I had a feeling this was coming, in one way or another:

Homosexual sex should be just as against the law as injection drug use is. They represent the two leading modes of transmission for HIV/AIDS, and our policy toward one should be the same as our policy toward the other.

The Centers for Disease Control – which, by the way, is not the research arm of the American Family Association – says that in the entire history of the AIDS epidemic, 91% of the males who have been diagnosed with the disease contracted it either through having sex with other males or through intravenous drug abuse. Both are lethal forms of behavior, and neither should be endorsed or normalized by any sane society.

Difference, of course being that unprotected gay sex with a trusted partner who is not infected with anything is anything but harmful, and indeed can be super. It’s not the act — it’s the disease.

Homosexual sex is clearly not a victimless crime; passive recipients of unprotected gay sex can die as result of what another male does to them in the sex act.

But only if the other partner is infected with something. If they’re not [and kids, you should really all be getting tested and when you screw, do it with people whose status you know], then no worries.

So what should the penalty be? That’s easy – whatever gay porn actors say it should be. Let’s let gay porn actors tell society what the penalty for unprotected gay sex ought to be. I’m happy to let them take the lead on this issue, and will be happy to support whatever sanctions they recommend.

See the wingnut switcheroo Fischer pulls for his seven fans? It’s no longer about disease transmission — it’s about having unprotected sex of any kind, because in wingnut world, all gays have AIDS, and straight people don’t, and it’s certainly not a problem in Africa…

Fischer then references the story of Derrick Burts, an adult film star who has worked in both straight and gay porn, who recently contracted HIV, and is now calling for condom use to be mandatory in the gay porn world. [This is a good idea.] But, it’s Bryan Fischer, so you know that he doesn’t actually give a shit about the fag who got HIV, but rather wants to use him to make a bigoted point:

Now Mr. Burts is on a crusade to make condom use mandatory in the filming of all gay sex scenes.

Of adult film work, Mr. Burts says, “It’s very dangerous. It should be required that you wear a condom on the set.”

Now think about this for a moment. If Mr. Burts wants condom use to be mandatory, that means he wants to impose some kind of penalty for unprotected homosexual sex.

Um, no, it doesn’t, you unrepentant imbecile. It means he wants condom use to be mandatory in the adult film business. Indeed, the quotes from Burts are fairly clear.

Here’s my suggestion. Let’s follow Mr. Burts’ lead, and use his suggested penalty as the penalty society imposes on all unprotected homosexual sex.

Because a couple who’s been together 25 years doing it without a condom is just as bad as carelessness on a porn set. Yeah. Again, it’s always useful to remember that wingnuts like Bryan are so scientifically retarded [but with extra helpings of irrational bigotry] that they sort of think that HIV just springs up in gay men’s bodies out of nowhere.

I say we let the victims of gay sex, like Mr. Burts, tell us what kind of penalty should be imposed on their victimizers.

Mr. Burts is not a “victim of gay sex.” He got hurt by the poor standards and practices employed by the film company where he worked.

Homosexual activists will certainly go ballistic over this suggestion…

Nah, just making fun of the dum-dum, as usual.

After all, if unprotected gay sex is the problem, then the problem is gay sex. Ultimately we need to get to appropriate sanctions for the act itself. After all, condoms break or don’t get used at all in the heat of the moment. But beginning with sanctions for unprotected gay sex is a place to start.

Uh, no, the problem is disease. This is why, though, the AFA has been labeled as a hate group. For people like Bryan Fischer, who are so untethered from reality, all gay sex is equivalent to the free-for-all sexual nature of a porn set. I understand why he thinks that way, because for him to think differently would destroy his worldview. Wingnuts are essentially required to sign on to false ideas about any number of things, in order for their ideologies to remain at least tenuously coherent.

So oddly, I will be the one taking the side of the homosexual porn star in this matter, willing to support him in his effort to sanction unprotected gay sex, while irrational and unhinged homosexual activists will try to demonize both him and me. Let’s stand together, Mr. Burts

.Derrick Burts never said anything about sanctioning all unprotected gay sex. But don’t expect the average 70 I.Q. AFA reader to notice that…

Know your status and be safe, kids.