Saturday, March 28, 2015

California Wants To Destroy All Faith-Based Alternatives to the Gay Lifestyle

California State Sen. Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens), has introduced the Protecting Youth From Institutional Abuse Act, legislation that he said would regulate [out of existence] the private treatment of sexually confused teenagers. The legislation would require private alternative youth treatment and education institutions — such as boot camps, therapeutic boarding schools, religious children’s homes and behavior modification programs — to be licensed by the state Department of Social Services. Dave Garcia, director of public policy for the Los Angeles LGBT Center — which supports Lara's proposed bill — said many of the facilities are religiously affiliated. The legislation would not permit religious exemptions that would allow facilities to not be regulated by the state. “Your religion does not give you the right to abuse a child,” Garcia said. “No cross will protect you from the law.”

Author’s note: Professional therapeutic counseling for same-sex attracted children is already illegal in California as well as New Jersey and Washington DC; with similar laws working through the legislature in Iowa, Massachusetts, New York, Ohio, and Oregon. But, the new California measure goes a step further – seeking to ban Faith-based programs; in other words, any effort to advise a minor suffering from same-sex attraction within the child’s religious community would be forbidden; even if the child asked for such guidance; this law would affect the ability of priests, ministers, and church counsellors to fulfill their God-given vocations. This draconian attempt to infringe upon religious liberty is in part a reaction from the gay community which plainly exposes their fears – that homosexuality is treatable; in addition, it also exposes the strong strain of anti-Christian occultism which continues to grow increasingly virulent; as the gay lobbyist stated – there is something greater than religion, or the cross, and that is the secular state; sadly, this is part of the homosexual neurosis: a need to remake everything into a gay-friendly nirvana; an inverted world where the pain of childhood is instantaneously wiped away by one everlasting embrace – with big daddy government standing in for their father, and for God.

Friday, March 27, 2015

Gay Hubris Causing Backlash

In 2008, Proposition 8 passed in the state of California; if enacted, it would have forbidden the licensing and recognition of same-sex marriages. A bit of background: in 2000, the State of California adopted Proposition 22 which did exactly what Prop 8 was supposed to do. Only, during February and March 2004, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom directed the licensing of same-sex marriage marriages on the basis of the state’s equal protection clause, prompted also by recent events including George W. Bush’s proposed constitutional ban and a Supreme Court of Massachusetts ruling deeming same-sex marriage bans unconstitutional and permitting them from May 2004. While only lasting a month before being overruled, this was supported by other cities such as San Jose and gained global attention. Therefore, the actions of power hungry liberals, seeking the galvanized gay vote, and the homosexual elitists of San Francisco, LA, and New York, made the passage of Prop 8 possible. From then on, state after state has fallen to a gay marriage juggernaut; often, with the winners denigrating those who oppose it as ignorant, homophobic, and or bigoted. Now, in Indiana, Governor Mike Pence signed into law the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, modeled after federal legislation of the same name. Supporters believe it will safeguard against businesses being forced to provide services they find objectionable on religious grounds; for example, the law will help prevent Christian bakers and florists from being punished for refusing to participate in a same-sex marriage ceremony. In reality, the arrogance and extreme hubris of the gay power-pushers has alienated much of the Christian community; currently, homosexuality is actually creating homophobia where it never existed; not wise - in a world which has seen a return to barbarism: the frequent murder of accused homosexuals in the Middle East; often by being thrown from buildings; the Christian Faith is the only benevolent religion under which homosexual communities have been able to thrive relatively unscathed - as proven by the enormous gay enclaves in almost all major Western cities. The gay need for acceptance, and the resulting bulldozer mentality with regards to same-sex marriage has also created alienation: a fatalism within some Christians with regards to the possibility of redemption in homosexuals; in addition, and, worse of all - the venomous rhetoric emerging from gay circles, blasting Christians for their intolerance, has also pushed the gay community into a deeper and more entrenched form of secularism; i.e. a culture containing no interest in the transcendent. Already wholly bound to the material, homosexuality is decisively becoming a life without the possibility of a Christian God. Those that have tried to keep some semblance of Jesus in their lives, often try to remake Him in the same way that the homosexual elites are seeking to remake marriage; fitting everything to our liking - regardless of the Truth; in the end, a Christ created in our own image is not Christ at all. Then, while we worship our false God, the true Church drifts further away. 

Thursday, March 26, 2015

Johnson & Johnson Hires Sexually Confused Boy to Peddle Products

Gender identity disorder sufferer Jazz Jennings, a 14 year old anatomical boy who dresses as a girl, has been hired by Clean and Clear Cosmetics, owned by Johnson & Johnson, to be a new spokesmodel targeting teens. Recently it was announced the Florida ninth grader is the star of a progressive campaign for the skincare giant called “See The Real Me.” The campaign video shows Jennings speaking of “the struggles of growing up as ‘a girl trapped in a boys body’ and how she internalized it, before breaking free and being herself.” The Fifth Edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) published in 2013, replaced the term gender-identity disorder with gender identity dysmorphia; the same mental illness, a different more politically correct title; this is unlike the complete removal of homosexuality from the DSM in 1973.
A new study has confirmed that transgender youth often have mental health problems especially depression and anxiety; the results were presented at The Endocrine Society's 97th annual meeting in San Diego: “Forty-two patients participated in the study at the Rady Children's Hospital clinic. Twenty-six (62 percent) reported that they had depression, anxiety or both and/or cut themselves, with seven patients having a self-cutting history…Eleven patients had additional psychiatric or behavioral problems, including attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, or ADHD, Asperger's syndrome/autism spectrum disorder and bipolar disorder.” As for gender identity disorder, the APA admits that there are no scientifically proven theories and no consensus as to its origin or treatment; as noted in a recent APA Task Force report, “Opinions vary widely among experts and are influenced by theoretical orientation as well as assumptions and beliefs (including religious) regarding the origins, meanings, and perceived fixity or malleability of gender identity. Primary caregivers may, therefore, seek out providers for their children who mirror their own world views, believing that goals consistent with their views are in the best interest of their children”*

Please boycott the following Johnson & Johnson brands and products:
Caring Everyday
Clean & Clear
Coach Professional
Coach Sport
Corn Huskers Lotion
Healthy Woman
Johnson's Baby (baby shampoo)
Johnson & Johnson Red Cross
Motrin Children
Piz Buin
Pepcid AC
Pure Essentials
Rembrandt toothpaste
Simply Sleep
Tucks Pads
Tylenol Baby
Tylenol Children

*Byne W, Bradley SJ, Coleman E, Eyler AE, Green R, Menvielle EJ, Meyer-Bahlburg HFL, Pleak RR, Tompkins DA: Report of the American Psychiatric Association Task Force on Treatment of Gender Identity Disorder. Archives of Sexual Behavior 2012;41:759–796. (pp. 762–763).

Wednesday, March 25, 2015

Pro-Gay San Francisco Parish Gets Honored by National Catholic Reporter

Photo of current MHR pastors as pictured in NCR.
MHR pastor at 2014 SF Gay Pride Parade; and the MHR float.
An article, one in a series of overly-simpering pieces focusing on Most Holy Redeemer [MHR], titled “‘Gayest’ US Catholic parish strives to maintain openness, accepting…” published March 16th 2015, by “The National Catholic Reporter [NCR]” profiles the Castro District church located in the Archdiocese of San Francisco; beneath the picture of the smiling faces of the current pastors, the author of this article resorts to the worst sort of gay-fascist demagoguery: “When applied to religious or clerical life, the virtue of chastity is viewed as a gift given to a relative few -- those who enter religious communities or become priests. When applied to LGBT people, there is no talk about chastity as a ‘gift.’ Rather, the institutional church teaches, it is a demand, an obligation, across the board, for all. LGBT people, the church teaches, must refrain from all sexual intimacy…This seemingly impossible demand and concomitant threat of serious sin has sent countless young LGBT Catholics into confusion and self-loathing and even to suicide.” This ugly tactic of fear-mongering; scaring gay men into believing that if they accept and try to live-by the “impossible” demands of the Catholic Church they will inevitably end up suicidal; also, is incredibly patronizing and belittling – as if saintly priests and religious are only capable of even approaching the idea of chastity; in addition, the position of the Church, regarding God’s plan for those who suffer from homosexuality is greatly misrepresented when the author derisively describes how the mean Catholic hierarchy severely imposed “an obligation” to chastity upon homosexuals, when, in reality “The Catechism of the Catholic Church” goes beyond calling chastity merely a “gift,” but states that those afflicted with same sex attraction can reach “Christian perfection.” (CCC #2359)
Most Holy Redeemer pastor Fr. Jack McClure apparently agrees with this one-sided approach to the homosexual problem. He wisely said little in the article, but did add this: “And just as our parish is an accepting parish…each of us needs to be accepting people. But sometimes the most difficult thing about being accepting is accepting ourselves.” Of course, we need to be accepting, but being tolerant doesn’t mean facilitating and supporting someone’s wounded sinfulness. Also, why should I have to accept myself…if that means “accepting” a homosexual orientation? Only, this rational fits in with the entire demeanor of the NCR take on homosexuality: that of the sheer hopelessness of acquiescing to a “rigid” form of Catholicism which could only lead to eternal unhappiness; accepting who you are (i.e. gay) is the lone truthful and honorable thing to do. Not to do so is to be intellectually and spiritually dishonest. Why? Because in their mind - homosexuality is essentially good; only, the Church, according to one of the gay men interviewed at MHR, is sorely lagging behind with regards to this enlightened idea: “But I don’t want to wait for a pope or a bishop to say something is okay. If we are the Body of Christ we have to start right now. If we cannot at this time have women priests on the altar, we can at least have women speak. If we cannot have same gender couples married, we can at least welcome them in our pews.” But, in reality, when one succumbs to the gay orientation and the group-think mentality, they are not choosing to accept themselves, nor the Love of God, but to accept what society expects of them – if you are attracted to the same-sex, therefore you must be gay; part and parcel with this ideology is the list of demands made by the confused parishioner – insisting on satisfaction; not humbly yielding to the Truth of Christ. And this exact same scenario was addressed in 1986 by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in their “Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons,” stating quite explicitly on the matter: “…special concern and pastoral attention should be directed toward those who have this condition [homosexuality], lest they be led to believe that the living out of this orientation in homosexual activity is a morally acceptable option. It is not…An essential dimension of authentic pastoral care is the identification of causes of confusion regarding the Church’s teaching.” Therefore to exhort men and women suffering from same-sex attraction to accept themselves is doing a great disservice to them; let alone to the directives of the Church as instituted by God: “…we wish to make it clear that departure from the Church’s teaching, or silence about it, in an effort to provide pastoral care is neither caring nor pastoral. Only what is true can ultimately be pastoral. The neglect of the Church’s position prevents homosexual men and women from receiving the care they need and deserve.” Of this, MHR is most seriously culpable.

The original NCR article:

Monday, March 23, 2015

The Gay Michelangelo: A Portrait of the Artist’s Lifelong Struggle With Same-Sex Attraction 

There are certain circumstances present in a young man’s early life that often contribute to a later homosexual state in adulthood; I labeled this the “gay boy syndrome.” It usually includes: an absent or domineering parent, in particular - the father, an experience of sexual molestation, and or bullying from male peers. Typically the presence of one of these incidents is enough to help facilitate a swerve towards the eroticization of the same sex; in the case of Michelangelo Buonarroti, they were all in evidence. 
Michelangelo was born in 1474, the second of six children; his mother died after a prolonged illness when he 7 years old. His father was overly preoccupied with money, but demanding and unambitious. Eager to have one less child around the house, in 1488, his father took the not unusual step of having the already artistic Michelangelo apprenticed with Florentine painter Domenico Ghirlandaio. From that point forwards, Michelangelo’s relationship with his father and siblings would remain cold, but distantly cordial. 
At this time, Florence was the nucleus of the Italian Renaissance, a rebirth of classical appreciation for Ancient Greek and Roman thought; most vividly expressed through the medium of sculpture. So extraordinary were the talents of the young Michelangelo, that he caught the attention of Lorenzo de Medici (the Magnificent) the head of a wealthy merchant oligarchy and a famous benefactor to the Arts. At his private villa and gardens, Lorenzo created a highly sophisticated workshop and educational program for aspiring artists. An integral part of this milieu was a revival of Neoplatonic theory which boasted that through the appreciation of beauty, principally the physical beauty of the human body, the male being the utmost example, one could come closer to God; conjoined with this cult of beauty was a similar revival of Athenian boy-love; the practice of older males guiding boys into manhood with this process normally taking on a limited sexual component; symbolized by the near lascivious representation of the Lorenzo de Medici commissioned “David” (1430) by Donatello. 
The dead face of Antinous.
Far from being sedate and bucolic, the atmosphere at the Medici mansion was highly competitive; quickly, the remarkable work of Michelangelo in sculpture set him apart from the other would-be masters. This inevitably caused envy as some of his fellow pupils mocked him; going as far as to permanently scar him with a severely broken nose; an iconic physical attribute that would remain for the rest of his life. Yet, as his first biographer, Giorgio Vasari, would mention, the young Michelangelo was gifted with an extraordinary “holiness of conduct.” For, from his childhood, Michelangelo was a mystic; in an age when the arts were seen as an extremely viable means to fame and fortune, as more explicitly evidenced in his later career, Michelangelo often went above and beyond the precepts of the commission, for the sake of art, and for his own personal and spiritual consummation.
..."David;" and Hugh O'Brain as Wyatt Earp.
Lorenzo (Medici Tombs.)
From his earliest surviving studies and immature works, namely “The Battle of the Centaurs,” the absorption of the Medici preoccupation with a strange sort of chaste homoeroticism is blatantly evident; even reemerging oddly in the background of an early easel painting of the Holy Family – now referred to as the “Doni Tondo;” witnessed by the odd placement of lounging nude males in the background. Yet, the triumph of the nude male body as a vehicle towards salvation acquired its most heroic status in Michelangelo’s “David;” created when he was only in his late-twenties. Unlike the ephebic Donatello version, Michelangelo accentuates the masculine: unnaturally large hands and feet; vascular arms, a protruding and rounded buttock; Here, the tension between Michelangelo’s homosexuality and his faith is subdued - and God is glorified through the beauty of His creation; as “David” goes beyond the antique prototypes as a genuinely Christian work: the deadness of ancient models acquires life - as if the Incarnation (God become Man) has taken the body beyond just a thing of beauty into the world of the divine; yet, David stands alone - a solitary celebration of man and his nearness to God through physical perfection; a stance of such sheer confidence and solidified masculinity that it would not be broached until the American persona of the lone lawman against the brutality of barbarism became realized in 1950s and 60s movie and television Westerns; Michelangelo as originator of the gay macho-man; albeit with the sexual component always in careful check. This preoccupation with manliness would be epitomized in Michelangelo’s borderline grotesque depiction of the rippling male chest and stomach for the much later accomplished Tomb of Lorenzo de Medici. Yet, in his youth, when Michelangelo most believed that the body beautiful was rapturously God-like, did he create in “David” the perfect balance between masculinity and a lithe spirit yearning for heaven.
"Night" from the Medici tombs.
Despite his love of the male body, Michelangelo’s endeavors at female representation results oftentimes in an incongruous man with breasts attached; his women are misshapen and clunky; they are hideous drag-queens; one critic described his image of “Night” as a female bodybuilder with implants; renowned art historian Kenneth Clark called Michelangelo’s female breasts “humiliating appendages.” These strange women are seen throughout the Sistine Chapel: on both the ceiling and his mid-career work “The Last Judgment.” Their uninspiring presence heightens the triumphalism of the men; in particular the Ignudi (the 20 figures of athletic males that were placed in each corner of the five narrative scenes running along the center of the ceiling.) These unbelievably beautiful bodies are demonstrations of the Lord’s perfect creation before the Fall of Man; God’s supreme Love for Man: as also shown in the stunning body of the newly made Adam; yet, also the Ignudi are blissfully self-contained, somewhat unaware, and wholly glamorous – worthy of their own admiration; they exist for beauty’s sake. This again reveals the underlying tension in Michelangelo: the Ignudi as pagan idols of beauty now infused with a soul, somewhat weighted down and made frantic by their new found responsibility of restored humanity. In contrast, at mid-career, Michelangelo would go over the edge, in the near pornographic “Dying Slave;” where the sublime has been taken over by the erotic. The Sistine is balanced; a victory of controlled physicality over lust. 
The Sistine ceiling, besides the painting itself, also reveals the fullness of Michelangelo’s commitment to his art, and, the means by which he dealt with his homosexuality. From the near onset, the commission, though huge, requiring several assistants, was taken on solely by Michelangelo after he became frustrated with the so called experts – as he was not by trade or training a painter, but a sculptor. For four years he labored; almost entirely alone. The stress and strain ruined his health. He said of the process: “Somehow my loins have climbed into my gut, and as a counterweight I use my arse, and where my feet are going eyes don’t know.” Despite the destruction to his own body, he created a vision of manly beauty that would serve as an artistic model for centuries; and, this was more than a desire for artistic perfection, but a need to grasp the celestial through the creation of male physical splendor. For that, to even slightly grasp the divine – Michelangelo was willing to sacrifice so much; And, in his slavish workmanship, he transferred all his personal longings into his Art: through total commitment to labor, fasting, and a general disregard for his own basic comforts – by means of artistic creation, he mortified his senses while glorifying his deepest compulsions: the pure admiration for beauty in the masculine. Interestingly, the History of Art is strewn with similar same-sex afflicted artists who submerged desire with overwork: Caravaggio, American illustrator Joseph Leyendecker, Hollywood designer William Haines, film director James Whale, and even Andy Warhol; to varying degrees, unlike Michelangelo, they were unable to fully transfer their sexual infatuation to their art; a desire for heavenly perfection that got misplaced in the purely sexual; a yearning for the transcendent that sometimes fell back down to earth with a thud; a sensitive artistic temperament and a need to create beauty that became corrupted -giving way to decadence, pornography, and madness. With the exception of Caravaggio, these men were sons of a more godless time; when the heavenly had been supplanted by the greatness of Man; creating an idea of salvation through expression - where lofty and noble aspirations turned to excess. Michelangelo is the ultimate example of the personal will displaced by the moral imperative.
Michelangelo’s obsession with male nudity, contrasted with the gentle handling of femininity by his contemporary Raphael, combined with his perpetual bachelorhood, and the lack of any women in his life, caused some gossip – perhaps so widespread that Vasari felt it necessary to defend him in print: “Michelangelo’s religious sense has always been evident in his way of life; and, as an admirable example of this, he has avoided court society as much as possible…Certainly one may judge that he has never been surpassed for benevolence, prudence and wisdom in the practice of his art. And all those who attributed his departures from convention to mere caprice or oddity should forgive him because in truth one may see that whoever wishes to reach perfection in art is obliged to flee conventions, because, instead of having the mind distracted by such things, genius requires thought, solicitude and time for reflection.” Here, Vasari painted the portrait of the artist-monk; unlike several of his contemporaries, for instance, the more socially well connected and personally fearless, Leonardo da Vinci (he was charged with sodomy in 1476), Michelangelo always remained aloof. In 1521, a relative of the artist must have also heard the rumblings about Michelangelo’s private life and stepped forward to warn him; or, to simply inquire; a certain Lionardo wrote Michelangelo, stating somewhat cryptically: “…to abandon practices harmful to the body and the mind, in order that they may not hurt the soul.” Michelangelo’s response has not survived, but the follow up letter from Lionardo does exist; he wrote: “I am delighted you are free of a malady dangerous to the soul and body.” Since no other rumors, besides that of homosexuality, ever swirled around Michelangelo, the practice of which is written here is very clear; and, to the delight of his correspondent – apparently, Michelangelo was uncontaminated by any such activity.
Cavalieri and Boy George. 
Later in life, Michelangelo fell in love with a young Roman gentleman over 30 years his junior: the cultured and virtuous Tommaso de’ Cavalieri. Michelangelo described Cavalieri as: “[the] light of our century, paragon of all the world.” Although there is only one definitive surviving portrait of him, a superb drawing of Cavalieri that veers into decadence - the beautiful boy as harlot dressed in female clothes; anticipating the modern phenomena of shocking pop-culture gender confusion; Cavalieri encapsulated Michelangelo’s idea of masculine beauty. He was Antinous to Michelangelo’s Hadrian; the homosexual Roman Emperor Hadrian fell in love with the beautiful slave boy Antinous; after his drowning, Hadrian plastered the Empire with the image of his dead obsession. In one of his many poems to Cavalieri, Michelangelo surmised his belief in beauty as the route to God: “Here in your lovely face I see, my lord, what in this life no words could ever tell; with that, although still clothed in flesh, my soul has often already risen up to God.” In this young man, for Michelangelo, art met life: the image of the perfect man on the ceiling of the Sistine came alive. Yet, like his approach to art, Michelangelo mixed desire with religious fervor: beauty as the path to deliverance.
As Michelangelo advanced from middle-age into an artist of advanced years, a radical change took place: in his art and in his thought. His obsession with masculine beauty faded and then disappeared altogether. During this period, he maintained a correspondence with the only woman he ever had a serious relationship: the widowed poetess Vittoria Colonna. As with many gay men, his connection was too emotionally close as would be typical between a heterosexual man and a heterosexual woman; for them, it was a spiritual and artistic bond, rather than a physical one, reflected in the many poems they exchanged. Hence, after her death in 1547, Michelangelo became even more introspective; in 1555 he wrote: 
“Weighed down by years and swollen with my sin,
With evil custom that has taken root,
I see two death approach, and yet my heart
Still loves the poison that it feeds upon.
Nor do I have enough strength of my own
To change my life and love, my ways, my fate…”
The almost pornographic "Dying Slave" and the sublime Rondanini. 
Written roughly 10 years before his death, Michelangelo seems resolved to the lasting oppression of his same-sex attraction: a sin which he has failed to act upon, but which still haunts his every waking moment. Almost in recompense, Michelangelo becomes obsessed with the Crucifixion, in drawings, and in his final pieces of sculpture. Unlike the homoerotic “Slave,” openly taking a sort of masturbatory pleasure in his own exquisiteness, Christ in Michelangelo’s late-phase works seems to defy the body; in one spectacular drawing, the body literally dissolves; there is no longer a need for a reliance upon the beauty of male nudity - for, the body has ceased, and the aspirations of Man become truly spiritual. Michelangelo only once before broached such near perfection: inspired by the incredibly handsome neo-classicism of Cavalieri, Michelangelo focused his attention on Christ’s Resurrection in a series of masterful drawings that he sent as gifts to his young paramour; the artist remakes Jesus as the Christian Apollo - echoing back to the earliest Roman catacomb mosaics of a beardless Christ blazing like the Greek sun-god. Yet, in old age, Michelangelo lost confidence in this mode of artistic and religious expression; like many homosexual men who begin to confront their mortality - the world of the purely physical begins to fall apart as the afterlife looms ahead.
In his final incomplete work, The Rondanini, Michelangelo finally dies to his self, the same-sex attraction that he made a life-long attempt to contain is finally conquered; the beautiful young men of the past are gone forever: all that remains is Christ and the artist - Michelangelo as Joseph of Arimathea, cradling the body of the dead Savior; in a slightly earlier version, the head of Joseph is clearly a self-portrait. The suffering Michelangelo is joined forever to the Passion; all that was material is lost; only love remains. The bodies and forms are reduced to an almost Romanesque sort of symbolism: beauty has been given over to emotion. It’s a fulfillment of what St. John of the Cross expressed in words, Michelangelo created in stone: “Their goal…transcends all of this, even the loftiest object that can be known or experienced. Consequently they must pass beyond everything to unknowing.” 

Friday, March 20, 2015

New Survey Reveals That Gay Men Are Still Wounded and Seeking Recovery Through Sex

A Huffington Post survey of 4,000 gay men revealed that, despite the efforts of the gay political power-pushers to remake the homosexual image as literally dying for monogamy, domesticity, and marriage, gay men are still extremely sexually promiscuous. The most telling findings: 83% of those surveyed have sent an electronic picture of their genitals; 69% of those who use gay apps are looking for a hook-up; and 30% do not need to see a face-pic before hooking-up.
What this survey reveals is that gay men, in particular, are highly concentrated on sex and arranging and being involved in a series of, oftentimes anonymous or certainly fleeting, sexual encounters. Another interesting question from the survey showed that 59% of gay men ask about penis size on dating apps. Again, this represents the completely physical-fixated world that gay men live in; a mentality which perceives sexual exploration as a means to self-expression; with the phallus as the ultimate symbol of attaining masculine perfection. Yet, this hook-up culture, once firmly stationed in the bathhouses and sex-clubs, as was still the case for my generation, tragically gave rise to the horror of AIDS. Although fewer men are dying, the infection rate in the gale male population remains high: “Gay and bisexual men make up about 2% of the overall population, but account for approximately two-thirds of all new HIV infections each year. Data included in CDC’s 2013 National HIV Prevention Progress Report show that there was a 12% increase in new infections among gay and bisexual men overall between 2008 and 2010, and a 22% increase among young gay and bisexual men aged 13-24.”