Posted on 06/02/2014 5:54:30 AM PDT by reaganaut1
...
In many jurisdictions, people who know they are H.I.V.-positive are legally required to disclose this status to potential sexual partners, even when they intend to engage in relatively safe and protected sex. Why do our disclosure policies single out this group, and not, for example, people with other incurable, or possibly fatal, infectious diseases? Why do most policies demand transparency between sexual partners in regard to their H.I.V.-status, but not in regard to past behaviors that may have caused a yet undetected H.I.V. infection, such as intravenous drug use or unprotected sex with partners who do not regularly get tested for sexually transmitted diseases? Switzerland may be the only country whose H.I.V.-disclosure laws mandate the latter kind of information.
While reports of prosecutions and imprisonment of H.I.V. infected persons rarely make headlines, the numbers are significant. This map from the organization Aids-Free World gives a global picture of the prevalence of prosecutions. As of April 2012, the United States prosecuted more H.I.V. cases than any other country: 345. Canada, where authorities have brought charges for a mother-to-child transmission and carried out a murder conviction, ranked second, with 96. Canada is notable for its particularly harsh countrywide criminalization policies, which were detailed in this article in Slate last month. That report puts the number of people charged in Canada to date at 146.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com ...
Does this question make any sense to anyone else? It doesn't to me.
The laws should also cover other similarly transmitted diseases.
It’s all about the homos.
Yep. According to the CDC, the vast majority of new AIDS and HIV cases come from men having sex with men.
?????
It gets better:
“Should we be able to bring charges against former sexual partners who failed to disclose their marital status, sex offender status, fertility status, or assigned gender?”
Only a professor of women’s and gender studies could compare those to a fatal disease.
We should be more compassionate and support the spread of AIDS. It’s only those hateful conservatives who want to discourage gay men from spreading HIV to other gay men.
How about 1) If you know you are HIV positive, engaging in sexual intercourse in your chosen fashion will put your partner at risk, and your potential partner should be made aware of that risk, to make an informed decision, 2) intravenous drug use is an illegal activity, as opposed to voluntary sexual intercourse. If you engage in that activity, by definition, you are engaging in risky behavior, and 3) "unprotected sex who do not regularly get tested for STD's" -- Maybe getting to know your partner and engaging in sexual activity within the confines of a monogamous relationship IS a bit old fashioned, but it would certainly limit this risk, and just might, make such a relationship more meaningful in the process.
Since the beginning of AIDS until now how many have died compared to those killed by a private gun owner.
How much has been spent on medical research and medical care for this preventable disease? And yet sodomy is being encouraged.
Reckless endangerment law always applies.
The HIV specific laws were passed because it was a specific problem that kept coming up. Just as you might see a specific law against damaging a parking meter, but not a specific law about every other piece of city property.
...ah, but they’re demanding their tainted blood be included in the nation’s blood supply, so more normal people will be infected.
She has dedicated her life to creating and propagating failure. A liberal in the fullest sense of the word.
Actually, this is a right to know, labelling issue. People with incurable infectious diseases should be tatooed on the forehead to provide fair warning to the uninfected.
This would also have the side benefit of properly qualifying the public spokesmen on both sides in the ongoing debate over sexual ethics.
Could any argument be more insane? Liberals have no bounds.
The law should at least cover all potentially-fatal STDs.
This is the same mentality that fought closing the bath houses.
It’s all about “more sex at any cost”.
My gawd, the NYT bottom dwellers have plumbed new depths.
They are truly not worth even spitting at.
Thanks to capitalism, however, they will soon go the way of the Yugo.
Those released from prison do not have to disclose this to partner nor does the gov’t. Which is why it is spreading so fast in yhe minority community to women.
“Should we be able to bring charges against former sexual partners who failed to disclose their marital status, sex offender status, fertility status, or assigned gender”
NONE of those kill you.
Yikes. Are these people for real?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.