Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Proposed Kansas law could ‘quarantine’ people living with HIV and AIDS

Proposed Kansas law could ‘quarantine’ people living with HIV and AIDS

by PinkNews.co.uk Staff Writer; 27 March 2013, 7:40pm

A proposed Kansas law could lead, claim campaigners, to people living with HIV or AIDS to effectively being quarantined.

The law would negate the need for a firefighter or paramedic to secure a court order to test a victim’s blood for infectious diseases. If tested positive for HIV, these victims would be able to be quarantined.

The proposed law would overturn a ban on the practice passed in 1988.

“They didn’t get that whole idea of being discriminated against,” said Cody Patton of Positive Directions said. “They didn’t get that that stuff still happens today. My concern is that there’s a lot of people in this state that are still fearful of HIV that don’t look at factual information.”

Elena Ivanov, Executive Director, Douglas County AIDS Project (DCAP) said: “I am disappointed and saddened that people living with HIV/AIDS are no longer exempt from quarantine under current law in Kansas. The Kansas Senate has voted to pass HB 2183 and has rejected the amendment to exempt people living with HIV/AIDS. This bill will harm people living with HIV/AIDS and stands as poor public health policy.

“Under the bill people who have HIV can be separated and have their movement in Kansas restricted. The use of quarantine and isolation powers by the state officials will exasperate many sensitive issues related to the civil liberties of these individuals and create unnecessary and prolonged hardships for all those infected and affected by HIV/AIDS.

“This bill will further decrease their low self-esteem and deepen their suffering from anxiety and depression. Moreover, it will further increase the stigma, associated with the chronic disease and hamper the efforts of organizations, such as Douglas County AIDs Project (DCAP), which combat its spread. These individuals will now worry about punishment, fines, and imprisonment if they refuse to be isolated by the state authorities or if the quarantine order established by the Kansas Senate is broken.”

by Anonymousreply 4204/01/2013

SUrely this is a joke, no?

by Anonymousreply 103/27/2013

No joke

by Anonymousreply 203/27/2013

Those red states sure are red,

by Anonymousreply 303/27/2013

This kind of shit makes you wish "The Day After" wasn't fiction.

by Anonymousreply 403/27/2013

This is truly scary. I have long been in opposition in regards to having to "register" once you recieve a positive diagnosis. I dont care how confidential they claim the system is...they know exactly where you are and how to find you. All it takes is the wrong nutjob to access the information and its over...so much for privacy.

by Anonymousreply 503/28/2013

[quote]I have long been in opposition in regards to having to "register" once you recieve a positive diagnosis.

I've never heard of this. All but the last HIV test I took was at a clinic where they didnt ask your name or for your ID. How can they forcibly make you give them your ID?

by Anonymousreply 603/29/2013

R6 - all it takes after a positive test is looking at who is buying the very specialized medications. For all intents and purposes, it is a registry.

by Anonymousreply 703/29/2013

R7 That makes even less sense. All a prescription has on its label is the name you gave the doctor when they prescribed them. They dont have your address, your phone number or your social security number. The only way they can connect you is if you willingly give up that information.

by Anonymousreply 803/29/2013

I'm no expert but I'm guessing you can't go into a pharmacy in a trench coat, dark glasses and a bag of cash to buy these things. Given the cost, you are either going to be using insurance or public assistance. Both of which are rather diligent on knowing who their customers are.

by Anonymousreply 903/29/2013

R9 So the alternative is not treat the illness and just let yourself die?

You're making less and less sense with each post. I suggest you do what you did yesterday when your status as a troll was revealed and you got laughed out of another thread. Cut and run is your best move.

by Anonymousreply 1003/29/2013

Have they been dreaming about this since the 1980s

by Anonymousreply 1103/29/2013

[quote]I'm not saying people shouldn't get treated or anything remotely close to that.

I never said you did say that. I only asked a question. One that you refused to answer. And the only side to your argument was predicting how the GOP was going to come back bigger and better then before.

You cant read. You lie. And your sloppy posting reveals what you really are. Are you tired now, baby?

by Anonymousreply 1303/29/2013

Red state definition of government staying out of people's lives: I'm a white (emphasis on the "h"), Christian, hetero male.

by Anonymousreply 1403/29/2013

[all posts by ham-fisted troll a removed.]

by Anonymousreply 1503/29/2013

Good lord, r13, you're tiring ME out. Do you know what the term "thread killer" means?

by Anonymousreply 1603/29/2013

I am not for this type of segregation, but it would be helpful if Poz people were upfront about status with every partner everytime they had any form of sex.

by Anonymousreply 1703/29/2013

[quote] All a prescription has on its label is the name you gave the doctor when they prescribed them. They dont have your address, your phone number or your social security number.

Most pharmacies require an address and phone number to be provided prior to filling a prescription.

by Anonymousreply 1803/29/2013

Agree with R17.

Look, no one's going to allow a quarantine, ultimately. It's nuts and most reasonable people can see that. Freepers can rant and bellow all they like, it aint gonna happen.

However, there's also the issue of the unbelievable irresponsibility of gay men still spreading this disease, and THAT needs to be addressed within our community.

by Anonymousreply 1903/29/2013

[quote]Most pharmacies require an address and phone number to be provided prior to filling a prescription.

That doesnt mean you give it to them. Make something up. I always do. There is no reason why they need my phone number.

by Anonymousreply 2103/29/2013

This is absolutely ridiculous. Shadings of Nazi Germany.

by Anonymousreply 2203/29/2013

R21. Are you paying cash? Otherwise, there is an absolute data stream to track.

by Anonymousreply 2403/29/2013

R24 If I really didnt want any paper trail of something I was buying, then yes, I would use cash. But I am not overly paranoid about those things. If the government wants to keep a file on me, let them. Hell, for all I know they already have one. Chances are, if anyone wanted to read it they would have a hell of a time finding it and be very disappointed in its contents. I'm more bothered by telemarketers, junk mail and spam, thats why I seldom reveal my contact info to anyone.

by Anonymousreply 2503/29/2013

R23 Thats the best you can do? Really? I pointed out you are a liar and the best way you can defend yourself is to call me names? Thank you. You did more to undermine any points you will ever make than I could ever dream of.

by Anonymousreply 2603/29/2013

First responders do not test people for infectious diseases. People may get tested for many things at a hospital if their symptoms dictate. Medical personnel deal with HIV positive patients the same as any other patient, because they assume all patients have bloodborne disease. There is no reason to quarantine someone with HIV. There is no lab aboard ambulances or fire engines.

by Anonymousreply 2903/31/2013

It is targeted on people with HIV. You have to understand the Kansas mindset.

by Anonymousreply 3004/01/2013

R27 and R28 are bullshitting fascists. The last time there was talk like this what happened....people went to any lengths to prevent being tested, resulting in more spread of HIV.

by Anonymousreply 3104/01/2013

r5 (and others), you really shouldn't say things like "I've been an opponent to 'registers'" when it doesn't happen. Could it happen based on information that can be collected by insurance? Yes, but so can other forms of illness based on medicine. You shouldn't try to scare people with that (false) language.

by Anonymousreply 3204/01/2013

So, this is the fallback position when gay marriage passes. Let's assume all queers are diseased riddled typhoid Marys and we can round them up and put them in camps and thus retain the old social order.

I have AIDS and let me tell you, no negative person, straight or gay, is preoccupied about NOT stigmatizing us. They either do stigmatize or they don't and NOBODY is legislating them either way. Plenty of blaming the epidemic on the victims, as if negative people have no say on whether or not they turn positive. It's been 30 years plus of the epidemic and people have known for at least a couple of decades how the infection passes.

If you're having unprotected sex with anyone, whether you get infected or not, you are actively responsible for your sero-status. And yes, that includes me. But it also includes you, r28 and your ilk.

I would never have sex with a negative man. And I haven't since my diagnosis. And yes, not everyone POZ is like me. But unfortunately, plenty of negative men were like me when I was negative: pretending that it was my right to have un-protected sex in the age of AIDS. And that all the responsibility feel on the positive guys. Unless you're raped, it takes two to spread the disease. I learned that the hard way.

by Anonymousreply 3304/01/2013

I'm really tired of POZ guys being characterized as morally deficient sex addicts who lie about and obscure their status in order to get laid.

Not saying it doesn't happen, but the assumption and assertion that it is common is total urban myth.

by Anonymousreply 3404/01/2013

[quote]However, there's also the issue of the unbelievable irresponsibility of gay men still spreading this disease, and THAT needs to be addressed within our community.

My BF is HIV+, I am not. Please quit posting passive-aggressive shit implying that HIV is spread by irresponsible gay men.

R33, not all HIV- people are so paranoid/ negative about HIV. I'm not.

by Anonymousreply 3504/01/2013

It's interesting how because it's a gay outbreak in the united states people say not knowing and spreading is akin to murder.

In Africa where it's a hetero problem you don't hear that type of conversation.

If I were having sex, anonymous sex, I would treat everyone as if they were positive, you are your own protection.

by Anonymousreply 3704/01/2013

R31. Try to gain experience and knowledge outside of mommy's basement and come back.

by Anonymousreply 3804/01/2013

In Africa they rape babies for a cure r37!

by Anonymousreply 3904/01/2013

[quote]negative people have no say on whether or not they turn positive.

Actually, we do.

by Anonymousreply 4004/01/2013

We sure do.

by Anonymousreply 4104/01/2013

Great! Let them! Any self-respecting gay guy living in Kansas deserves what they get, you know, "The will of the people" and all. Why not snap out of your Stockholm Syndrome, grow a set of balls and MOVE OUT!

by Anonymousreply 4204/01/2013
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.
×

Follow theDL catch up on what you missed


recent threads by topic delivered to your email

follow popular threads on twitter

follow us on facebook

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!