Rapid City homosexual activist Thomas Allen Heald has a story featured in the Rapid City Weekly News entitled "A year after South Dakota man’s HIV+ diagnosis, life goes on."
The closest we get to candor in this article is the following quote from the man with AIDS:
“No, I’m not hiding it from them out of fear of disapproval — far from it. They would only love me all the more, but I don’t want to hurt them like this. It’s not an instant death sentence, but due to my own folly and stupidity, I’ve made my life and the lives of those who know and love me very, very complicated. I apologize to everyone for that. In the meantime, please don’t anyone out there make the same mistake I did — having unprotected sex. I took my chances …”
The rest of the article attempts to paint this man as an unwitting victim of something that just struck him out of the blue, kind of like walking along and getting hit in the head by a meteor; nothing he did contributed to his circumstances:
“I remember hearing about it before I entered my teens, when it was thought to be a ‘gay-only’ disease.
As if it we now realize can strike a person without doing anything whatsoever to increase ones chances of getting it.
While there are many who have AIDS and aren't homosexual, according to the New York Times, 71% of AIDS sufferers there are said to be homosexual and bisexual men. Except for those who innocently get it through a blood transfusion, or a married person who gets it because their spouse was unfaithful and got it from someone else, everyone else who contracted AIDS engaged in immoral and unhealthy behavior to get it.
Can anyone tell me how two faithful married people can contract AIDS without getting it through a blood transfusion?
A member of my family died of AIDS some years ago, so I have a little knowledge of the subject--as if one needed close experience to understand how AIDS is contracted.
I'm sorry for the suffering the man in this story is going through. But it's wrong and it's dangerous to portray him as an unwitting victim of this disease, someone designed to illicit sympathy. If he (and this so-called story) were out there to encourage people to not only have safe sex (and the only true safe sex is between a man and woman in marriage), or better yet, to stop engaging in homosexual sex, I could applaud the story. But it's a misplaced sympathy piece.
And misplaced sympathy often gets people hurt or killed.
30 comments:
Wow. You are truly a vile person.
I'm vile because I spoke the truth? They crucified Jesus because he told a truth that wasn't politically correct, so I can live with that label when it's applied to me by certain people.
Could you honestly see a story like this about a drunk guy who ran his car into a telephone pole and was then paralyzed?
Could you see a story of this tenor about a drug addict who OD'd or fried his brain?
Could you imagine a story of this nature about someone who gambled away their house, job and family?
Somehow, I can't. Except for those few unwitting victims outlined in my post, everyone else gets it because of a BEHAVIOR, a behavior that is immoral.
Someone who gets cancer through no fault of their own--their struggle can be noble and deserving of admiration. Someone who does something dangerous, stupid and immoral deserves compassion, but their story does not deserve to be told in anything other than a "This is what NOT to do" tone. Except for fleeting mentions of vague responsibility, I didn't see that in this piece.
So, what are you saying here? AIDS is God's way of punishing sinners? I guess I don't get it. I would think if God punished us for sinning by making us sick, we'd all be sick, all the time. You would too.
Incidentally, if AIDS is punishment for homosexual sex, why is it that lesbians almost never transmit HIV? What is their punishment, Bob?
Anon9:39 and 9:43 - Did I say anywhere that AIDS is God's punishment on homosexuals? I don't think I did. Think of it like this: is the lung cancer a smoker gets a "punishment from God," or is it simply the natural consequences of doing something stupid? Is the liver disease the drunk gets a "punishment from God" or just the natural consequences of doing something stupid?
BTW, with lesbians, there isn't as much transfer of body fluids, nor is the mode of sex as likely to cause tearing of the flesh, as it is with homosexual males.
Does that help?
It seems to me that you've never known anyone who has had an immunodeficiency
disease. And for that I feel so sorry for you. Instead of bashing people with disease and blaming them, you could be out there helping them. You aren't now and have never helped them.
You've never even befriended a person with such a disease. Your words have spoken volumes for the sensitivity of creationists...and your unwillingness to do anything but present the "party line" is about as un-Christian as you can get. I'm certain your reward is in heaven because you've never been rewarded with unconditional love and have never given it based upon your words in this life.
What do you say to the citizens of the Congo who were initially infected with what became AIDS...from SIV...by the doctors from Belgium who infected them along with giving them injections for polio? Nothing. Because you don't know about these things. You're not willing to learn the true origins of the disease...you still blame people for getting the disease instead of trying to help find cures and assisting those with the disease. The people in the Congo didn't get the disease because of behavior. The disease spread through the populations of Africa....and you get to sit on your throne and toss stones. What a sad man you are...
Wow. Impressive. How much hatred can a Christian show. How judgmental (or mental) can you write about AIDS and people that are affected by it.
When you read the article, did you really read it, or did you interpret it to suit your own views? Where does Jerry claim he is an unwitting victim? Am I missing something?
And why, oh why, lash out by refering to his story as "His 'so-called' story" - note the quotes you used. And why refer to the journalist as an activist. In your view can anyone writing about homosexuality or AIDS not be an activist?
You know. I really don't care about your views, conservative and filled with hatred as I may find them. What I do care about are children growing up close to you (maybe your own kids if you have them), who one day will maybe find out that they are gay. Not a 'phase', not as a fashion statement or to be trendy. Just gay, because that is the only way they truly feel they can find happiness. Who realise that, should they marry someone of the opposite sex (as you seem to want them to do) they would not only severely hurt themselves, but most importantly also their partners.
Your destructive criticism hurts those children in their development way more that it could ever touch me. For that, I think your attitude is truly disgusting.
Anon11:55 - Did you not read that someone in my family has died of AIDS? Maybe it's you who just doesn't get it.
Tell me more about these AIDS infections in the Congo through polio injections, because I haven't heard anything about this. Everything I've read says that AIDS is spreading like wildfire in Africa because of all the sex outside marriage there.
Here in the States, AIDS is mostly a homosexual disease.
Have any people in the US received AIDS through anything other than a blood transfusion or involving sex outside marriage?
Stop trying to deny reality. It may make you feel better, but it can get you killed. God can save your life not only in the afterlife, but can make this one much better. Give up your sins and trust Him to help you. He will, if you'll only trust His way.
Anon5:47 - As I said (if you had read my post), while there was a fleeting reference to Jerry's culpability in contracting AIDS, the overall tone of the article treated this superficially and seemed to concentrate on eliciting sympathy for someone who created their own problem.
Compassion for the man is called for, because who among us hasn't created our own mess, but when we bestow unearned sympathy (i.e. a sense that recognizes someone has befallen hard times through no fault of their own), we just make it more likely that they will continue to make the same mistakes, or will embolden others to make the same mistakes. That's not love and compassion--that's dangerous.
As for Thomas Heald being a homosexual activist, if you lived in the Rapid City area (and were honest), you'd know that he is well-known for his homosexual activism, just as I am well known as a pro-family activist. He's probably as proud of his distinction as I am of mine. My identification of Thomas as such was for the purposes of helping to discern his motives for writing the story--and writing it as he did.
I, too, am concerned that people around me might someday end up in homosexuality, just as I am concerned people might fall into drunkenness, drug addiction, gambling or some other destructive behavior.
The drunk isn't happy to remain in his drunkenness, no matter how much he may pretend he enjoys it (I know; I used to be a drunk). The drug addict isn't enjoying their state, either. And do you think the gambling addict who loses family, house, job is having a good time?
The thing is, for the most part, society still attaches a stigma to those behaviors, providing a mechanism for the addict to grab onto to motivate them to get out of the lifestyle. Sadly, that's no longer the case with homosexuality. Instead of telling people it's a lifestyle which is dangerous (not only spiritually, but to their physical health and mental well being), we encourage them to continue their self-destruction by assuring them it's "normal, natural and healthy."
Others may be able to do that, but I can't. The Bible says in Ezekiel chapter three that "When I say to a wicked man, 'You will surely die,' and you do not warn him or speak out to dissuade him from his evil ways in order to save his life, that wicked man will die for his sin, and I will hold you accountable for his blood. But if you do warn the wicked man and he does not turn from his wickedness or from his evil ways, he will die for his sin; but you will have saved yourself."
I would not only like to preserve my own standing with God, but would also like to see homosexuals turn aside from destruction and enter the full, happy life that God wants for them.
I've realized that I'm not really anyone unless I somehow threaten someone by just being me. Most folks would be a little put off or upset about the comment to the first half of my news story so far, but all it did was crack a smile across my face and confirm my suspicions that some people do protest a bit much. I don't know the man, but my impression is he is a rather sad, self-hating little person. Ah well. I actually find myself craving more exposure, and in spite of my bipolar nature, wanting to confront more folks of his ilk in person for a change.
I take a mild offense to being lumped in with a drunken driver, but I understand his analogy. At least he didn't make the popular assumption that I'm a child molester as well.
Heroic, no. But one thing that sets me apart is my honesty and openness about my situation and hoping that others will not make the mistake I did.
Sympathy I can do without.
Sex outside of marriage, ha! This hearkens back to the old and tired argument that sex is strictly for procreation between people of the opposite sex. Here we go again. Some people never tire of dragging that dead horse out. In a world that is already straining to feed everyone on it, and not really suceeding, would he suggest that sex still be used only for procreation?
As for marriage, I hardly see how extending the same legal rights and obligations to folks of the same sex will ruin the institution. As I heard Dolly Parton say once tongue in cheek, ..."why shouldn't gay people have all the same opportunities to be miserable like the rest of us?"
And finally, I was not an unwitting victim. I was aware of the risks, and took my chances. Now I have a plethora of drugs that make me feel like shit everyday that I can look forward to taking for the rest of my life in order to help me live out a hopefully normal lifespan. Things that I took for granted are suddenly a great deal more important, such as making sure I wash my hands frequently, staying on top of my health, etc.
Although I'm not sure he entirely meant it this way, I wonder if he considered that there are unwitting, innocent victims out there of this virus, such as the children born to parents with it, or unsuspecting partners who get infected from unfaithful partners? What about rape victims? What about people like Ryan White? Those are truly the folks who deserve sympathy.
Shame on people like him for being ignorant at the least, and downright mean and hateful for deciding that anyone who gets this deserves it.
Anon12:11 - From what you said in your comment, I'm assuming you are the man in the article. If so, I feel for what you're going through, but the other things you said reveal why you're going through this.
God designed human sexuality to function in one way: between one man and one woman within marriage. Just like when you use anything in a way it isn't intended, you sometimes run into problems. You can make jokes about it, you can call it old fashioned, you can deny reality all day long, but it won't change the facts.
How long have we known AIDS is primarily contracted through sexual contact--not to mention that it's been primarily confined to the homosexual community in the United States? Since the early-to-mid 80s? We've known that for over 20 years, yet you chose to try to buck the odds.
You admitted in your post that, even aware of the risks, you took your chances. Don't you think it would be a noble thing if you took every opportunity to counsel people not to take chances like you did?
I completely concur with you that children born of a mother who has it, people who get it from unfaithful spouses, etc. are truly deserving of sympathy. They did nothing wrong, but others who did caused them to suffer. So when we choose to do wrong, often we hurt not only ourselves but others.
That is why I think it is so important that when consequences catch up to us, we should do everything we can to warn others, and not gloss over why we're in the situation we're in.
That's part of the 12-Step program many drunks go through in order to get better. You first have to acknowledge that you have a problem. That lesson applies to most other areas of life, as well. It isn't mean to recognize that; it's dangerous to ignore it.
I reject the "morality" argument out of hand.
Quote:
Can anyone tell me how two faithful married people can contract AIDS without getting it through a blood transfusion?
Sharing needles for IV drug use. Any other questions?
Quote:
A member of my family died of AIDS some years ago, so I have a little knowledge of the subject--as if one needed close experience to understand how AIDS is contracted.
My spouse founded the first AIDS-intervention program in a major Midwestern city in the '80s. I'm sorry about your family member. It must be hard to feel so judgmental toward him.
Quote:
the only true safe sex is between a man and woman in marriage
The only true safe sex is masturbation -- preferably with rubber gloves (vinyl, if you have that latex allergy) -- and anyone who tells you otherwise is promoting immoral and dangerous behavior.
_________________
You can reject the morality argument out of hand, but that doesn't affect its validity one iota. Sex outside of marriage remains immoral whether you like it or not.
Regards the question about married people contracting AIDS, you "missed" the context of my statement, which was sexual. Intravenous drug use is also immoral, whether you like it or not.
Regarding my family member, it isn't hard to feel judgmental toward him at all, anymore than it's hard to be judgmental about anyone who does anything wrong. For that matter, if you believe judgmentalism is so wrong, why are you judging my judgmentalism?
Regarding your comments about sex inside marriage and masturbation, I know you're just being sarcastic, as only a complete idiot would actually believe what you said, so I won't dignify it with further response.
In the comments, Bob writes he say he used to be an drunk. Looks like the drinking cost him quit some braincells.
What the Dutch guy in the comments say is more or less true too. It's not as much as the Belgian doctors brought AIDS in congo, aswell as by the vaccinations they gave and not always with sterile needles, they transmitted the hiv without knowing.
He also say it was the polio vaccination, but that is not correct. polio vaccination existed in a drinking form. Kids got spoons. It were the other vaccinations against measels and stuff that did the trick. Just thought I corrected this.
You might wonder how I know this? A collegue of my mum used to go there with her husband. They are both nurses and they made a dispensarium there. A little hospital where they gave lessons to local people and teach them to become nurses too. They were specialised in lepra, but they got of course mostly AIDS patients.
They also say that the spreading of the hiv goes there so quick is because the Catholic church say the use of condoms is a sin. So they don't use condoms. Or very little. They also believe, if they sleep with a virgin, their HIV will heal. Instead they just make new victims.
The drinking probably did cost me some brain cells, but I'm still intelligent enough to realize that most AIDS transmission is through immoral behavior (sex outside marriage, illegal drug use, etc). Condoms only do so much to protect from the AIDS virus, though; the virus is much smaller than the pores inherent in condoms, so the virus sometimes gets through.
It's sad that some innocent people end up with AIDS through someone else’s mistakes or someone else’s evil. But my main point remains that instead of glossing over how this man got AIDS, the best thing to do would be to make the story clear and unequivocal that others should avoid sex outside marriage so they don't have to suffer this devastating disease.
i read the entire piece in the paper which you're quoting selectively (but not linking to) and the story seems to be perfect for misuse by all those fraudulent / highly profitatble scam "ex-gay" groups and fundamentalists.
The story's subject says plainly (not fleetingly) that he blames himself for his status, was warned and condemned by his family and friends, and yet it's not enough for you as it's missing a bible verse every three sentences and doesn't make its subject as much of a caricature as you would prefer him to be.
Guess you can use this as a profit making item in your own paper tho. Hope you send the weekly news guy and its subject their cut of your pieces of silver.
Maybe the actual mainstream paper will give you the guys phone number and street address for you to post on your site. You can not only interview him and convert him to your denomination ($20s and $50s) but let everyone know where he lives and tell him how awful he is in person or via plain wrapped ticking packages.
United Christian Soldier (and I use that term for identification purposes only): I did link to the story, but you apparently missed it.
Just as it's pretty easy to miss the message that his homosexual behavior is what brought this disease upon him.
Out of 17 paragraphs, two deal with where the responsibility for his infection lies. That's 146 words out of 978, or 15% of the article. And even that much only acknowledges that he didn't use a condom. That's like driving drunk and crashing your car into a tree, then saying you messed up because you didn't wear your seatbelt.
While this man did seem to express more regret in his earlier post to this blog today, the rest of his comments indicated a lack of repentance. He claims God's design for human sexuality is "old fashioned," dragged out the discredited "population bomb" argument about reproduction, advocated creating a counterfeit version of marriage for homosexuals, and then tried to equate his own situation with people who have contracted AIDS through no fault of their own.
This is the pathetic level to which our civilization has sunk. If you don't shower sympathy on someone who did something immoral and is now paying the price for it, then you're mean, vile, self-hating, and all the other stuff that's been said about me.
Yet it's mean to stand by and pretend everything is okay when someone's engaging in self-destructive behavior. And it's reprehensible when that self-destructive behavior is glossed over so that other people don't understand the danger and how to avoid it.
how exactly did you become the victim when you're the one who started the attack?
the news article was written solely to make you ill? must be some powerful activist to make them publish 20,000 papers just to target you.
I never said I was "the victim." I don't get off on being a victim. I merely said it was pathetic we've come to the point where good is called evil and evil is called good.
The Bible talks about the day when that will come (I think it's here), and about how people will not tolerate the truth, instead will look to have their ears tickled. Sorry, but I'm not into ear-tickling.
Oh but you are bemoaning your victimhood in not having your feet slathered with oil for smiting this man with AIDS.
Perhaps your copy or the bible is missing these or you have a better version that only supports your "Version" of Christianity?
There are some things in my bible on false prophets, moneychanging in the temple and pharisees too. There was kindness toward those who persecute you, acceptance of eunuchs, cautioning silence for healing the leper, honoring all men, not oppressing strangers for you know not what's in their hearts, lying if you say you love god but despise a brother, Paul declaring that "There is no one who is righteous, not even one", denouncing judgemental and self-righteous behaviour.
you said...
"You can reject the morality argument out of hand, but that doesn't affect its validity one iota. Sex outside of marriage remains immoral whether you like it or not."
Why don't you take your cloaked homophobia to your local BI-ble kollege? You might be able to find some action amongst Pat Robertson's disciples. Maybe one that feels that .. BY GOD YES.. you are God's choosen one and falls all over your judgemental message. Who knows she might even be a sweet little virginal lass who's never known anything but her trusty battery powered toy.
you wrote:
Regards the question about married people contracting AIDS, you "missed" the context of my statement, which was sexual. Intravenous drug use is also immoral, whether you like it or not.
He didn't miss anything.. ya moral majority pissant. I realize that the world is just too tough for someone like yourself who can't handle that fact that strangers are having sex somewhere out there in the great big void known as the world. Or is it the fact that these strangers are getting some and you're not? I should be nicer... they say that idiots who are shamelessly patronizing suffer from some sort of psychological disorder. Did some kid kick you in the crotch on the playground?
you wrote:
Regarding my family member, it isn't hard to feel judgmental toward him at all, anymore than it's hard to be judgmental about anyone who does anything wrong. For that matter, if you believe judgmentalism is so wrong, why are you judging my judgmentalism?
Because it's fun. What made you think choosing the path of self-righteousness was going to be the easy one? This is going to be painful for you.
you wrote:
"Regarding your comments about sex inside marriage and masturbation, I know you're just being sarcastic, as only a complete idiot would actually believe what you said, so I won't dignify it with further response."
We didn't ask for your santimonious misogyny now did we? Listen, bub--it takes more than a wafer-thin pretense at civility to cover the serious stench of patriarchal patronizing. So dignify or don't. We could give a rats tail what some pathetic, santimonious prude thinks is immoral or not. I hear the prayer line is open.. go tell it to someone who cares!
Actually, United Christian Soldier, that bit about no one being righteous wasn't just about being judgmental, it was talking about the fact that we're all lost without the saving grace of Jesus Christ.
Thankfully, I've renounced the way I used to live and accepted God's pardon. When we accept that, we can live the full life that God intended for us, without being a slave to sin--we can choose to do the right thing. God's Spirit also enables us to see through the lies that Satan has fed us, that our sins really aren't that bad--or maybe that they're not bad at all.
If you'll reach and and accept God's forgiveness and turn away from your sins, you'll see that warning someone of their sins isn't an act of hate, but of love.
Surreal: you're here, reading this blog and posting to it, so I don't buy that you don't care what someone thinks is immoral or not.
It actually doesn't matter what I think is immoral or not. What matters is what our Creator says is wrong. He created us, and he created the laws of the universe. He is the personification of what is good and right, and anything that doesn't conform to his character is wrong.
He created human sexuality to be enjoyed between one man and one woman in marriage for life. Anything else violates the Creator's design.
Me, I'm just another imperfect sinner whose only claim on heaven is the righteousness of someone else--Jesus'.
But it does matter what God thinks. We'll all face that fact someday; it's best to be on the right side of Him.
As an HIV positive, homosexual man myself, I must say, that when I read what you have to say about that poor guy, I am almost moved to get down on my knees and thank God that I am doomed to Hell for all eternity. Because I can't think of a more hellish fate than spending eternity in "Heaven" with the petty, smug, mean-spirited likes of you and your brethren.
But what's saddest for you is that from your comments, it becomes so clear that you have seen few , if any, demonstrations of love and generosity of spirit in your life. So, I guess you can't be called upon to live or give something you've never seen. So keep reading that New Testament, brother. You'll get it eventually, if you're lucky.
Funny, isn't it, how those conservative people, Christian (born-again or been-like-that-forever) usually, preach exactly the opposite of what they claim they are saying. His message again is a message of playing the blame-game, of kicking someone in a corner, of being judgmental, of telling others how they should live. Why can't these rednecks just stop minding someone else's business. And just mind their own. Just as Jerry did in the newspaper article.
I started reading the DV blog and was hesitant to comment here after reading some of your reponses to criticism I realised it was probably a waste of my time.
When someone starts to compare themselves with Jesus Christ you know there is no getting through to them!
I think most people who have any REAL understanding of the life of Jesus would know exactly where he would be if he were on Earth now. He would be in homeless shelters, he would be in the red light districts of the world talking to the prostitutes, he would be with all the people who are suffering from and living with disease. He would not be in the sterile echoing churches that they have built to 'honour' him.
Jesus, if you believe he existed, lived with the people and if he were here now amongst us he would be kicking the arses of the Televangelists for being the real prostitutes, dragging his name through the mud.
Evangalism is the cancer in the midst of your American society just as Islamic Fundamentalism is a cancer in others; I hope to God that that is one aspect of American culture we don't adopt in England.
Colin: I spent several years in England, and know that your country abandoned it's Christian heritage a long time ago. So long ago that you have only a twisted idea of what Christianity and Christ are all about. While Christ does want to help people have a better life in this life, He is about eternal change in their lives. That comes through the realization that we are sinners and need to change our hearts (remember: all those folks he helped, he told them to "Go and sin no more"). Because it's sin that makes wrecked lives.
PM: You can reject the truth by saying it's petty and smug, but that won't change the truth a bit. In fact, that's the lie Satan is whispering in your ear, to keep you bound to a life that's an anchor around your ankle.
I have seen many demonstrations of love, kindness and generosity. But it is NOT a demonstration of love, kindness and generosity to tell someone they are okay when they are sick, sick to the point that their life is not only physically ruined, but spiritually ruined.
As Christ said, the well don't need a doctor, but the sick. If we don't admit we need Jesus, we can't go to the doctor (Him) and get cured. As long as we keep saying that our sinful lives are fine the way they are, we get to live with our "cancer." It isn't love to pretend that someone who is terminally ill that they're doing just fine.
Skintype: I was just minding my business...until this article was published to illicit sympathy for homosexuals who have AIDS.
People caught in that situation as Jerry is deserve our compassion, but neither they nor the rest of society deserves to be lied to and misled into believing that he was just walking down the street minding his own business and was suddenly struck with this disease through no fault of his own.
As long as the truth is glossed over as it was in this piece, people will keep having risky sex (sex outside marriage) and will keep getting and spreading the disease.
When the homosexual community quits shoving this stuff in my face, and quits trying to mislead people, then I'll mind my own business.
Post a Comment