Replies

Add to this the fact that male homosexuals have a very poor rate of monogamous relationships (even so-called long term relationships often have the understanding that there will be outside sex). So even if a couple of homosexuals don't currently have HIV, they may have it down the line, and the drugs cost upwards of $10K.

Yes, sure.

But keep in mind that 10K for drugs is not the full bill. Hospitalizations, opportunistic infections, etc. -- I did not mention these since I cannot estimate them.

I hope that what I wrote can be used. It is certainly non anti-gay and should withstand the usual "bigotry" screams. Perhaps we should try to change the discussion toward the costs to the society and children from the "Gay Marriage" idea.

=== Add to this the fact that male homosexuals have a very poor rate of monogamous relationships (even so-called long term relationships often have the understanding that there will be outside sex)

How is this different from heteros these days?

As for the monies scammed from insurers to pay for AIDS cocktails, it's just a matter of the pharmas CONTINUING to use homosexuals as the cash cows they infected with Hep-C and AIDS in the first place courtesy of the SAME tainted plasma derivatives that infected 90% of American hemophiliacs as well.

Hemophiliacs are not the "renew-able" resource, however, that are homosexuals. Jocelyn Elders' sorts have no hope of educating a person into the masturbatory, narcissistic sexual model that is most conducive to homosexuality and the increasingly state-regulated "private sex lives" of mock heteros whose financial layout for birth control (and sometimes even abortion) as funded by insurers certainly adds up to -- if not exceeds -- the paltry AIDS cocktails of homosexuals.

That's another thing I want to point out. Of all the male gay couples I have known, about 10-15 of them that are 'married', not a ONE of those couples even try to be monogamous. They just admit that two men together can't do it.