Posted on 02/14/2008 1:56:50 PM PST by NYer
Sorry, that’s bunk. Not a day goes by that I don’t hear about a HIV positive patient on the OB unit where my wife works, and these women didn’t contract it by being gay. If HIV were a gay disease it would strike only men, but instead women account for 26% of HIV infections and the NIH and CDC both estimate that 80% of those cases are from heterosexual contact.
“unfortunate women who happen to have sex with those pigs and the unfortunate men who happen to have sex with the sluts who have sex with the bisexual pigs.”
First they are unfortunate by contracting HIV, then they morphed into sluts? I believe the largest spreaders of HIV into the heterosexual population are guys living lies and brining it home.
In the beginning it was called GRID for Gay related immune deficiency. The PC police couldn’t leave it at that. We’d all have to share in the burden.
Is ugliness and unwashed a disease?
Some gays are bi-sexual and that is all it took. It is a gay disease spread via deviant behavior.
Bears repeating:
“guys living lies and bringing it (HIV) home.”
But HIV remains a gay-disease, which claims innocent victims.
Sorry, can’t drop those stats without a link.
PERVERT DISEASE....well deserved.
I’m sure the rest of the diversi-crews will be along shortly to smear, demonize and discredit this.
Maybe that obnoxious kid that does the anti-smoking commercials (the ones where they make asses of themselves in public) can switch to harassing the homos about their sex lives....? It would be amusing to see him in the Castro district in SF with a megaphone yelling, “Hey, homos, your leaders admit that you’re killing yourselves with your butt sex, so why can’t you?!”
http://www.unctv.org/senatorno/peopleevents/people.html
Patsy Clarke
Co-founder, MAJIC (Mothers Against Jesse in Congress)
“I do not hate Senator Helms. Please let me be honest about that. I truly don’t. I do hate what I think he has propagated.”
Patsy Clarke was a Jesse Helms supporter through the early ‘90s, and her late husband had been a Helms advisor. In 1994, after her son Mark died of AIDS, Clarke wrote Helms asking him not to pass judgment on AIDS victims. Helms wrote back that he wished Mark “had not played Russian roulette in his sexual activity,” and was later quoted saying the disease was the result of “deliberate, disgusting, revolting conduct.” In response, Clarke and Eloise Vaughn, also the mother of an AIDS victim, established “MAJIC: Mothers Against Jesse in Congress” to oppose Helms’s bid for a fifth Senate term in 1996.
Wonder if they'll also tell them it will kill them?
The big question should always be, “So now what?”
Lethal diseases typically follow a lethality curve. At their onset, they are murderous, but over time they become less so.
Syphilis, at its peak, ravaged Europe, killing indiscriminately, driving many people insane or blind or both, with all sorts of other horrible effects. That is why Paul Ehrlich (not to be confused with the modern eco-scoundrel Paul R. Ehrlich), the inventor of the first effective treatment for syphilis, was lauded around the world.
Even years later, untreated syphilis was still awful, as evidenced in the inhumane and racist “Tuskegee Experiment” conducted in the United States. But today, syphilis is seen more as an annoyance, taken care of with an injection or two of penicillin. Just embarrassing, not deadly at all.
HIV has taken a similar course, but far faster. For numerous reasons, its lethality in the US has taken a nosedive. The extremely harsh drugs given to suppress it are now seen by some as even more damaging than the disease itself. Some are discontinuing their drugs altogether, but without rapid decay in their symptoms.
Importantly, this is not happening in much of the rest of the world, where HIV is still terribly deadly. And the factors which caused the US strains to diminish in virulence may not exist elsewhere.
So what does this mean for the future?
At first, it has meant the reemergence of dangerous diseases that had previously been under some degree of control. Diseases such as the also-used-to-be-terribly-lethal Tuberculosis, is returning in very drug resistant strains, which represent a clear and present danger to the US public.
So it will be a while before these brush fires are again put under control.
Of much greater interest is to create some means to eradicate HIV from the US population altogether. That is, a means of eliminating it from the systems of infected persons, or giving them some medicine that will prevent them from passing it on to others.
HIV, however, has become one of the most studied viruses, also because it has some extraordinary characteristics as a virus. It has an extremely high blood density, many times higher than for typical viruses, and a great capacity to “hide” in faraway parts of the body, to reemerge later.
As such, the way to eradicate it might be in using it for helpful, instead of harmful purposes. That is, by designing a non-harmful strain that dominates the harmful strain, it might push the harmful strain out of the body.
But at the same time it might even be used as what is called a “bacteriophage”, a virus that attacks harmful bacteria. If such a strain can be developed, people might intentionally be give that strain of HIV in the future, to attack a very dangerous bacteria, like MRSA, which is resistant to antibiotics.
If we’d quarantined all active male homosexuals in the early 80’s, HIV-AIDS would be a footnote in medical journals, and we’d be Nazis.
homosexual behavior is both extremely high-risk and primarily responsible for the spread of HIV/AIDS in the U.S.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.