Ireland becomes first country to legalize gay marriage via pop vote

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(05-28-2015, 03:07 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: You said that you think the spread rate will slow down if we allow SSM, at worst remain the same.

I bring in data showing that it actually increased in a country after they legalized SSM.

I showed that the amount of people living with HIV almost doubled in 10 years. Did the population rate double?  No it did not, so how can you sit there and say it remained the same taking into consideration that Population Growth Rates and Birth Rates have dropped drastically during this same time frame.

1. I just provided you a chart that showed that it did.
2. *sigh. If it's so much harder to get, then why does it keep spreading at such a high rate? What % of the population must be infected before we admit we have a problem?
3. I'm not sure what should be done, but I think that legalizing SSM is not the answer.

Let's look at Belgium.
Prevalence Rate same.
Infected Doubled.
Number of deaths same
Pop Growth rate dropped by 2/3
Birth Rates dipped

Canada
Prevalence Rate increased
Amount infected increased by 50%
Death Rates same
Pop Growth rate dropped by 50%
Birth rates dipped

Let's look at a country where it's not legal.
Japan
Prevalence Rate remained steady
Amount infected dropped by 30%
Death Rates dropped by 80%
Pop Growth rate dropped
Birth rates dropped

How about India.
Prevalence Rate dropped in half
Amount infected dropped by 50%
Death Rates dropped 40%
Pop Growth Rates dropped
Birth Rates dropped

You are confusing incidence and prevalence. The website you used to provide a graph without any context indicates the incidence is the same. That means the number of new cases each year is the same so the rate at which the disease is spreading remained relatively constant. The prevalence is total cases. The prevalence increased over time because the mortality rate was less than the incidence. In other words, they're not dying. If they were dying at the same rate as the incidence then the prevalence would remain constant. If the incidence was increasing while the prevalence was decreasing that is the disease you should fear because it is spreading like wildfire and people are dropping like flies. You really should take a course in statistics or epidemiology before telling Matt you're embarrassed for him. As far as your "analysis" goes, you don't have data regarding the rates in homosexuals vs heterosexuals. The rates among heterosexuals could exceed the rate among homosexuals or vice versa. Without this information, concluding a increase is due to one group is impossible and any attempt to do so foolish.

Believing discriminatory marriage bans will discourage homosexuality is foolish. Would a marriage ban discriminating against you make you reconsider your sexual orientation?  Of course not 

For once explain how married homosexuals will spread STDs at a greater rate than single homosexuals.