Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!ucsd!orion.oac.uci.edu!ucivax!ucla-cs!jay@banzai.PCC.COM From: jay@banzai.PCC.COM (Jay Schuster) Newsgroups: sci.med.aids Subject: Re: (2568) Re: Intentional Transmission of AIDS Message-ID: <39834@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> Date: 6 Oct 90 01:55:30 GMT References: <39719@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> Sender: root@CS.UCLA.EDU Organization: The People's Computer Company, Williston, VT Lines: 28 Approved: phil@wubios.wustl.edu Note: Copyright 1990 by Daniel R. Greening. Permission granted for Note: non-commercial reproduction. Archive-number: 2593 In <39719@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> IPWP400%INDYCMS.BITNET@oac.ucla.edu (MacGyver) writes: >On Mon, 1 Oct 90 18:24:45 pdt Support Account for SCI.MED.AIDS said: >>No, it doesn't excuse those people who have >>sex with someone without using safe sex -- but there are still a lot >>of people who are not well educated about that subject or sadly >>believe themselves invulnerable to terminal illnesses because they >>are young. >This is exactly what happened with Typhoid Mary. ... >How is that any different than someone who >knowingly exposes someone unnecessarily to AIDS? As does the drunk driving story, this analogy fails. Sex is always a private, consensual act. Just as one does not give their consent to drive on a road filled with drunks, people did not consent to eat typhoid contaminated food (they were in a situation where it could be expected that they were safe). You cannot expect to have safe, unprotected sex anymore. If someone has unprotected sex, it is with their consent, and the only reason they would try to legislate instead of educate is because they have a misguided sense of retribution and revenge. >(Those who do not learn their history...) (Those who do not get their analogies right...) -- Jay Schuster uunet!uvm-gen!banzai!jay, attmail!banzai!jay The People's Computer Company `Revolutionary Programming'