Professor Brendan Bain, one of the Caribbean’s pioneers in clinical infectious disease practice and a leading medical authority on the HIV epidemic in the region, was fired by the University of the West Indies this week for testifying that men sleeping with men is a danger to individual and public health.
Can’t say I’m surprised that some people object to an inconvenient truth.
That article is quite biased and skewed in the way it’s reported and written.
He wasn’t fired simply for testifying two years ago and saying that.
He was dismissed because his job in that specific program is to reach communities and work closely with people who have AIDS–many of whom are homosexual.
And his statement–which was given on behalf of a group of churches–was consciously given and used to support and maintain a law from 1861 that **criminalizes **homosexual sex.
His testimony two years ago subsequently ended up making it impossible for him to work with his patients properly because he contributed to the stigmatization of homosexuality and thereby harmed his relationship with his patients and their confidence in him.
A press release by UWI on why they terminated their contractual arrangement with now- retired Prof. Brendan Bain’s to direct its Caribbean HIV/AIDS Regional Training Centre Network (CHART):
“Professor Bain has lost the confidence and support of a significant sector of the community which the CHART programme is expected to reach, including the loss of his leadership status in PANCAP, thereby undermining the ability of this programme to effectively deliver on its mandate”.
I’ve been reading through some of his comments and while I would usually take the words of such an esteemed doctor on board when it comes to this topic I can place no trust in his work for a number of reasons…
-The Doctor himself is a fundamentalist christian known for his extreme anti-gay views He has suggested previously that homosexuals should not be given medical care as well preaching on behalf of a group of churches seeking to retain the 1861 Law criminalizing MSM.
-Jamaica is one of the most anti-gay nations in the world, and he is part of that culture.
-There are anomalies and errors in his report that even a non scientist like myself can identify. Some of his statistics are blatantly untrue.
Also, he wasn’t fired, he has already retired and this report came out post-retirement. He’s just another Theocrat, so I’m going to politely reject his findings. Perhaps if Putin won’t give him a job he will find one in Uganda or Iran.
This is a misconception that is too often repeated, and sadly, believed. Gay sex does not cause STDs or AIDS. Two clean monogamous men can have sex 3x/day for 50 years and have no risk of catching anything.
Gay sex is more likely to spread AIDS because the virus is more easily transmitted between men than it is from a woman to a man. (Though it’s easily transmitted from man to woman, hence the exploding HIV rate amongst African American women). Additionally, many gay people don’t see as much of a need for protection because there isn’t a risk of pregnancy (fortunately this is starting to change since the recent AIDS resurgence). And finally, condoms are more likely to break during anal sex than vaginal.
Wow. I hope he didn’t actually say that. Of course homosexuals should receive medical treatment. Everyone has a right to medical care no matter what their sexual orientation is. If he did indeed say things then yes it would be justified to kick him out of the medical profession in my opinion.
That said, I wish that there was more emphasis on prevention of sexually transmitted diseases and no, I do not mean that condoms should be promoted. I honestly believe that chastity should be promoted. After all, being chaste is the best way to prevent sexually transmitted diseases from being transmitted to other people.
Oh. I am sorry. I did say that it causes sexually transmitted diseases. I guess I wasn’t thinking clearly when I said that. I should have said that it is more likely to spread the diseases. Sorry about that.
There are a variety of other diseases they can contract. Using your bodily organs for things they weren’t intended to be used damages them. That damage can cause severe problems. There are many diseases/viruses/illnesses/bacteria that can be transmitted through other means than sex.
It’s your counterarguments which don’t hold up. Women have used makeup for centuries, millenia even. And our modern makeups show no serious health risk when used normally over the course of a lifetime. Same for toothpicks. Of course you can stab yourself in the eye with a toothpick, but the toothpick isn’t defective.
Injections is a GREAT example though, but it proves my point and not yours. Veins can handle some minor amounts of injections if done just properly. Done incorrectly they can damage the veins, and repeated, continual use of injections, even ones done correctly, damage veins. That is why IV drug users have arms that look awful, and for older, chronically sick patients, it is a real concern. They have to change injection points and arms used. The body has to heal the injured portion.
This is very similar to anal sex. The anus wasn’t designed for sex, and sex damages the anus and other organs. If done infrequently and (what’s the best word here) gently, the damage is limited. But repeated sex in the anus, even if done “gently”, WILL damage the organs there.
Maybe you should reconsider your position since your counterarguments have failed.
There were 2 statements made. Statement A - Homosexuals shouldn’t have the right to health care, and statement B - men sleeping with men is a danger to individual and public health.
Those are two statements whose only similarities are that they are both about homosexuals. Statement B should not be conflated with statement A, and disregarded because both statements were made by the same person. They each need to be weighed individually on their own merits.
Statement A should have gotten him fired, and there is some truth to statement B
Getting fired for making statement A does not invalidate statement B.
The law there that criminalized msm was being challenged. The Professor in his capacity as a dr and someone who had opened the first center to care for those with AIDS testified that the law should remain because of the data (which is similar to what the CDC reports). He thinks the acts should still remain a crime. That is why he was dismissed.
I do NOT think he should have been dismissed.
I assume PC is politically correct?
Not all laws that criminalize behaviors will be acted upon but act as a deterrent. It seems in this case, since he was treating those with AIDS/HIV who are NOT in jail, that the law is not enforced strictly speaking but acts as a deterrent. They probably also know what ushering in all the SS marriage in other countries also.
When it was decriminalized in Texas it was foretold that what we have now would happen. They were laughed at.
I am sure in his capacity he thinks it should still be in place and a person should not be dismissed because of it. He has data to back it up.
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.