More Evidence Homosexual Sex is Against The Natural Law?

[Michael_Forrest]

lifesite.net/ldn/2008/jan/08011514.html

Highly Infectious, Deadly Bacteria Striking Gay Men

Disease spread primarily through anal intercourse

By Matthew Cullinan Hoffman

SAN FRANCISCO, January 15, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A new medical study appearing in the Annals of American Medicine shows that homosexuals are spreading a new, highly-infectious and extremely dangerous bacteria amongst themselves, most probably through anal intercourse.
The bacterium, called MRSA USA300, is impervious to front-line antibiotics and can only be treated with rarer drugs, primarily Vancomycin. Researchers say that the bug, which is a type of staphylococcus, is primed to develop immunity to that drug as well.

Infected patients may have inflammation, abscesses, and tissue loss in the affected areas. Although the bacterium does not literally “eat” the body, it manufactures toxins that can cause “necrosis” - the death of surrounding tissue.
The study’s authors note that the strong link between unhealthy behavior, particularly among homosexuals, is the driving force behind the disease. “Spread of the USA300 clone among men who have sex with men is associated with high-risk behaviors, including use of methamphetamine and other illicit drugs, sex with multiple partners, participation in a group sex party, use of the internet for sexual contacts, skin-abrading sex, and history of sexually transmitted infections,” the authors write.
“The same patterns of increased sexual risk behaviors among men who have sex with men - which have resulted from changes in beliefs regarding HIV disease severity with the availability of potent antiretroviral therapy - have been driving resurgent epidemics of early syphilis, rectal gonorrhea, and new HIV infections in San Francisco, Boston, and elsewhere,” add the researchers.

The study, which focused on clinics in the San Francisco area, found that in some cases up to 39% of patients had the MRSA USA300 infections in their genitals or buttocks, although the disease can be spread by general skin-to-skin contact and can even be picked up from surfaces.

Observing that “Infection with multidrug-resistant USA300 MRSA is common among men who have sex with men,” the study timidly concludes that “multidrug-resistant MRSA infection might be sexually transmitted in this population,” and counsels “further research.”

It is estimated that in San Francisco’s Castro District, which has the highest concentration of homosexuals in the country, the infection rate is 1 in every 588 residents. One in every 3,800 residents of San Francisco are infected. Homosexuals are 13 times more likely to be infected than others in the city.
The disease is not only spreading in San Francisco, but also Boston, New York and Los Angeles. In addition to homosexuals, people who are ill or have weakened immune systems are particularly susceptible. MRSA and other types of staphylococcus bacteria, often spread in hospitals, kill more than 19,000 Americans each year, a rate higher than deaths due to AIDS.

Peter LaBarbara, president of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality, is hoping that the revelation of yet another homosexual epidemic will have an impact on the public’s perception of homosexual behavior. “I think that the media, and Hollywood, and a lot of our policy makers and certainly academia are in a world of ‘let’s pretend’ with regard to homosexual behavior and its consequences,” he told LifeSiteNews. “They don’t want to focus on the special risks that homosexual behavior, especially between men, have in the public health arena, and issues like this keep coming up.”

However, LaBarbara acknowledges that the major media will “invariably spin things in a homosexual direction.”
“We saw the identical thing happen 25 years ago with the reporting on AIDS,” he said, “but ironically the whole AIDS crisis strengthened the homosexual lobby in this country.”

Related Links:
FULL STUDY TEXT: Emergence of Multidrug-Resistant, Community-Associated, Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Clone USA300 in Men Who Have Sex with Men
annals.org/cgi/content/full/0000605-200802190-002…
%between%

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

Actually bacteria in this case will go after any host/creature it is near. The act that it is passed on does not mean anything related to “Natural Law”. Different-gender preference people can get it just as easily.

By the way, can you fix the formatting? It runs off my screen.

 

[Michael_Forrest]

AIDS can infect anyone, too. But it preponderantly infects those who engage in certain sexual practices common in the homosexual community and/or drug use.

It appears such is the case with this infection as well. It is spreading preponderantly within the homosexual community, just as AIDS did.

That is what I meant by the implications to Natural Law.

Again, here is the pertinent paragraph from the article:

The study’s authors note that the strong link between unhealthy behavior, particularly among homosexuals, is the driving force behind the disease. “Spread of the USA300 clone among men who have sex with men is associated with high-risk behaviors, including use of methamphetamine and other illicit drugs, sex with multiple partners, participation in a group sex party, use of the internet for sexual contacts, skin-abrading sex, and history of sexually transmitted infections,” the authors write.

“The same patterns of increased sexual risk behaviors among men who have sex with men - which have resulted from changes in beliefs regarding HIV disease severity with the availability of potent antiretroviral therapy - have been driving resurgent epidemics of early syphilis, rectal gonorrhea, and new HIV infections in San Francisco, Boston, and elsewhere,” add the researchers.

 

[tiggeriffic]

Just because it is spreading primarily in the homosexual community does not lend itself to the argument that homosexual sex is against natural law. As a homosexual I do not participate in any of the “activities” they listed as common in the homosexual community. My partner and I are monogamous and disease free. There was a time when African American women were the fastest growing number of new cases of HIV, using your argument then that would mean they were against natural law. My argument against your reasoning is coming from a logical perspective not the fact that I am homosexual although most will not see that and use my homosexuality against me.

 

[Michael_Forrest]

Triggerific,

I’m sorry if the posting offended you, but your argument does not follow. My focus was on the action, not the identity. A woman’s “blackness” is not an action. Neither is a homosexual orientation an “action.”

The article singled out high-risk behavior (actions) in particular because this kind of sex is dangerous. And I don’t think it is debatable that these kinds of sexual practices are prevalent in the homosexual community.

In regard to homosexual monogamy, this certainly helps. It is much better than the kind of promiscuity common in the homosexual community (especially male). If you are male, especially, you would appear to be in a relatively small minority in that regard. But this does not address the issue of the danger involved in certain sexual practices (like anal sex) that do not involve the transmission of disease (anal fissures, anal incompetence, etc).

I also have to know what you mean by “monogamy”. Because I have read articles in which those who self-identify as homosexual mean something different than what is commonly accepted. Apparently, even in what are called monogamous relationships, homosexuals may regularly engage in infidelity as long as they return to their partner (The Male Couple by David P. McWhirter and Andrew M. Mattison). Perhaps this does not apply to you.

Regardless, the evidence seems clear enough to me that certain kinds of sexual practices commonplace in homosexual sex are particuarly dangerous.

catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html

 

[NewUlm1976_2000]

Regardless, the evidence seems clear enough to me that certain kinds of sexual activity commonplace in the homosexual sex are particuarly dangerous.

catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html

Actually, sleeping around, either heterosexual or homosexual will give you the same risks. You can get nasty diseases from others regardless of orientation. The gender of your partner does not matter. Some diseases are more prevelant in some groups but it eventually all gets spread around to those who sleep around.

 

[Michael_Forrest]

Actually, sleeping around, either heterosexual or homosexual will give you the same risks. You can get nasty diseases from others regardless of orientation. The gender of your partner does not matter. Some diseases are more prevelant in some groups but it eventually all gets spread around to those who sleep around.

You’ll get no argument from me that “sleeping around” is a bad idea for anyone, on many different levels.

But I don’t agree that it doesn’t matter what kind of sexual practices you engage in. It doesn’t square with logic or the evidence I have seen.

Whether one is homosexual or heterosexual, anal sex is dangerous. There are a list of other sexual practices I could mention that are dangerous as well, such as “fisting”. But it seems clear enough that these practices are far and away the most common in the homosexual community.

When two men are involved, it is impossible to have the kind of sex that is less prone to spreading disease: vaginal sex.

It’s just a matter of biology. I’m sorry if this is blunt, but the vagina was designed for sex. The anus was not.

 

[AnnaPerry]

Triggerific,

I also have to know what you mean by “monogamy”. Because I have read articles in which those who self-identify as homosexual mean something different than what is commonly accepted. Apparently, even in what are called monogamous relationships, homosexuals may regularly engage in infidelity as long as they return to their partner (The Male Couple by David P. McWhirter and Andrew M. Mattison). Perhaps this does not apply to you.

Interesting discussion, but I’m afraid I must disagree on the above monogamy issue- it is ridiculous to imply that homosexuals are somehow more promiscuous and unfaithful than heterosexuals. That is not even a Catholic issue- but a common sense issue. I do, however, respect your opinion- without different opinions there would be no discussions, true? Blessings

 

[Exalt]

Unfortunately, a gay aquaintence of mine was hit by a car a couple years ago.

Clearly, this is more evidence that homosexual sex is against natural law.

 

[Daddums]

Interesting discussion, but I’m afraid I must disagree on the above monogamy issue- it is ridiculous to imply that homosexuals are somehow more promiscuous and unfaithful than heterosexuals. That is not even a Catholic issue- but a common sense issue. I do, however, respect your opinion- without different opinions there would be no discussions, true? Blessings

Not ridiculous at all. This is from website on HIV/AIDS. It suggests that true monogamy may be rare within committed homosexual relationships.

Most heterosexuals, across racial and socioeconomic lines, regard monogamy as an adequate prevention strategy and do not use condoms for HIV prevention within the relationship. For gay men, the situation is quite different. Small studies have shown that even gay male couples who espouse and practice monogamy still regularly use condoms for anal sex. This suggests a tacit recognition of the difficulty and rarity of the maintenance of true monogamy, even within a committed and loving relationship.

thebody.com/content/art14030.html

Daddums

 

[Sanctus_Paladin]

I have to agree with the OP.

When it becomes clear that preforming the act that is wrong begins to beget a drawback that should be a clear warning sign not to do it, seems quite clear to me whats expected of us.

 

[Filius99993]

Not ridiculous at all. This is from website on HIV/AIDS. It suggests that true monogamy may be rare within committed homosexual relationships.

Most heterosexuals, across racial and socioeconomic lines, regard monogamy as an adequate prevention strategy and do not use condoms for HIV prevention within the relationship. For gay men, the situation is quite different. Small studies have shown that even gay male couples who espouse and practice monogamy still regularly use condoms for anal sex. This suggests a tacit recognition of the difficulty and rarity of the maintenance of true monogamy, even within a committed and loving relationship.

thebody.com/content/art14030.html

Daddums

How sad. Gosh, maybe we should support homosexual relationships and watch them die off… wouldn’t that be the moral thing to do?

I wish people would just accept Church teaching. Abstaining is not that difficult.

 

[Sanctus_Paladin]

How sad. Gosh, maybe we should support homosexual relationships and watch them die off… wouldn’t that be the moral thing to do?

I wish people would just accept Church teaching. Abstaining is not that difficult.

Funny story I was in religen class one day in highschool and we were talking about what to do about abortion and homosexuality. I was getting fed up with the kitten and fluff “Lets all love each” other ******** that I said.

“Fine you want to not make it a ‘issue’ to them cause they have free will fine. Let them go the way they want to. Those who belive in abortion and those who are gay will die off anyway.”

I got into so much trouble for saying that but it was so worth is to see the shocked look on those faces.

 

[Exalt]

“Fine you want to not make it a ‘issue’ to them cause they have free will fine. Let them go the way they want to. Those who belive in abortion and those who are gay will die off anyway.”

You were doing so well with the first two sentences, and then…

Yeah.

There has been homosexual behavior in human beings for thousands of years. It hasn’t disappeared. It probably won’t disappear anytime soon.

 

[Michael_Forrest]

Interesting discussion, but I’m afraid I must disagree on the above monogamy issue- it is ridiculous to imply that homosexuals are somehow more promiscuous and unfaithful than heterosexuals. That is not even a Catholic issue- but a common sense issue. I do, however, respect your opinion- without different opinions there would be no discussions, true? Blessings

I agree that people may have different opinions. No problem.

But I base my views on evidence (studies, etc., that even include those who are not anti-homosexuality in this regard). And the idea seems logical enough to me…especially if you notice any difference between the sexuality of men and women in general…let alone the other psychological issues that may be involved with those who have same sex attractions.

God bless.

 

[Michael_Forrest]

You were doing so well with the first two sentences, and then…

Yeah.

There has been homosexual behavior in human beings for thousands of years. It hasn’t disappeared. It probably won’t disappear anytime soon.

True. And the same could be said of violent behavior, stealing, pedophilia, etc.

 

[Michael_Forrest]

Or adultery, fornication…

I expect they’ll all be around until the Second Coming. But none of them are good ideas, on many different levels. Over time, most of them tend to be self-limiting propositions for a variety of reasons.

 

[Michael_Forrest]

Funny story I was in religen class one day in highschool and we were talking about what to do about abortion and homosexuality. I was getting fed up with the kitten and fluff “Lets all love each” other ******** that I said.

“Fine you want to not make it a ‘issue’ to them cause they have free will fine. Let them go the way they want to. Those who belive in abortion and those who are gay will die off anyway.”

I got into so much trouble for saying that but it was so worth is to see the shocked look on those faces.

I think I understand what you’re getting at. PC can get out of control. But you never know who might be suffering in your midst. This kind of forum is a bit different, imo…but I still am not a fan of jumping down someone’s throat. There’s a place for such responses, in my experience, but a very rare place.

With the exception of the “activists” (who may necessitate a stronger response), I’ve generally found that those with SSA are by and large very wounded people. In particular, many of the women I’ve known with SSA (short for same sex attraction) were sexually abused by men.

I’ll never forget an encounter I had on Beacon Hill with two women (in a homosexual relationship) during the “gay marriage” debate. The individual who chose to engage me in discussion was absolutely shocked that I had no intention of condemning her.

She knew what I believed about homosexual acts, yet over the hour that we talked, she eventually hugged me with tears streaming down her face and asked me to pray for her.

It was absolutely heartbreaking.

(I may not be able to return to this for some time. My apologies in advance to anyone who may write to me.)

 

[SpiritMeadow]

The Vatican has made it clear that homosexual acts cannot be supported. That said, whether you agree or not, no further “proof” need be given unless one is simply about the business of finding new ways to attack a class of people that appear to really bother a lot of folks on this site. I continue to question what all this talk about does this prove that homosexuality is not genetic, against nature (whatever that means) or whatever is about except it gives people a chance to be bigoted “safely” by discussing a “serious” question about “health”. Its just the usual gay bashing. I wonder why its so frightening? Those you oppose the most usually relates to what you are having difficulty resolving within yourself. Isn’t it time to worry about our own sin than this constant attempt to define other people’s sin?

 

[Michael_Forrest]

The Vatican has made it clear that homosexual acts cannot be supported. That said, whether you agree or not, no further “proof” need be given unless one is simply about the business of finding new ways to attack a class of people that appear to really bother a lot of folks on this site. I continue to question what all this talk about does this prove that homosexuality is not genetic, against nature (whatever that means) or whatever is about except it gives people a chance to be bigoted “safely” by discussing a “serious” question about “health”. Its just the usual gay bashing. I wonder why its so frightening? Those you oppose the most usually relates to what you are having difficulty resolving within yourself. Isn’t it time to worry about our own sin than this constant attempt to define other people’s sin?

I received a note about your posting…so before I run:

1. Not everyone is Catholic
2. Not nearly all those who are Catholic are willing to simply “listen to the Vatican” and leave it at that.

If you have any experience with these issues, then you should know that there are many, many people who believe there is nothing wrong with homosexual sex. There are many activists who have been quite effective at convincing people that these issues are merely ones of personal choice, all morally equivalent.

And many people are confused by them.

There are some people who will do what is wrong even when they know it is wrong, illegal, socially unacceptable or what have you. There are some people who will not do what is wrong, no matter what. And then there are a great many people in the middle who are swayed one way or the other by the witness of those around them.

My concern is primarily for these people, whether considering the possibility of acting upon possibly homosexual impulses or not.

Whether you know it or not, your posting conveys the kind of rash judgmentalism that you seem to dislike. You have no idea why I wrote (how could you), yet you jumped to the most negative conclusion and brushed apparently everyone on this thread with the same stroke…and that’s putting what you’ve demonstrably done most charitably.

I can only speak for myself. I have no interest in condemning anyone. But in whatever way we are able, we are called to stand against sin and falsehood.

Issues related to homosexuality are on the forefront of the cultural battle being fought in our society. That much should be plain to anyone who even watches a little television. Other such front-line issues are abortion, euthanasia and embryonic stem-cell research.

Were there a very successful movement to define adultery as just another lifestyle choice, I would hope Catholics would strenuously resist it…for the sake of everyone. I certainly would.

None of us are islands. We are all affected by each other. And the problematic choices made by many with same sex attractions are no exception.

Peace.