1 in 5 gay, bisexual men has AIDS virus and many don't know it, says CDC study

[Brittain33]

And according to an article I read a while back it's currently hip within the gay community to not use a condom.

"Hip to not use a condom"?

This is a complex issue, and many men likely aren't wearing condoms, not that I would know... but I really don't think it's a question of trendiness, which would imply a level of vacuity and thoughtlessness beyond normal expectation. I think it might be lack of vigilance after 15 years of protease inhibitors, young people growing up without thinking too much of AIDS, the problem of people not identifying as gay and then having risky sex, and long-term couples not using condoms.

[Brittain33]

actually, it's biblical values.

Just not necessarily Old Testament, where "one man, one woman" wasn't really the model.

[Brittain33]

OK - maybe as a small factor, I'd agree then.

I can tell you from living in Massachusetts and socializing with lots of gay men, married and unmarried, that presenting yourself as married ups the social expectations of your behavior, for certain, as it does for every other couple. If you're wearing a ring, it's a definite sign to people who would otherwise approach you. This is why Andrew Sullivan first proposed same-sex marriage 20+ years ago, when no one else was thinking about it. He was a small-c conservative who thought it would change behavioral norms.

If we weren't married, it would be much easier, from a legal perspective, for me to walk away from my current relationship. Not that I want to. But all I would have to do is move out, get a lawyer, and sell our home. Now it's much harder--and this is one reason why so many Republican policymakers encourage marriage as a way to modify people's behavior.

[Brittain33]

Well, I'm just quoting. I read an article in my morning paper about it and the claim was that gay porn has been featuring less and less condoms over the last few years and that this was a part of an overall trend within the community.

I suspected this was primarily about porn. I would be very skeptical of looking to porn of any type as representative of what non-porn actors are doing.

[Brittain33]

Although we have come a long way since the 1980s and early 1990s, there is a long history of blaming gays for AIDS being predominant among our population with a very wide degree of justifiability. Some of the reasons are much more under our control than others, and some of them come from a total lack of empathy or a way for people to believe that they're immune from an epidemic by finding a rational reason why gays in the early 1980s are responsible for getting sick with a disease before it had been identified.

There's a distinction between people getting AIDS because they're having unprotected sex to have a physial thrill vs. under the influence of meth vs. in abusive relationships vs. "they shouldn't have been having sex with men anyway." With a full spectrum in between.

Claiming that people are giving up condoms because "it's hip" to do so is too close to the last for me--it's saying people are getting AIDS because they're stereotypically obsessed with fashion and trends and don't care about their own health. Wow, those people are so stupid--no wonder they got hit by it. There are lots of reasons that men don't use condoms, but they tend to relate to more base and powerful human urges (that I won't defend) than something that is so avoidable. Hence my reaction.

[Brittain33]

At the same time, there is no sexual education in most states, so where people are learning about sex?
Internet.

What they see, there?
Porn movies.
So, they have an influence, for sure.

I agree, that's certainly possible. I would respond that this is the reverse direction of causation originally mentioned, though.

[Brittain33]

"one man, one woman" originated in the Old Testament

But it wasn't the only model. Marriage in the OT is a chamber of horrors, really.

[Brittain33]

but since it was the original model and since that original model is the New Testament model, and since homosexual marriage was NEVER part of any model....what is your point, exactly, in regard to the topic of this thread, other than you don't have a point?

My point is that people define "biblical values" as meaning a lot more than "no same-sex marriage," and to the exclusion of lots of true biblical values. Otherwise, why argue that same-sex marriage opens the door to polygamy? Polygamy is biblical! That's my point.

Personally I don't care, I don't need biblical sanction to sustain my faith and belief in same-sex marriage. I regret that you can't understand it, but perhaps someday you will open your eyes and mind.

[Brittain33]

i fully understand that, I was simply pointing out that you were bastardizing "love thy neighbor" in order to promote something the scripture condemns.  

You're mixing me up with someone else, I think.

[Brittain33]

If you want to argue that porn has no effect on sexual behaviour, well...I think you're wrong there.

No, I agree it can; I was disagreeing with the idea that it was representative of something in society rather than a force in its own right which people would then follow. But I agree we've reached the end of this discussion.