Quote (InsaneBobb @ Apr 2 2020 01:31am)

Far more realistic than you'd think, in this context. Consider this: Due to "privacy concerns" a person is not required to tell you if they have HIV before sleeping with you. In fact, any STD, or any health issue at all, is their personal business. Yet if you contract HIV from a person and don't even know, it could get to full blown AIDS and you never knew you had it. FURTHER, you could have spread it to others without knowing. So in order to insure the privacy and "normalcy" of those who have the virus, we've completely fucked the safety and well being of those they may infect. Now, AIDS is 100% lethal. Nobody who has had AIDS survived or recovered. HIV costs $10K-$30K/year to treat, and has to be treated for the rest of your life. So, to make people feel normal and comfortable, and "protect their privacy" we will allow them to transmit a disease that always ends in thousands in treatment and/or death. But now, we're going to violate EVERYONE'S privacy for a cold? I don't think so.

Minor side-note: A woman can't give consent if drunk these days, because she's not in her right mind. She may not understand what or who she's consenting to. It's considered rape. Yet a person can knowingly spread HIV without properly informing them first, REMOVING their ability to give informed consent, and that's somehow okay. Asked my wife earlier, when referring to this conversation: Would you rather a man raped you (as long as it's not too brutal), or that a man gave you HIV by not bothering to inform you he was infected prior to your agreeing to sex? Her choice was rape.

Now, that being the case, tell me again why my phone should be turned into a tool that is used against me?

Quote (InsaneBobb @ Apr 2 2020 12:31am)

Now, AIDS is 100% lethal. Nobody who has had AIDS survived or recovered. HIV costs $10K-$30K/year to treat, and has to be treated for the rest of your life. So, to make people feel normal and comfortable, and "protect their privacy" we will allow them to transmit a disease that always ends in thousands in treatment and/or death. But now, we're going to violate EVERYONE'S privacy for a cold? I don't think so.

Quote (Ghot @ Apr 1 2020 10:35pm)

Along with illegal aliens I'm definitely not in favor of the new Cali HIV rules. That's a disaster waiting to happen.

Quote (Thor123422 @ Apr 1 2020 10:25pm)

The "freedom" that Franklin was referring to was the freedom of the state to tax.

Quote (Thor123422 @ Apr 1 2020 10:37pm)

Your data is many many many years out of date.

Additionally, your statement about not being able to consent while drunk is incorrect, as long as they aren't passed out and they are coherent enough to know who the person is it's not rape.

Quote (InsaneBobb @ Apr 2 2020 12:41am)

True, and I'm aware. But it had nothing to do with the freedom of the state to violate your right to privacy. If the State wants to tax the purchase of your phone, for instance, it has that right. Most refer to it as a "sales tax". On the flipside, your phone is your personal property, and belongs to you and you alone. For the state to use it to track your movements and monitor who you interact with, and when and where, is tantamount to a warrantless wiretap. And again, that's NOT legal, there are specific laws forbidding such invasions of privacy.

The other question would be: How would allowing the state to use your personal property halt the spread, or even slow down the spread, of covid19? What, are they going to go busting in the doors of everyone who was anywhere near somebody who has it? What then? Is it a crime to get a cold? What exactly are they trying to protect with this move?



Which data is out of date? Are you saying they've cured a case of AIDS? If so, prove it, because that'd be some groundbreaking shit right there. There are two cases of HIV that have been "cured" that I'm aware of. But those required stem cell shit and were just byproducts of cancer treatments. And regarding the consent while drunk, that, as with so many other things, depends on what State you're in. It also depends on how good your lawyer is. She wakes up next to you and claims she never gave consent, or doesn't remember giving consent, you're screwed.

Quote (Thor123422 @ Apr 1 2020 10:49pm)

The modern drug cocktails for AIDS have lowered the HIV viral count for patients to undetectable levels. We've made great leaps and bounds, and for a lot of people AIDS isn't fatal or even an infection risk for their partners. We've made truly amazing progress.

Ultimately what is "rape" legally depends on what jurisdiction you are in, however generally having sex while drunk isn't rape, and claims of rape can happen regardless of alcohol consumption.

Quote (InsaneBobb @ Apr 1 2020 10:59pm)

AIDS is always fatal. What are you talking about? Do you know the difference between AIDS and HIV? Once you have AIDS, you no longer have an immune system. You WILL die. The only question is "what gets you?" There is a treatment that MAY extend your life 10 years or so after the onset of AIDS, but it's not a very high probability of even giving you 2 years. But yeah, you never get your immune system back. Every bacteria, virus, or fungal infection is life threatening, and one of them WILL get you.

Your point regarding false rape accusations have no bearing. In Minnesota, for instance, nobody under the influence of mind altering substances can consent. That's law. So you have sex with a drunk chick, it's rape, by law.

And it's still a felony in many places to knowingly have sex with a person without informing them of any "bad" STD/STI you have, such as HIV or Syphilis, which if untreated, tend to be lethal or cause permanent damage. The great state of California is where it's not.

But you're arguing side points. Warrantless wiretaps, by law, are outside the bounds of the government's rights. Why would you assume that using everyone's phones to do exactly that, their personal, privately owned property, would be an exception? And once again, how would that slow or stop the spread of covid19?

Quote (Handcuffs @ Apr 1 2020 11:45pm)

This is inaccurate information. The two main ways that AIDS is diagnosed is by either having 200 or less CD4 T-cells/mm³ or the presence of an opportunistic infection.

Both of these can be recovered from through ART, with folks achieving virtually equivalent life expectancy as those who are HIV negative.

Quote (InsaneBobb @ Apr 2 2020 12:20am)

You should probably go find some numbers on people who survive full onset AIDS to live to a normal life expectancy. You won't like what you find. You should also look up the costs of even treating HIV, which are lifelong costs.

And why is it that you want to argue minutiae? I'll ask the question again, this time to you: "But you're arguing side points. Warrantless wiretaps, by law, are outside the bounds of the government's rights. Why would you assume that using everyone's phones to do exactly that, their personal, privately owned property, would be an exception? And once again, how would that slow or stop the spread of covid19?"

Quote (Handcuffs @ Apr 2 2020 12:36am)

Oh, I have no interest in addressing moved goalposts. I'm just out here trying to correct misinformation regarding HIV when I can.

Carry on.

Quote (InsaneBobb @ Apr 2 2020 12:41am)

Haven't corrected much. And there's no moved goalpost.

Quote (InsaneBobb @ Apr 1 2020 10:59pm)

AIDS is always fatal.