When did it become so 'cool' to be gay?

[P19978]

I am discussing this strictly from a fiscal and gov't/political angle.

I actually give money to AIDS charities because I have a brother with AIDS.

Socially, and morally, I'll help anyone regardless of their stupid choices (I even helped a liberal... once).

Having said all of that, AIDS is extremely preventable with mature decision making...

... and I can't see why my tax dollars should go to folks who make bad decisions when there are perfectly innocent folks suffering from equally cruel diseases.

And yes, I am talking about the US.

 

[buckethead1978]

If being gay is cool then consider the OP to be Miles Davis

 

[CUJO_1970]

The study cited above repeatedly mentions gay/bisexual males aged 13(!) and over.

13 years old? There's a big enough sample size of children contracting aids through homosexual relations to track statistically in a national study?

 

[Bill Derington]

The phrase squeaky wheel gets the oil is why aids/hiv gets so much research money while Alzheimer's doesn't.

 

[MegaBlue05]

Gayness pisses off social conservatives.
Social conservatives are terrible.
I'm in favor of more gayness.

Seriously, why do so many people get worked up over gay people being represented in culture? Is it religion? Bigotry?

I'm glad the religious indoctrination I was brought up with was rejected by me around age 15.

In the words of the immortal Early Cuyler: "Hate what ya fear. Fear what ya don't understand."

 

[jamo0001]

The phrase squeaky wheel gets the oil is why aids/hiv gets so much research money while Alzheimer's doesn't.

Who will cost the taxpayer more money:

a 75yo dementia patient who gets a drug that will allow them to live on SS and Medicare 10 more years than they otherwise would've...

...or a 30yo with a college degree and HIV who gets a drug that will allow him to stay out of the hospital and in the workforce?


I mean, if we're being cold-hearted accountants, there's very little reason to save Granny, right?

 

[MegaBlue05]

We could probably pay for AIDS and Alzheimer's research at the same time if we'd tackle domestic issues and let the "crazy person" part of the world police its damn self.

But wars are money makers for the puppet masters so .....

 

[LineSkiCat]

I mean, not like it's a huge deal, but why are we assuming the 30-year old with aids has a degree? Only a 1/3rd of 25-29 year old's have a BA.

I know I sound like I'm splitting hairs, but it seems that to combat some of the homophobic sentiments, some here are swinging into the opposite direction by making Aids victims out to be a group of articulate and thriving persons.

I guess my point is this: Somewhere in the city, an Aids victim is lecturing at a fancy art gallery where proceeds go to feed starving children, and goes cycling on the weekends... while at the very same time, right outside the very same gallery... another Aids patient with a 0.14 blood alcohol level and dressed in tattered clothes is wanking himself right onto the large front pane glass for everyone to see and smearing it into his own form of "art".

 

[-LEK-]

I am discussing this strictly from a fiscal and gov't/political angle.

I actually give money to AIDS charities because I have a brother with AIDS.

Socially, and morally, I'll help anyone regardless of their stupid choices (I even helped a liberal... once).

Having said all of that, AIDS is extremely preventable with mature decision making...

... and I can't see why my tax dollars should go to folks who make bad decisions when there are perfectly innocent folks suffering from equally cruel diseases.

And yes, I am talking about the US.

I mean, you seriously can't be this obtuse? It's a troll act, right? No way you are an adult, because your reasoning skills are on par with a elementary school child. Grats on the good troll act. I mean, it's borderline impossible to be as stupid as you are trying to be here.

 

[VT/UK Rondo]

I mean, you seriously can't be this obtuse? It's a troll act, right? No way you are an adult, because your reasoning skills are on par with a elementary school child. Grats on the good troll act. I mean, it's borderline impossible to be as stupid as you are trying to be here.

Why isnt AIDS preventable by mature decision making? Is there still some percentage of the population after 3 decades of public service announcements that doesnt know the disease is bloodborne and spread through unprotected sex and contaminated needle use or are you referencing the miniscule sample of the population which accidentally contracts the disease through unexpected contact with contaminated blood?

 

[-LEK-]

<facepalm gif>

 

[wild mandu]

This isn't' the first of your posts (just in this thread, fine else where) that made me scratch my head. Another one before this talked about Gays in the media, where the numbers looked funky and didn't provide any link, unless I missed it. The guy above is talking about comparing money spent on one disease versus another, and your retort is then to compare money spending on a disease to money we give to other countries? Not that I don't agree, but that's apple to oranges, and you kind of skirted the question. Are we spending too much on Aids research (From a U.S. standpoint)? Honest question to everyone here.

http://www.iflscience.com/health-an...tween-diseases-we-donate-and-diseases-kill-us

http://report.nih.gov/categorical_spending.aspx#legend8

One thing to note is that it's very hard to calculate Aids/HIV funding because it begins to touch other diseases, in that it weakens the immune system and opens up several other chances for disease and illness.

Still.. According to the second link, Aids is the highest SPECIFIC area of concern we've donated and fund-raised money for. All the areas above it, and a lot of the areas below are broad and general areas, encompassing many variations and fronts of said subject.

I do think you were right to call out the guy, pretty insensitive, but I absolutely think it's fair to question the amount we donate to Aids research.

The point of the 20% globally was to show it isn't just a gay disease, that we're spending money in places with large heterosexual cases. A large part of his argument was basically "we're wasting this money so queers can screw."

The 1% was to illustrate that even though spending has increased over the years, it's really a drop in the bucket in terms of overall budget spending.

Here's a link if you so needed one. Look at the footnotes for all of the sources:
http://kff.org/global-health-policy...nts-fy-2016-budget-request/#footnote-148589-1

 

[wild mandu]

I mean, you seriously can't be this obtuse? It's a troll act, right? No way you are an adult, because your reasoning skills are on par with a elementary school child. Grats on the good troll act. I mean, it's borderline impossible to be as stupid as you are trying to be here.

I like how he's at least implying that just being liberal is tantamount to having AIDS.

 

[-LEK-]

The funniest part, is they think they are making reasonable points. If your premise is so jacked from the start, your conclusions will be jacked.

 

[Bill Derington]

Who will cost the taxpayer more money:

a 75yo dementia patient who gets a drug that will allow them to live on SS and Medicare 10 more years than they otherwise would've...

...or a 30yo with a college degree and HIV who gets a drug that will allow him to stay out of the hospital and in the workforce?


I mean, if we're being cold-hearted accountants, there's very little reason to save Granny, right?

Alzheimer's affects a much larger group than aids, and it's not preventable.
If these 30 year old college graduate were as bright as you suggest wouldn't they use protection? Hell, I knew to do that when I was 16.

 

[LineSkiCat]

My mistake Wild.. I thought you meant that 20% as having nothing to do with Aids funding. I thought it was peculiar you brought up Aids funding and compared it to generic global aid.

 

[P19978]

The point of the 20% globally was to show it isn't just a gay disease, that we're spending money in places with large heterosexual cases. A large part of his argument was basically "we're wasting this money so queers can screw."

The 1% was to illustrate that even though spending has increased over the years, it's really a drop in the bucket in terms of overall budget spending.

Here's a link if you so needed one. Look at the footnotes for all of the sources:
http://kff.org/global-health-policy...nts-fy-2016-budget-request/#footnote-148589-1

$25 billion (U.S. only) is a drop in the bucket?

Again, I'm sure the Alzheimers/cancer/heart disease folks would like that "insignificant" amount of money.

 

[P19978]

I like how he's at least implying that just being liberal is tantamount to having AIDS.

They do share one commonality: really poor decision making.

 

[elwood_blue]

P could very well be talking about funding the Aids problem in THIS country, and isn't specifically talking about the issues in say, Africa. Doesn't mean he's stupid. Maybe a cold-hearted asshole, though. The problems in Africa with Aids and other diseases is horrific.

A lot of the diseases in Africa are by choice as well. Witness:

 

[LineSkiCat]

Hold on, let me light a few candles for this one.

 

[RUPPsRevenge1]

Who is forced to celebrate anything? Have you been required to march in a gay pride parade?
I've never celebrated anything regarding gays...I just don't persecute them.

Being called a bigot because you want to slander people who are gay isn't being forced to celebrate being gay.

You are doing the same thing I'm talking about. I didn't mention or slander any gay person. It doesn't bother me. But even talking about the PC of this and you make those remarks.

Associate any comment that is made that isn't cheering with being a bigot. You associated my comment with bigotry. By doing this, no one speaks out with any opinion outside of "your" norm.

 

[Willy4UK]

A lot of the diseases in Africa are by choice as well. Witness:

View embedded media

hahahahahaha

 

[WayneDougan]

It's National Gay Month. Pretty sure the government, of which we are tax payers, are celebrating it.

 

[Kooky Kats]

Slightly OT but curious in anyone saw the bearded lady on America's Got Talent this past week? From Lexington.

Bruce Jenner's from Lexington?

 

[Willy4UK]

It's National Gay Month. Pretty sure the government, of which we are tax payers, are celebrating it.

My wife and I are doing our part. We're going to a burlesque drag show this weekend.

 

[Kooky Kats]

A lot of the diseases in Africa are by choice as well. Witness:

View embedded media

Not that there's anything wrong with that, but you suppose this dude brushes his teeth after his date with Colonel Angus?

 

[Willy4UK]

Not that there's anything wrong with that, but you suppose this dude brushes his teeth after his date with Colonel Angus?

Worst halitosis ever.

 

[shutzhund]

I avoid them whenever possible. When avoidance isn't possible I'm polite and move on without too obvious haste. Works for me.

This has been one funny thread.

 

[-LEK-]

They do share one commonality: really poor decision making.

Jesus man, can you really just try once not using faulty logic in your thought process.

Here, because it is obvious you fall into the camp of dumb assess:

"A False analogy is an informal fallacy. It apples to inductive arguments. It is an informal fallacy because the error is about what the argument is about, and not the argument itself. When you use these types of arguments, you are commiting fallacies with logic, and thus an invalid argument. Your whole thought process seems to be based on this."

"An analogy proposes that two concepts which are similar (A and B) have a common relationship to some property. A has property X, therefore B must also have property X. In a false analogy, the objects may have some similarities, but they do not both have property X. That way, both objects may have the same color, but this does not mean that they have the same size.[1] Even if bananas and the sun appear yellow, one could not conclude that they are the same size. One who makes an invalid analogy or comparison is often said to be "comparing apples and oranges"."

Now I get that logic is a few thousand years old, and while most of us as humans have been able to grasp certain ideas in relation on how to make correct arguments, some humans, like yourself, have not. So rather than be stuck 2000 years plus in the past, here are some links to educate you. Most humans use logic to put sentences together, understand their world, and make truthful or valid arguments. When you fail to make these types of arguments, you have untruthful and invalid arguments. Basic reasoning skills are what set humans apart from most of the natural kingdom. So when you make arguments that lack basic reasoning skills...(hopefully you will read the links and know what logically comes next from these premises!)

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_analogy

http://www.answers.com/Q/Why_is_logic_relevant_to_everyday_life

 

[P19978]

This has been one funny thread.

On this we can all agree lol.

 

[fuzz77]

You are doing the same thing I'm talking about. I didn't mention or slander any gay person. It doesn't bother me. But even talking about the PC of this and you make those remarks.

Associate any comment that is made that isn't cheering with being a bigot. You associated my comment with bigotry. By doing this, no one speaks out with any opinion outside of "your" norm.

You said; "Because that is the new scary PC culture that is the US now. It's not even about agreeing or disagreeing, you have to promote and celebrate. If you dont, you are a bigot. You have to have a certain opinion that is exactly like everyone else's or you are going to get blasted.".

What is the point of your comment?
Who "blasted" you for doing or saying nothing?

I doubt many if anyone who is not gay has promoted and/or celebrated people who are gay. I've know quite a few people who are gay and none have ever "blasted" me because I didn't celebrate or promote their existence. I don't make a distinction between my gay friends and straight friends...they are all just friends and they know that.

I'm not sure what others sexuality has to do with you. Other than the person with whom you might be in a relationship, a person's sexuality is none of your damn business. If you are making comments or judgments on other people then you deserve what you get. If you tell a woman that she's fat, you might get blasted, right?
What's the difference?

When people stop worrying about the sexuality of others then all the other stuff will go away. The fact that someone is gay should make no more difference to you than if their name was Smith or Jones. Their sex life shouldn't be any of your concern.

 

[-LEK-]

Its a known fact that people who are adamantly against homosexuality secretly wish for the cock. Everyone knows this. Its classic over compensation.

 

[VT/UK Rondo]

This whole thread is a "informal fallacy". Somehow it went from gay being cool...to RSVP cards... to Dungeons and Dragons conventions... to muslim men fornicating with sheep...to some guy saying he would suck a dong for a bag of weed...to the bearded lady...to alzheimers...and finished up in African with somebodys head up a cows ass. Only on the paddock...

 

[Willy4UK]

This whole thread is a "informal fallacy". Somehow it went from gay being cool...to RSVP cards... to Dungeons and Dragons conventions... to muslim men fornicating with sheep...to some guy saying he would suck a dong for a bag of weed...to the bearded lady...to alzheimers...and finished up in African with somebodys head up a cows ass. Only on the paddock...

I can't post on my phone, but I can read. and dammit, I haven't laughed this hard in awhile. Nicely stated VT/UK

 

[fatguy87]

When didn't being straight become so trendy?

Oh how I am so jealous of our ancestors that reproduced by budding. I think they were the cat's pajamas.

 

[pikespeak1]

Yeah because we know that breitbart is so objective.

Gays exist and have existed in every culture since the beginning of time despite the fact that they've been historically shunned and persecuted including executed. You'll have to reconcile how that is without there being some biological reason.
Because science hasn't found a "gay gene" could mean many things. Science has also not found a "smart gene" or an "athletic gene". Imagine the social firestorm if we discovered that one race of people was genetically smarter than another. Josef Mengele was conducting research that was considered to be unethical. Perhaps nobody has looked too hard for that "gay gene" because they fear being labled Mengele-like?

Before you go the pedophile route...the difference is consent.

Just as objective as you.

 

[Willy4UK]

When didn't being straight become so trendy?

Oh how I am so jealous of our ancestors that reproduced by budding. I think they were the cat's pajamas.

When skinny jeans got down to $20 a pair at TJ Maxx.

 

[pikespeak1]

This already happens. Gaming conventions, outdoors conventions, gun conventions, tech conventions, furry conventions, porn conventions, etc... Everyone celebrates their interests. Gay people are interested in the gay community so they celebrate it.

It's your opinion that it's idiotic and that's fine....but people who are not gay do similar things.

Just like you aren't forced to go to a Dungeons and Dragons convention, you also are not forced to go to a gay pride parade.

But its perfectly acceptable to publicly ridicule gun owners and make fun of a dungeons and dragons convention. Not so with the homosexual "community".

 

[pikespeak1]

I guess you've overlooked the fact that the black community as a whole has been much less receptive to gays than the general population as a whole.
Also to claim that gays haven't been persecuted throughout history, mind boggling.

I'm sure when people stop trying to deny gays their rights, they will no longer feel the need to be seen as different.

He didn't say that gays haven't been persecuted. Of course they have faced persecution but to equate that persecution to the way blacks were once treated in this country is nearly as offensive as anything I can imagine.

Which rights are gay people being denied?

 

[pikespeak1]

Maybe? He did live in L.A. Ayoooo

Let's not act like AIDS is not a lifestyle disease that is spread through sex and drugs for the most part.

Crazy study done by the NY Times a few years ago that claimed 80% of homosexual relationships are open.

Also, the CDC posted this...

The Numbers
New HIV Infectionsb

• In 2010, gay and bisexual men accounted for 63% of estimated new HIV infections in the United States and 78% of infections among all newly infected men. From 2008 to 2010, new HIV infections increased 22% among young (aged 13-24) gay and bisexual men and 12% among gay and bisexual men overall.
• Among all gay and bisexual men, white gay and bisexual men accounted for 11,200 (38%) estimated new HIV infections in 2010. The largest number of new infections among white gay and bisexual men (3,300; 29%) occurred in those aged 25 to 34.
• Among all gay and bisexual men, black/African American gay and bisexual men accounted for 10,600 (36%) estimated new HIV infections in 2010. The largest number of new infections among black/African American gay and bisexual men (4,800; 45%) occurred in those aged 13 to 24. From 2008 to 2010 new infections increased 20% among young black/African American gay and bisexual men aged 13 to 24.
• Among all gay and bisexual men, Hispanic/Latino gay and bisexual men accounted for 6,700 (22%) estimated new HIV infections in 2010. The largest number of new infections among Hispanic/Latino gay and bisexual men (3,300; 39%) occurred in those aged 25 to 34.

HIV and AIDS Diagnosesc

• In 2013, in the United States, gay and bisexual men accounted for 81% (30,689) of the 37,887 estimated HIV diagnoses among all males aged 13 years and older and 65% of the 47,352 estimated diagnoses among all persons receiving an HIV diagnosis that year.
• In 2013, gay and bisexual men accounted for 55% of the estimated number of persons diagnosed with AIDS among all adults and adolescents in the United States. Of the estimated 14,611 gay and bisexual men diagnosed with AIDS, 40% were blacks/African Americans; 32% were whites; and 23% were Hispanics/Latinos.
• By the end of 2011, an estimated 311,087 gay and bisexual men with AIDS had died in the United States since the beginning of the epidemic, representing 47% of all deaths of persons with AIDS.