response 63 of 129:

Jun 3 17:58 UTC 2002

Oh, my.  Where to start.  

Walter, for someone who appears to have paid some attention to what's
happening with AIDS in the world, you appear to have retained some glaring
errors of fact.  You appear, for instance, to believe that "HIV will kill
virtually all members of a human population [in which the majority 
are sexually active with multiple partners over time]."  Huh?  You do 
remember, don't you, that it's a precondition for catching HIV by 
sexual transmission that your partner has HIV?  You are aware that it's 
possible to test for HIV with high accuracy, yes?  I assert that these 
two facts suggest a method by which it may, in fact, be possible to 
get one's freak on with very little likelihood of contracting HIV.  If 
the sea manatees knew where to go where there weren't any propellers, 
they might not face extinction.  

Clinton may well be a sex addict.  I'm a sex addict, too.  I get all 
cranky and irritable and such when I'm forced to go without sex for 
long periods of time.  I've been known to do irrational things in 
pursuit of sex.  As it happens, (and this may be a shock to some of you) 
there are circles in which the quirks of my personality are regarded as 
charming.  I'd be a perfect recipe for a "Typhoid Mary of VD", too, but
for one minor but crucial fact:  I DON'T HAVE VD.  Guess what?  Neither 
does Clinton, to the best of my knowledge.  

This kind of twisted, limping argument for abstinence tends to suggest to 
me that the proponent has something against sex, not against AIDS.