California Shouldn’t Make It Easier For HIV-Positive People Like Me To Give Blood And Have Risky Sex

Oct 13, 2017 by Jill

by Chad Felix Greene, The Federalist:

The demand for HIV privacy as an entitlement will create a scenario of predatory behaviors, recklessness, and ruined lives. Gay and bisexual men will be at a higher risk.

California recently passed a law that reduces the criminal charges related to knowingly exposing someone to HIV without consent. It demonstrates the power of narrative over reason. Scott Weiner, a Democratic state senator of California who co-wrote the law, penned an article defending his decision. It provides us with an in-depth look at how progressives not only view the law but the morality and ethics of disclosure.

He states, “Last week, Governor Jerry Brown signed SB 239, a bill I co-authored to modernize California’s HIV criminal statutes by treating HIV *exactly* the same as other serious and deadly diseases such as Ebola, SARS, hepatitis C, and tuberculosis: as a misdemeanor. Under current California law, only HIV is treated as a felony, and you don’t have to infect anyone — or even create a risk of infection — to be guilty and go to state prison.”

By “modernize” he means the law better reflects the liberal notion of what he describes. HIV is just another disease, no worse or more destructive than any other. It also assumes the issue at hand is infection rather than disclosure or consent. He is not alone in this thinking. The LGBT advocacy group Human Rights Campaign has advocated for the removal of HIV disclosure laws for quite some time. Zack Ford of ThinkProgress has devoted many pages and even an advocacy video titled “Criminalizing HIV Doesn’t Do Anything to Help Anyone” pushing this same narrative. All parties sincerely believe they are defending innocent people from discrimination and stigma and that the issue is criminality itself.

Read here