Fistgate to be Held Again on March 15

MassNews ^ | March 7, 2003 | MassNews Staff

[EdReform]

You're welcome! There's lots of good documentation in the following threads:

Parent Alleges Harassment for Exposing 'Fistgate'

Assemblyman MOUNTJOY opposes promotion of homosexuality in public schools

[philetus]

I think Ed and I both made our point.

No one should be teaching children about gay sex.

I think you made your point too.

You advocate it.

[philetus]

"So your teenager comes home from school and asks you "what is 'fisting?'"

Ya, like there are any teenagers left that don't know what fisting is.

How do I respond?"

I would tell him/her "it's where sick,perverted,weirdos, get their jollies, ramming their fists up each others rectums."

My kids would then say "ewww,gross" and go looking for one to beat up.

[DBrow]

"(Likewise, your apparently misinformed opinion of condoms is also irrelevent.)"

Not sure what his misconception was, madg, but I use this reference for HIV/condom effectiveness. The study was for male-female contact and did not get into gay sex in any detail:

"Among participants who reported always using condoms, the summary estimate of HIV/AIDS incidence from the twelve studies was 0.9 seroconversion per 100 person years. Among those who reported never using condoms, the summary estimate of HIV/AIDS incidence from the seven studies was 6.7 seroconversions per 100 person years. Overall, Davis and Weller estimated that condoms provided an 85% reduction in HIV/AIDS transmission risk when infection rates were compared in always versus never users."

http://www.niaid.nih.gov/dmid/stds/condomreport.pdf

This is the report CDC uses when asked about condom effectiveness. Assuming the same protection rate among gays, a 15% risk (the flip side of 85% effective) is pretty risky when your life is on the line. The more partners or the more contact with an infected partner and the risk goes up.

In Russian Roulette, having only one cylinder loaded is 5/6, or 83% effective in not getting shot, or 16% dangerous (1/6), depending.

When I read the NIAID study it made me rethink risks!

[codder too]

The "mandated assembly" I mentioned, was performed in a MA High School by Suzie Landolfi. She was promoting condoms as "safe sex". That IS a lie. The AIDS virus is able to easily penetrate flaws in the latex and the out and out failure rate of condoms is high. That is fact not "Misinformed opinion". Curious that the "Safe" Sex slogan was changed to "SAFER" shortly thereafter. The prospect of lawsuits looming on the horizon.

The SCREAMING I am doing is just that, and it started a long time ago when it became evident that the Sex EDUCATION curriculum being formulated for use in ALL public schools, was and now is,being used primarily as a vehicle for the homosexual agenda. To move public opinion from toleration of the life style to accepting it as NORMAL. To date, hundreds of thousands of young, innocent, impressionable minds have had this SHOVED at them, to use your expression.

Massachusets was in the vanguard of the Sex Ed curriculum and Falmouth held the distinction of being the first JUNIOR and Senior Highschools, in the NATION,to provide condoms for their students.

You are defending the right of 25 young minds to voluntarily attend this GLSEN workshop. I will continue to fight for the innocent who didn't volunteer and for their parents who don't know what is being TAUGHT in their public school classrooms and For parents who have given their children strong values and find that those values are challenged and are not acceptable in todays SAFE classrooms if they don't include the acceptance of homosexuality as NORMAL.

[codder too]

The "mandated assembly" I mentioned, was performed by Suzie Landolfi. She was promoting condoms as "safe sex". That IS a lie.The AIDS virus is able to easily penetrate flaws in the latex and the out and out failure rate of condoms is high. That is fact not "Misinformed opinion". Curious that the "Safe" Sex slogan was changed to "SAFER" shortly thereafter. The prospect of lawsuits looming on the horizon.

The SCREAMING I am doing is just that, and it started a long time ago when it became evident that the Sex EDUCATION curriculum being formulated for use in ALL public schools, was and now is,being used primarily as a vehicle for the homosexual agenda. To move public opinion from toleration of the life style to accepting it as NORMAL. To date, hundreds of thousands of young, innocent, impressionable minds have had this SHOVED at them, to use your expression.

Massachusets was in the vanguard of the Sex Ed curriculum and Falmouth held the distinction of being the first JUNIOR High and Senior Highschools, in the NATION,to provide condoms for their students.

You are defending the right of 25 young minds to voluntarily attend this workshop. I will continue to fight for the innocent who didn't volunteer and for their parents who don't know what is being TAUGHT in the classroom. For parents who have given their children strong values and find that those values are not acceptable in todays SAFE classrooms if they don't include the acceptance of homosexuality as NORMAL.

[John O]

Your prospective answer is factually inaccurate.

How? It involves one person inserting their fist into a body cavity of another person. When those two persons are male then that cavity must be the rectum. Seems that philetus' reply was 100% factually accurate. Only "sick,perverted,weirdos," would do such an unnatural thing.

[John O]

I believe the poster used the term "ramming." That is factually inaccurate.

"Ram" according to webster's dictionary "(3) to stuff; cram (4) to force passage or acceptance of"

Seems that anything going in the out door will need to be crammed or forced through the passage.

philetus was 100% accurate. You owe him an apology

[John O]

but your terms are too violent. It’s not ramming, cramming, stuffing, shoving…

None of those words denote violence. They denote force. force is always required to push something where it doesn't naturally go.

You still owe philetus an apology

[Bryan]

I see that you've all become acquainted with madg.

[DBrow]

madg, you missed the part of the report where it said 85% effective. That was calculated out of the seroconversion data you misunderstood.

The condom is 85% effective in preventing HIV infection with male-female vaginal intercourse, that was the point.

Do you know of another report that has a different number for effectiveness?