Do you people get off to walls of text, or what?

I notice you overlook the first part of the definition....

Do you normally identify a person by a vivid and highly imaginative description of a sex act sans the accompanying emotion and relationship commitment or do you only do that with homosexuals?

What goes on in the privacy of the bedroom is between the consenting adults involved.

It also doesn't alter the fact that Raytri made: when it comes to HIV/AIDS it is only a subsection of homosexual males (those who practice high risk sexual behavior or are IV drug users) who are at increased risk. Those same factors apply to the heterosexual population. Of course you also ignore HIV/AIDS outside of the US with your pretty little disclaimer. That's good though. You need that disclaimer - without it, your theory is kapoot.

__________________

I'm a leftwing fascist, disease spreading, devil worshipper!

You sound like a sock puppet...

__________________

I'm a leftwing fascist, disease spreading, devil worshipper!

Imagine that there was a magic glass rectangle that let you see into the unaldulterated ID of perfectly random strangers, anonymously.

The least common denominator among us would anonymously lay open their most irrational fears and biases and halfbaked perceptions of the world to any passerby, either turning their stomachs or scaring the living beJesus out of them, with the realization 'people like this might vote.'

It could be horrible.

And, it is.

reguarda,
frediano

No... I stated as a matter of incontestable fact that you were questioning the proper usage of a noun and in support of your fallacious drivel you ran to post the definition of an adjective as that of a noun.



So accurately describing the elementary results of homosexual sex, is imaginary to you? Hmm... Perhaps we've found your problem, you're unable to discern the distinction between that which is real and tangible and that which is solely a creation of the imagination...

Homosexuality as a matter of privacy? Is that where you want to square off? Great... I'm a big fan of bedroom privacy, except where it becomes a concern for those outside the bedroom because the private activity is say illegal or spreading disease...<< which is illegal in your better places, except where radical leftist within the judiciary who have again undermined the culture by falsely declaring that sodomy laws are unconstitutional. As such is absurd... as there is no right to infringe upon the right of another, by exposing them to deadly diseases... For instance, if you're a pathetic sexual deviant that is unable to control your base instincts and today you're all sweaty over Fred, engaged in mixing each other’s blood and feces, exposing the internal body to this nasty bacterial cocktail, through any number of orifices; but tomorrow you're sitting down with Diane for a lovely glass of Chardonnay and perhaps a little nosh of cheese... and the two of you hit it off, connecting on a spiritual level... whereupon you express your feelings in the sack... you've now tainted the pool for everyone in Diane’s orbit and those orbiting around those orbiting around Diane and so on.

Homosexuals engage in dangerous sexual practices. PERIOD. You disagreeing does not make it less dangerous and the feigning offense at the vague descriptions of homosexual sex is a joke. In effect you're advocating for that which you claim to be offended; but that's about right for someone that can't discern the distinction between the descriptive adjective and the identifying noun.

Yes the same with intravenous drug users, the only ones at risk of contracting the HIV are the ones engaging in high risk behavior. Of course it should be noted that engaging in intravenous drug usage is high risk behavior... as is the case in homosexuals. The behavior is indicative of those who simply lack the intellectual acuity and the moral courage to recognize the deviant nature of the behavior and the risks inherent to it. Coy here would likely never be found justifying smoking for the light smoker, but she has no problem with rationalizing that if you only mix feces and blood, exposing said cocktail to ones internal organs, hey... where's the problem in that?

Homosexuality was designated a cultural taboo 5000 years ago and that is because those people discovered that NOTHING GOOD CAN COME FROM IT! It destroys those who in engage in it and they are intrinsically connected to the rest of the community.

As to the African scam… “Those same factors apply to the heterosexual population.” ROFL… I love it, sodomy spreads the HIV throughout Africa, as a result of HOMOSEXUAL and BI-SEXUAL practices and you people run to exclaim: ‘LOOK! These pervs are spreading the HIV and they’re not all homos!’ Which of course the reason it’s not the same in the US are the FREAKIN RULES THAT FORBID SODOMY, RAPE AND CULTURAL TABOOS AGAINST PROMISCUOUS DISEASE SPREADING SEXUAL PRACTICES. Rules which it must be pointed out you’re here to contest… suggesting we change these rules because in Africa… the HIV is not just limited to the queers, it’s killing EVERYONE! (Ya see sis… that’s why we take the position we’re taking… We want to limit the damage to those perpetuating it.)

Which brings us to the rub… This isn’t Africa and we aren’t interested in turning it into Africa. I suggest that those homosexuals who feel that Africa is more open minded about their sexual practices; perhaps better suited to your particular kink.. That they leave what they feel is the bigoted mindset of the US and go to Africa or frankly anywhere else which they feel gives them greater sexual freedom; and may I just say as a parting thought… “don’t forget the Preparation H!”

Well, if it makes ya feel any better, I don't really see you standing much of a chance of forming a society. So I wouldn't worry about it.


Well as a matter of fact, Democracy, as a form of government was rejected by the framers of the US on just such grounds. John Adam’s spoke at length on the inequities of social Democracies… stating in a letter to Abigail Adam’s that Democracy amounted to a ‘tyranny of the majority.’ Now I tend to agree with that assessment, and considering that in every place on earth where social Democracy has been rolled out, that is precisely what one ends up with…

On a brighter note, however; I do agree (and this is just between the two of us) someone is not too terribly bright… but the good news is, they’re eager to prove it, so what fun that should be AYE?

SOooo… Fascists realized that socialism was a failure and adopted capitalism?

Tell me Jethro, where'd you hear this? NOOooooo Forget that; I'm not interested in what ya heard from your local Commandant down at what stands as your clubhouse... 'er... Beer Hall! Pardon the condescension.

What I'm interested in hearing about is say ONE example wherein Fascists are shown to be advocates of free market Capitalism, the viability of which hinges upon the natural rights of in the individual to freely exchange goods and services to the mutual benefit of each party.

Now take your time and as a way of showing you that I'm here to have a friendly conversation, I offer this advice: Don't ask anyone with a tattoo of a swastika on his neck.

Yet (a) homosexual refers to both men and women.


Oh...? And just how is it you have such "accurate" knowledge of the act?

Even more interesting why don't you refer to heterosexual acs as....mixing ones blood with human semen and shoving the bacteria infested cocktail into a woman's vagina? (keep in mind if your partner isn't very hygenic that is exactly what you've got).

You had better make all sex a matter of public concern (other than artificial insemination) due to the risk of spreading syphillis, gonorhea, herpes, HIV. However...this doesn't square with your "conservative" position of minimal government.

You mean like Iran and Saudi Arabia?

Unconsitutional? Well, they used to think that abolishing slavery was unconstitutional. However...I have a tip for you. If you don't want to risk being exposed to deadly disease avoid putting yourself in one of the high risk categories. Control your base instincts and don't hump everything in sight or do IV drugs.

(*)(*)(*)(*)...I'm sorry....I didn't realize that was you in orbit.....you know how it is....spiritual, special...something about the Merlot (you got the wine wrong), the moon, the well...you know how that goes.

Well, unfortunately reality doesn't bear you out....

Lots of ways to have safe and unsafe sex - homosexuality alone doesn't make it unsafe.

The taboo is cultural and variable and far from universal in human cultures.

How exactly does it "destroy those who in engage in it"?

Well bro....it appears that in Africa the main source of spread is heterosexual. But - you hit the problem right on the proverbial (or maybe literal) "head": promiscuity is the biggest risk factor.

Thanks for making my point

Who cares if it isn't Africa? Diseases and pandemics don't recognize artificial political boundaries. They're just as happy with an American carcass as with a Nigerian one.

__________________

I'm a leftwing fascist, disease spreading, devil worshipper!