Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ames!henry.jpl.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ucla-cs!brianl@uunet.uu.net
From: brianl@uunet.uu.net (Brian Larsen)
Newsgroups: sci.med.aids
Subject: Re: Is it attempted Murder?
Message-ID: <27687@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>
Date: 3 Oct 89 22:16:36 GMT
References: <27434@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>
Sender: news@CS.UCLA.EDU
Reply-To: brianl@uunet.uu.net (Brian Larsen)
Organization: The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc.
Lines: 119
Approved: aids@cs.ucla.edu
Archive-number: 1296

In article <27434@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> Tom.Mickus@f440.n250.z1.fidonet.org (Tom Mickus) writes:

How old are you?

I can't believe that you have been around this"club" very long,
based upon your discussion here.

>        How should society deal with those citizens who *knowingly*
>continue to practice intercourse with members of the opposite/same sex
>after having been diagnosed as carriers of one of the strains of the
>AIDs virus, and who do not tell their partners?

I think you need to open up a little here and look at the situation
more realistically.  I don't believe we have alot of individuals
running around "infecting" others maliciously.  The situation of
finding you are HIV+ and how that affects your sex/emotional life
is a very complex matter involving alot of denial, blame, anger,
depression etc.  These people are not criminals.  They are dealing
with a problem that in our society, there is little support or 
assistancein coping with, you're on your own BABES!!

>
>        We all of course remember the controversial PBS documentary of some
>years back, describing such behaviour as practiced by a black street
>person.

-nasty

>
>        Just recently in Maritime Canada, a man was arrested for having
>given the AIDs virus to a pregnant mother.  We've all heard of
>"cocaine-babies", now it seems we're going to have to get used to another
>such label.  Chances are the baby will get the virus passed on via her
>mother.

I admit this is a sad scenario.  But where is the pregnant woman's
responsibility in this? 
>

>        Should we lock these people up? Should they be charged with 1st
>degree murder?  Manslaughter?
                              
How about government funded counseling post positive testing?
How about government funded medication?
How about more education?
How about compassion and not blame?

>
>        Perhaps even more pertinent, how does society protect its citizen's
>from such an "attack"?  Hard questions...no easy answers.  

Do you really feel that "society" needs protecting from a PWA's "attack"?

>Ultimately, we                                             
>as individuals have to be the watchguard of our own safety.  

BINGO!!!!!!

>Everyone time
>we engage in sex, if we want to be smart, we'll have to make some kind of
>determination as to what the risk is going to be (ie. your sleeping with
>everyone they've slept with for the past X amount of years...).  Seems to
>me that unless you're 99% sure, sex isn't going to be a whole lot of fun,
>at least on the cerebral level.

If you want to be smart, PLAY SAFE!!!
Any determination you make will be subjective and will ALWAYS leave
the possibility for error.  What will you base your decision on.
What he/she says. "Who" they dated/fucked before you.  And even then
Even if they give all the "right" answers and are as honest as possible,
who's to say the one they were with before you, hadn't lied, and he/she
are now carrying the virus only to innocently pass it on to you.

I guess you would want the gas chamber.

>
> The answer?  

(am I ready?)

>Some how mutual masturbation doesn't seem like a long
>term solution.  Strict monogamy?  I guess, but that's old fashioned.  What
>about tightly screened sex clubs?  If everyone is carefully tested, and
>agree to put some restraint on their behaviour, then it seems that such an
>idea would work.  

You are not to be believed!!!
What kind of "screening" do you feel is appropriate.
Or would it suit you better to have a nationwide mandatory
testing of everyone and "weed" out the undesireables.

The idea would/could never work.  Who's going to police the 
individuals on the dates.  Are you "safe" ALL the time.  When
you get drunk and have sex with someone (which I'm sure you *never*
do)  Don't you "slip".  I mean they "look" clean.

>That way people could get the variety they've been
>looking for, without the risk.  However, one could foresee abuses even
>here.  Its all a question of trust, and simply put, its easier to put your
>trust in one person whom you live with, than in a group of people you only
>meet occasionally.

my, my how profound.

>
>        Just a couple of thoughts on some aspects of the AIDS dilemma.

Why don't you pull your head out of your ass!!!
"The AIDS dilema".
Is that what you call it?  Is it merely an inconvenience to your
sexuality.  I am amazed when I read garbage like this here.  It
makes me realize just how fucked up things/people are.  

These are my thoughts.

If you don't want AIDS, have safe sex!!!!

Brian Larsen ..................................................................>
>--