. at April 20, 2006 12:20 AMIf the suicide rate among gays is high then perhaps you're right. Maybe being gay is one hell of a disgusting existence for them and simply don't care. According to the numbers it's pretty obvious they don't care who they transmit it to.
Creepy thought, but has there ever been a study of the virus to determine if it can mutate at some time for easier transmission? Like airborne for instance?
Posted by: Tom Wall at April 20, 2006 12:21 AMI don't think they hate themselves at all. Or at least any more than anyone else does. It's just that Leftists are morons who's policies often work counter to their intention. This is news?
I think, as someone (Orrin?) on this site once said, gay men behave as sexually irresponsibly and promiscuously as straight men would if straight women would let them.
that's not gay behavior, it's just male behavior, the driving urge is to have sex with as many people as you can. If you happen to be attracted to women, you've got your hands full just trying to have sex with one of them and then dealing with the endless consequences. Gay men are just regular men stuck in permanent sexual adolescence, straight men with access to unlimited sexual partners, like movie stars for example, generally behave in the same juvenile way.
Posted by: Amos at April 20, 2006 2:06 AMTom Wall:
HIV is a pretty fragile organism, fortunately dying rapidly with exposure to air and light, which is why it can't be caught from door handles and toilet seats.
It would have to mutate A LOT to be an airborne threat.
While it's not impossible, it's also not worth losing any sleep over.
Posted by: Michael Herdegen![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://brothersjuddblog.com/nav-commenters.gif)
at April 20, 2006 4:00 AM
I must say that I do not grasp this "stigma" issue: if I were a queer, I should want those infected with AIDS to have skulls-and-crossbones tatooed on their p*ckers. The more stigma the better, I would think.
Posted by: Lou Gots at April 20, 2006 7:30 AMThe stigma is that AIDS is a "gay disease." It goes back to the Jerry Falwells & Pat Robertsons declaring that AIDS was God's plague sent to kill off Sodom and Gomorrah.
Posted by: sharon at April 20, 2006 8:26 AMAIDS is a disease of gay men.
Posted by: oj at April 20, 2006 8:37 AMFighting nature is a losing proposition. Promiscuous homosexual behavior is not natural. Taboos, whose reasons for existing may no longer be rationally understood, should be respected in the breach. Radical egalitarianism or relativism can only be supported through artificial means. PC afficianados don't care how many die. "Equality" , as an abstraction only feeds the smug, self-satisfaction that seems to drive the leftist agenda.Killing in the name of an abstraction is the mark of the sociopath and the left.
Posted by: Tom C., Stamford,Ct. at April 20, 2006 9:07 AMOppositing to testing springs from the same well that believes the government created AIDS in the first place, and from those who believe conspiracies like the government being the real masterminds behind Sept. 11. When the wrong party is in office, as was the case during the first AIDS outbreak, or as is the case today, it can't just be that the government doesn't have a magic wand to solve the problem in a nanosecond; they have to be not only indifferent to the disease, but deliberately causing people to get it.
So if a Republican administration wants to do AIDS testing of gay males in San Francisco or elsewhere, AIDS testing must therefore be part of some nefarious scheme to kill off the gay population of San Francisco and elsewhere. Combine that with the blind hatred you see on so many of the left's sites, and you get people so convinced of the evilness of their opponents and reaffiriming those beliefs over the Internet, that they're willing to reject precautions that could potentially save their lives.
Posted by: John at April 20, 2006 9:23 AMThey sincerely want to stop the spread of the disease--but only if there's a way to stop it while preserving the free and easy bathhouse lifestyle. If its a choice between an incurable fatal disease and giving up one's access to immediate physical gratification, most can't bring themselves to forego the immediate physical gratification.
Posted by: Mike Morley at April 20, 2006 9:53 AMAmos:
Yes, straight men would like to degrade women if allowed to do so. Gay men degrade themselves.
Posted by: oj at April 20, 2006 9:56 AMTom:
It's extremely difficultt to get. Even transmission rates from infected mothers to fetuses are low.
Posted by: oj at April 20, 2006 10:17 AMI'm a bit confused on something--there has been quite a bit of advocacy recently for universal AIDS testing, and it sure hasn't been from the Right. It's been, as far as I can tell, a pretty transparent attempt to portray the disease as something anyone can get, which is preposterous, of course.
Posted by: b at April 20, 2006 10:44 AMAs others have pointed out, this kind of self destructive behavior, of valuing lifestyle over results, is hardly unique to the gay culture. Is this not fundamentally the same as problem recently posted about with adolescent black culture in America? You have a set of people who know how self destructive their behavior is, but simply can't give up the gratifications of it, along with a supporting cast of liberal elites who get off on the transgressiveness of that behavior.
Posted by: Annoying Old Guy at April 20, 2006 11:18 AMoj-
Agreed. Equating the acting out of homosexuals with normal heterosexuality is the cause. Refusing to acknowledge the results of the behavior is what's nuts. Attempting to frighten the normal population with equivocation and promotion of a twisted 'lifestyle' is criminal.
Posted by: Tom C., Stamford,Ct. at April 20, 2006 1:09 PM