exactly.
the incentives and theoretical situations do not all go one way.
a felony is a serious deterrent and punishment.

regardless of whether you think it will help spread aids or not, knowingly spreading hiv/aids to an unsuspecting victim is a disgusting crime.
Thats a serious offense that deserves more than a slap on the wrist. Its closer to attempted murder than sex ed. There is a clear victim.

Claiming the victim should take "personal responsibility" for some fuck that secretly has HIV and potentially gives it to him is way off base, and is not a replacement for criminal consequences. The one taking responsibility should be the person with HIV.

'Dont want to get shot? Get a gun or hire a bodyguard. Personal responsibility!' guess we dont need any punishment for attempted murder now. There is a big stigma around being a murderer. that needs to change!


There SHOULD be a stigma surrounding a life threatening/serious disease and knowingly transmitting it to people without their knowledge.
Claiming its "categorically false" that not telling your partner you have HIV and having sex with them will spread HIV is total nonsense.
People who are made aware someone has HIV will largely avoid having sex with them like the plague when they might otherwise.

This post was edited by cambovenzi on Jul 30 2017 12:03am

Getting shot is a bad analogy because there's no assumption of risk or act of consent with "being shot". If you're going to have sex then you should do so responsibly and utilize available resources for your safety and protection.

It is categorically false because these laws don't have the profound effect they're hoping for in terms of HIV prevention. Better sex education would be a great start, because people go through their school years with an opinion such as yours that it's equivalent to a "deadly disease" and that you shouldn't have sex with people who are HIV positive.

This post was edited by Handcuffs on Jul 30 2017 12:07am

And we all know people that participate in bareback orgies can totally pay 2k a month

Sex ed and punishment for knowingly exposing people to HIV without their knowledge are not mutually exclusive.
The notion that it might be wise to avoid having sex with people who have aids is not some ignorant opinion that should be stomped out by sex ed, despite your snobbish and perverted insinuation.

His statement was this:
"Not telling your partner that you have HIV, will help spread HIV."

That is NOT categorically false. Its common sense.

Hopefully the people participating in bareback orgies are aware of PrEP/Truvada. Unfortunately, people would rather focus on laws like these as a primary form of prevention.

Let the faggots die out

Alright those are some big words so ill take your word on it

Ill take a stab at the bad analogy part tho

Lets stop regulating the tobacco companies, cancers treatable with simple monthly medication

I'm being snobbish because I actually work at an HIV clinic and have tested literally hundreds of people for HIV in the past year, where in those sessions we do education and counseling. So you'll have excuse the blatant air of "I know what I'm talking about" because unlike pretty much everyone else in PaRD and in this thread, I actually have knowledge and experience regarding HIV.

It's not common sense at all, and your insinuation that it is is a reflection of your ignorance regarding HIV. Let's focus on the first half of that claim, that of "Not telling your partner that you have HIV...". The statement itself argues that HIV is always transmissible, which it is not. If people who are living with HIV are on effective treatment, they'll become virally suppressed and incapable of transmitting the virus to another person. So whether they end up telling their partner(s) that they have HIV or not, the risk of transmission is 0, and it does not "help spread HIV".

So whos life are you gonna ruin first after this law passes?

You shouldn't have sex with people who are H.I.V. positive. You also shouldn't try to take a selfie with a wild bear. Not everybody who takes a selfie with a wild bear dies, but that doesn't make it a good or safe idea.

IIRC condoms are like 97% effective when used correctly and are roughly 86% effective when accounting for how people actually use them (the numbers may have shifted or I could be recalling incorrectly; it's been a decade since I took a sex ed class). How many people here would eat a piece of cake if they were told it had a 3% chance of irreparably damaging them for life?