You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

3
9

[–] CaloricKarma 3 points 9 points (+12|-3) ago  (edited ago)

Wtf? AIDS isn't only for gays.

Also, diabetes is something that can be reversed after developing it. AIDS is with you for life. So your "argument" or whatever this is is completely invalid.

Edit: ALSO. Diabetes won't fucking kill you. So calling them the same is completely retarded.

0
7

[–] ShitLord-Vader 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

Diabetes can kill you without being treated. Which is hopefully the case for all butter golems that have it.

1
4

[–] eueueu 1 point 4 points (+5|-1) ago 

AIDS doesn't kill one these days if it's being treated, too.

Nevertheless, this homophobic fatlogic is wrong on so many levels.

1
2

[–] CaloricKarma 1 point 2 points (+3|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Well yeah, but dying from diabetes is something you pretty much have to work at and getting it is something that will happen when you give up on your life already where as AIDS will kill you no matter how hard you try to fight it, no matter how healthy you were before contracting it.

But yeah, I pretty much pray the lard whales that get diagnosed diabetes don't have the tools/brain to keep it in check and die from it.

1
5

[–] EarlPoncho 1 point 5 points (+6|-1) ago 

The chance of catching the AIDS virus from a single act of heterosexual intercourse with an infected partner is 1 in 500 if no condom is used. It's basically a gay disease.

1
-1

[–] Delusion_of_Adequacy 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago  (edited ago)

That simply not true. For starters, there's a difference in infection rate between vaginal and anal intercourse. Anal is not limited to strictly gays only. In addition, in heterosexual unprotected intercourse, the woman has a higher chance of being infected than the man, so the 1 in 500 would not apply to both genders. Therefore, your comment is incomplete at best. The same applies to anal intercourse by the way; the 'receiving' party has a higher chance of infection than the penetrating party.

Furthermore, there's a difference between sex with someone who's only been recently infected, as opposed to somebody who has advanced to a late stage. Then there are huge differences between high-income and low-income areas. Although gays do have a higher risk of infection, so do drug addicts (if they use needles). Calling AIDS a gay disease is just not factually correct.

Edit: source http://www.aidsmap.com/Estimated-risk-per-exposure/page/1324038/

0
1

[–] Raylan 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

It kills you if you eat the cake. Choices-choices.