Take Charge: Black Women HIV & AIDS Awareness

Saturday March 10th was National Women & Girls HIV/AIDS Awareness Day. The alarming facts are that within the United States, women constitute 25% of all new HIV infections annually. If that weren't alarming enough, out of that 25%, Although Black women only constitute 14% of the United States population, they are approximately 60% of all new HIV infections among women. When compared to less technologically advanced sub-Saharan countries within Africa, such as in the Congo (0.28%) and Kenya (0.53%), the American numbers become especially alarming. 

According to The Huffington Post Black Voices, the HIV Prevention Trials Network (HPTN), announced results from its HPTN 064 Women's HIV Seroincidence Study (ISIS)  stating the following findings among 2,099 women ages 18 to 44, 88 percent of whom were black:

• 1.5 percent (32 women) tested positive at the outset of the study, even though they all thought they were negative. 
• Among those who initially tested negative for HIV, the rate of new infections was 0.24 percent within a year after joining the study.

Additional statistics are as follows:

• More than 290,000 women in the United States are living with HIV/AIDS. Studies show that women tend to face greater gaps when it comes to accessing care. 
• One in 32 Black women will contract HIV/AIDS in their lifetime. 
• Black women constitute 13 percent of the total AIDS epidemic.
• Heterosexual Black women have the second highest rate of new infections behind only gay and bisexual men. 
• Black women contract the disease at 15 times the rate of white women

Quite naturally, this leads to questions of rates of incidence among black women in particular. 

Read more!

HIV/AIDS & Health Care Reform, What Do We Really Know?

This Post Discusses Adult Situations And Describes Sexual Activities That Some May Find Offensive. Material Contained Herein Is For Educational Purposes

In the days of health care reform one thing is abundantly clear. No matter what the public says Washington will reform the system in some manner or fashion. Supposedly this reform is for the approximately 38 to 45 million uninsured individuals in the United States legally. This reform will, in some form or fashion, make employers responsible for the health care of their employees imposing penalties for failure to acquire health plans. This in and of itself could put some companies out of business depending upon the requirements. While it is not yet all hashed out there is also additional pressure for what has been called the "Public Option". This option is said to be a way for individuals to secure coverage at supposedly lower and more competitive prices group rate prices as opposed to individual plan prices. I have placed the most up to date information on the current congressional wrangling at Dunamis Insurance & Business Services web site, and will update that regularly to clarify exactly what's going on regarding this issue.

However, as noted in "Hate Crimes Legislation, Presidential Approval Of The Gay Agenda" in light of our President's agenda to normalize homosexuality, even calling homosexual relationships:

"just as real and admirable as relationships between a man and a woman."

We should ask and look critically at the real motivation behind such an expansive move, and we should better define what is really occurring and why there is such a push to insure the "uninsured". Most of those infected with HIV/AIDS in care rely on public sector insurance programs or are uninsured, estimated to range between approximately 70% and 83%  [Fleishman, J., Personal communication, Analysis of HCSUS Data, January 2002 also see: Nakashima AK. “Who Will Pay for HIV Treatment? Health Insurance Status of HIV-Infected Persons.” In: Proceedings of the 1997 Meeting of the Infectious Diseases Society of America; September 13-16, 1997; San Francisco, CA. Abstract 293.]

3 Facts To Keep In Mind Before We Embark Upon This Subject:

1- America's citizens should have access to excellent health care and there is enough money within the system to provide such for all of it's citizens. That doesn't necessarily mean that health care should be controlled or distributed by the government. Those things are a separate issue from this writing.

2- No individual should be denied adequate health care because of any factor including sexual orientation. To suggest so is a ridiculous notion. This article makes no such suggestion.

3- There is NO ENDORSEMENT of any immoral sexual activity within this article. God's way of marriage and one man and one woman still is the best prescription for sexual activity, health, growth of the family and health of the community and society in general.

Read more!

Praying For The Healing Of AIDS?

On Sunday Aug. 17th 2008, the CBS Evening News featured a story on an organization called RAIN (Regional AIDS Interfaith Network). The impetus of the story was to uncover the alarming rates of HIV and AIDS infections among African American individuals especially in the Southern United States. The report was that although African Americans, by demographic, only make up 19% of the population of the South, we somehow manage to represent 56% of all new diagnosed HIV infections.

An August 8th article at Charlotte Observer.com stated the following:

• "The South is now the epicenter of the HIV/AIDS epidemic in this country. We have the highest number of adults and adolescents living with and dying from AIDS. (Southern States Manifesto: Update 2008). The South does not get the attention or funding to adequately address prevention, treatment care and housing."

Along with setting forth information of the current conditions, the story also set out to uncover the religious community's relationship to this resurgence. The report claimed negligence and absenteeism by the black church in dealing with people both infected and affected by HIV/AIDS virus. Repeatedly representatives form RAIN claimed that the Black church has been disengaged in ministering to the needs of individuals with HIV and AIDS within the Black community and community in general.

This Deserves A Much Closer Look

On June 27th 2008 the Washington Post.Com reported what the CDC (Centers For Disease Control) called the current resurgence of HIV/AIDS in the United States a "2nd wave epidemic". The CDC reports a a 12% rise per year in reported HIV infections among young black gay males ages 13-24. The reported stated the following:

• " The study found that homosexual men were the only risk group in which the number of new infections rose annually from 2001 through 2006. (Epidemiologists prefer the term "men who have sex with men," or MSM, because many of them do not identify themselves as homosexual or gay.)"

The week of Aug. 11th 2008, NBC News reported an Associated Press discovery that treatment for men with HIV/AIDS is inadequate. Reporting on the same story Newser.com stated:

• "In 86 nations, homosexual sex is considered a crime, and in seven countries it is punishable by death, according to the Foundation for AIDS Research, known as Amfar. During the conference's inauguration, U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon urged nations "to follow Mexico's bold example and pass laws against homophobia." "In 2003, Mexico banned discrimination based on sexual orientation, and it has opened what it calls homophobic-free health clinics. The government has a national campaign that includes radio spots with mothers accepting their gay sons. Saavedra's program has earmarked 10 percent of its $12 million budget toward prevention among gay and bisexual men."

The RAIN website said the following:

• "RAIN hosts the nation’s largest minority CareTeam program. The Minority program targets the African American community through African American congregations. RAIN is a national partner with the Balm in Gilead and sponsors the Black Church Week of Pray for the Healing of AIDS. The minority program staff hosts Pastors Summits providing culturally appropriate theology training for ministers and lay leaders."

"culturally appropriate theology training for ministers and lay leaders"

What does this little statement mean?

This means that RAIN is teaching churches and church leaders to respect the diversity of sexual lifestyles within the African American community. In the CBS report one minister proclaimed that the church shouldn't be known for its "homophobia" and that stigma against the church created by the church must cease. In essence the suggestion was that the church engage the gay community with "love" and "tolerance" instead of with "love" and "truth".

Here we have two things inextricably woven together to create the greatest emotional response, and stir up unrest against the bible and the church. The seeming objective of RAIN and other organizations is to use the resurgence of the epidemic of HIV/AIDS and inadequate medical care associated with it, as being directly associated with issues of religious tolerance.

In other words the suffering of individuals with HIV/AIDS is being exploited and used as a camouflage in an attempt to reinculturate the church in the acceptance of ungodly and unbiblical value systems, thereby committing the church and church leaders in accepting, allowing and having regard for the homo-agenda and the homosexual lifestyle.

One Thing That RAIN Does Not Teach Or Promote Is Repentance From The SIN Of Homosexuality

I acknowledge that NOT every HIV/AIDS infection is solely the result of homosexual activity or sin. In fact current statistics affirm that the largest segment of new HIV infections in the United States are among heterosexual black women. Many of these women contracted the disease from their male lovers, "friends with benefits", and in some cases husbands.

I acknowledge that anyone who has contracted this disease should have access to the most proficient medical care available to anyone with a life threatening illness.

I acknowledge that anyone should not face any sort of discrimination or lack of care because of the disease.

I acknowledge that the medical profession and social service agencies should treat the HIV/AIDS virus like any other illness that is currently allowable in their system.

I acknowledge that the human aspects and devastation of this dreaded disease cannot and should not be overlooked.

Simultaneously, I also acknowledge that it is inappropriate to ask the church to change it's message against the sin of homosexuality and non marital sexual relations simply because individuals are infected with this deadly disease.

Some call this sentiment cold, unfeeling, callous and insensitive. I would respond to that accusation by presenting the following three points:

1- The New Testament message against sexual immorality is clear. All sexual sin is grievous (Gal. 5:19). Although most individuals clearly acknowledge the Old Testament mandate against homosexual activity, it should also be acknowledged that the New Testament has set forth a convincing and solid case against homosexuality and homosexual behavior as well as other sexually immoral behaviors. I have set forth and affirmed the New Testament Case against homosexuality HERE. The church should remain stable in the acknowledgement of the Word Of God and remain steadfast against the special pleading of RAIN, Balm In Gilead, and/or any other organization that addresses this issue suggesting that the church must change.

2- The church is not a social service agency. The world's vision of the church is no greater than the "sifted" and powerless social gathering. The world views the church as a glorified and unfunded social service respot and in many cases a mere marketing opportunity. To the contrary, the church that Jesus established has a mission is to draw men and women to salvation through preaching and teaching the gospel of Jesus Christ. (Mt. 28:19) Part of that mission is to preach against sin. (Isa. 58:1) with love and humility. Without equivocation, homosexuality is a sin and must be preached against. I submit that the epitome of being unfeeling is to minister to a person's physical or emotional condition with no or little regard for their spiritual welfare and behavioral and spiritual condition.

3- The church should be careful as not to interfere with the judgement of God upon certain sins and behaviors. If we are not careful, vicariously, the church could become guilty of endorsing unrepentant sin. I acknowledge that this is the most emotionally charged part of this discussion, and a point that fuels rage among many.

Many individuals assert that the HIV/AIDS virus is a judgement against homosexuality but they do not explain how. In the following I will attempt to provide the biblical precedent as to why the church must continue to be on the Lord's side of this issue no matter what type of pressure is exerted from organizations such as RAIN and Balm In Gilead.

Part I: The Establishment Of The Justice Of God.

As any other attribute of God, HIS ability to judge and judge righteously cannot be overlooked, diminished or set aside for our convenience. The church must continue to be made aware of the judgement of God because judgement will first begin at the church.

1 Peter 4:17~ "For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?"

Scripturally, when God moves in judgement, those that oppose HIM are often cast aside and in many cases included in that judgement.

In Judges 19, we have a story of a Levite who had an unfaithful wife. She left him for a season and ended up at her father's house. To cut to the heart of the issue, after the Levite recovers his wife they end up spending the night in Gibeah which was part of the Tribe Of Benjamin. An "Old Man" of Mount Ephraim that lived in Gibeah ended up taking them into his house to lodge for the night. As it got darker and later the true problem of the city became magnified:

Judges 19:22 ~"Now as they were making their hearts merry, behold, the men of the city, certain sons of Belial, beset the house round about, and beat at the door, and spake to the master of the house, the old man, saying, Bring forth the man that came into thine house, that we may know him."

The term "sons of Belial" was used to indicate men who had an evil nature and evil intentions. These men ruled the night of the city and were certainly observant of the changes that took place in the are with a purpose of exploiting weakness. They were also homosexual and bisexual men and at the very least men who believe that having sex with other men and strangers were permissible acts.

Now it should be remembered that these "sons of Belial" were descendents the Gibeonites who, approximately 200 years earlier, (Joshua 6-8) deceived Joshua and the Elders of Israel into an agreement of protection from the Amorites by pretending to be sojourners and strangers instead of residents of the land.

The Levite eventually gave his wife to these evil men and they sexually abused he and killed her(Judges 19:27)

That incident prompted the following actions:

Judges 19:29 ~ "29-And when he was come into his house, he took a knife, and laid hold on his concubine, and divided her, together with her bones, into twelve pieces, and sent her into all the coasts of Israel. 30-And it was so, that all that saw it said, There was no such deed done nor seen from the day that the children of Israel came up out of the land of Egypt unto this day: consider of it, take advice, and speak your minds."

After this incident, the Levite cut his wife's body into 12 pieces and sent them to the elders of Israel. This represented a message of distress and untold despair. Once the elder's received this they met the Levite in Mizpeh (Judges 20:1). In this council it was decided that all of Israel would go up and make war against Gibeah.

The Benjamites were bound to protect the Gibeonites and the inhabitants of Israel resided in the city also. The message and response was clear:

Judges 20: 19~ "Now therefore deliver us the men, the children of Belial, which are in Gibeah, that we may put them to death, and put away evil from Israel. But the children of Benjamin would not hearken to the voice of their brethren the children of Israel:"

The Benjamites refused to hear the council of God because they were busy "protecting" the people from God's judgement. This led to the loss of 26,000 Benjamite soldiers in the battle (Judges 20:35) and an utter destruction of the city.

Four Things Are Interesting To Note Here:

1. The deceit of the Gibeonites graduated to other sins for which the Bejamites became responsible.
2. The sins of the Gibeonites grew to affect the entire region.
3. The people of God in trying to assist and protect the Gibeonites and "sons of Belial" positioned themselves as enemies of God and HIS righteousness and were judged accordingly.
4. At NO POINT did the people of God pray for the "healing" of the sin. Sin cannot be healed, it can only be repented of.

AIDS can be healed, SIN can only be repented of and there is a distinguishable difference between the two. The healing of the Homosexual comes when they repent of their SINS which includes their homosexual activity.

In Part 2 I will set forth a deeper biblical precedent and reaffirm the call of God to HIS church.

Blessed!

Read more!