Carswell slams Farage over ‘plain wrong’ election attack on foreign HIV patients

Jun 1, 2015 by

by Tom McTague, Mailonline: Ukip MP Douglas Carswell reignited his feud with Nigel Farage this morning after publicly slamming his election attacks on foreign HIV sufferers receiving treatment on the NHS. Mr Carswell, who is Ukip’s only representative in the Commons, said the remarks were ‘mean-spirited’ and ‘wrong’. […]  During the TV election debates Mr Farage said it was wrong that people ‘can come to Britain from anywhere in the world and get diagnosed with HIV and get retroviral drugs that cost up to £25,000 per year per patient’. He said that Britain needs to ensure that the NHS is for ‘British people and families who in many cases have paid into this system for decades’. But Mr Carswell – whose father was the scientist who diagnosed the first cases of HIV – warned Ukip needed to ‘always remember’ that there was ‘something fundamentally generous’ about Britain. He said: ‘Some of the things we said ….There’s something wonderfully generous about this country and there’s something wonderfully good and right about this country and if we frame debates that are mean-spirited I think a lot of people in this country will be put off. ‘Yes, there’s a really important case to be made about restricting people’s right to come here and take advantage of our health service and we need to make sure it is not an international health service, but there’s also something fundamentally generous about this country and I think we should always remember that.’ Read here Read also:  Let’s add ‘HIVism’ to the glossary of PC tyranny by Alexander Boot...

read more

US Exporting Sexual Anarchy

May 25, 2015 by

By Dr Kay Baily, Jamaica Gleaner: Barely 12 weeks after his appointment as United States special envoy for human rights of LGBT persons, Randy Berry is currently paying a visit to Jamaica. The timing of his visit and the priority of Jamaica in the list of planned stops are not insignificant. In appointing him to this unique post, the secretary of state, John Kerry, emphasised that Mr Berry’s mandate was at the “heart of American foreign policy” as an “advocate for the rights of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people overseas” and for “overturning laws that criminalise consensual sex acts”. No one can deny that all the genuine fundamental rights of LGBT persons are already guaranteed and enforceable under Jamaican law. The priority of special LGBT ‘rights’ is clearly evidenced by the fact that the current administration has not seen it fit to appoint a similar ambassador in any other sphere where human rights are considered to be under threat. The appointment of Mr Berry suggests that sexual anarchy – the establishment of sexual ethics based on desire – is now a central aspect of American foreign policy. This is an alarming development considering the high and increasing prevalence of HIV in Western democracies where Mr Berry’s goals have already been achieved, and the annual cost of treating this largely preventable condition. It may be instructive to consider the milestones on the trajectory of this notable moment in American history. Read here...

read more

American College of Physicians endorses gay ‘marriage,’ opposes reparative therapy

May 15, 2015 by

By Lisa Bourne, LifeSite: The nation’s largest association for internal medicine doctors this week officially endorsed homosexual “marriage” and blamed marriage protection laws for damaging the physical and mental health of people who identify as LGBT. The American College of Physicians (ACP) also officially opposed reparative therapy for individuals suffering from unwanted same-sex tendencies, and called for all-inclusive “transgender healthcare services” in its policy paper published May 12 in the Annals of Internal Medicine. “It’s based upon our longstanding policy in regard to eliminating healthcare disparities,” said Dr. Wayne Riley, president of the ACP and a clinical professor of medicine at Nashville’s Vanderbilt University School of Medicine. The policy paper, titled, “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Health Disparities: Executive Summary of a Policy Position Paper From the American College of Physicians,” places the blame for the increased rates of anxiety, suicide, and substance or alcohol abuse that are common among homosexuals squarely on marriage protection statutes and other pro-family laws. The homosexual movement, aided significantly by the Obama Administration andother left-leaning politicians, have attacked reparative therapy treatment for same-sex attraction. While many who say they have been able to leave the homosexual lifestyle and have even reduced or eliminated unwanted same-sex attraction havespoken positively about the treatment, it has been made illegal in some states, and there is a continued push to ban it in others. The Christian Medical and Dental Associations (CMDA) were unable to offer detailed comment on the ACP endorsement of homosexual ideology to LifeSiteNews prior to press time. However, the CMDA expressed concern, and provided LifeSiteNews its policy statement on same-sex “marriage,” which defines marriage as a consensual, exclusive and lifelong commitment between one man and one woman, expressed in a physical union uniquely designed to produce and nurture children. The CMDA cautions that acceptance of homosexual “marriage” disregards ages of legal and cultural upholding of natural marriage, and also warned marriage redefinition will not end with sanctioning homosexual unions. Meanwhile, Jane Orient, M.D., executive director of the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), had strong critical words for the ACP’s new paper. “Does ACP really think that the risk of AIDS, hepatitis, syphilis, etc. is much higher in ‘MSMs’ (men having sex with men) because of ‘healthcare disparities,’ or do behavior and biology have anything to do with it?” she asked in an interview with Breitbart News. Read here...

read more

Animus Towards Gay Sex Means Love for Homosexuals

Apr 15, 2015 by

By John-Henry Westen, Crisis Magazine: In February, the journal Social Currents published a survey that purports to show the motivations that drive the overwhelming majority of those opposed to same-sex “marriage.” According to the research, “Nearly all respondents (90 percent) who strongly oppose same-sex marriage also believe that ‘sexual relations between two adults of the same sex’ is ‘always wrong.’” On the other side they found that “approximately five-sixths (83 percent) of responses who support same-sex marriage view same-sex relations as ‘not wrong at all.’” Given that opposition to same-sex “marriage” has always held that gay sex is wrong, one might think those interested in maintaining traditional marriage would have provided the rational for the perspective—including, but not limited to, HIV/AIDS—by making it a focus of pulpit, cultural, and public policy discussions. However, the vast majority of America’s conservative and even religious leaders have chosen to ignore or remain silent about the harms of gay sex and if they entered into the fray at all it was mainly to talk about the benefits of heterosexual marriage to children and society. Contrast this with secular pulpits, which for two decades have without ceasing proclaimed the gospel of the support for gay sexual relationships from every screen, newspaper, magazine and book. The argument for sexual lifestyles free from moral restraint and disregarding medical consequences resonated with America’s political, legal, and popular culture, which has been steeped in heterosexual promiscuity, dangerous sexual acts and high divorce rates even inside religious communities. It may be too late to salvage traditional marriage, but if America’s orthodox religious, political, and cultural leaders want to defend marriage from homosexual redefinition they must focus on the harms of gay sex. Read here...

read more

Nigel Farage: Not un-Christian to stop treatment of foreign-born HIV patients

Apr 6, 2015 by

By Patrick Sawer, Telegraph: Nigel Farage has said his comments about ‘HIV tourists’ are perfectly compatible with a religious outlook, claiming that it is “a sensible Christian thing to look after your family and your own community first”. The UKIP leader spoke out on the topic of Christianity over the Easter weekend, after his criticism of foreign-born HIV patients receiving treatment under the NHS during the party leaders’ election debate was condemned as intolerant, xenophobic and lacking in basic human charity. Mr Farage had claimed that 60 per of the 7,000 HIV annual diagnoses in the UK involved “health tourists” who travel to Britain to receive retroviral drug treatment at a cost up to £25,000-per-year. His comments provoked widespread criticism, with Leanne Wood, the Plaid Cymru leader, accusing him of “dangerous scaremongering”. She was applauded by the studio audience after telling him during last Thursday’s party leaders’ debate: “You should be ashamed of yourself.” But asked on Saturday whether his views were compatible with a Christian outlook, Mr Farage said: “What good Christian would say to an 85-year-old woman ‘you can’t have breast cancer treatment because we can’t afford it’, whilst at the same time shovelling a billion pounds on foreign aid, allowing people from all over the world to fly into Britain as health tourists get an HIV test and drugs over £20,000 a year?” Speaking to Sky News he added: “It is a sensible Christian thing to look after your family and your own community first.” Mr Farage said that he regarded himself as a Christian, despite attending church only a “few times a year”, and insisted Britain should maintain its cultural position as a “Judeo-Christian” country. Read here Read also:  Nigel Farage was right about health tourism by Guido Fawkes Farage’s remarks on health tourism are very offensive explains HIV-infected health tourist by James Delingpole, Breitbart  ...

read more

By lifting blood ban for gay men, FDA decides feelings are more important than lives

Jan 8, 2015 by

By Dustin Siggins, LifeSite: Just before Christmas, the deputy director of the Food & Drug Administration (FDA)told reporters that the agency had decided to lift the lifetime ban on blood donations from men who have had sex with men. While the details still have to be worked out, as does a period of public comment this year, the FDA intends to institute a one-year ban it says fits in with current evidence. And what evidence is that? According to the Associated Press: Marks said some of the most compelling evidence for changing the policy comes from Australia, which put in place a one-year ban on donations over a decade ago. Recently published studies showed no change in the safety of the blood supply after making the switch. Additionally, studies conducted by the U.S. government suggest gay and bisexual men are actually more likely to abide by donation guidelines under a 12-month prohibition period. All blood donors take a questionnaire about their health and sexual behavior, but some gay men reportedly answer inaccurately to donate blood. All U.S. blood donations are screened for HIV but testing only detects the virus after it’s been in the bloodstream about 10 days. Still, FDA officials said current research does not support reducing the donation ban below the one-year mark, though the agency may consider changing the timeframe in the future. Additionally: The American Red Cross estimates the risk of getting an HIV-positive blood donation is 1 in 1.5 million. About 15.7 million blood donations are collected in the U.S. each year. While the above may seem compelling at first glance, the bigger picture makes it clear that the FDA is simply trying to appease the homosexual lobby and the emotions of men who have sex with men, rather than focusing on helping patients — and the risk to those patients far outweighs the potential benefit. This is especially true as the AP makes it clear that this change is just the first step to a total elimination of the ban. First, as noted by the Associated Press, “men who have had sex with other men represent about 2 percent of the U.S. population, yet account for at least 62 percent of all new HIV infections in the U.S.” In other words, this is justifiable discrimination. Homosexual activists say both the existing ban and anything short of a total lift of the ban stigmatizes gay and bisexual men, but in fact the existing ban does not care if someone is gay or bisexual. All it cares about is whether someone is part of the minority of the U.S. population that carries HIV/AIDS in the large majority of circumstances. Read...

read more