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 ...
Well, if your sexual partner is married, his or her spouse might kill you.
Because they can give blood.
I don't think she should be speaking on the topic. There's no danger of her getting a sexually transmitted disease.
LOL, and homos should have the notice tattooed on their butt cheeks or on the lower back (with an ad for condoms).
If my Dad were alive to see this photo he'd ask "how much does she charge to haunt a house?"
Here is a feminist article, where the woman made monogamy a condition of her and her boyfriend having sex. He cheated, and continued having sex with her, and infected her with an STD. She argues that his violation of the conditions of her consent makes it rape.
It would be interesting to see the feminists and gay supporters fight it out, if the requirement was to produce a sex-neutral standard that would apply to both men and women.
There is also the offense of rape by deception, where it is considered rape because consent would not have been given in the absence of the named deception.
First of all, gender refers to parts of speech. Nouns and pronouns have gender. People have a sex: male or female.
Except for those born with certain genetic disorders, maleness or femaleness exists at the level of genes and chromosomes. It is not something that can be "assigned."
Verbal manipulation always precedes social manipulation.
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.
