White House report: End state criminalization of HIV transmission

White House report: End state criminalization of HIV transmission

iowaindependent.com

A white paper issued this month by the Obama administration is calling for an end to state laws — including Iowa’s — that make transmission of HIV a crime.

(visit the link for the full news article)

I am at a loss of how to read this article. If taken on face value, the Obama administration supports HIV positive individuals having sex with unknowing partners, the donation of organs from HIV positive individuals, and a host of other scenarios that drastically increase the contact rate of a deadly virus between people. I'm sure there has to be more to this, but really, what was this task force thinking? I keep reading it over and still just don't get it. Where is criminalizing an invasive deadly act not a crime? Even reading through the comments left on the article it seems that no one out can figure this one else either.


iowaindependent.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 7/20/2010 by thomasblackraven]

I guess he is after the AIDS vote now?

Thank god I'm married, if I wasn't I wouldn't have sex ever again if this thing passed.

I'm thinking that they would like to encourage people to get tested by taking away the criminal aspect of having HIV. You can't get in trouble for spreading something which you don't know you have. The only way you for sure know that you have HIV is to get tested.

Where will the total, complete and utter stupidity end?

Wow, Obama better not get re-elected...

So let me get this straight. Someone with HIV has sex with someone, gives them the virus basically issuing them a death sentence and the GOP doesn't think this is bad enough to be a crime? Yet people get jail for pot, slapped on the wrist for child molestation... Obama, you are an idiot.

[edit on 20-7-2010 by DaMod]

Originally posted by Mr. Tinkertrain
I guess he is after the AIDS vote now?

Thank god I'm married, if I wasn't I wouldn't have sex ever again if this thing passed.

Um, I don't get it. You're married and you still have sex?


Actually, I am curious if this sort of issue apllies to other diseases. If you have hepatitis and you *know* about it, yet you have sex with multiple partners without protection, can that be considerd assult? If the person dies from the disease contracted from you because of your actions, can that be considered manslaughter?

reply to post by rogerstigers

Yes, and several people have been convicted of such crimes here in NY. I remember one particular barbaric one where a guy infected with HIV (he knew he had it) slept with something like a dozen women, several of whom are now infected with HIV as well.

Originally posted by rogerstigers

Originally posted by Mr. Tinkertrain
I guess he is after the AIDS vote now?

Thank god I'm married, if I wasn't I wouldn't have sex ever again if this thing passed.

Um, I don't get it. You're married and you still have sex?

Actually, I am curious if this sort of issue apllies to other diseases. If you have hepatitis and you *know* about it, yet you have sex with multiple partners without protection, can that be considerd assult? If the person dies from the disease contracted from you because of your actions, can that be considered manslaughter?

Actually according to most state laws, yes.

reply to post by rogerstigers


Yes I still have sex.

May 22 of every year.

If a person knowingly passes on a disease that causes you to die then yes they can be charged with manslaughter.

I'm sure if you are charged with manslaughter then assault falls under that.

In reality isn't this what everyone really wants?

Protect yourself. If you catch it its YOUR FAULT. You get a choice.
No one can "sentence you to death " Cause you make a stupid decision .
Just as no one can make you use protection.
As they say . It takes two to tango.

Originally posted by DaMod
Where will the total, complete and utter stupidity end?

Wow, Obama better not get re-elected...

So let me get this straight. Someone with HIV has sex with someone, gives them the virus basically issuing them a death sentence and the GOP doesn't think this is bad enough to be a crime? Yet people get jail for pot, slapped on the wrist for child molestation... Obama, you are an idiot.

[edit on 20-7-2010 by DaMod]

you do realize the GOP or Grand Ole Party is the Republican party don't you? And don't take this wrong but contracting HIV isn't a death sentence. With current meds and a healthy lifestyle you can live a fairly long normal life with HIV never becoming AIDS. With that said, I still think if you knowingly infect someone with HIV you should be charged with attempted murder, no questions asked. I couldn't agree more that doing time for possessing pot and NOT doing any for knowingly infecting someone with HIV is completely ass backwards.

A week or two ago Obama lifted the ban on immigrants with HIV. I think Obama must be a psycopath. Either that or he receives a lot of money from the rich gay men (double income - no kids) to do these things as part of their agenda.

Oh yeah - it's just another fed take over individual state's rights.

[edit on 20-7-2010 by Starbug3MY]

Originally posted by d11_m_na_c05
In reality isn't this what everyone really wants?

Protect yourself. If you catch it its YOUR FAULT. You get a choice.
No one can "sentence you to death " Cause you make a stupid decision .
Just as no one can make you use protection.
As they say . It takes two to tango.

I would have to say that an HIV+ adult who intentionally non-sexually exchanges bodily fluids with a minor should be charged with more than assault or child endangerment (e.g. those playing the "biting" game).

You know, I think its really sad that we already live in a very promiscuous world, but if you are going to fool around, you SHOULD be telling a person if you are infected. I never understood why people go out and sleep around, as I personally believe it is trashy, but I guess this is one bad thing that comes with it. And if that is the case, and you do continue to have sex then you need to be straightforward and not screw up somebody elses life with the disease.

So its official now? The Obama Administration really is trying to make us sick or kill us on purpose?

Perhaps he has it and he is worried about his own extramarital affairs?

Seriously, this one is bizarre. You know what that means don't you? He is trying to divert attention from something else. What is this guy up to now I wonder. What is he doing so bad he needs this diversion?

I wish there were clearer laws on this in South Africa. The person who infected me seems to have known, but I was told it would be impossible to prove.
I must also take part of the responsibility for compromising on the safe sex front - despite his reassurances.
However, that specific law sounds unworkable. Disclosure (unless everyone signs a contract before sex) happens in the bedroom without witnessess, so how can one prove in court that it did or did not happen?
It's one word against another.
I suppose one would need a pattern of victims.
I saw a case on the Crime channel about a woman who was injected by a jealous Doctor with HIV and Hepatitis C. Only luck allowed a prosecution however - the doctor kept files on his patients and the persons from whom the viruses were extracted came forward to assist the police. Otherwise the woman's testimony would have counted for nothing as evidence.
I think it allows people to accuse innocent people for ulterior motives.
Perhaps it could be further tailored to anal and vaginal exchanges, or blood exchanges. Kissing should really be removed.
Unless HIV/Aids is notifiable it is impossible to say who knew when or who infected whom. Perhaps one could correlate specific strains, but even this is open to question, since they can mutate.
Generally it sounds good on paper, but anyone who suddenly tests positive can suddenly be falsely accused by past partners (real or imagined)of giving them the virus.

[edit on 20-7-2010 by halfoldman]

reply to post by Styki


Nope. Don't care. If you're too stupid to notice the effects of aids and stupider still to sleep around without testing occasionally, you're a good as a criminal and just as irresponsible.

reply to post by thomasblackraven


im not american so i will not mince words

your president has shown time and time again that he hates you all and wants you dead

lets spred aids so everyone has it? wtf
stanists require death for their rituals
bohemium grove is for satanists who worship death
is obama going?
how many americans have to suffer or die or be infected before you realize this is his plan

destroy america and lay waste to your population and make you slaves to the satanists dependant on drugs and govenment satanists
for your life

his actions speek volumes to me
his words are a cruel joke to string you along untill the point of no return is achived then you will see him for who he truly is

any man doing these things is evil any colour any race any beleif
this is slow motion genoside of all races mine included

i will say the truth as i see it black white christen jew or athiest

evil comes in all colours and shapes and sizes

XPLodER

reply to post by Gorman91

The symptoms of AIDS can take 10 years to develop.
During this asymptomatic phase people look totally normal.
Shortly after infection people are in the window period (when they are highly infectious because they haven't built up antibodies), yet they will test negative to most antibody-based screening tests.
While testing occassionally is a good idea, it does put the onus on the person that does test. A person who doesn't test can infect people for a decade or more and die of AIDS (which is not always a lengthy procedure). An unworkable law like this does leave the person responsible enough to test vulnarable. The true sicko or person who doesn't care can get away with it.
Any old slut (for example, either male or female) could overlook the person who actually infected them, because they are untested and claim to be HIV negative. In hindsight the next-best HIV positive partner is then blamed according to unsure memory.

Perhaps everyone should be tested by law twice a year (since the window period is at most six months). Then nobody has an excuse for not knowing their status and it will be easier to establish who knew what and when.





[edit on 21-7-2010 by halfoldman]

reply to post by halfoldman


Well as far as I know that already is law. I get blood tests every few years just for the sake of health.

In the end, what they taught me in school is the truth. Abstinence works. No STDs and happy.