Dean Blundell producer in hot water for discussing jury duty
- Thread starter colt
- Start date
Thank's for your Post, Mr. SkyRider.... a calm voice in a sea of hostility.... Lol... In all seriousness, I don't see this discussion that way... In reviewing it, my perspective has solid merit and stands up well to the raw emotion, diversion tatics and unrelated issues presented as argument. What I find particularly interesting about this social issue, is that it seems that it can never be discussed in a calm and rational and adult way. These discussions always degenerate into immature and vicious personal attacks. A review of this Thread shows this and sadly, illustrates my point about how important free speech is for everyone. I'd like to Thank Mr. Zed and his administration for allowing these discussions to flow freely and for keeping them- and many other Threads- readily available for reference, as well. This issue may heat up again what with the upcoming Olympics in Russia.Hey Jon,
I admire your steadfastness in defending your POV's, right or wrong, but this thread has degenerated into personal attacks on your character, integrity and intelligence. Maybe time to take a break and let things cool off a bit?
I understand that many members appear not to care much for my presence on this site and would like to see me banned because they don't like my point of view on, as it happens, this specific social issue. For anyone's interest, I could point out that I never get called the things in real life that members here accuse me of being....... I suppose that this issue is a deeply personal and emotional one for many people. Sincerely, Jon
Try again, indeed...Lol... So answer the question... You've had a few months to reply. You understand the direction given and the question asked. What the problem? Where is your answer? If it's is all so simple in your mind then it should be easy for you to offer a reasonable rebuttal instead of just these little, hit and run chicken shit taunts always safely delivered on the coattails of another member. While you're trying to think up what you believe is a witty reply, why not consider why it's so important for you to have my voice silenced on this issue- if, as you repeatedly have told everyone here- my perspective on this issue is just so 'ridiculous' and 'bigoted', etc. ? Sincerely, Jon .Sorry, not a cogent argument
Try again
Simply because you are either completely unaware of how science works with regard to how HIV/AIDS came to exist and yet pass off your homophobic pseudo-science as 'fact'.Try again, indeed...Lol... So answer the question... You've had a few months to reply. You understand the direction given and the question asked. What the problem? Where is your answer? If it's is all so simple in your mind then it should be easy for you to offer a reasonable rebuttal instead of just these little, hit and run chicken shit taunts always safely delivered on the coattails of another member. While you're trying to think up what you believe is a witty reply, why not consider why it's so important for you to have my voice silenced on this issue- if, as you repeatedly have told everyone here- my perspective on this issue is just so 'ridiculous' and 'bigoted', etc. ? Sincerely, Jon .
You are blaming gay people for the creation and spread of HIV, which is as close to hate speech as one can get. It is akin to the Nazis blaming the Jews for all of Germany's problems.
So you are either intellectually dishonest to further your agenda or you are willfully ignorant and trying to steadfastly pass off your unsubstantiated garbage as fact to muddy the waters/inflame anti-homosexual sentiment or you are a troll.
I disagree that my perspective reresents 'hate speech'. I was right there in Toronto as a young fellow in the 1970's and 80's and watched the whole drama unfold and expand into a completely preventable World Wide Pandemic. My brief outline of just how sick and ugly this whole Homosexual AIDS drama played out is only a tiny snippet of the realities of the day and I'd be happy to enlighten members here on the realities of the day further if anyone wishes. It's all part of the Homo/ AIDS history whether people want to hear it or believe it or not.Simply because you are either completely unaware of how science works with regard to how HIV/AIDS came to exist and yet pass off your homophobic pseudo-science as 'fact'. You are blaming gay people for the creation and spread of HIV, which is as close to hate speech as one can get.
So you are either intellectually dishonest to further your agenda or you are willfully ignorant and trying to steadfastly pass off your unsubstantiated garbage as fact to muddy the waters/inflame anti-homosexual sentiment or you are a troll.
The key moral issue back then for me and many other people now and still was the relative ease of prevention of this brand new and extraordinarily virulent and infectious desease and how expressing how easily this new deadly desease could be addressed and contained - with a goal of the desease being prevented- evoked hysterical and rabidly emotional protests from the Homo folks in Toronto because they felt with all their hearts that their 'civil' rights and 'Human' rights were being 'violated' by the mere discrete and quiet suggestion that they shouldn't anally fornicate with one other and everybody else because of the risk of causing and spreading a deadly infectious desease. The opposing point of view was and remains for me that AIDS is a public health issue- not a 'civil' rights issue- and that, in my view, is the way it should have always been treated.
It was then and remains now the abject refusal of the Homo folks to acknowledge, accept and take responsibility for the consequences of their behaviour and that remains the central moral issue for many people. The Homo folks without doubt played a significant role in the spread of the desease through their behaviour. It sure seemed obvious enough to everyone that AIDS is the result of Homosexual behaviour, specifically, Homosexuals anally fornicating with one and other without using a condom. Watching it all unfold in Toronto and being bombared daily for years and years with media coverage back in the day made it all so easy for me and just about everyone else within my social circle and everywhere else to understand that being a Homo and anally fornicating with another Homo would cause and create and help spread AIDS.
So the message was clear enough then as it is now and it still remains relevant today: If you're a Homosexual and wish to anally fornicate with another Homsexual then it would be a moral and just thing to do as a Human being- in order to not cause and help spread a deadly infectious desease- to use a condom. As I mentioned earlier, back in my day one couldn't go any where in Toronto without seeing posters plastered everywhere urging the Homos folks to use a condom and get tested and don't anally fornicate with one and other or whoever else with out using a condom because that would cause and help spread AIDS. That was pounded into everyone's consciousness whether anyone wanted to hear it all or not. So what is so wrong with expressing this still relevant public health issue policy concerning our health and the spread of a deadly, infectious desease...? Could it be because the issue remains a deeply hurtful and emotional one for some people...?
By the way, I think any objective observer reviewing the previous linked discussion would find my science to be solid. You as are others here are welcome to show me the faulty science used in my arguments anytime you wish. Thank you for your comments. Sincerely, Jon .
Outside of you and your "social circle" I doubt anyone would find your "science" to be solid. There is literally zero credible science that supports your premise that gay men engaging in unprotected sex created and caused HIV or AIDS. Period....I think any objective observer reviewing the previous linked discussion would find my science to be solid. You as are others here are welcome to show me the faulty science used in my arguments anytime you wish...
You could say that unprotected anal sex helped spread HIV/AIDS. That is fair. But to claim that AIDS (literally) sprang out of gay man's ass is so asinine, so outside of the realm of science that not only are you laughable, you are a menace. Seemingly devoid of a basic understanding of science, let alone virology, you make sweeping statements based on late 80s to early 90s fear-mongering rhetoric and position it as fact.
Your disinterest in acknowledging real science combined with your obvious disdain for homosexual men is what makes your postings akin to hate speech. Like I wrote, your rhetoric sounds curiously like the Nazis used to make the Jews scapegoats for all of Germany's ills in the 20s and 30s. No evidence based in fact, just pure hatred, scapegoating and fear-mongering. Thankfully we aren't as vulnerable to the rabble-rousing rantings of lunatics-as-leaders (insert Rob Ford joke) decrying "undesirables" anymore.
There is more than ample evidence that HIV-1 and HIV-2 both find their origins in African simian immunodeficiency viruses (SIV) and were passed from apes & monkeys to humans (most viruses can be transmitted from species to species; since humans and chimpanzees share over 98% of the same DNA, making such transmission is even easier) via bushmeat. Transmission was then accomplished through a variety of means.
Retroviruses like SIV/HIV are thought to have been around since the beginning of time and evolve as their environment (often their animal hosts) changes. Unfortunately, because viruses don't leave fossils and because they trick cells and hide very well, understanding a virus' history means it needs to be 'untangled' from not only the host, but from other contemporary organisms that they could have developed in en route to later forms. As technologies improve and samples are more readily made available and catalogued, more of the virus' origin mystery(-ies) will be divulged.
Viruses don't just appear out of thin air because of an action like unprotected sex, but they can be transmitted that way (among numerous other ways) once acquired from another host species. Perhaps you're confused and that's what you mean? Or are you positing that gay sex suddenly awakened a dormant virus in these men in the late 20th century after hundreds, if not thousands of years of gay sex? (And if so, how exactly does that work?) Or are you one of those people who believes God created HIV/AIDS to punish homosexuals for their sins? (Oh wait, you claimed gay men created AIDS...)
Sorry, your 'argument' doesn't hold up to any scrutiny. The reason people respond so viscerally to your posts is simply because it has zero verifiable scientific credibility and reeks of homophobia/hatred. Most people here and in society in general - again, outside of you and your "social circle" - tend to live and let live when it comes to homosexuality... And if one makes outrageous (or as you might call it, "unpopular") claims, we as a society tend to require evidence backing said premise up.
So please, feel free to share some science. There is nothing in your previous postings that has shown a shred of evidence to back up these types of claims:
... anally fornicate ... causing and spreading a deadly infectious desease. [sic]...
...It sure seemed obvious enough to everyone that AIDS is the result of Homosexual behaviour, specifically, Homosexuals anally fornicating with one and other without using a condom...
...Watching it all unfold in Toronto and being bombared daily for years and years with media coverage back in the day made it all so easy for me and just about everyone else within my social circle and everywhere else to understand that being a Homo and anally fornicating with another Homo would cause and create and help spread AIDS...
...in order to not cause and help spread a deadly infectious desease [sic]...
Exactly.Please refer to post #117
Not to mention every other post that has begged you to put forth any sort of scientific proof for any of your wacky beliefs
You have been weighed, you have been measured and you have been found wanting.
Bigot.
I have shared some some science in the previous discussion. Please refer to: https://terb.cc/bulletin/showthread...ary-place-for-LGBT-people-in-Russia-right-now . You may reference Post # 579 and note that my rebuttal has stood unchallenged now for a few months. Why do think that may be...?Outside of you and your "social circle" I doubt anyone would find your "science" to be solid. There is literally zero credible science that supports your premise that gay men engaging in unprotected sex created and caused HIV or AIDS. Period.
You could say that unprotected anal sex helped spread HIV/AIDS. That is fair. But to claim that AIDS (literally) sprang out of gay man`s ass is so asinine, so outside of the realm of science that not only are you laughable, you are a menace. Seemingly devoid of a basic understanding of science, let alone virology, you make sweeping statements based on late 80s to early 90s fear-mongering rhetoric and position it as fact.
Your disinterest in acknowledging real science combined with your obvious disdain for homosexual men is what makes your postings akin to hate speech. Like I wrote, your rhetoric sounds curiously like the Nazis used to make the Jews scapegoats for all of Germany`s ills in the 20s and 30s. No evidence based in fact, just pure hatred, scapegoating and fear-mongering. Thankfully we aren`t as vulnerable to the rabble-rousing rantings of lunatics-as-leaders (insert Rob Ford joke) decrying "undesirables" anymore.
There is more than ample evidence that HIV-1 and HIV-2 both find their origins in African simian immunodeficiency viruses (SIV) and were passed from apes & monkeys to humans (most viruses can be transmitted from species to species; since humans and chimpanzees share over 98% of the same DNA, making such transmission is even easier) via bushmeat. Transmission was then accomplished through a variety of means.
Retroviruses like SIV/HIV are thought to have been around since the beginning of time and evolve as their environment (often their animal hosts) changes. Unfortunately, because viruses don`t leave fossils and because they trick cells and hide very well, understanding a virus` history means it needs to be `untangled` from not only the host, but from other contemporary organisms that they could have developed in en route to later forms. As technologies improve and samples are more readily made available and catalogued, more of the virus` origin mystery(-ies) will be divulged.
Viruses don`t just appear out of thin air because of an action like unprotected sex, but they can be transmitted that way (among numerous other ways) once acquired from another host species. Perhaps you`re confused and that`s what you mean? Or are you positing that gay sex suddenly awakened a dormant virus in these men in the late 20th century after hundreds, if not thousands of years of gay sex? (And if so, how exactly does that work?) Or are you one of those people who believes God created HIV/AIDS to punish homosexuals for their sins? (Oh wait, you claimed gay men created AIDS...)
Sorry, your `argument` doesn`t hold up to any scrutiny. The reason people respond so viscerally to your posts is simply because it has zero verifiable scientific credibility and reeks of homophobia/hatred. Most people here and in society in general - again, outside of you and your "social circle" - tend to live and let live when it comes to homosexuality... And if one makes outrageous (or as you might call it, "unpopular") claims, we as a society tend to require evidence backing said premise up.
So please, feel free to share some science. There is nothing in your previous postings that has shown a shred of evidence to back up these types of claims:
I know that many members here have said that they `can`t be bothered` to read through the earlier Thread, so with that in mind I will again ask anyone reading this to please provide us with a legitimate, reliable, recognized and acredited academic, scientific or scholarly publication which shows that Homosexual behaviour has any Evolutionary, Biological, Morphological, Physiological or Reproductive context. Please, show us the science. Additionally, I would ask you to show us the science that supports your claim that retroviruses such as SIV and HIV/AIDS have been around `since the beginning of time`. Can you please support this assertion, scientifically?
You say that there is no evidence that the Homo folks back in the early 1980`s who were hysterically adamant about their `civil` and `Human` right to anally fornicate with one and other without using a condom created AIDS; but when AIDS was first discoverd- up the anus and in the rectum of promiscuous Homosexual men in the eary 1980`s- and described by science as a new.....`syndrome` that was...... `acquired` and was afflicting only Homosexual men who were anally fornicating with one and other and eveything and everybody else without using a condom- no one anywhere was talking about monkeys in the jungle being the cause of the infection that only afflicted the Homo folks who were rabidly anally fornicating with one and other without the use of a condom. The Homo folks were certainly talking about all kinds of things being the cause of AIDS, such as dirty Hatian people and dirty intravenous drug users and dirty secret military plots secretly endeavouring to secretly infect the planet with a new and deadly and secret and infectous anal disease and on and on and on... The Homo folks were hysterically pointing their fingers at just about anything... except themselves and their behaviour as the cause of AIDS. All of this is a matter of fact that can be easily researched as a matter of public record. You talk about science and viruses and retroviruses and fossils and so on, but my sense is that you have no formal academic training or scientific accreditation. You are certainly not a virologist.
Your analogy of Nazi`s in war time Germany is ironic becuase as we all know, Homosexuals are the most intolerant people in Society. The Homo folks will not allow anyone, anywhere at anytime to offer a dissenting point of view on the origins of AIDS other than their Homo dogma of `monkeys in the jungle` being responsible for this completely preventable, deadly and infectous disease. But yes, this kind of tyranny and attempts at censorship and disgraceful lying and refusal to accept responsibility for the consequences of their behaviour is for me and many other like minded folks very reminiscent of watching the old, archival news reals of the Nuremburg Trials, where senior Nazi officers would step up smartly to the witness stand, all smug and shiny in their crisp, clean Nazi uniforms; and with their shoulders back and chins held high, answer direct questions from prosecutors with responses such as... Jews...? What Jews? I never saw any Jews. What are you talking about...? Perhaps all the Jews ran away or maybe all the Jews were killed by monkeys in the jungle....?
Please show us exacty how the historical events as they occurred- and which happen to be readily available as archival documents- lack credibility? Please show us how the question that I`ve asked- and which so far remains unchallenged- about Homosexual behaviour having any evolutionary or biological or morphological or phsyological or reproductive context is without... or as you say... having `zero` verifiable scientific credibility? Please edify us all on these points, if you can. Sincerely, Jon .
I'm not quite sure why the link didn't work, however it remains accesible through Post #: 59 in this discussion. Please refer to Post #: 579 in that linked Thread, as required. Sincerely, Jon .
you had a social circle?....Homosexuals anally fornicating with one and other without using a condom. Watching it all unfold in Toronto and being bombared daily for years and years with media coverage back in the day made it all so easy for me and just about everyone else within my social circle and everywhere else to understand that being a Homo and anally fornicating with another Homo would cause and create and help spread AIDS. ...
Sincerely, Jon .
lol... You would be surprised... Sincerely, Jon .you had a social circle?
I disagree that my perspective reresents `hate speech`. I was right there in Toronto as a young fellow in the 1970`s and 80`s and watched the whole drama unfold and expand into a completely preventable World Wide Pandemic. My brief outline of just how sick and ugly this whole Homosexual AIDS drama played out is only a tiny snippet of the realities of the day and I`d be happy to enlighten members here on the realities of the day further if anyone wishes. It`s all part of the Homo/ AIDS history whether people want to hear it or believe it or not.
The key moral issue back then for me and many other people now and still was the relative ease of prevention of this brand new and extraordinarily virulent and infectious desease and how expressing how easily this new deadly desease could be addressed and contained - with a goal of the desease being prevented- evoked hysterical and rabidly emotional protests from the Homo folks in Toronto because they felt with all their hearts that their `civil` rights and `Human` rights were being `violated` by the mere discrete and quiet suggestion that they shouldn`t anally fornicate with one other and everybody else because of the risk of causing and spreading a deadly infectious desease. The opposing point of view was and remains for me that AIDS is a public health issue- not a `civil` rights issue- and that, in my view, is the way it should have always been treated.
It was then and remains now the abject refusal of the Homo folks to acknowledge, accept and take responsibility for the consequences of their behaviour and that remains the central moral issue for many people. The Homo folks without doubt played a significant role in the spread of the desease through their behaviour. It sure seemed obvious enough to everyone that AIDS is the result of Homosexual behaviour, specifically, Homosexuals anally fornicating with one and other without using a condom. Watching it all unfold in Toronto and being bombared daily for years and years with media coverage back in the day made it all so easy for me and just about everyone else within my social circle and everywhere else to understand that being a Homo and anally fornicating with another Homo would cause and create and help spread AIDS.
So the message was clear enough then as it is now and it still remains relevant today: If you`re a Homosexual and wish to anally fornicate with another Homsexual then it would be a moral and just thing to do as a Human being- in order to not cause and help spread a deadly infectious desease- to use a condom. As I mentioned earlier, back in my day one couldn`t go any where in Toronto without seeing posters plastered everywhere urging the Homos folks to use a condom and get tested and don`t anally fornicate with one and other or whoever else with out using a condom because that would cause and help spread AIDS. That was pounded into everyone`s consciousness whether anyone wanted to hear it all or not. So what is so wrong with expressing this still relevant public health issue policy concerning our health and the spread of a deadly, infectious desease...? Could it be because the issue remains a deeply hurtful and emotional one for some people...?
By the way, I think any objective observer reviewing the previous linked discussion would find my science to be solid. You as are others here are welcome to show me the faulty science used in my arguments anytime you wish. Thank you for your comments. Sincerely, Jon .
Here are a few links for your perusal that all say both types of HIV (HIV-1 and HIV-2) came from a simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) and not, as you so ignorantly and offensively say, from the rectum of a homosexual manI have shared some some science in the previous discussion. Please refer to: https://terb.cc/bulletin/showthread...ary-place-for-LGBT-people-in-Russia-right-now . You may reference Post # 579 and note that my rebuttal has stood unchallenged now for a few months. Why do think that may be...?
I know that many members here have said that they `can`t be bothered` to read through the earlier Thread, so with that in mind I will again ask anyone reading this to please provide us with a legitimate, reliable, recognized and acredited academic, scientific or scholarly publication which shows that Homosexual behaviour has any Evolutionary, Biological, Morphological, Physiological or Reproductive context. Please, show us the science. Additionally, I would ask you to show us the science that supports your claim that retroviruses such as SIV and HIV/AIDS have been around `since the beginning of time`. Can you please support this assertion, scientifically?
You say that there is no evidence that the Homo folks back in the early 1980`s who were hysterically adamant about their `civil` and `Human` right to anally fornicate with one and other without using a condom created AIDS; but when AIDS was first discoverd- up the anus and in the rectum of promiscuous Homosexual men in the eary 1980`s- and described by science as a new.....`syndrome` that was...... `acquired` and was afflicting only Homosexual men who were anally fornicating with one and other and eveything and everybody else without using a condom- no one anywhere was talking about monkeys in the jungle being the cause of the infection that only afflicted the Homo folks who were rabidly anally fornicating with one and other without the use of a condom. The Homo folks were certainly talking about all kinds of things being the cause of AIDS, such as dirty Hatian people and dirty intravenous drug users and dirty secret military plots secretly endeavouring to secretly infect the planet with a new and deadly and secret and infectous anal disease and on and on and on... The Homo folks were hysterically pointing their fingers at just about anything... except themselves and their behaviour as the cause of AIDS. All of this is a matter of fact that can be easily researched as a matter of public record. You talk about science and viruses and retroviruses and fossils and so on, but my sense is that you have no formal academic training or scientific accreditation. You are certainly not a virologist.
Your analogy of Nazi`s in war time Germany is ironic becuase as we all know, Homosexuals are the most intolerant people in Society. The Homo folks will not allow anyone, anywhere at anytime to offer a dissenting point of view on the origins of AIDS other than their Homo dogma of `monkeys in the jungle` being responsible for this completely preventable, deadly and infectous disease. But yes, this kind of tyranny and attempts at censorship and disgraceful lying and refusal to accept responsibility for the consequences of their behaviour is for me and many other like minded folks very reminiscent of watching the old, archival news reals of the Nuremburg Trials, where senior Nazi officers would step up smartly to the witness stand, all smug and shiny in their crisp, clean Nazi uniforms; and with their shoulders back and chins held high, answer direct questions from prosecutors with responses such as... Jews...? What Jews? I never saw any Jews. What are you talking about...? Perhaps all the Jews ran away or maybe all the Jews were killed by monkeys in the jungle....?
Please show us exacty how the historical events as they occurred- and which happen to be readily available as archival documents- lack credibility? Please show us how the question that I`ve asked- and which so far remains unchallenged- about Homosexual behaviour having any evolutionary or biological or morphological or phsyological or reproductive context is without... or as you say... having `zero` verifiable scientific credibility? Please edify us all on these points, if you can. Sincerely, Jon .
http://http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/aids/virus/origins.html
http://www.aidsmap.com/Where-did-HIV-come-from/page/1391601/
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/basics/whatishiv.html
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/06/0612_030612_hivvirusjump.html
If you have issues with the CDC, with National Geographic and with PBS then that is your own stupidity
HIV did not originate with homosexual men. A homosexual man did not brew an AIDS cocktail in his anus like a demented witch like you claim
You are wrong and a bigot
Are you the dungeon master in your "social circle"?lol... You would be surprised... Sincerely, Jon .
Dumb question maybe... was there multiple on air discussions of his jury duty before the actual verdict?
I recall hearing one.
I recall hearing one.
I appreciate your efforts in responding.... I don't have any issues at all with the CDC or National Geographic or anyone else who has a opposing point of view on this issue. Indeed, lets review the content of the links that you've provided, shall we..........? 'Researchers believe'; their 'best guess'; 'probably'; 'Everybody's looking for certainty, It doesn't exist'. 'it's all theory'; 'There are several competing theories'; 'studies suggest'; 'it has been hypothesized that the virus made the leap( from monkeys in the jungle to Homosexuals)'; the 'virus's shadowy origins'; 'SIV doesn't kill or even sicken chimps who carry it'; etc., etc., etc....
Here are a few links for your perusal that all say both types of HIV (HIV-1 and HIV-2) came from a simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) and not, as you so ignorantly and offensively say, from the rectum of a homosexual man
http://http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/aids/virus/origins.html
http://www.aidsmap.com/Where-did-HIV-come-from/page/1391601/
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/basics/whatishiv.html
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/06/0612_030612_hivvirusjump.html
If you have issues with the CDC, with National Geographic and with PBS then that is your own stupidity
HIV did not originate with homosexual men. A homosexual man did not brew an AIDS cocktail in his anus like a demented witch like you claim
You are wrong and a bigot
Your post reminds me of the other member's links which were posted in the previous Thread that also acknowledged the origins of AIDS remains uncertain. I know that you've likely trawled the internet for articles that support your point of view and when you found some you've slammed them down hard on an anonymous internet chat forum like a trump card in a poker game, but the reality remains the same nonetheless. And that reality is that Homosexual men who anally fornicate with one and other without the use of a condom creates and causes AIDS. This is a fact. This is reality. This is the Truth and this Truth is unassailably beyond question.
All these theories and speculations and conjectures about monkey viruses in the jungle are simply a diversion tatic designed to distract from the core issue, and that core issue is that Homosexual men who anally fornicate with one and other without the use of a condom causes and creates AIDS. That is the Truth whether or not you or anyone else wants to hear it and the fact that Homosexuals who knew the facts and continued to anally fornicate with one and other without the use of a condom are responsible in a significant way to the spread of this deadly, incurable, infectious and completely preventable new anal disease. This new deadly and incurable disease is the most virulent pathogen yet know to science. The fact that the Homo folks have always and still continue to deny their responsibility in their part in this completely preventable tragedy simple speaks for itself. I believe as do many other people that the Truth is important and the Truth supersedes the risk of hurting anyone's feelings. The Homo folks are most welcome to believe whatever they like and they have an absolute right to express their point of view on this issue openly and freely and as I've stated previously in the earlier Thread, I will defend the right of all people-Homo folks or normal folks or anyone else- to express their point of view openly without censorship or reprisals. Let everyone speak. The Truth always prevails.
One may note further that the argument that I've presented- twice now- remains unchallenged. That's because my argument is incontrovertible. Please remeber, Ms. Mur101, that all we're talking about here is sex. That's all. It's just sex. And there are many, many long standing social conventions that outline, guide and in many cases outlaw certain kinds of sexual behaviours. For example, We as a Society dissaprove of incestous relationships, such as a father having sex with his daughter or a mother having sex with her son or a brother having sex with his sister, etc., becuase it is known and has been known for many, many years now that these kinds of sexual behaviours have a clearly negative impact on the participants and on Society as a whole. Incestous relationships bring out recessive genes and those recessive genes cause such things as cognitive disorders and physical impairments in any offspring that are brought forth by such sexual unions. So, with that knowledge- that incestous relationships cause damage to both the participants and Society- these kinds of incestous behaviours are outlawed. This makes sense. Just as it does to outlaw unprotected Homosexual anal fornication because the consequences of unprotected Homosexual anal fornication are profoundly destructive. Homosexual anal fornication causes, creates and helps spread AIDS. Please feel free to check the World Health Organizations figures for how many people have died and will continue to die and or will become infected and then ultimately die later to get a sense of how serious this Homosexual Holocast of Death has been, is and will continue to be into the future. Sincerely, Jon .
Please... Feel free to use the ignore feature on this site anytime you wish. Take care. Sincerely, Jon .LOL .... is this still going on, I put that jack-off troll on ignore and moved on.
Fuji nailed it in post # .... I dunno what fucking post number but he called him a troll and said he probably doesn't even believe the shit he is posting.
The ignore feature has great value.
Glad to see how much the ACUTUS fan club has expanded. It puts much of what he posts in other threads in perspective.
Liar. That was proven false above by Joe. After having lost the debate on that point so thoroughly, and he was very thorough, simply repeating your debunked claims amounts to lying. You KNOW it's false.Homosexual men who anally fornicate with one and other without the use of a condom causes and create AIDS.
