Write a Comment
6 Comments
Agree with Jeton regarding culpability but agree with Cain regarding responsibility. I used to 'presume' as the former stated and those presumptions got me in trouble. So yea, I wish I had not presumed but taken responsibility. I'm with the ACLU on this one but reading the full story, it seems this guy was really on a roll. Hopefully this has slowed him down.
I think this is stupid. My fiance has it and they wanna take away my rights as his woman to have sex with my man. Uh no not gonna fly with me
Doesn't the Minnesota Supreme court have better things to concentrate on than consuel sexual encounters. Clearly both parties need counseling and help ..... and the person infected with HIV has by this time suffered enough. And the man who foolishly had unprotected consensual sex needs to own his part in this saga. The gay community has suffered enough with this disease and all of us deserve compassion.....Nigel
uhm, no. this man obeyed the law in his state. as their Appellate Court made clear, if any sexual exposure was meant to be included in the 2nd part of the law, the first part would be redundant. the first part of the law (tell your sex partners) underlines that the 2nd part can not apply to sex. btw, a neg person acquiring HIV by not using a condom with a presumed-neg partner who infects them will NEVER equal the culpability of the poz partner who hid their status, all poz activism be damned!
this should not be actionable,a person should be responsible for themselves, make sure to insist on condoms, if you do not , then its your own fault.
Ross Robbins
Quickly, everyone, to the courts! Don't bother taking responsibility for your own behavior! After all, you can punish those terrible sex partners who forced you to bareback! Ugh, how ridiculous.
May 28, 2013 • Portland