But it's TOTALLY okay for an Aids infected man to rape a woman or child.... So long as he's straight.

And one gets Aids, primarily, through homosexual acts.

Um, check your premises:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidemiology_of_HIV/AIDS

The main route of transmission for women is through unprotected heterosexual sex. African American women are 19 times more likely to contract HIV than other women.[21]

In the United States in particular, a new wave of infection is being blamed on the use of methamphetamine, known as crystal meth. Research presented at the 12th Annual Retrovirus Conference in Boston in February 2005 concluded that using crystal meth or cocaine is the biggest single risk factor for becoming HIV+ among US gay men, contributing 29% of the overall risk of becoming positive and 28% of the overall risk of being the receptive partner in anal sex.[22]

In Africa:

Across Sub-Saharan Africa, more women are infected with HIV than men, with 13 women infected for every 10 infected men. This gender gap continues to grow. Throughout the region, women are being infected with HIV at earlier ages than men. The differences in infection levels between women and men are most pronounced among young people (aged 15–24 years). In this age group, there are 36 women infected with HIV for every 10 men. The widespread prevalence of sexually transmitted diseases, the practice of scarification, unsafe blood transfusions, and the poor state of hygiene and nutrition in some areas may all be facilitating factors in the transmission of HIV-1 (Bentwich et al., 1995).

Mother-to-child transmission is another contributing factor in the transmission of HIV-1 in developing nations. Due to a lack of testing, a shortage in antenatal therapies and through the feeding of contaminated breast milk, 590,000 infants born in developing countries are infected with HIV-1 per year. In 2000, the World Health Organization estimated that 25% of the units of blood transfused in Africa were not tested for HIV, and that 10% of HIV infections in Africa were transmitted via blood.

Poor economic conditions (leading to the use of dirty needles in healthcare clinics) and lack of sex education contribute to high rates of infection. In some African countries, 25% or more of the working adult population is HIV-positive.

It's always so bracing to wake up to a little demonization of gays.

Smokers get cancer. Should we jail them for smoking?

Smokers get cancer. Should we jail them for smoking?

That's just because we haven't gotten around to it.

So allow me to be the devil's advocate: where are the progs who would ordinarily say something like leave them alone, respect their culture?

Amy, I agree with your post above.

I was not demonizing gays; just trying to be brief.

The history of Aids in the U.S. is: Aids first appeared in the 80's. Medical opinion at the time was that it was prevalent in and probably restricted to the gay community. Since there were bi-sexual men in the gay community, the disease spread to women. More women got Aids because men, generally, seek multiple partners. Then people who shared needles became infected.

Point is: it all began with homosexual activity then spread in ways we could not contemplate at the time. "Safe sex", not practiced in the early 80's, became absolutely necessary. Medical offices destroyed used needles (in the 70's, needles were sterilized and reused).

Not demonizing, just stating facts.

I won't elaborate on Africa, except to say the history is the same as the U.S., but developed into something worse because of lack of education, hygiene, and all the factors you mentioned.

But another point is why do we in the West meddle in the affairs of another country ? Notice we take note of the treatment of gays in the Middle East and Russia, but say nothing. But Uganda...well they are weak so we can come down strong on them. We in the West should not presume that our beliefs in general are superior to the beliefs of other countries. Our tolerance should be to leave other cultures alone and allow them to go about their lives as they see fit.

"where are the progs who would ordinarily say something like leave them alone, respect their culture?"

Hiding out in Rush Limbaugh's mind somewhere, I suppose.

Since we're working with hypotheticals here.

Nick wrote, re Uganda:

Our tolerance should be to leave other cultures alone and allow them to go about their lives as they see fit.

You really, really don't see the irony in what you just wrote?

Nick: " . . . it all began with homosexual activity . . . Just stating facts"

Wow, Nick, where did you get those "facts"?

Further: "We in the West should not presume that our beliefs in general are superior to the beliefs of other countries. Our tolerance should be to leave other cultures alone and allow them to go about their lives as they see fit."

Actually, I DO see our Western culture as superior to others - Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness! (just being brief, there is a lot more that makes "The West" superior) I guess that makes me a cultural imperialist, so sue me!

Yes, I do agree with allowing them to go about their lives as they see fit; EXCEPT when what they "see fit" is attacking those with less power than themselves.

Should we always stand idly by and allow bloodshed because we don't want to impose on their culture?

Should we say because we can't/won't do anything about the attacks against the less powerful (such as gays in Iran) that we shouldn't do anything about attacks against the less powerful anywhere else?

I do hope that I am simply misunderstanding your comments because I find it hard to believe that someone could be that callous towards those less fortunate than ourselves.

This reminds me of the story that I've heard about the British in India outlawing the practice of suttee (the widow throwing herself, or being thrown by others, on the funeral pyre of her husband). Indian leaders said that suttee was a part of their culture; to which a British Governor said that is your culture and we will allow you to continue this practice, but, be aware it is our practice to arrest and jail those who kill others including those who try to burn widows alive.

The late, great, Oriana Fallaci, in defending Bush's decision to go after Saddam said that the Italians could not have gotten rid of Mussolini without the Allies first going after him. Something for which she was very thankful.

In other words, some times the help MUST come from outside, by people who do NOT leave other cultures alone.

- Charles.

My recall is that Aids began in the early 80"s. Medical opinion at the time was that the disease was prevalent in and probably restricted to the gay community. Those are the "facts" as I recall them. So the words,"...it began with homosexual activity" is not out of line. If I am wrong, please tell me how Aids got its start in the U.S.

Time proved later that the disease spread to women through bi-sexual men then to others through shared needles.

"...help MUST come from outside, by people who do NOT leave other cultures alone"
-Charles

I agree, Charles

Assume you have the power to do the right thing. What would you do specifically to enforce tolerance of gays and lesbians in the Middle East ? Your example of India's suttee and the invasion of Italy were examples of countries backed by a strong military. Would you use the U.S. military to enforce tolerance in the Middle East if that is what it took ?

Why didn't Museveni REALIZE this would happen?!

1. In the West, AIDS still is largely restricted to gay men and drug users. Women who are not drug addicts are not significantly affected.

2. I didn't read anything that indicated any connection between this law and AIDS. The law is a moral statement about homosexuality that would have been commonplace in the West mere decades ago - and still is quite accurate in its assessment of the gay lifestyle, from that moral perspective.

The West didn't "progress" to accept homosexual behavior - it threw over received moral teaching.

3. Losing Western money may be the best thing for this - and many other - African countries.

Not this AIDS homosexuality garbage again.

But before I begin- Ugandans actually were pretty accepting of homosexuality until westerners came in. So them saying we are trying to impose our western ideals of accepting homos is kind of ironic. But if you follow ex African colonies it's always like that. Adopt the worst aspects of a foreign culture, claim it as your own and whine about the western powers.

(Hell even the janjaweed adopted Arab culture so much they hunt down their neighbors for being too black.)

As to AIDS it originated most likely from consuming bushmeat, and spread initially via heterosexual contact (sailors/truckers with hookers).

To say the history of AIDS, as Nick did above, is the same in America as it is in Africa is well.....utterly ridiculous.

One reason it spreads so much among African women is because the men like having dry sex. They don't like pussies to get wet for whatever bullshit cultural reason.

And I can tell you while gay men do some crazy sexual shit lesbians have the lowest AIDS rate of any group-including longtime married heterosexuals.

You risk getting AIDS by engaging with a man. But it's not because men are evil lecherous creeps.

They just take risks and in that group homosexual men have the opportunity that straight men will never experience.

Now understanding AIDS in Africa is an entirely different subject than what's going on in the U.S. k?.

Ben David

"accurate in its assessment of the gay lifestyle, from that moral perspective"

The gay lifestyle? You know Ben I know you are an Orthodox Jew and I've read fascinating accounts on the prevalence of homosexual acts among the ultra orthodox Jewish men. It seems a common occurrence among Gulf Muslim Arabs as well.

And for anyone out there that thinks homosexual behaviour stops because they don't live the gay lifestyle I will tell you that I have personally seen married men of all races and religions cruising the gay bars.

If man ass titilates you no amount of pussy will ever cure that.