JO> Rebecca Mckinley wrote in a message to Jim Staal:
RM> [......] Besides, WHY shouldn't homosexuals practice their sexuality as freely as do heterosexuals? I'd like a good, unrefutable reason - and, since I don't share your religion and have no wish to push mine on you, let's try to stay far away from "God doesn't like it" arguments. If I wanted that deity's opinion, I WOULD ask Him. His followers concern me more. <<<<<
JO> The only reasons I've ever seen stated here, or anywhere for that matter, is the "God doesn't like it" argument, or it's not _natural_. Good luck getting a rational responce. :=} <<<<<<<<<
For your rational consideration:
EXTRACT From: Fidelity magazine
The Coming Population Implosion
By Rev.Anthony Zimmerman,S.V.D.
The AIDS Dynamic in the West page 33
The advent of AIDS is nature's invitation to the human species to blow the whistle on excessive sexual aberrations. As things stand now, AIDS is always fatal, and no cure nor vaccine is on the horizon.
Nature selects for destruction and extinction chiefly the unchaste. Insensitive to our cries for compassion, nature grimly puts to death individuals and populations who dare to ignore her commandment:
"Thou shalt not commit adultery."
Nature's wrath against active sodomists is reflected in mortality statistics. The median age at death calculated from obituaries in U.S. homosexual journals is a young 42 years; 39 if they died of AIDS. Whereas that of the general population of married men is 75. "Homosexuals rode into the dawn of sexual freedom and returned with a plague that gives every indication of destroying most of them" (Dr. Paul Cameron, Medical Consequences reprint, FRR, 1992).
Once the HIV virus attacks even a single person in a sodomist network, it spreads like a prairie fire fanned by prodigious multiple-partner contacts. The New England Medical Journal (1980: 302: 435-438) carried a report of gays averaging 110 sex partners a year. Other studies recorded a decrease of sex partners, from 70 to 50, and from 76 to 47 per year (see Cameron ibid.), following the discovery of AIDS. However, when a homosexual has intercourse with another, he has intercourse with every other person with whom his partner has been in sexual contact. The odds in favor of escaping AIDS when following this lifestyle are limited.
The doubling interval of AIDS infections in the USA lengthened gradually after the highest risk populations - the homosexually active and the needle sharers - approached the saturation point. What experts fear now is an eventual escape of the virus out of the sodomist and needle-sharing ghettoes into the general heterosexual population. In the USA that may not be today or tomorrow.
There is still time to circle the wagons. Dr. Gerald Myers, expert on HIV mutations, observes that of the five major subtypes of HIV-1 (A,B,C,D,& E), the United States has only one form, subtype B, which is comparatively less transmissible heterosexually. "But this situation is likely to change as new strains of HIV develop in the U.S. or are carried in from elsewhere." (Cameron, citing Dr. Gerald Myers, in Family Research Report September-October 1993, p. 8).
Not only are HIV viruses mutating constantly within the bounds of the USA; international travel also threatens to spread a type which is in one nation today into much of Village Earth tomorrow.
[-----------] END page 34
The Monogamous Family: Bulwark Against AIDS
From: page 35
"One of the remarkable properties of the natural institution of the family," writes pediatrician and former public health official Herbert Ratner, "is that it protects society against epidemics of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), the latest and most lethal of which is AIDS. It accomplishes this by making sex intrinsic to and limited to marriage. The reason is clear. Epidemics of AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases have their genesis in multiple sex partners." (Child and Family, 20:181).
Dr. Ratner, editor of the same quarterly journal, reasons consequently that even if AIDS or any other sexually transmitted microorganism were to develop de novo, it would be limited to the couple in which it started, and die out again with them provided everyone would practice premarital chastity, and post marital monogamy.
"Nature's script, in effect, becomes the prescription protecting man and woman from epidemics of sexually transmitted diseases." (ibid.:182).
This experienced former public health official makes the remarkable statement that
"AIDS is the most threatening infectious disease that man has ever encountered. It is even questioned whether the human species will survive its insidious onslaught."
He observes that both primitive and later societies in which monogamy was the norm have been notably free of sexually transmitted diseases; whereas in societies in which sexual morals be came lax, where multiple sex partners were commonplace, there
"perversions prevailed, sexually transmitted diseases were common, an anti-child mentality developed, and the family as a functioning unit broke down." (p. 182).
And such is the condition into which modern society has allowed itself to drift, continues Dr. Ratner.
"Society is presently characterized by infidelity to family, country and religion, dissension between man and woman, single parent and broken homes, insecure childhood carried over to in secure adulthood, sex without norms, rampant sexually transmitted disease including an unusual increase of new ones, a sharp increase in the incidence of sterility, seemingly uncontrollable drug misuse, and a growing disregard of the value of life as seen in abortions on demand and in the promotion of infant and adult euthanasia under the principle that some people are better off dead." (p. 182).
When the mores of the race had deteriorated to this extent in recent years, he continues, nature "has apparently thrown down the gauntlet with AIDS. It is if nature is saying:
'You have misbehaved long enough; get back to abstinence and monogamy or perish.'" (p. 184).
Knowing Doctor Ratner for many years, I venture to say that he is not ready to agree with those who question whether the race will survive the onslaught of this disease, which so far is proving fatal to every single carrier without exception, once he or she is infected with the HIV virus. Survive we must, and survive we will in those family lines who are chaste.
Demographer Corrado Gini, taking a bird's eye view of human history, observed that numerous nations have, in the past, gone into decline or complete extinction, despite the fact that natural resources were plentiful to them. He theorized that biological factors were operating effectively in the process: when a critical mass of a population lost interest in reproduction, or lost powers of fertility, other signs of physical decay appeared with successive generations, and eventually the population moved off the stage of continuing human history. (Harris Lectures, 1929; Univ. of Chicago Press, 1930).
Fidelity April 1994
End page 35
Homosexual Intercourse: Pestiferous Cloaca
From: page 36
Among genital sexual practices, the receptive partner in anal intercourse is by far at the greatest risk of acquiring an HIV infection. This is true whether the receptive partner is male or female. It accounts for most HIV infections in the United States. Other genital sex practices which transfer HIV infected semen into another's body also contribute to the number of cases.
The secondary spread of HIV through blood contact, e.g. through shared infected needles among drug users or vertically from mothers to unborn children, does not lessen the fundamental role (emphasis mine) of genital sex, particularly anal intercourse, in the genesis and maintenance of the AIDS epidemic (Dr. Ratner, Semen and AIDS, 170).
Former Public Health Official Ratner presents four types of mechanism by which anal intercourse tends to abet the spread of AIDS:
1) Trauma in the delicate and vulnerable rectal tissue by reason of which HIV gets directly into the bloodstream of the recipient of semen.
2) The special affinity between HIV and the colorectal cells.
3) The comparatively rapid absorption of components of seminal plasma by the colorectal walls in contrast to the slow and modulated absorption of the vaginal wall.
4) The seminal plasma's enhancement of viral attack.
The fourth factor is especially significant, insofar as "the danger of semen introduced into the rectum, even in tiny amounts, is its powerful pathological ability to produce, maintain, and increase an immunodeficiency state in the recipient. In an HIV infected person this immunodeficiency state becomes a co-factor causing immune disfunction independent of the presence of HIV. This may explain the newly discovered, puzzling cases of AIDS in the absence of HIV- (ibid.: 171). In other words, semen in the rectum causes a malfunction of the body's immunity defenses in a manner parallel to and independent of the HIV virus. The United States Public Health Services therefore warned, in a public statement (February 16, 1988) that anal intercourse should be avoided for health reasons:
Because of the association between anal intercourse and transmission of the AiDS virus, this sexual practice must be considered extremely risky with or without a condom for either heterosexual or homosexual partners where one person may already be infected.... The most effective way to reduce risk is to avoid this practice altogether (Quoted in Ratner, ibid.: 171).
But Doctor Ratner thinks the warning does not do full justice to the lethal effects to which anal intercourse tends to lead. Seminal plasma, he states, acts as a powerful immune suppressant and so weakens the body's defenses against all infections: it therefore facilitates HIV infections, and may accelerate the progress of various diseases spawned in a situation of HIV induced immunodeficiency, and so accelerate the dizzying downward spiral into the inevitable crash of the terminal AIDS finale. Nature is poised like a vulture over practitioners of anal intercourse, to rid the earth of the practice.
END page 37
END EXTRACT QUOTE
JO> ...If we honor the rights of gays then everyone else will want rights too! <<<<
"Gays" already have the same "rights" others have.
What the "gay" leadership now demands are extra "rights" in honor of their chosen method having orgasms.
With best wishes, John