I know you have criticized me before about bashing anti-gay Christian-Republicans, and I have not responded because I do not believe in fueling a flame war. But since I trust you, I will try to make a rational response here.

Until this last election, I was very open minded about my anti-gay Christian-Republican friends. However, it became clear during this last election that they are unwilling to compromise and be tolerant of me and my lifestyle as I am tolerant of their lifestyle.

Because of this, I agree with the gay conservative http://www.andrewsullivan.com that we can not continue to compromise on such an important point as our basic rights.

I have never said and I will never ever say that ALL Christian fundamentalists or ALL Republicans are anti-gay, but when I say anti-gay Christian-Republicans, I am including President Bush because I believe he is actively working against my best interest as a gay American.

If I was an abortion doctor, I would be afraid of Christian terrorists who regularly murder doctors and burn down their clinics. They are no different than the Muslim terrorists that kill people. Certainly, I believe that most Christian fundamentalists are happy just denying me equal rights instead of killing me. I think the same is true for Islamic fundamentalists.

Yes, research goes on elsewhere. There are some excellent studies that have been done in Britian about safe sex. However, as you probably know, the U.S. research budget dwarfs the rest of the world just like our defense/warmongering budget does.

In terms of your criticism of five year old research, I have access to a large university medical library, and I have been diligent in looking at all new research papers on oral sex safety. There have been some more recent ones, but they all have a much smaller sample size, or they have not been published in peer-reviewed journals. This study has held up since it has never been contradicted by any more recent study.

I think the best guess is that if you suck enough HIV-positive cocks, you will probably get infected, but it might take more years to happen then you want to suck cock. Also, you could be unlucky and get infected with the first cock you suck. This is what low probability means.

For example, here is a study on the safety of oral sex that appeared recently on the ABC News website. Of course, it has the basic problem of trying to extropolate from animal studies to humans:

================

http://www.advocate.com/new_news.asp...04/04-12/06/04
12/4/04-12/6/04

Study: Oral HIV infections may be more easily transmitted than previously thought
Researchers at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas have used an animal model to track how HIV may enter the body following oral exposure to the virus, and they conclude that oral HIV infections may be more easily transmitted than previously thought. In a study published in the December 3 edition of the journal AIDS, the researchers report tracking which tissues in the mouth and digestive tract of rhesus monkeys were first infected with the simian version of HIV when the virus was placed against the inside of the monkeys' cheeks and then swallowed, simulating HIV exposure through either breast milk from HIV-positive mothers to their infants or semen from oral sex.

Among the first tissues in which the simian version of HIV could be detected in the monkeys were the soft tissue in the mouth, esophagus, and tonsils, suggesting these sites became infected when initially exposed to the virus. Because the virus likely contacted these tissues when swallowed, the researchers believe HIV-infected milk or semen that enters the mouth and comes in contact with the tissues also could pose an infection risk.

At one day after oral exposure and initial infection, lymph nodes near the head and the neck began to show signs of viral infection. Digestive tract tissues below the esophagus did not show signs of HIV infection until four days after oral exposure--the same time as other tissues throughout the body--suggesting that stomach acids likely destroyed the virus when swallowed.

"It is clear from our study that the oral and esophageal mucosa and the tonsils are likely to be the most important sites of viral entry," said lead researcher Donald Sodora. "These tissues should be a major focus of any additional studies of HIV or SIV oral transmission."

Because SIV spreads so rapidly throughout the bodies of infected monkeys, antiviral therapies can be effective only if they are given within hours of exposure to the virus. Researchers hope the study further identifies one of the major problems facing the formulation of a vaccine: Any vaccine needs to overcome the rapid spread of the virus from the site of infections to tissues throughout the body.

Quote |