it's a joke
Jokes should be funny, and this happens in real life too much for it to be funny.
it's a joke
Like you and Dave!
After yesterday you shouldn't ever call someone else thick-skulled ever again!
In most States, individuals with no intent to transmit HIV may be punished as harshly as a person who actually intends to transmit the virus. Similarly, low- and no-risk activities may be punished as harshly as riskier exposure activities. In most States, any sexual exposure—regardless of whether protection is used—is subject to the same
punishment as actual transmission.
(11) According to the CDC, correct and consistent condom use reduces the risk of HIV transmission. Nonetheless, most State HIV-specific laws and prosecutions do not treat the use of a condom during sexual intercourse as a mitigating factor or evidence that the defendant did not intend to transmit HIV.
(12) In addition, criminal laws and prosecutions do not take into account the reduced risk of infection by an individual who is taking antiretroviral medication, which can significantly reduce viral load to undetectable levels, posing a very low risk of transmitting the virus.
(13) Although HIV/AIDS currently is viewed as a chronic, treatable medical condition, people living with HIV have been charged under aggravated assault, attempted murder, and even bioterrorism statutes because prosecutors, courts, and legislators continue to view and characterize the blood, semen, and saliva of people living with HIV as a ‘‘deadly weapon’’.
First, the proposed bill states that “The criminalization of exposure to and/or transmission of HIV without the requirement of malicious intent violates the civil and human rights of individuals who are HIV-positive,” and it’s correct. According to Housing Works, the largest community-based AIDS organization in the U.S., HIV-crimes do more harm than good even though their supporters claim these policies protect the public health.
The proposed bill goes onto say that “The criminalization of exposure to and/or transmission of HIV without the requirement of malicious intent violates the civil and human rights of individuals who are HIV-positive.”
But worst of all, HIV-criminalization laws not only perpetuate anti-HIV animus by suggesting the idea that HIV-positive people are disease-spreading pariahs worthy of extra societal punishment, but they also provide a good reason NOT to get tested. After all, if neither you nor anyone else knows your HIV-status, how can anyone accuse you of knowingly trying to spread it?
Repealing these laws would help us re-direct local resources to where the real HIV-battle is: reducing transmission in the first place as well as educating and treating those who are already infected.
What does that even mean?
We both love beer and men?
What does that even mean?
We both love beer and men?
What does that even mean?
We both love beer and men?
You both look like teen boys?
Yea, but those guys are idiots. Don't be one of them.
The not getting tested argument shows how selfish people are, not caring if they spread a deadly disease as long as they get laid.
You both think giving aids to some unsuspecting person should be legal and perfectly ok.
I dont think either one of us said that.
No, but Db is saying 'If you get it, it's not the guys fault who had it for not telling you he did'.
which is effed up thinking in any parallel universe.
I like cats.
Yup, you still don't get it.
How the hell is knowing you have it, and know that if you raw dog someone that they have a good chance of getting it not in any way malicious.
You're concept of intent is so off center on this I can't even fathom it.