Armchair, here's your progressive and awesome California

#52
#52
So the best defenders of California can manage is that TX and AL are the equivalent of CA?

Ooookay.

Of course covertly transmitting STDs, especially HIV, should be a criminal offense. And to equate it with *curable* diseases is idiocy. This Facts About HIV: Life Expectancy and Long-Term Outlook isn't "just like other STDS". Neither is HPV and worrying about death from genital cancer the rest of your life. Or both disease robbing you of the opportunity for consensual relations without "Uhm, about that..." in perpetuity.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#54
#54
luthervol said:
All STDs?
Click to expand...

Knowingly infecting someone with any std?
Yes.
Knowingly punching them in the face?
Yes
Knowingly infecting them with the flu?
Yes.

It's an assault.
Here's the answer.....don't knowingly infect someone with anything. Communication is not hard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#55
#55
MaxamusXIII said:
Knowingly infecting someone with any std?
Yes.
Knowingly punching them in the face?
Yes
Knowingly infecting them with the flu?
Yes.

It's an assault.
Here's the answer.....don't knowingly infect someone with anything. Communication is not hard.
Click to expand...

Exactly, especially the incurable STDs. It's no better than rape; your life is forever changed without your consent.
 
#56
#56
BigOrangeTrain said:
No. Just the incurable ones. I really wish you could have a conversation with my best friend. He is an infectious disease specialist that specializes in treating HIV. You would actually learn a few valuable things.
Click to expand...

We keep straying from the original point of this thread. The OP was trying to make California look bad. I personally feel that failing to inform a person that you have any STD prior to the fact is unforgivable. I never said it shouldn't be criminal. I only repeatedly asked that people compare the CA law to the laws of other states and to at least read the article the OP provided.

I also never said HIV was like other STDs. I said it was more like them than it use to be.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#57
#57
MaxamusXIII said:
Knowingly infecting someone with any std?
Yes.
Knowingly punching them in the face?
Yes
Knowingly infecting them with the flu?
Yes.

It's an assault.
Here's the answer.....don't knowingly infect someone with anything. Communication is not hard.
Click to expand...

What you are describing is technically "battery". An "assault" is the threat of bodily harm.

But I get your point.
 
#58
#58
luthervol said:
We keep straying from the original point of this thread. The OP was trying to make California look bad. I personally feel that failing to inform a person that you have any STD prior to the fact is unforgivable. I never said it shouldn't be criminal. I only repeatedly asked that people compare the CA law to the laws of other states and to at least read the article the OP provided.

I also never said HIV was like other STDs. I said it was more like them than it use to be.
Click to expand...

Do you believe California comes off looking good here?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#60
#60
85SugarVol said:
Do you believe California comes off looking good here?
Click to expand...

I couldn't really tell. There wasn't enough information for me and I had no comparative basis with other states. I knew that the intent of the thread was to make them look bad. Drawing conclusions with insufficient data is an art form in the PF.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#62
#62
luthervol said:
I couldn't really tell. There wasn't enough information for me and I had no comparative basis with other states. I knew that the intent of the thread was to make them look bad. Drawing conclusions with insufficient data is an art form in the PF.
Click to expand...

Regardless of what any other state is doing, CA does look bad. It's as though they caught themselves doing the right thing and said "Shazam!...fk that!"
 
#63
#63
luthervol said:
I couldn't really tell. There wasn't enough information for me and I had no comparative basis with other states. I knew that the intent of the thread was to make them look bad. Drawing conclusions with insufficient data is an art form in the PF.
Click to expand...

You socialists and liberals have been pros at that ever since the 2016 election.

California is a toilet.
 
#64
#64
NCFisher said:
Regardless of what any other state is doing, CA does look bad. It's as though they caught themselves doing the right thing and said "Shazam!...fk that!"
Click to expand...

Did you read the rationale? They had some legitimate reasons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#65
#65
theFallGuy said:
no big deal, the state can pay for your $$$$$$ drug cocktails, amirite?
Click to expand...

You know, I'm almost immune to the pervasive shallowness. There were many on here that warned me that an elitist attitude was counterproductive and one of the things that fed into the trump backlash "phenomenon". But dang, some of you guys make restraint difficult.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#66
#66
luthervol said:
I see the Confederacy of Dunces has struck again. Read the article and then the thread (we're only 3 pages in, so you should be able to knock it out in a couple of hours).
Click to expand...

can't believe no one commented on this.

50 posts per page or gtfo.
 
#67
#67
luthervol said:
We keep straying from the original point of this thread. The OP was trying to make California look bad. I personally feel that failing to inform a person that you have any STD prior to the fact is unforgivable. I never said it shouldn't be criminal. I only repeatedly asked that people compare the CA law to the laws of other states and to at least read the article the OP provided.

I also never said HIV was like other STDs. I said it was more like them than it use to be.
Click to expand...

They had a law in place and are choosing to repeal it. That's worse then not having one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#68
#68
luthervol said:
Did you read the rationale? They had some legitimate reasons.
Click to expand...

I don't find a conflict between "treating HIV as a public health issue, instead of treating people living with HIV as criminals...(and) like all other serious infectious diseases" and NOT knowingly screwing up others' lives.
 
#69
#69
luthervol said:
I couldn't really tell. There wasn't enough information for me and I had no comparative basis with other states. I knew that the intent of the thread was to make them look bad. Drawing conclusions with insufficient data is an art form in the PF.
Click to expand...

doesn't need comparison. Wrong is wrong.

"Its ok that I beat my wife, my brother killed his."

just because another state doesn't do something doesn't clear California or make it any better or worse. you are just trying to relativisticly make it not as bad. if they OP wanted to do the same he could have. you were the one changing the argument to fit your side.

Did the removal of the law make things better or worse? I have no idea how California state laws works, but if something is identified as a crime and then that law is removed that something doesn't suddenly fall under other laws unless explicitly stated. so this isn't a case of them defaulting back to other laws.
It’s also not a crime in Georgia if you engage in the prohibited conduct after you disclose your infected status. For example, if you solicit someone to engage in a sexual act and reveal that you are HIV-positive, you have not committed a crime if you made the disclosure prior to the solicitation or prior to engaging in the act. However, it is a crime if you tell the person about your status only after you have engaged in the prohibited conduct.
Click to expand...
Transmitting an STD: Criminal Laws & Penalties | CriminalDefenseLawyer.com

so to answer your question yes it is a crime in other states to not tell someone your are HIV positive if you know you are.
 
#70
#70
that link has links to every state's laws on STD crime summarized nicely. you just have to click each state to see
 
#72
#72
luthervol said:
I couldn't really tell. There wasn't enough information for me and I had no comparative basis with other states. I knew that the intent of the thread was to make them look bad. Drawing conclusions with insufficient data is an art form in the PF.
Click to expand...

Set aside comparative data, and what other states may or may not be doing. Do you personally believe California looks good here reducing this from a felony to a misdemeanor?

(And yes, I read the article)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#73
#73
85SugarVol said:
Set aside comparative data, and what other states may or may not be doing. Do you personally believe California looks good here reducing this from a felony to a misdemeanor?

(And yes, I read the article)
Click to expand...

I can see both sides. If the reduction to a misdemeanor leads to more people being tested and treated and a long term reduction in the number of people with HIV, then it's great.
 
#75
#75
LouderVol said:
yeah, i thought it was in the User CP but I couldn't find it. so much less loading. it will change your life. Might even make you less liberal. :)
Click to expand...

I found the option and changed it to 30 per page. I don't want to get the bends, plus I can't run the risk of becoming less liberal.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top