As you may have heard I was on some little radio show to talk about my "don't teach gay" bill. After a few minutes, the host (Who shall we say was not of a receptive lifestyle) jumped topics and I made some comments on how the homosexual lifestyle was WAAAAAAY more risky then the hetero sexual lifestyle. Of course the regulars went bonkers. Here are some facts on the issues we covered.
Here are a few links with a compilation of facts found elsewhere mostly from the CDC
On the short lifespan of homosexuals,http://theroadtoemmaus.org/RdLb/22SxSo/PnSx/HSx/hosx_lifspn.htm
http://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/docs/fastfacts-msm-final508comp.pdfOdds of getting AIDS through vaginal sex
Many people love to throw around numbers from Africa and say the AIDS numbers are higher there for heterosexuals. This is true but mostly because in Africa it is common to practice anal sex as a form of birth control among prostitutes (an activity that is much more prevalent then in the US) and others. When I spoke on the radio show I was talking of vaginal heterosexual sex in the US. What are the odds here?
This was posted in the KNS today and are probably conservative numbers as it probably includes anal sex as a form of heterosexual sex (again, not what I was talking about).
"UNAIDS estimates that in the U.S., living with HIV as of 2009, 310,000 are women.The total US population as of 2010 is 308,745,538
Lets just go with about 50% are female = 154,372,000 female population.
Lets then say you take absolutely no care and sleep with anyone willy nilly. Your odds of getting a female with AIDS is 1 in @ 4970.
Lets go with the pro in the article who said on average, heterosexual intercourse between an infected person and a non infected person results in transmission of the disease about "one in a thousand times." (I assume this is without a condom)
Right off the bat that puts your odds of getting AIDS through heterosexual sex at about 1 in 5 million.
Most "Normal" people I imagine would also stay away from the IV drug users, hemophiliacs, known disease carriers, prostitutes and other high risk people. Also conceding a man less likely to receive the disease then a women because of the nature of sex, the odds of a man getting AIDS from a female are pretty low.
Add a condom and some common sense and you can add probably at least add a 0 to the number."
Who IS getting AIDS
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/aa/ and http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/index.htm or
I admit (As I did in the interview), I am not a historian on AIDS (If you listen to the actual uncut interview I was asked to tell what I had heard was the history of AIDS) The research on sex with a monkey being the first transmitter of AIDS has not been proven nor firmly dis proven. It is one of about 5 theories I was able to find on the source of AIDS. No credible source said any one was clearly definitive one way or the other.
It was first published I think in a book which documents the history of the AIDS epidemic is entitled "And the Band Played On." The author of "And the Band Played on" was appalled by the unsanitary and degrading behavior of homosexuals. He died of AIDS a year after his book was published.
The homosexual pilot comment was first printed in the American Journal of medicine article about "Patient 0". His name was Gaeton Dugas. While possibly not the first person with AIDS he is still widely considered the person who widely transmitted the modern outbreak of the disease in the gay community. I admit I gave him false credit. I said I thought he was a pilot as I recall. He was a flight attendant.
Here is a link on that...
As for the reason for the interview (My bill on parental responsibility of teaching sexuality to very young children) Here are some points of view for you to consider.
-It is a parents responsibility to decide when a child is ready to grasp such a complex issue as sexuality and what they want to tell the child about that complex subject. Not a teachers.
- All children develop mentally at different rates. I do not feel a teacher with an agenda (Be it pro
or con) is the appropriate person to decide "Now is the time" for an entire class of children just because they may think one way or another on an issue and want to espouse it.
-A teacher is not a trained child psychologist or psychiatrist and could do as much harm as good to a sexually confused child.
-I doubt many on the other side would want a teacher who said "Homosexuality is evil, dirty and wrong" just because they felt that it was what is appropriate, that it is what they thought the children needed to and were ready to hear. This bill ensures neutrality from teachers.
-Physically threatening behavior is what is and needs to remain covered for all groups. Not the sexuality of the victim. We already have anti bullying legislation passed in Tennessee (In fact I co sponsored it 2 or 3 years ago when it passed) so all children are protected from bullying in our schools.
-We do not need an un equal justice system that creates special separate classes of protected people that gets special protection under the law.
-Nor do we need to silence the first amendment rights of religious free speech of those in our schools whose family may hold different beliefs (as long as those beliefs are not physically threatening).
-While there is a scientific and educational need to mention the basics of heterosexuality when teaching the basics of reproduction (XY chromosomes, etc.) there is no scientific need to mention homosexuality as homosexuals do not naturally reproduce.
-We are falling behind the rest of the world in math, science, and English amongst other things. Tennessee ranks about 46th in most areas. Social engineering is just one less issue teachers should have to worry about teaching as part of their curricula.