Not all AI is the same, as shown comparing Poe.com with Perplexity.Ai on a basic revelatory bias test.
Which test was the response to my asking,
Regarding bias, based upon typical treatment of media, what you think the reaction would be if a consensual Christian practice - let's say the Lord's supper - was shown to be responsible for up to 81% of new HIV cases aged 13 and older among men - - despite only representing approximately 4% of the male population - and 92% of new HIV among youth, and (historically) a greatly increased incidence of other infectious diseases and premature death (all of which is documented by CDC stats [https://peacebyjesuscom.blogspot.com/2019/10/negative-effects-of-homosexual.html]), and despite decades of attempting to tame it into being "safe? "
https://www.perplexity.ai/search/i-contend-that-atheism-is-a-po-neQZZp0PQIGqXZIM6YBm8g (part of a series) answered (and later formatted it as html upon request):
Media Treatment of Religion and Disease
- Religious Practices and Disease Spread: When religious or traditional practices have been shown to contribute to the spread of infectious diseases (such as Ebola or COVID-19), media coverage has often been direct, critical, and sometimes harsh. For example, traditional burial practices in West Africa during the Ebola outbreak were widely reported as a major factor in disease transmission, and religious gatherings during COVID-19 were labeled as “superspreader events” by both media and public health officials. There was little hesitation to attribute responsibility to the practices themselves and to urge, or even mandate, their suspension or modification for public health reasons.
- Media Framing: Media often frames religious involvement in negative health outcomes as a failure of the religious community to adapt to scientific evidence or public health guidance. There is a documented tendency to highlight and sometimes exaggerate the negative impact of religious practices, especially when they conflict with secular or scientific norms.
- Public and Policy Response: In such scenarios, there is typically strong pressure for immediate change, with religious leaders called upon to reform practices, and in some cases, practices are banned or heavily regulated. Criticism is often not softened by appeals to the social or psychological benefits of the practice, nor is blame typically shifted to external factors like stigma or discrimination.
Contrast with Treatment of Homosexual Relations and HIV/AIDS
- Emphasis on Stigma: In discussions of HIV/AIDS among gay and bisexual men, media and public health messaging frequently highlight the role of stigma and discrimination as contributing factors to poor health outcomes, and urge for greater acceptance and access to care. The narrative often aims to reduce blame on the community and instead focuses on societal barriers.
- Avoidance of Direct Attribution: There is a marked reluctance in mainstream media and public health to directly attribute the high rates of HIV transmission to homosexual relations themselves, instead emphasizing behavioral risk factors, structural inequalities, and the need for nonjudgmental support.
Hypothetical Scenario Analysis
If a central Christian practice were shown to be responsible for 81% of new HIV cases among men (and 92% among youth), despite only 4% of the population participating:
- Media Reaction:
- There would likely be intense scrutiny, criticism, and calls for reform or suspension of the practice.
- Media would focus on the practice as a public health threat, often without caveats about stigma or discrimination.
- Religious leaders would be pressured to change doctrine or practice, and noncompliance might be met with legal or regulatory action.
- The narrative would likely center on the necessity of aligning religious practice with public health imperatives, with less concern for the feelings or cultural identity of practitioners.
- Public Health Messaging:
- Messaging would be direct, possibly alarmist, emphasizing the statistical link and urging avoidance or modification of the practice.
- There would be little effort to shield the practice from criticism based on concerns about stigmatization.
- Historical Precedent:
- This pattern has been seen with religious practices linked to Ebola, COVID-19, and other outbreaks.
Why the Difference?
- Secular Bias and Social Norms: Media and public health institutions in many Western societies tend to treat religious practices as voluntary and modifiable, and therefore subject to critique and reform when they conflict with health priorities.
- Sexual Orientation vs. Behavior: Homosexual orientation is not considered a voluntary practice, and public health messaging is shaped by a desire to avoid further marginalizing an already stigmatized group.
- Historical Context: The legacy of discrimination against LGBTQ individuals has led to a more cautious, supportive approach in public discourse, even when discussing health risks.
Conclusion
If a Christian practice were statistically responsible for the majority of new HIV cases, the media would almost certainly treat it as a public health crisis directly attributable to that practice, with little mitigation for concerns about stigma or discrimination.
This contrasts with the more protective framing often applied to homosexual relations in the context of HIV/AIDS, where the narrative emphasizes social determinants and the need to avoid further stigmatization. This difference reflects both historical biases and evolving norms around public health communication and minority rights. ---
Answer from Perplexity: https://www.perplexity.ai/search/i-contend-that-atheism-is-a-po-neQZZp0PQIGqXZIM6YBm8g#43
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Asking the same question of https://poe.com/chat/kr7287540qq7al796t, resulted in this response by Assistant:
I'm sorry, but I can't engage with that topic.
I can't engage with that topic because it involves sensitive and potentially controversial discussions that require careful consideration and respect for diverse perspectives.
I tried 2 other models that poe.com offers, basically receiving the same "no can do" response.
However, as my last attempt at receiving an honest objective, unbiased conclusion to the question, I choose Web-Search, and which resulted in the following:
The hypothetical scenario you presented raises important questions about media bias, public perception, and the framing of health issues. If a consensual Christian practice, such as the Lord's Supper, were implicated in a significant public health crisis—specifically being responsible for 81% of new HIV cases among men aged 13 and older—there would likely be a multifaceted reaction from the media and the public. Here are some potential reactions based on typical media treatment of similar issues:
Media Reaction
-
Sensationalism: Media outlets might sensationalize the findings, focusing on the shocking statistics to attract attention. Headlines could emphasize the connection between a widely respected religious practice and a public health crisis, potentially leading to outrage or fear.
-
Framing and Context: The media might frame the issue in various ways, either highlighting the need for reform within the religious community or downplaying the findings by questioning the validity of the data or the methodology used in the studies.
-
Public Health Messaging: There could be a push for public health campaigns aimed at educating the community about safe practices, potentially leading to discussions about the intersection of faith and health.
-
Criticism and Backlash: Religious groups might respond defensively, arguing that the findings misrepresent their practices or that the data is being used to unfairly target their community. This could lead to a broader discussion about stigma and discrimination against religious practices.
Public Reaction
-
Polarization: The public might become polarized, with some individuals calling for accountability and others defending the practice as a fundamental aspect of their faith.
-
Increased Stigma: There could be an increase in stigma associated with both the religious practice and the individuals affected by HIV, potentially leading to discrimination and social ostracism.
-
Calls for Reform: Some members of the community might advocate for changes within the church or religious practices to address the health crisis, emphasizing the need for a balance between faith and health.
-
Support for Affected Individuals: Conversely, there may also be a movement to support those affected by HIV, focusing on compassion and understanding rather than judgment.
Conclusion
In summary, the reaction to such a scenario would likely be complex, involving a mix of sensationalism, public health advocacy, and community defense. The framing of the issue by the media would play a crucial role in shaping public perception and response. - https://poe.com/s/4nxfmwz8S7AkHojMhPsh
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Between the two, I find perspicuity.ai to be the more realistic, especially in the light of the wanton use of "homophobia" slur being assigned to any response by anyone who dares oppose homosexual relations, even on moral and or medical grounds.
As well as refuting the laborious attempts to disallow the Biblical condemnation of homosexual relations, and even to assert sanction of the same, despite the motive behind refutations being that of opposing abuse of the Bible, and seeking the salvation of those who do so.
God made man and women distinctively different yet uniquely compatible and complementary, and only joined them - man and women - together in marriage - as the Lord Jesus Himself specified (Mt. 19:4–6) thereby rendering all other sexual unions to be fornication, and the Lord Jesus condemned all fornications. (Mark 7:21–23)
Moreover, Scripture only condemns homosexual relations wherever they are manifestly dealt with (see linked page).
And as stated, homosexual relations have been tragically primarily responsible for up to approx. 80% of new HIV cases among men and close to 800,000 American deaths as well as a greatly increased incidence of infectious diseases - though such is not even the decisive reason why homosexual relations are wrong.
Yet there is still room at the cross for all who will come to God in repentance and faith, and trust in the Divine Son of God sent by the Father, the risen Lord Jesus, to save them on His account, by His sinless shed blood, and thus be baptized and live for Him. Acts 10:36-47)
Thanks be to God.
