I'd Walk a Mile for Gay Sex

Much as I admire Cliff Kincaid for his all-out war against the traitorous Islamofascist dupes at Fox News, honesty obliges me to note - yet again - that he's an utter buffoon. Here's exhibit A:

Have you noticed that many news organizations, in honor of former ABC News anchorman Peter Jennings, have embarked on a quit smoking campaign? So why don't our media launch a campaign advising people to quit engaging in the dangerous and addictive homosexual lifestyle?

Good question. The first reason is that people who dwell outside the fairy ring of sexually retarded conservatism are generally aware that homosexuality isn't unnatural, and has been observed in many species. They also tend to realize that homosexuality is very likely to be at least partially genetic, and that whatever its basis, it's not simply a matter of deciding that turning gay might be a nice change of pace. Only ideologues and the ignorant take the ludicrously antiquated stance that one chooses to be homosexual the same way one might choose to get a tattoo or a nose-ring.

Come to think of it, one of the mantras of conservatism is that liberalism hobbles excellence and rewards mediocrity, by putting everyone on the same level regardless of merit. And yet, the conservative movement is infested with scientifically illiterate ciphers who, like Kincaid, have no problem demanding that knowledgeable people cripple themselves by descending to the conservative's level of ignorance and bigotry.

Speaking of ignorance and bigotry, here's a fairly droll case in point:

It appears that the homosexual lifestyle is as addictive as smoking.

Sounds like they'd rather swish than fight! But you can't blame them, really. After all, pleasure helps your disposition!

Pathologizing an everyday form of sexual expression as "addictive" is a classic gambit of sexually crippled hysterics. It had very little preventative effect when deployed against masturbation circa 1880, and it's even less efficacious today. Even if one were to grant that homosexuality is a conscious choice, it takes a very strange sort of mind to decide that once a person has made that choice, his or her basic human desire for sex constitutes more of an addiction than it would otherwise. But then again, Kincaid specifically said the lifestyle was addictive, so perhaps gay folks simply get off on paying taxes to a government that denies them basic human rights.

Or perhaps, if they're really perverted, they enjoy being told by sanctimonious bigots that America spends too much money on AIDS research:

Not only will the media not highlight this fact [i.e., the "fact" that it "appears" that homosexuality is as addictive as smoking], reporters shy away from the facts concerning the great disparities in federal funding favoring AIDS over other diseases. The FAIR Foundation points out, "The lion's share of the federal research budget is spent on AIDS—a disease that is killing a fraction of Americans each year when compared with diseases like diabetes and Alzheimer's. Even the flu kills twice as many people as AIDS."

There are a couple of problems with that flu statistic. First off, the time between disease onset and mortality is much shorter for flu than for AIDS; flu victims are likely to die within days or weeks, while AIDS victims are increasingly likely to live for at least several years. As Avert.org notes,

People with AIDS are surviving longer and are contributing to a steady increase in the number of people living with AIDS. This trend will continue as long as the number of new diagnoses exceeds the number of people dying each year.

The CDC claims that flu kills about 36,000 people in an average year (that number is disputed). In 2004, roughly 38,730 new diagnoses of HIV infection were reported in the United States, and there are thought to be about 1.1 million Americans currently living with AIDS. Unlike flu, of course, AIDS is a death sentence if left untreated. In other words, a small percentage of flu cases requires expensive treatment to postpone or avoid a fatal outcome, as opposed to 100 percent of AIDS cases.

Kincaid says it would be "humanitarian" for the media to advise people against being gay, because gay sex can lead to AIDS. Of course, the conservative illiterati insist that the usefulness of condoms in reducing the risk of HIV infection must not be taught in schools, nor promoted with tax dollars. In fact, the efficacy of condoms must be downplayed or denied, while the far more alarming failure rate of abstinence pledges is ignored entirely. Kincaid himself has argued that condoms are actually responsible for the increase in AIDS cases.

As far as I'm concerned, anyone who wants to identify the real advocates for perversion and immorality in our society could do worse than have a look at Mr. Kincaid.