Now on to one of the sub questions. Is it natural? Well, someone mentioned that it wasn't natural only for humans. Now, why this discrimination? If the Gods of various religions keep throwing and creating people who are homosexual, either a) They're bad factory operators or b) Something is fishy with whatever anti-gay talk religious conservatives swear is sacred.
Why? I mean, I'm sure I'll get the usual "because they beieve it's a sin," but why?
I suspect the threat of death would deter the majority from being openly homosexual, so those who are homosexual keep quiet about it. For the people who are against it, homosexuality doesn't exist for them because nobody dare discuss it.
The reason it is such a problem in the US is because it has to do with religion, and even though we can freely practice religion, those who believe that homosexuality is a sin, 'legalizing' it would be legalizing a sin in their eyes.
I don't know if that has been covered, but that's all I can contribute for now.
The HIV virus is passed through unprotected sex. Is it only gay men who practise unprotected sex?
It is because gay men, when performing sexual intercourse, use the only option available and practice **** sex. Now, if they have protected sex, than nothing bad should happen. But when they don't, they are more likely to contract STDs because the anus is not meant for sex, and thus the skin breaks more easily because it does not lubricate naturally. Any broken skin allows for a virus to penetrate more easily, so therefore gay men who practice unprotected sex are more likely to contract an HIV/AIDS virus than a heterosexual couple practicing vaginal intercourse.
But you're presuming only gay men practise sex in that manner. Many hetrosexual couples do the exact same thing, many unprotected. So again why is it more likely that gay men will contract the disease?
But you're presuming only gay men practise sex in that manner. Many hetrosexual couples do the exact same thing, many unprotected. So again why is it more likely that gay men will contract the disease?
Because gay men are more likely to practice sex in that manner than straight couples. Obviously, unless a woman has had a sex change, they a man will not have a vagina, so it is impossible to have penetrative intercourse by gay men without having **** sex.
Yes, but unless they are druggies, gay men are likely going to spread HIV to other gay men, keeping it within their community, and not spread it to the entire human population, which straight people are capable of.
Although I accept what you're saying about a certain type of sex being more likely among gay men, but is a homosexual man who is in a monogamous relationship and practices safe sex more likely to catch the virus than a hetrosexual man with multiple partners and doesn't practice safe sex?
It just seems to be a bit general to presume that gay men are responsible for the spread of AIDS, when there are many hetrosexual males (and females) who regularly practice unprotected sex. Being that the percentage of hetrosexual people is much greater than homosexual, surely the math would point to hetrosexuals being more likely to spread AIDS?
Although I accept what you're saying about a certain type of sex being more likely among gay men, but is a homosexual man who is in a monogamous relationship and practices safe sex more likely to catch the virus than a hetrosexual man with multiple partners and doesn't practice safe sex?
No, because the gay man in this case is monogamous and practices safe sex. However, gay men are more likely to contract the disease because of the only way that they can practice penetrative intercourse.
It just seems to be a bit general to presume that gay men are responsible for the spread of AIDS
I never said that. I'm saying why it's most likely that gay men will acquire the virus rather than heterosexual couples.
Being that the percentage of hetrosexual people is much greater than homosexual, surely the math would point to hetrosexuals being more likely to spread AIDS?
Logically, yes, that would be the case. However, because of the nature of gay sex, it is more likely that homosexual male couples spread the disease among themselves rather than heterosexual couples spread the disease, due to the...nature of the object being penetrated.
Whilst I accept that homosexual men have a higher risk of contracting HIV, I'm not sure I can accept that they are more likely to spread the disease. More so when you compare how small the gay community is compared with heterosexual communities.
We might have to agree to disagree on this one. I can't find any data anywhere to support either argument.
