Last edited by MaggieD; 08-09-10 at 10:13 AM.
Thank you, Quazi!
Last edited by CriticalThought; 08-09-10 at 10:24 AM.
For example, a survey conducted from 1994 to 1997 in San Francisco by the Stop AIDS Project indicated that among men who have sex with men (MSM), the proportion engaging in anal sex was 61.2%.
However, the Laumann study claims that 80% of gay men practice it, while the remaining 20% never engage in it at all.
What is clear is that nowhere near 100% of gay men or MSM practice anal sex, so homosexuality is not synonymous with anal sex However both groups are several times more likely than the general heterosexual population to engage in anal sex, so in that respect, rivrrat is incorrect.
Thank you, Quazi!
The leading cause of HIV in the United States is promiscuous, unprotected anal sex. Men who have sex with men, as a population, are the most likely to practice promiscuous, unprotected anal sex and are therefore the most likely to get and spread the disease. However, if men who have sex with men do not engage in this risky behavior, then their risk of contracting HIV is no greater than the rest of the population. If they practice monogamy with a clean partner, then they will not get HIV.
That is all I am arguing. Do you have a problem with that arugment?
You might want to check out the section where they compare to previous surveys. In addition, you might want to notice at the top of each table where it explains what information is being presented.
You have GOT to be kidding. It shows gay men who have contracted HIV. Please explain your theory on how they contracted it besides anal sex that has any statistical backing whatsoever
The two "wildly different numbers" have been averaged for both hetero and homosexuals. That seemed the fairest way to come up with an... average number. The report explains how and why those wildly different numbers came about. (due to survey methodology and the survey sampling.And thee times now it is completely false. Your study does not break down the sexual preferences between the men in your study. It gives 2 wildly different numbers on gay men without a conclusion on what number is right. Repeating a false claim doesn't help you.
I can't quote a PDF. I gave you the PDFYou are quoting a synopsis of the article not the article itself. Either quote the article directly or don't bother.
Explain what, exactly? That unprotected anal sex with HIV positive people is an extremely high risk activity regardless of the genders involved? Or that one's sexual orientation is completely separate from one's risk of contracting an STI?Please explain my numbers from the CDC if you are going to hold onto this fallacy.
The whole point is, there are more heterosexuals in the country. So of COURSE more heterosexuals engage in anal sex. The difference is, heterosexuals have a much larger pool of people with which to engage in sex WITH. The smaller the pool of people, the more rampant any disease is going to run within it. But one's sexual orientation is irrelevant to the activities that may or may not increase risk of transmission. What IS relevant is the type of sex involved, and if it's protected or not. Period. End of story.
Last edited by rivrrat; 08-09-10 at 10:46 AM.
"Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run
Mace Windu: Then our worst fears have been realized. We must move quickly if the Jedi Order is to survive.
Again for the 3,421 time the ONLY reason this was brought up was to expose the fallacy of CC's argument when he claimed he could deny marriage to groups based on positive and negative contributions to a society. The higher occurance of HIV in homosexuals particularly male homosexuals was to expose the fallacy of his argument by proving all sexual orientations have negatives and positives.
That's when he began his mental gymnastics and got a few others to play along ignoring the evidence of the CDC report.
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.