Posted on 06/26/2003 10:16:44 AM PDT by Polycarp
Physical damage (“trauma”) and infection
“The shape of the bowel is not intended for the purpose of sexual intercourse. The muscle of the anal sphincter has to be forced open. The lining of the bowel is a single cell layer. As a result there is trauma and tearing. The semen action damages the bowel lining and the consequence is easy entrance of bacteria and viruses.” (1) Professor Elizabeth Duncan, MD(Hons), FRCOG, FRCSE
Dr Jeffrey Satinover says: “anal intercourse, penile or otherwise, traumatizes the soft tissues of the rectal lining. These tissues... are nowhere near as sturdy as vaginal tissue. As a consequence, the lining of the rectum is almost always traumatized to some degree by any act of anal intercourse. Even in the absence of major trauma, minor or microscopic tears in the rectal lining allow for immediate contamination and the entry of germs into the bloodstream.” (2)
“Furthermore, comparable tears in the vagina are not only less frequent because of the relative toughness of the vaginal lining, but the environment of the vagina is vastly cleaner than that of the rectum. Indeed, we are designed with a nearly impenetrable barrier between the bloodstream and the extraordinarily toxic and infectious contents of the bowel. Anal intercourse creates a breach in this barrier for the receptive partner, whether or not the insertive partner is wearing a condom.” (3)
The reason why it is possible for a person to “infect themselves” by their own bowel lining being torn is that bacteria reside in the gut. We need these bacteria for our digestion. Human faeces contains some of these bacteria. This causes no problems so long as the lining of the rectum is intact.
Top
HIV
Sexual acts such as ‘oral sex’ or mutual masturbation are known to be a low risk for HIV. But the risk of HIV infection from anal intercourse is extremely high: for men it is at least 2,700 times the risk from vaginal intercourse. (4)
Professor Elizabeth Duncan has highlighted recent research which shows that semen can eat away at the cells in the lining of the lower bowel. This not only allows viruses such as HIV to infect the blood stream but also affects the bowel’s ability to withdraw water from waste, causing diarrhoea. (5)
Anal sex is so dangerous for homosexual men that the UK Blood Transfusion Service will not accept blood from any man who has ever had sex with another man, even if it was ‘safe sex’ with a condom. (6)
Top
Condoms
Even condom manufacturers advise against anal sex. The condom company, Durex, said in October 2000 : “Anal intercourse is a high-risk activity because of the potential for infection from STDs including HIV transmission. Currently, there are no specific standards for the manufacture of condoms for anal sex. Current medical advice is therefore to avoid anal sex. However, whenever this advice is not followed, the medical profession recommends that stronger condoms should be used although studies have shown that there is still a risk of breakage and slippage”.(7)
Condoms do not offer adequate protection because condoms slip and break at an alarming rate during anal sex. One study calculated that 32% of condoms broke and 21% slipped during anal intercourse.(8) The researchers pointed out that “Condoms manufactured in the United States generally are labelled ‘for vaginal use only’. This labelling reflects the concern that condoms designed for use during vaginal intercourse may fail at an unacceptably high rate when used during anal intercourse...”(9)
A condom only has to slip or break once for HIV to be transmitted.
Top
Drugs
To facilitate anal intercourse, some people use drugs to relax the anal muscle. These drugs may unfortunately suppress the immune system. The recipient may learn to relax the anal muscle, but even then there is usually some tearing of tissue.(10) This damage can lead to a high level of rectal incontinence. One study found that over a third of those who received anal intercourse reported some degree of anal incontinence or urgency of defecation.(11)
Top
Other facts about anal intercourse
Both homosexuals and heterosexuals engage in anal intercourse. Anal intercourse between men and women was only legalised (for those aged over 18) in 1994. One major study for the Department of Health found that the average age for first anal intercourse for homosexuals was 20.9 years (12) and that that 71% of homosexual men have engaged in anal intercourse in the past year.(13) Some 6.5% of heterosexual men have engaged in anal intercourse in the past year according to the largest study ever carried out in the UK on sexual behaviour.(14) This same study found that only 0.3% of men are exclusively homosexual.(15) Whilst proportionately more homosexuals than heterosexuals engage in anal intercourse, in terms of numbers there are more heterosexuals than homosexuals who have ever had anal intercourse.
Top
As if a man has a vagina?
Other than a decent concern for their immortal souls, I'm not sure why we conservatives should be so concerned about sodomy laws and the like.
Assuming (and this is a big assumption) we can keep, and enforce vigorously, laws against nonconsensual sex, public sexual displays, and sex with the underaged, why shouldn't we be perfectly happy that homosexuals and other deviants want to injure themselves in the course of their perversions, even to the point of transmitting diseases such as HIV? As long as we don't pay the hospital and treatment costs, let them destroy themselves. I mean, we've tried to keep the laws and lost. Ok. We'll pray for them. Ok, that's the Christian thing to do. But, let them as consenting adults do what they want. Do they do bizarre S&M rituals that injure each other. Fine! Maimed old queers walking around looks like a pretty good disincentive to me!
I join Justice Scalia's dissenting opinion. I write separately to note that the law before the Court today "is ... uncommonly silly." Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U. S. 479, 527 (1965) (Stewart, J., dissenting). If I were a member of the Texas Legislature, I would vote to repeal it. Punishing someone for expressing his sexual preference through noncommercial consensual conduct with another adult does not appear to be a worthy way to expend valuable law enforcement resources.
Notwithstanding this, I recognize that as a member of this Court I am not empowered to help petitioners and others similarly situated. My duty, rather, is to "decide cases 'agreeably to the Constitution and laws of the United States.' " Id., at 530. And, just like Justice Stewart, I "can find [neither in the Bill of Rights nor any other part of the Constitution a] general right of privacy," ibid., or as the Court terms it today, the "liberty of the person both in its spatial and more transcendent dimensions," ante, at 1.
[bold-type added]
AntiGuv's addendum: Get over - it's a done deal..
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.