Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Remedy
Fourth and finally, get off the defensive and take the offensive on the homosexual issue by purging "gay" activism from the Republican Party.

Oh, great.... a purge. Feh.

I'd be unwelcome in the Dems, because I support low taxes and the 2nd Amendment, as well as opposing partial birth abortion. I'd be unwelcome in the Libertarian Party, because I supported the war in Iraq and an active foreign and defense policy. Now, I'd be unwelcome in the GOP, because I oppose anti-sodomy laws and support legal recognition of gay marriage. I don't want to be an independent, as I can't vote in primaries.

Nope. I ain't leaving the GOP. I have nowhere else to go. And the fact that I doubt that this ideological purging is too likely to come off means that, if this isn't my political home, it's the closest I have right now.

9 posted on 04/28/2003 2:50:09 PM PDT by Celtjew Libertarian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Celtjew Libertarian

because I oppose anti-sodomy laws and support legal recognition of gay marriage.

Family Research Report - Nov 2001

Oral-anal sex:

Unlike mouth-to-genital sex, mouth-to-anus activities cannot possibly be considered medically benign. There is simply no way to 'safely' lick or insert the tongue into the anus without ingesting biologically significant amounts of fecal material. Not only do a host of viruses (e.g., Hepatitis A), bacteria, and other infectious organisms (e.g., Giardiasis, amebiasis) reside in feces, but various forms of hepatitis, herpes and many of the same organisms that cause food poisoning are transmitted through its ingestion.3

Separating feces from the food chain and living areas via modern sanitation has arguably been the single most important contribution of modern public health. Avoiding the ingestion of fecal material in either food or in sex practices is healthy; any oral exposure to feces is unhealthy. This is precisely what much of modern 'sanitation' is about.

Indeed, in 1981, at the beginning of the AIDS epidemic, Dr. M Heller, Director of the Division of Emergency Medicine at the University of California's Moffitt Hospital, San Francisco, observed4 that "the large number of patients, virtually all male and all gay, with these diseases [various enteric infections collectively called 'gay bowel syndrome'] is indeed a new phenomenon" which he noted was associated with "the emergence of a well-defined 'gay scene,' including gay bars, restaurants, movies, clubs, indeed whole neighborhoods catering openly to the gay lifestyle."

The recipient of oral-anal sex is not immune to infection either. Unlike the mouth, the anus is designed to eliminate waste, not to process and incorporate semen, saliva, etc. So it has few protective devices. The mouth can and does transmit sexual infections to the anus. Ultimately, for either the 'doer' or the one to whom oral-anal sex is done, the claim that "engaging in... anal sex does not result in... physical dysfunction" is absolutely false.

Penile-anal sex:

Placing a penis in the anus is also fraught with medical risks. For the recipient, there is good evidence to suggest that the rectum and anus are negatively affected over the long term by the insertion and movements of the penis during sexual activity. Men who are the recipients of penile-anal sex are many times more apt to develop anal or rectal cancer and to lose sphincter tonus, perhaps up to 20 times the national average.5 Those who put their penis in others' rectal cavities are also more apt to get urinary infections. After all, the penis is bathed in feces or surrounded by fecal residue during the process.

The bottom line is that the rectum was not designed for sexual activity. Indeed, because of its one-cell-wall thickness and rich supply of blood vessels, the rectum is almost 'perfectly suited for infection.' This is undoubtedly the reason that the vast majority of MSM who have gotten infected with HIV practiced penile-anal sex.

While only a smattering of evidence suggests that the 'insertor' of the penis has contracted HIV from anal sex, there is overwhelming evidence that the rectal 'insertees' got their HIV from penile-anal sex. Indeed, the practice of penile-anal sex is associated with well over 95% of all HIV infections among MSM.

There is also fair evidence that a disproportionate degree of HIV infection among women is due to penile-anal as opposed to penile-vaginal sex.6 The same is true of hepatitis B, syphilis, and all the other blood-borne pathogens. In short, the natural functions of the rectum (e.g., efficient absorption of water and other nutrients from the fecal mass) act to make it unsuitable for penile intromission.

Furthermore, there is good evidence that depositions of semen in the rectum are deleterious, per se, to the functioning of the immune system. This was first demonstrated in rabbits and has been confirmed in both male and female prostitutes.7

Oral & Anal Sex: Not Benign

Analysis of the obituaries of over 9,000 gay men suggests that they are unusually subject to cancer of the mouth, pharynx, stomach, and esophagus, all of which may be related to typical sexual practices among MSM of ingesting semen, urine or feces.8 Indeed, while the constellations of morbidities differ between the groups (with men who have sex with men [MSM] exhibiting higher rates of infectious diseases than heavy drinkers or illicit, but non-shooting/non-IV drug users), the lifespans of MSM are similar to the lifespans of very heavy drinkers or heavy consumers of illicit drugs, but not as short as regular IV drug abusers.

The evidence on women who have sex with women [WSW] is less certain, but it appears that their lifespan may be only a few years longer on average than the lifespan of MSM.

13 posted on 04/28/2003 2:57:27 PM PDT by Remedy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Celtjew Libertarian
"Nope. I ain't leaving the GOP. I have nowhere else to go. And the fact that I doubt that this ideological purging is too likely to come off means that, if this isn't my political home, it's the closest I have right now."

I'm with you, and I'm not leaving either.

They can try and force their religious notions of what's moral and what's not on me, but I will forever believe that those decisions are individualized decisions that the government has no business making.

Funny, but usually it's the democrats that are arguing to bigger government. I guess when it comes to sexual insecurity, it's easier to run to the government.

That's my take on it anyway.

Trace
24 posted on 04/28/2003 3:09:47 PM PDT by Trace21230 (Ideal MOAB test site: Paris)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Celtjew Libertarian
Relax - it is the feckless crowd, flexing muscles it doesn't have. You are in the crowd least likely to be purged, because there is a day of reckoning coming from that group of social conservatives that is not electorally significant, yet hysterically wails that the party needs to comfort and soothe their feelings on a near constant basis.
54 posted on 04/28/2003 3:29:37 PM PDT by Chancellor Palpatine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Celtjew Libertarian
Just punish these this rather intolerant and strident species of social conservative in the primary, and if one actually wins the primary (a very rare event), and the one is too offensive, just vote for the Dem in the general. Simple really. Punish them electorally, and then punish them some more. They like it.
86 posted on 04/28/2003 3:52:56 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

To: Celtjew Libertarian
Pretty good summary. If you find a party that's anti-tax, pro-2nd Amendment, anti-abortion, pro-defense, anti-anti-sodomy laws, and pro-civil unions, please ping me.
143 posted on 04/29/2003 6:13:38 AM PDT by tdadams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson