 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / AIDS / September 2006British government announced plans Friday to revisit legislation making it a crime to knowingly infect someone with HIV.
(London) The British government announced plans Friday to revisit legislation making it a crime to knowingly infect someone with HIV. http://365gay.com/Newscon06/09/090106ukhiv.htm The Crown Prosecution Service said it is not considering a call to abolish the law but wants to clarify it so that the public is aware how it is applied. "We wish to issue a clear statement that explains the way we handle cases involving the intentional or reckless sexual transmission of infections," said Seamus Taylor, the Director of Equality and Diversity for the service said. "We wish to set out our position clearly as we want to promote greater confidence in the criminal justice system - a key aim for all agencies involved." Taylor said that the government wants input from the public on seven key areas. Among them should any relevance be placed when charges are laid on whether a suspect had medical advice, if safe-sex was ever discussed or if a suspect had the ability to ensure that protection was used in sex. The law has been criticized by several HIV/AIDS groups concerned that the law was too sweepingly applied. To date there have been eight convictions under the law, all but one involving heterosexuals. In the gay case, an international manhunt was launched this week for a man convicted of infecting his same-sex partner. (story) http://365gay.com/Newscon06/07/070406hiv.htm Mark James failed to show up in court for his sentencing earlier this month. A judge did not let that stop him from imposing a three-year sentence on James. During the trial a West London court was told that James knew he was HIV-positive for seven months but did not share the information with his lover, whose name is withheld under a court order. The partner learned of James' status after being told by a mutual friend of the couple. When confronted with the information James denied it and the couple continued to have unprotected sex. The partner only discovered the truth after he tested positive for HIV. At that point he went to police. Last month in a similar case the California Supreme Court ruled that people who lead high-risk sexual lives have good reason to know they may be infected with the virus that causes AIDS and are responsible for informing partners about possible exposure. (story) A federal court in Michigan is the only other jurisdiction to rule similarly, in a 1993 case involving former NBA star "Magic" Johnson, who tested positive for HIV in 1991. http://365gay.com/Newscon06/09/090106ukhiv.htm >The partner only discovered the truth after he tested >positive for HIV. At that point he went to police. Homosexuals, because of their promiscuity, will lie, deny and make every effort to suppress the truth if it helps them satisfy their lust for "sex at any cost." >>The partner only discovered the truth after he tested >>positive for HIV. At that point he went to police. > >Homosexuals, because of their promiscuity, will lie, deny and make >every effort to suppress the truth if it helps them satisfy their lust >for "sex at any cost." LOL...I know more heterosexual men that are like that--and a few straight women too. Often cause they're married. Sillyl homophobe. Haven't had enough dick to suck yet? George M. Carter *** Adams HE; Wright LW Jr; Lohr BA. Is homophobia associated with homosexual arousal? J Abnorm Psychol 1996 Aug;105(3):440-445. Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, Athens 30602-3013, USA. The authors investigated the role of homosexual arousal in exclusively heterosexual men who admitted negative affect toward homosexual individuals. Participants consisted of a group of homophobic men (n = 35) and a group of nonhomophobic men (n = 29); they were assigned to groups on the basis of their scores on the Index of Homophobia (W. W. Hudson & W. A. Ricketts, 1980). The men were exposed to sexually explicit erotic stimuli consisting of heterosexual, male homosexual, and lesbian videotapes, and changes in penile circumference were monitored. They also completed an Aggression Questionnaire (A. H. Buss & M. Perry, 1992). Both groups exhibited increases in penile circumference to the heterosexual and female homosexual videos. Only the homophobic men showed an increase in penile erection to male homosexual stimuli. The groups did not differ in aggression. Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies. >> The partner only discovered the truth after he tested >> positive for HIV. At that point he went to police. > > Homosexuals, because of their promiscuity, will lie, deny and make > every effort to suppress the truth if it helps them satisfy their lust > for "sex at any cost." Troll alert. I'll say it once, just for the record. Not all homosexuals are promiscuous. Check your premises; you may (will find that one (or all) of them is wrong. </snark>  Signature-Erica ^.^ I live for breaking the mold. >>> The partner only discovered the truth after he tested >>> positive for HIV. At that point he went to police. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >promiscuous. Check your premises; you may (will find that one (or all) >of them is wrong. </snark> Homosexual males are promiscuous enough to be the number one vector of AIDS in the US for more than twenty-five years and they are able to accomplish this feat while making up less than 3% of the population. PROMISCUITY AT IT FINEST! > >>> The partner only discovered the truth after he tested > >>> positive for HIV. At that point he went to police. [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > accomplish this feat while making up less than 3% of the population. > PROMISCUITY AT IT FINEST! Data can be misleading directly or indirectly. Some heterosexual dating sites have have been known to spread some STDs rapidly because it is a small cluster of people who have sex with each other. Since homosexuals are the most hated people on the planet, the likelihood is that many people have secret sex so as not to lose their job or embarrass their family. The environment and social acceptance of homosexuality can be a significant contributing factor to the degree of safe sex that is carried out as opposed to the promiscuity factor. >Since homosexuals are the most hated people on the planet, the >likelihood is that many [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >factor to the degree >of safe sex that is carried out as opposed to the promiscuity factor. Of course you're wrong. Atheist are the most hated group. For your reading pleasure: March 24, 2006 The Atheist is the most hated group in America According to a study done by University of Minnesota researchers: Americans increasing acceptance of religious diversity doesn't extend to those who dont believe in a god, according to a national survey by researchers in the University of Minnesotas department of sociology. From a telephone sampling of more than 2,000 households, university researchers found that Americans rate atheists below Muslims, recent immigrants, gays and lesbians and other minority groups in sharing their vision of American society. Atheists are also the minority group most Americans are least willing to allow their children to marry. Even though atheists are few in number, not formally organized and relatively hard to publicly identify, they are seen as a threat to the American way of life by a large portion of the American public. Atheists, who account for about 3 percent of the U.S. population, offer a glaring exception to the rule of increasing social tolerance over the last 30 years, says Penny Edgell, associate sociology professor and the studys lead researcher. Edgell also argues that todays atheists play the role that Catholics, Jews and communists have played in the pastthey offer a symbolic moral boundary to membership in American society. It seems most Americans believe that diversity is fine, as long as every one shares a common core of values that make them trustworthyand in America, that core has historically been religious, says Edgell. Many of the studys respondents associated atheism with an array of moral indiscretions ranging from criminal behavior to rampant materialism and cultural elitism. bibon@râlant.org wrote... >>I'll say it once, just for the record. Not all homosexuals are >>promiscuous. Check your premises; you may (will find that one (or all) [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > accomplish this feat while making up less than 3% of the population. > PROMISCUITY AT IT FINEST! And we can't forget Gaetan Dugas, the homosexual French-Canadian flight attendent who single-handedly spread the virus across North America in several years. When AIDS began appearing in 1981, gays were convinced it had to be a CIA plot, that nothing else could possibly explain how a viral disease could appear simultaneously on both east and west coast. The CDC soon determined it wasn't the CIA, but rather a single flight attendent who overnighted in cities across the country where he would engage in wild bathhouse orgies with thousands of other gay men. Of course the other gay men proceeded to infect thousands of others as well, but Dugas is important because he transcended all geographical boundaries and destroyed any chance of containing the spread of the virus. >| bibon@râlant.org wrote: >| > On 07 Sep 2006 03:26:05 -0400, Don Saklad [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >| >| Troll alert. billy-boy taylor isn't a troll. He just hangs around aph just so he can talk about his gay fantasies. >| I'll say it once, just for the record. Not all homosexuals are >| promiscuous. Check your premises; you may (will find that one (or all) >| of them is wrong. </snark> --------------------------------------------------------------- jnorthau@yourpantsyahoo.com.au : Remove your pants to reply --------------------------------------------------------------- On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 21:35:48 GMT, Jeff North aka Jenn, No One, maf&dog, L. Michael Roberts and dozens more, wrote: >billy-boy taylor isn't a troll. He just hangs around aph just so he >can talk about his gay fantasies. Who is Bill Taylor and why do you fear him so much? Every post that a homo or homophile can't refute is said to come from this mysterious Bill Taylor -- when was the last time anyone saw a post from this alleged 'Bill Taylor'? I suggest that he is to homosexuals and their 'philes what the 'Chupacabra' is to the uneducated of Mexico and Central America; some thing that scares them shitless, that comes out of the mist of night to torment them....poor babeeeeeeeeeees! Otenkiya wrote... >>>The partner only discovered the truth after he tested >>>positive for HIV. At that point he went to police. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > promiscuous. Check your premises; you may (will find that one (or all) > of them is wrong. </snark> You are correct, I happen to be homosexual and I am not promiscuous. Sadly, I seem to be the only one, and I am also probably one of the only gay men in America who isn't HIV+. Whoever wrote the paragraph above yours is pretty much correct, the behavior describes every homosexual male I have ever known. While sexual orientation is no longer considered a mental disorder, the behavior of gay men is a mental disorder in that it has disrupted their lives and turned them into drugged-out sex addicts. I'm not sure if they can even be considered human anymore, they become nothing more than walking penises with orifices for drug and semen ingestion. > Otenkiya wrote... >> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > be considered human anymore, they become nothing more than walking > penises with orifices for drug and semen ingestion. Wow, what a stupidly obvious load of trolling. If I didn't know you were lying out of your a.s, I would ask you--how are you not promiscuous yet all the gay men you know are? Someone who isn't a slut doesn't hang around sluts all day. You are so full of sh.t. How do you know you and your sex partner or partners are not HIV+ ?... > How do you know you and your sex partner or partners are not HIV+ ?... You apparently didn't understand the answers to that question the last time you trolled, er, asked. > >The partner only discovered the truth after he tested > >positive for HIV. At that point he went to police. > > Homosexuals, because of their promiscuity, will lie, deny and make > every effort to suppress the truth if it helps them satisfy their lust > for "sex at any cost." Heterosexual men around the world by the millions try to talk women in to having unprotected sex every minute of the day. Go to any heterosexual bar and watch the men desperate for a yes from any woman. >> >The partner only discovered the truth after he tested >> >positive for HIV. At that point he went to police. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >desperate for a yes from >any woman. This being completely opposite from the homosexual "scene" where every one is ready to f.ck at the drop of a hat. Right, Governor? > >The partner only discovered the truth after he tested > >positive for HIV. At that point he went to police. > > Homosexuals, because of their promiscuity, will lie, deny and make > every effort to suppress the truth if it helps them satisfy their lust > for "sex at any cost." Don't forget underage boys, gerbils and bowling pins......... Don Saklad wrote... > (London) The British government announced plans Friday to revisit > legislation making it a crime to knowingly infect someone with [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > to abolish the law but wants to clarify it so that the public is > aware how it is applied. And I thought they were considering passing such a law, but it seems they already have such a law but are so afraid to enforce it that they would rather abolish it. Not suprising at all, considering that the UK is also considering paying for HIV treatment for illegal African aliens, and there are even calls for the country to offer an open invitation for all HIV+ Africans to emigrate to the UK for free health care. > To date there have been eight convictions under the > law, all but one involving heterosexuals. Several years ago I ranted on about how in the USA almost nobody is ever prosecuted under the intentional transmission statutes, and that in the few cases that have been prosecuted they were almost always heterosexual transmission - specifically a male infecting a female. > In the gay case, an international manhunt was launched this week > for a man convicted of infecting his same-sex partner. (story) > http://365gay.com/Newscon06/07/070406hiv.htm In the single homosexual HIV transmission case I remember being prosecuted, it involved a known AIDS patient anally raping the teenage son of conspiracy radio show host Art Bell. The case would never have been prosecuted if the victim was another adult male, and probably not even an underage boy, except that in this case the victim was the kid of a local celebrity. > Last month in a similar case the California Supreme Court ruled > that people who lead high-risk sexual lives have good reason to > know they may be infected with the virus that causes AIDS and are > responsible for informing partners about possible exposure. > (story) You should note that the California decision involved a married couple where the husband was bisexual and infected his wife. He is being held liable because he is a male who infected a female. If both were male, no court would rule in the victim's favor. It would seem that the attitude is that the intentional transmission of contagious sexually-transmitted diseases is some sort of civil right for homosexuals, as well as that homosexual victims of HIV infections don't deserve legal recourse because since most gays are already infected, and that they should have assumed that their partner was HIV+ and taken the appropriate precautions. No such assumption is expected when a woman consents to sex with a man. Females who infect males aren't prosecuted, though, they enjoy the same minority/victim status as gay men. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.