Reader comments · Comment: Catholic inconsistency over epidemics · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Comment: Catholic inconsistency over epidemics

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Simon Murphy 15 Jul 2009, 2:49pm

    I hope whoever made this recommendation that wine not be served at communion is excommunicated. The CHEEK of him. AS IF the blood of our lord and saviour Jesus H Christ Esquire could give someone the pig flu. It is BLASPHEMY I tell you. BLASPHEMY.

  2. if swine flu was seen as a ‘gay disease’ no-one would stop the communion

  3. The Vatican is terrified of anything to do with condoms as it might present the first breach in the wall of their ban on contraception. That is more important to them than saving the lives of millions from HIV. The evidence that condoms don’t work is ridiculous and based on very poor studies.

  4. A what? An inconsistency! Don’t be absurd. You know very well that condoms help spread HIV/AIDS, you heretic, you.

  5. I’m still skeptical about HIV/AIDS and the whole story of how it came to be….there are some very interesting and compelling theories (backed up with evidence, might I add) suggesting AIDS was created in a lab as a tool to help de-populate the planet, especially Africa.

    People will probably laugh at this but I wouldn’t trust Western Governments as far as I could throw them.

  6. Laugh? Who me? I’m the guy who still believes that multi-national corporations run the world, not western governments.

    I’ve heard a number of theories concerning the origin of AIDS. All seem to agrre that it started in Africa, and that it had something to do with vaccines. Is there a particular book you’ve been reading?

  7. I didn’t mean you would laugh Bentham, you’re a very open-minded person thankfully!

    “I’m the guy who still believes that multi-national corporations run the world, not western governments”

    – me too Bentham, one only has to look at the fact that the Federal Reserve in the U.S is a PRIVATE BANK to confirm this. People think it’s a Government-owned bank, it isn’t! The U.S taxpayer (through the government) pays for this bank to print money at an extortionate rate, to the point where only two Presidents in history tried to stop this and print their own money, Abraham Lincoln and John. F. Kennedy ……both were assasinated!

    It’s a private bank yielding immense power, if challenged it could/will bankrupt the economy by calling in all of the U.S taxpayers’ loans to them for the money-printing….this is literally impossible to pay as the rates are so high. The Fed has the U.S economy and public by the balls.

    As for various AIDS theories, I have also heard that it was from ‘vaccines’, however my sources, namely Alan Cantmell Jr, M.D (‘AIDS And The Doctors Of Death’) state that these ‘vaccines’ were first tried on gay men in New York in 1979, a few years before the epidemic was first reported in Africa in 1982.

    Promiscuous gays were avidly sought as volunteers to test the efficacy of a newly-developed hepatitis B ‘vaccine’ manufactured by Merck and the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

    By 1977 over 13,000 Manhattan gays were screened to secure the final 1083 men who would serve as guinea pigs to test the hepatitis B vaccine. The vaccine was manufactured from the combined plasma of 30 highly selected gay men who carried the hepatitis B virus in their blood. Developed over a period of 65 weeks during 1977-1978 and tested for six months in chimpanzees (the primate in which HIV is thought to have originated), the first group of gay men were ‘inoculated’ at the New York Blood Center in November 1978.

    When Robert Gallo’s blood test for HIV became available in the mid-1980s, the New York Blood Center’s stored gay blood specimens were re-examined. Most astonishing is the fact that 20% of the gay men who volunteered for the hepatitis B experiment in Manhattan were discovered to be HIV-positive in 1980 (one year before the AIDS epidemic became “official” in 1981). This signifies that Manhattan gays in 1980 had the highest incidence of HIV anywhere in the world, including Africa, the supposed birthplace of HIV and AIDS.

    Never mentioned by AIDS historians is the fact that the New York Blood Center established a chimp virus laboratory for viral vaccine research in West Africa in 1974. One of the purposes of VILAB II, in Robertsfield, Liberia, was to develop the hepatitis B vaccine in chimps. The lab also prides itself by releasing “rehabilitated” (but virus-infected) chimps back into the wild, perhaps accounting for some of the ancestors of HIV and the KS virus found in the jungle by some government researchers. This would explain how the virus travelled to Africa.

    Significantly, there were no reported blood specimens anywhere in the U.S. that were HIV-positive prior to the epidemic in 1979, except in the samples stored at the NYBC.

    A 1986 report in JAMA showed 20% of the men in the experiment were already infected with HIV by the end of 1981; and by 1984, more than 40% of the men were HIV-positive and doomed to death.

    It’s clear to me from a review of the scientific literature that the “gay plague” began immediately after the government experiments; and that the experiments permanently damaged the health of the gay community, and led to continuing spread of HIV into the “general population.”

    Are we really meant to believe that all of this is merely a coincidence -and that AIDS in America, and specifically Manhatten, resulted simply from two viruses jumping species in the African jungle? Or are these hepatitis ‘experiments’, which fit perfectly into the timeline, to blame?

    So much to ponder Bentham! But I think there is more to AIDS than meets the eye!

  8. Lezabella, what do you eat for breakfast?! Do you have any idea how astounding you are!

    Yes, there is a lot of food for thought on the origines of AIDS. I had never heard of the author you mentioned. I can’t be as specific as you at the moment, but I read that Belgium scientists had set up a lab in Kinsella and had used monkey kidney tissue to develop a vaccine given orally to thousands of African children.

    The book was entitled ‘Around the River’, but I can’t think of the author.

    Ping! There goes another marble.

    Incidentally, I thought Simon Murphy’s comment quite astute. How can anything sacred be toxic?

    Catholics theologians do have their work cut out for them, although nobody takes them seriously anymore, now that the dictator spends most of his time selecting his wardrobes.

    I am so furious with the RCC, you can’t imagine, you just can’t.

  9. As the wine in the chalice is supposed to be the blood of Jesus it would therfore not be infected with any mere virus would it?(!!!)

  10. You got it! Mind-bending. isn’t it.

  11. What a strange item!

    If I was about to receive communion from a chalice knowing (or guessing) that the person in front of me had swine flu I wouldn’t go there (whether or not my personal belief that the contents were the real presence of Christ would be immaterial…it’s the spittle on the cup that’s dangerous)! If I knew that the person receiving from the chalice was HIV+ then I’d have no problem drinking from the same cup – there being no risk to health. Both issues are separate!

    I think, though, having said that, that most people who were going to have sex with someone found out that the potential partner had swine flu they’d have second thoughts, ditto if they found out about a positive HIV status – condoms or no (that 1% chance, or whatever, that the condom tears would be enough to put a lot of mentaly healthy / sorted people off). Most humans don’t want to put their lives at unnecessary risk.

    When it comes to transmission of the HIV virus during sex then the safest option is the classic Catholic (and most other faith-based) one: chastity, until commitment / marriage, and chastity with HIV+ partners. If a Catholic were to have anonymous / casual sex, sex outside marriage, etc then this would be a grave sin (a typical Catholic would be fully aware of that – 10 Commandments, etc). A person willing to do this isn’t likey to be worried about what the pope says about it – so why on earth do people think s/he’d worry about a relatively minor sin within the moral maze of committing a major one, i.e. putting a condom on during adultery / fornication (commonly referred to nowadays as “having fun”)?

    If people think that a fundamental change in Catholic moral teaching about the sacred nature of sex between two people is going to change then they’re living in cloud-cuckoo land…And, if they think that any change would somehow resolve the issue / make it better for good then that’s just as mad.

    Talking with someone who works for the NHS the other day I was told that about 1/7 gay men in London are HIV+, and that barebacking is on the rise…I doubt that those gay men in London who go to saunas, or Hampsted Heath (or whatever) are swayed by the official teaching of the Catholic Church (rosaries are mainly fashion accessories for them, not tools for meditation and prayer!). So, even in liberal Western Europe, where the opinions of the Church hardly make it to the news, or form public policy (where, in fact public policy opposes Catholic teaching), and where gay men and lesbians have never had it so good HIV and syphilis (something that had practically died out in the 19th century!) amongst the male gay community is rising, not going down. If it were going down, and people were show to be able to act responsibly then the Chucrh might have a case to answer – until that happens people will have to stop blaming the Church and just take responisbility for their own moral actions.

    As for those countries which might be predominantly Catholic and culturally conservative – in Africa, for example – and condoms aren’t promoted as much as they are in the West, well that’s called democracy! If you don’t like it, you should try the alternatives…or is that term “liberal fascist” really getting to be more and more appropriate as we move from one draconian feel-good (so called equality) law to the next!?

  12. “Lezabella”
    If aids was created in a lab then they should have got it to kill faster
    I couldn’t imagine knowing that i only had 12 years left.
    And it didn’t work aswell as they hoped clearly because Africa still has an increasing population

    Why don’t they deal with feeding the people they have before adding more people?

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.