Infighting continues over same-sex love over in India.

A High Court last week ruled that their colonial era prohibitions should remain, but some in the government, particularly the Health Minister, insist the law, called Section 377, does more harm than good. But government leaders aren't having it and told the Court yesterday to ignore Minister Anbumani Ramadoss pleas, which include highlighting the rate of HIV infection among shamed gays.

…The Government on Monday told the Delhi High Court not to consider Union Health Minister Anbumani Ramadoss’s views on legalising gay sex among consenting adults and said Section 377 of the IPC was “the will of Parliament and the people, how so wrong it may be”.

“Your Lordships can ignore the statements of the Minister…his statements cannot change the law,” said Additional Solicitor General PP Malhotra on Monday before a Bench of Chief Justice A P Shah and Justice S Muralidhar.

Such a stance astounds us - if a health official insists a population - and a nation - are in danger, we would be inclined to believe them.

Gay marriage foes sure are clever!

For so long this fine nation's homophobes and other narrow-minded baddies have been associated with stodgy, wholly unfashionable leaders like James Dobson, Phyllis Schlafly and the ne'er done-up Shirley Phelps. None of these people speak to the youth of America.

So, in an effort to make themselves more youth-friendly, California's anti-gay marriage activists have established a new site, iProtect Marriage, a spin-off of the more staid Protect Marriage.

Like its sister site, iProtect urges voters to vote "yes" on Proposition 8, a ballot measure aimed at overturning this year's gay marriage win. Unlike its sister site, however, iProtect has a decidedly youth-oriented outlook, complete with fresh, concerned faces. See that guy above? He's so young! His pensiveness really speaks to us.

And no spry site would be complete without to popular sites like Facebook and MySpace. How hip! How media-savvy! Even the intentionally lower-case "i" seems eager to suck the teat of Apple's ubiquitous iPod and iPhone.

Despite these juvenile measures, iProtect's inherited the tried and largely untrue tactics employed by their right-wing forefathers. We do some dissecting, after the jump. It's scary stuff…

CONTINUED »

Indian activists are gearing up for a battle this week as their government prepares arguments for and against Section 377, a colonial era law banning same-sex love.

The Indian government has agreed to hear their pleas after eight years of struggle. And, if all goes according to plan, lawmakers will revoke the legislation.

Health Minister Anbumani Ramadoss twice last month called for 377's removal, saying such a law only brings shame and self-loathing, which can lead to unsafe sexual practices and, of course, the spread of HIV.

New York City prides itself on being at the forefront of the action. This action, however, is not boast worthy:

The virus that causes AIDS is spreading in New York City at three times the national rate — an incidence of 72 new infections for every 100,000 people, compared with 23 per 100,000 nationally — according to a study released on Wednesday by the city’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene.
…
Blacks, and men who have sex with other men, are the groups at greatest risk of contracting H.I.V., the study found. A summary of the new data:

• Men accounted for 76 percent of new H.I.V. infections and women for 25 percent. (The figures exceed 100 percent because of rounding.)
…
• Sex between men was the main cause in 50 percent of new infections; high-risk heterosexual sex in 22 percent; intravenous drug use in 8 percent; and unknown or uncertain causes in 18 percent.

One would think this city, the epicenter of the AIDS crisis, would have learned its lesson. But, you know, New Yorkers aren't always so fast on the uptake…

The ongoing discrimination case against Australia's Red Cross continues - and the organization's allies keep offering outlandish arguments against allowing gay blood donors.

Yes, even more ridiculous than the "screening takes too much time" defense:

US professor Dr Paul Holland, a former blood source executive testifying for the Red Cross, claimed even digital penetration of the nose or ear would justify the lifetime ban his country imposes on gay men.

"That would usually be sufficient to exchange fluid and qualify as sex,” Dr Holland told the Tribunal. When asked if that included gay men who had done nothing more than kissing, Holland replied, “Yes, sir, because they increase their chance of transmitting an infection such as HIV.

Wait, wait - haven't we all been taught that kissing doesn't transmit HIV?

Unless, you know, you drink like 2 gallons of someone's saliva, or something. So, Holland's testimony isn't simply wrong, it's dangerous.

[Image: "Kiss" by Robert Richards.]

Contrary to what some believe, all black opinion is not informed by what is discussed in houses of worship and barber shops.

However, it would be foolish to deny that black churches, especially in the south, yield a lot of political and social power.

That power could be used to help fight HIV and AIDS in the black community, but, by many accounts, the church is not doing its job in that arena.

CONTINUED »