Is gay community focusing too much on marriage, too little on AIDS?

Are gay-rights activists focusing too much in Proposition 8 when a much larger issue is looming in the gay community? That's the intriguing questions asked by Johann Hari on the Huffington Post. Hari writes about the arrival of super-AIDS, "a new, more toxic mutation of the HIV virus, quicker and invulnerable to drug treatment." He says the gay community needs to focus more attention on the potential disaster this new AIDS threat could bring:

Today, we are all loudly focusing on the danger from Proposition 8 and its foul theocratic supporters - but this slower threat is swelling alongside it in silence. Some doctors have tried to warn against this narcoleptic response. HIV physician Dr. James Braun warned a recent Retrovirus conference that the transmission of treatment-resistant HIV is "a disaster waiting to happen." But the refusal to listen, the determination to keep on barebackin', shouldn't surprise us. The gay community is facing a string of HIV crises - and we are hitting the snooze button on all of them.

At the S.F. Weekly, writer Peter Jamison also has a contrarian take on Prop. 8 -- noting that democracy and equal rights don't always go together:

Another voice has arisen amid these plaintive notes, and it is one that speaks not with regret, but with something close to icy assurance. Its argument is that democracy is no guarantor of civil rights, and that Prop 8's success is thus, in the long run, irrelevant. Disenfranchised minorities have never advanced their cause at the ballot box, but through the federal and judiciary mechanisms designed to ensure equal protection under the law. One need look no further for evidence than the 1954 U.S. Supreme Court Case Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, which forced school desegregation upon unwilling states.

--Shelby Grad

Comments

[allaire]

The problem with Johann Hari’s question is that it implies HIV concerns are solely those of homosexuals and same-gender marriage opponents, when surely it is not. The HIV virus will infect anyone whether straight, gay, lesbian, bi, man, woman, child, any race, any location and everybody. To imply equality and same-gender marriage should be “held off” because of the HIV virus is like saying no one, opposite-gender too, should marry because cancer is too great of a threat. The HIV virus is a global human challenge, period. Your neighbors, they just want equal civil marriage rights, the kind that everyone gets from the government.

[GEAH]

Why worry about AIDS when physically intimidating the old woman who owns El Coyote is so much more fun?

[Flex]

Mr. Hari. Thanks for your concern about the new super HIV, and AIDS virus. However, I'm a gay man and I choose to use a condom, and practice safe sex, always! Therefore, I will never be infected by HIV/AIDS. So, let me focus on suing for my equal rights that everyone deserves.

STOP AIDS USE A CONDOM. Get your right to marry too!

[mick]

Years and Years have gone by and idiots like Johann are still linking Gays to AIDS. Sorry to break it to you simpleton, but AIDS is a heterosexual disease worldwide. It is in a higher prevalence here in the US among homosexuals but elsewhere its a straight disease. What next, should people who have a disease be prohibited from marrying? I would imagine that your logic would lead you to your linear conclusion of YES, disease prone individuals should not be allowed to marry. Maybe stupid people should be prohibited from marriage as well.

[Michelle]

Marriage encourages monogamy. More monogamous relationships slows the spread of STDs.

[Paz]

Two separate issues, AIDS and Marriage. The same can be ask if gay marriage opponents are focusing too much on the definition of marriage instead of the high divorce rate in our country.

[Karleigh De Salvio]

I don't care if they want to get married but they also have to worry about the harsh and serious side effects of getting AIDS! It's very dangerous for gay men to have unprotected sex. If they want the opportunity to get married than at least wear a condom when having sex to prevent Aids. You guys can be in love and be protected, do the safer thing to save yourself from getting hurt!!! I support you guys but be safe!

[Just facts]

The self-identified gays posting here are in a snit that AIDS is linked to being gay at all, but tough, the reports have been out for a while that younger gays who've grown up with the anti-virtal drugs are especially more likely NOT to use condoms, having not seen the worst ravages of the disease in early years. I've had several gay friends and neighbors die horrible deaths during the past 2 decades, and they've usually been serially monogamous, but in between had lots of partners (so did their partners) who they met at daily visits to the gym, bathhouses, the whole scene you claim are just stereotypes. And they were body-conscious gorgeous and yes, hedonistic. All but one were also terrific people who I was very sad to see so ravaged.
There is still a lot more promiscuous sex among the gay population, in bath houses or clubs, facts is facts. NOT by all, and there are many monogamous gay couples who have a right to marry, and there are some promiscuous heteros and some of them don't use condoms.

But the correlation and trend is definitely there in the community, along with a resurgence in AIDS, and now the drug-resistent type. That can and does affect the entire population, and it is everyone's concern. This is not a time to deny facts amidst political correctness, but to deal with it. What's sad is that every time anyone, including gays who have the sincerest motives, tell the truth, they're ripped into for admitting the truth. That doesn't help, even less so in the black and Latino communities where being gay is still often hidden.

As for Mick and others who deny facts by claiming that outside of the U. S. AIDS is more a hetero disease: yeah, in places like Africa and India, the men force women to have sex without condoms after having sex with prostitutes or male partners. It's a matter of men still being "male sexist pigs" who treat women like dirt. Even in Russia and many parts of the "Second" world. That only reinforces the fact that in places where heteros do use condoms and are more careful and selective about their partners, AIDS is much lower than among the first-world gay population.

[Timothy Kincaid]

HIV is a serious concern. One that impacts the health of about 12% of gay men living in the US (and virtually no gay women). So we all should be very concerned that our behavior does not lead us to increased exposure.

In contrast, civil equality impact 100% of gay men and gay women.

[Randy]

It is time for separation between bedroom and state. What one does in the bedroom is purely and simply choice. One can choose not to have sex regardless of disposition or "orientation". Orientation refers to ones preference in the bedroom and is not the subject of polite conversation or spoken about on the job. It should not be spoken about in politics and certainly not considered some kind of civil right. There is no right to have sex. Homosexual behavior makes Bible believing Christians "sick" as God calls it an abomination. It's like thinking about some horrible sickening thing. Christians have the right to not be offended by pornographic talk which the word "gay" has become. There is just no civility anymore. God will have the last word and he always does. Where is the humility and the will of the people is sovereign or else we don’t have a democracy anymore. We are ruled with the consent of the people not by “intellectuals” who have become gods in their own minds. God says wisdom starts with the fear of God which makes you humble to begin with. History has shown all atheist Governments have killed innocent people and with out the Bible then the only philosophy possible is “might makes right”. The people who run Wall Street, the Banks, the Government all went to the finest schools and graduated with the best degrees and came from the best families and look at what a mess we are in with the finest and the best running things. It’s the same old story of people becoming legends in their own minds and thinking themselves to be wise when in fact they are idiots and use flawed logic. Anyone who says (sexual activity is a civil right) is an idiot for sure. Just say it to yourself a few times over and over and it sounds ridiculous. That’s why they came up with another word like “gay” to use instead of homosexuality. The devil is a liar.

[Dan]

Must the gay community focus on only one issue at a time? I don't see why the threat of AIDS must replace the community's fight for civil rights. If the article's author wanted to discuss the homosexual community's ignorance of Super AIDS (a valid concern!), there was no need for him to criticize the focus on Prop 8. We can walk and chew gum at the same time, you know? THAT SAID... Might there be a link between gay marriage and a drop in the AIDS rate among homosexuals? The legal sanctification of gay relationships on the same level as their heterosexual counterparts might help foster a culture of monogamy, social responsibility and acceptance imperative to the creation of a stable, knowledgeable and pro-active community of individuals. That's not to say that the gay community is not responsible as a whole today, but the nation should not criticize a minority group based on the standards they set for themselves IF that group is not accepted or granted the same rights as the majority. The day a gay teenager can invite his boyfriend to the prom without having to think twice about the majority's reaction is the day the gay community can be held to the same cultural litmus tests of the heterosexual majority.