Earthbound64
Banned
I'm only okay with it in cases where I believe that there is zero risk of transmitting the disease.
Quoting for posterity.
I'm only okay with it in cases where I believe that there is zero risk of transmitting the disease.
You're right of course, but why does it need to specifically be a felony?People are missing the damn point. It doesn't matter how good treatment is if you don't know you have the diseases because it wasnt disclosed to you.... I feel like I'm taking crazy pills in this thread. Some selfish people live on this planet
People are missing the damn point. It doesn't matter how good treatment is if you don't know you have the diseases because it wasnt disclosed to you.... I feel like I'm taking crazy pills in this thread. Some selfish people live on this planet
Holyshit ITT people are defending the right for a pos person to not disclose their status because the disease is highly treatable. Damn fam.
no, he's saying it's OK not to disclose if your viral load is so low that you cannot transmit it to a partner.Holyshit ITT people are defending the right for a pos person to not disclose their status because the disease is highly treatable. Damn fam.
Plagiarize would be a shitty HIV patient.
"Effectively no risk" is not the same as "no risk" and you know that.
What I said, that transmission is extremely unlikely, but still possible, aligns with the CDC assessment.
If you're going to call me a fucking liar, then I expect better than out of date articles that do not reflect their stance as of September 2017. Heck I expect a fucking apology.What you keep claiming, that transmission is impossible, contradicts with the CDC assessment.
If you are going to use the CDC as a source for your claim, then argue what the CDC states, not what you want the CDC to say.
And that claim is also dependent on 100% adhesion to taking meds on schedule. Deviating from said schedule (aka human error) can allow the viral load to increase.
You're right of course, but why does it need to specifically be a felony?
Why would you not tell your sexual partner that you're HIV positive? I wonder.....no, he's saying it's OK not to disclose if your viral load is so low that you cannot transmit it to a partner.
Because untreated HIV which shows almost no symptoms leads to oh I don't know.. dying when you suddenly become septic from a common infection.
Because untreated HIV which shows almost no symptoms leads to oh I don't know.. dying when you suddenly become septic from a common infection.
Your emotional response to a case shouldn't affect public policy
And it being specifically targeted felony actually encourages some people from not getting tested at all and still continue boinking. You should know this.
No, we're making it seem like he is somehow ok with people not telling other people that they have been diagnosed with HIV.
Because that's what he's doing.
plagiarize
no, he's saying it's OK not to disclose if your viral load is so low that you cannot transmit it to a partner.
I'm only okay with it in cases where I believe that there is zero risk of transmitting the disease. But you know that already.
That doesn't answer my question. How does upgrading it to a felony help people disclose it? It does the opposite. So you should be for this change.Because untreated HIV which shows almost no symptoms leads to oh I don't know.. dying when you suddenly become septic from a common infection.
Isnt HIV low risk of transmission if youre not having unprotected vaginal or anal sex, or sharing a needle? Or am I woefully misinformed?
Because untreated HIV which shows almost no symptoms leads to oh I don't know.. dying when you suddenly become septic from a common infection.
Isn't HIV low risk of transmission if you're not having unprotected vaginal or anal sex, or sharing a needle? Or am I woefully misinformed?
I'm only okay with it in cases where I believe that there is zero risk of transmitting the disease. But you know that already.
GAF is a really weird fucking place that at times seems really disconnected from the outside world. If you have the disease, you should let the other person know. Educate them if need be, but let THEM make that choice. Fuck your feelings. You don't get to make that decision for them no matter how treatable the disease is.
So if they are having 0 sexual contact with people, ever. Right? Because anything else makes them a piece shit.
no. with the new law, following a medical regimen to reduce your viral load is treated the same as wearing a condom - it's not criminal at all.DAMN. That seems crazy to me.
Seemingly, not even the legislators in California believe that, because it's still a misdemeanor, just not a felony anymore.
In most European countries there are no specific laws regarding HIV. Instead knowingly infecting others is treated as willful aggravated assault (which means a mandatory prison sentence if convicted). Makes sense to me.
You should really look into recent studies on the risks of communicating the disease if you are receiving proper treatment and your viral load is undetectable.So if they are having 0 sexual contact with people, ever. Right? Because anything else makes them a piece shit.
I dont think its unreasonable for people to want to draw a line in the sand and stay away from any trace of a lifelong disease. Low risk is negligible, I wouldnt want any risk at all.You aren't no. But I guess HIV is too scary for people to think rationally.
Yup. And the beauty of it? We have other tools now as well.
If you're HIV positive, then just continue taking your meds.
If you're negative and worried? You can also take PEP and PrEP.
You do all three? The risk is pretty close to zero.
No. It doesn't. It literally doesn't align with their current thoughts. They are no longer saying there is a small risk. Their current assessment is that there is effectively no risk, and I know exactly what that means in scientific terms thank you very much.
If you're going to call me a fucking liar, then I expect better than out of date articles that do not reflect their stance as of September 2017. Heck I expect a fucking apology.
ITT (as in every other thread that discusses HIV) people still refuse to acknowledge the fact that you are less likely to be infected by someone HIV+ with a undetectable viral load (virtually impossible to transmit the virus) than someone that does not know their status.
Isnt HIV low risk of transmission if youre not having unprotected vaginal or anal sex, or sharing a needle? Or am I woefully misinformed?
So if they are having 0 sexual contact with people, ever. Right? Because anything else makes them a piece shit.
In sweden we have a law called "The Swedish Law for Communicable Disease Control". HIV is included in that.In most European countries there are no specific laws regarding HIV. Instead knowingly infecting others is treated as willful aggravated assault (which means a mandatory prison sentence if convicted). Makes sense to me.
I'm only okay with it in cases where I believe that there is zero risk of transmitting the disease. But you know that already.
Modern medicine, learn to use it.
I dont think its unreasonable for people to want to draw a line in the sand and stay away from any trace of a lifelong disease. Low risk is negligible, I wouldnt want any risk at all.
If you have HIV, I dont care what medications you are on or how strictly you follow it. If you dont disclose it to potential partners, youre a piece of shit. Same with ANY STD.
I get that the origin of the law was rooted in anti-gay sentiment (lawmakers trying to punish the gay rapist bogeyman that apparently spreads HIV to straight victims), but this solution seems misguided. If you knowingly have an STD, have sex with someone without disclosing your STD and promptly spread it to that person then straight to jail you go. It doesn't matter if some STD's are "treatable" now, if you knowingly spread an STD to someone else without warning them in advance them you're purposely burdening someone else with the physiological, emotional, and financial repercussions of being infected with an STD and that makes you an enormous asshole that deserves to go to jail and have any future wages garnished to pay for all STD medical expenses of your victim at the very least.
Doubling down on your misrepresentation doesn't make you correct.
If you have HIV, I dont care what medications you are on or how strictly you follow it. If you dont disclose it to potential partners, youre a piece of shit. Same with ANY STD.
no. with the new law, following a medical regimen to reduce your viral load is treated the same as wearing a condom - it's not criminal at all.
The previous law protected you if you insisted on condom use. This one extends that to people who are getting treatment.Does the new law state its not a felony only of your viral load is reduced to near zero due to medication? What about people who start the treatment one day and then go out and sleep with someone one day later without telling them or the people who aren't on the treatment at all. Fuck that, I want the library thrown at them.
If I was dating someone and I found out later they had HIV and didn't tell me I'd be furious. Inflict bodily harm furious. You don't get to make that choice for me.
The previous law protected you if you insisted on condom use. This one extends that to people who are getting treatment.
If someone isn't on the treatment, doesn't use a condom and doesn't tell you, they will be guilty of a misdemeanor and you will still have been the victim of a crime.
How many years of jail time is mandated with that misdemeanor? Misdemeanor just sounds like you are getting off with a fine and community service.
How many years of jail time is mandated with that misdemeanor? Misdemeanor just sounds like you are getting off with a fine and community service.
You're literally more likely to get HIV from someone who thinks they're clean than from someone who knows and is on appropriate medication. At this point you're safer picking up a pos person than a rando.
It's the same with all the other communicable diseases. I think this is where the misunderstanding with Plagiarize is coming from: They aren't for 'spreading HIV with no recourse'. They, along with me, simply want the new laws to reflect the new scientific consensus (risk of transmission, management, mortality, quality of life) especially for those that are actually taking the time to take care of themselves and making it so that others will seek treatment without the stigma. The spirit and intention of the new law is more inline with the experience of HIV medical professionals and advocates today.
You're literally more likely to get HIV from someone who thinks they're clean than from someone who knows and is on appropriate medication. At this point you're safer picking up a pos person than a rando.