Gay Marriage, HIV & Why Everyone's Spouse May Lose Health Insurance Coverage

Absolutely they are. And my "serial killer gay friend" is not alone...

The phenomenon is common enough where gays have coined a term for it:

 

Um, I'd just like to point out that that "online dictionary" was a general dictionary, not a gay dictionary. As such, the term could have been invented by, and applies to anyone regardless of if they're gay or straight. That said, I agree that people can do horrible things after experiencing extreme stress, they can start lashing out at themselves and the world... kinda like the extreem stress people put gays through by stigmatizing them and rejecting them.

 

Jeeze, talk about twisting the facts.

1. The insurance companies that provide group insurance are prohibited by federal law from discriminating based upon the gender of a spouse.
2. HIV can only be transmitted if one person is infected and the protection is not used during a sex act.
3. The vast majority of gays and lesbians are not infected with HIV.
4. Lesbians have a far lower infection rate for HIV and the vast majority that do became infected by a heterosexual relationship.
5. Based upon anacdotal evidence it appears that lesbians are more likely to marry than gay men.
6. Insurance companies are going to continue to offer spousal coverage as an option to the group polices because they make money on it.
7. Employers are going to continue to select and offer spousal coverage because its in their financial interests to do so.
8. Employees will continue to select spousal coverage when appropriate because its in their financial interests to do so.
9. According to researchers they're on the edge of a breakthough with an HIV cure which is anticipated in the next couple of years.

There is absolutely no creditability to the belief that spousal converge is going to be discontinued, period.

 

yep, as real as bigfoot

 

My friend fell under the 'intentional' category most of the time, according to his brother. But the category of 'reckless' is easily as devastating. Insurers have to consider that within this typically promiscuous sexual group, gay men who are intentional, reckless or otherwise going around having unprotected HIV contact with hundreds of contacts per year, this is going to affect the HIV rate in gay men. Truthfully, how many gay men do you guys know who have recklessly or otherwise had unprotected sex when they were HIV positive and didn't inform their anonymous contact for that day?

Just one man with a vengeance or simply satisfying his hypersexual compulsions who is going around having unprotected sex with thousands of men before he dies is enough to be alarmed about. But I assure you, there isn't just one man out there doing this. And you know it too.

Bigfoot is one thing. But in this "bigfoot" case, we have bodies.....lots and lots of them....

 

I don't have sex with anyone but my partner. He is the same. there are promiscuous people in the world. The best way to protect yourself is don't be. I am in a homosexual relationship, I am at zero risk. My lover and I are monogamous. Do when you say gay men you are talking about a particular type of gay man.

So instead of being upset with what someone is, focus on what they do.

 

according to every statistic out there, you are the exception rather than the norm....

stereotypes occur for a reason and don't have to mean EVERYONE. But gays aren't the leading demographic in HIV/AIDS because the disease is homophobic....

 

One more time- since over 80% of gay men do not have HIV/AIDS according to the CDC, he IS the norm, not an exception.This has been explained to you over and over and over and over and over and over and over...but yet it still does not sink in.

 

one more time....

http://greaterthanone.org/about/hivaids-facts.html


...yet it does not sink in

 

so I'm still going with the "he is the exception rather than then norm" statement. Since between our two opinions, mine has been backed up with proof, not just backed up with "I think" like you do.

 

I have to agree with Javis. This is a thread about statistics and how insurance companies set policy on trends, not exceptions to trends. Gay men are notoriously promiscuous. Their iconic leader, besides being into sodomizing vulnerable teen boys, also preached from the pulpit that gay men ought to stay way from monogamy and "love" as many men, "some more, some less" as they please.

So if you are a gay guy, throw a party and invite 30 of your friends over for an all-nighter, 6 of those men will be carrying the deadly HIV virus. If you can keep alcohol away from that party, the life expectancy might go up if everyone remembers protection..

20% of any demographic is stunning and alarming. Insurers therefore have to anticipate that 1 in 5 gay marriages will have a spouse that will cost $half a million to care for before he dies. That's prohibitive.

 

and if you read the stats I posted, not only are gays statistically more apt to get AIDS/HIV, but that number isn't even going down, its INCREASING.

Blacks/Latinos are also high risk, but they are not increasing.

Needle infections cases of infection are going down.

 

What sick little fantasies you have. You truly are obsessed with us and what you think we do. I'm tired of your ignorant tirades.

Yes, 19% is not a good number, where did I say it was? However- you have presented absolutely NO EVIDENCE to support the claim you make in this thread title. Insurance companies have in no way indicated their intention to drop all spousal benefits for married people just because gay people will be abel to marry soon.

You made an assumption, with nothing to back your claim.

 

risk = expense
gays = risk

who pays for that risk? We suggest the gays that are actually causing the risk.
Gays suggest they pay the same as lower risk groups.


so who picks up the added expense due to added risk? If noone does, then something has to get dropped.... ie - all spouses.

simple extrapolation if you have any basic working knowledge of ECO 1101.

 

Wanna know why these numbers keep going up? Ignorance and lack of education.

 

The demographic in the "alarming increase" category are young boys and men ages 13-29. The choice of Harvey Milk, GLBTs iconic leader, and various "crossover sex" campaigns aimed at young people, sponsored by gay groups [bi-curious and "fun sex" events] tend to suggest that gays and lesbians are actually inadvertently assisting those numbers.

I posted elsewhere about how alarmingly close the parallels are between what the gay culture is doing with influencing youth with this "crossover" stuff, and what pedophiles do when they stalk their targets. Pedophiles also when caught or thwarted from their targets will often threaten suicide. And what's the tried-and-true fallback gays always use? Gay suicide.

When you open your eyes wide enough and take off your PC rose-colored glasses, you begin to see quite a few parallels actually.. Don't be afraid if they call you a homophobe, bigot or [the ace of spades conversation stopper] "a closet homosexual"...lol..

Look...see...notice...and talk about it. Turn a deaf ear to the din that will try to shut you up any way they can. Even the Pope was blackmailed into submission. Get stubborn. Don't let them get away with that kind of coercion.

 

Present the evidence that insurance companies are going to drop all spousal benefits due to same sex marriage.

 

Umm...we do discuss the problem of younger people getting HIV. However, we also deal with reality, not your sick obsession with pedophilia and gay people.

You've got serious problems, Silhouette. You're not interested in finding the truth. What you're interested in is hurting people with lies and half-truths. That's ugly.

 

No, you're interested in killing people by ignoring facts and downplaying them when it comes to the deadliest incurable epidemic in recent US history. That's beyond ugly That's criminal.

You know I had a friend who died of AIDs. That his "gay" history included being molested as a boy, artificiallly imprinted with compusive orientation towards men, while falling in love with women. And how he went on a vendetta infecting as many of those "who did this to him" as he could before he died. To look away from that, to downplay it, lie about it or twist the facts to suit a political agenda is one of the ugliest things I can think of on the face of the earth.

 

Your friend had problems that were his, and his alone. But you want to blame an entire group of people for what happened to him and what he did. You simply can't do that. Not when the vast, vast majority of us have not had those things happen to us and would never do what he did.

But yet, you want to the whole world to think that most gay men are just like your friend. You wanna talk criminal? Well, that's it right there. You wanna talk about why younger people are getting HIV, that's one thing.

However, using your posts as evidence, that's not what you are out to do at all. You're out to paint an entire group of people as monsters. Well, I'm not gonna sit here and let you do it.

The reason young people are getting HIV at higher rates? Easy- they don;t see it like those of us in the older generation saw it. To us in the 80s it was a death sentence. Now with all the drugs available, people with HIV are living pretty much normal lives.

That's the problem. Kids already think they're invincible. They also think, "Oh, if I get HIV, all I have to do is take a few pills, like diabetes or something." So they are more likely to not use protection. We are trying to get them more educated about the disease so they understand that it will affect them a LOT more than that.

But you? You just want to blame it on being gay.

 

There you go again, endangering lives with your reckless and purposeful deception leek... you read this already from two pages ago but I'll repost it in case you forgot that my molested/"gay"/on an HIV-infecting rampage until death friend is not an isolated case...

 

Oh wow- you found a few more. Surely, the vast majority of gay men MUST do the same thing!

Hmm...I wonder how many heterosexual men have committed rape? Doesn't that make most heterosexual men rapists too? Why don't you want to talk about that, Silhouhette? Why are you covering up for them?

Your logic (or lack thereof) is lacking.

ONE MORE TIME- evidence for your claim that insurance companies will drop all benefits for spouses due to same sex marriage, or you're just here to bash gays.

 

Well if there are five cases of intentional or reckless HIV "terrorists" roaming the US, and those five men have sex with thousands of men [who may not test regularly] before they die of AIDS, the problem gets to be quite large, quite quickly.

And a demographic sporting a 20% infection rate of HIV is nothing to brag about at your sex parties...

Insurers pay attention to demographics like that. And you'll note the article said that aids-terrorism is on the INCREASE...

 

That your friend turned out to be a homicidal maniac is sad indeed.

It has nothing to do with the issue.

 

OK, that's it. After that stupid comment, you're on ignore. You are not here to discuss. You are here to condemn, tell lies make gross generalizations and hurt people you don't like. I have no desire to waste time on people like you, who don't wish to solve problems, merely point fingers at others they do not understand or even wish to try to understand.

The sad thing is, you're going to hurt someone else you know too. I feel sorry for them.