CC1981 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 It would be difficult to actually hang these creeps who don't give a thought before infecting their poor wives.But it is still murder and more fowl than any other murder because here you knowingly ,willfully are putting the risk of the very people you are supposed to care for.(i hold the same view about women who infect their husbands) This will be quite impossible to do within the legal framework. Perhaps Gaurang can shed more light into this but to punish someone for infecting their partners while they themselves are unaware carriers is going against every principle of freedom and democracy. Not to mention, this will be quite impossible to prove on court that your spouse is the one who gave you AIDS. Your spouse can easily counter that you got it from someone else you've been sleeping around with and good luck proving in a court of law that you havn't slept around ! Without clairvoyance, a court has no way of deciding whether your hubby gave you AIDS or whether your hubby's contention that you slept around and got infected on your own is true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zubinpepsi Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 1)Protected sex with a prostitute constitutes adultery.Unprotected sex puts his family at risk of death . 2)Since the man has gone to the prostitute ...it is more like a death wish. The prostitute is indirectly responsible but the man who goes out of his way to get the disease home is the man responsible for the families misery.He deserves nothing less than the punishment for willful murder most foul .No sympathy for such bastards .They deserve to die like dogs.Most women infected in India (apart from prostitutes) are poor wives who put their lives in the hands of their undeserving husbands. SPOT ON radhika.. as for prostitutes...i do believe most of them don't have much choice .Poor women (most of them ) do not even have the choice of protecting themselves ... i dont quite agree with u here.. i think women are in the driver seat here as the guys r desparate.. if they can demand the kinds money they want, then i think they can also demand the guy to have safe sex.. the thing is they r blinded by money they forget to see the safetiness jus like desparate guys tend to overlook the safety issue...i think prositutes shud be equally blamed for this... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beetle Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 We are not discussing sex or adultry here CC....how difficult is it to use protection to protect your family.What stupid social and cultural excuses are there for not using protection. Adultery is a different issue.Protected adultery at least means the poor woman lives to kick his ass.Unprotected adultery very often means putting your partner at risk of an infection which till now has no cure(lets not talk of medicines to prolong and better the lives of victims). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beetle Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 >>>while they themselves are unaware carriers is going against every principle of freedom and democracy...... Oh come on...a man has unprotected sex with a sex worker and doesn't even fear that he might be a carrier.Stop making silly excuses for them. Rajeev...Goa has started testing before marriage but I think it is still not mandatory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zubinpepsi Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Err..People dying is not "cool"... whichever way you look at it. Seems as though according to you , its O.K for people with terminal illness or other contagious diseases to die. i dont mean people dying in general is cool.. i know the value of life .. and at the sametime i dont care for those who die cuz of aids got from pros or unrprotected sex.. i think they deserve to die...those ppl are a disgrace to the society ...so im cool with society losing those ppl.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beetle Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 >>>>i dont quite agree with u here.. i think women are in the driver seat here as the guys r desparate.. if they can demand the kinds money they want, then i think they can also demand the guy to have safe sex.. the thing is they r blinded by money they forget to see the safetiness jus like desparate guys tend to overlook the safety issue...i think prositutes shud be equally blamed for this... Zubin ...a large %age of these women are forced into prostitution.The ones that are being forced have as much choice as a rape victim has of asking for protection. The ones who do it willingly are as much to be blamed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 We are not discussing sex or adultry here CC....how difficult is it to use protection to protect your family.What stupid social and cultural excuses are there for not using protection.1. You realize that many people don't like using protection/can't do it with protection because it is 'less tactile' than without a sheath of rubber on ? 2. Protection is not 100% garantee. If you are a prostitute and you insist on condoms, you are still extremely likey to catch HIV in your lifetime. Simply because while condoms reduce the risk down to 0.1 % or 0.01 %, you are still having sex with 1000s of people in your lifetime. Probability is also a question of repetititon here. 3. Logistics-wise, it is still doesnt stop AIDs because if you think about it, 'bedroom mishaps' are common too - kabhi kabhi rubber phat bhi jaati hai. Now if you are the average prostitute who sees 10 guys a day, everyday for 15 years, how many times would you have the 'phat gayee' situation ? Atleast a few- in other words, you wont find a prostitute who's never experienced the 'fat gayee' thing. So now what ? Adultery is a different issue.I am not talking about adultery here. Adultery is when you are married and you sleep around. It is not adultery if you are not married and you are sleeping with your girlfriend, you two break-up, you get another girlfriend/boyfriend and sleep with them etc. A teenage couple doing it is not adultery! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beetle Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 >>>>Err..People dying is not "cool"... whichever way you look at it. Seems as though according to you , its O.K for people with terminal illness or other contagious diseases to die If a person gets infected..one can sympathise with him...but when a person willingly gets infected (even this is ok ...if it only affects him) but then goes ahead and infects his family then he gets no sympathy from me. and the worst part is that in India ...it is usually the man who infects he wife.But when it comes to medical attention it is this husband who gets the best treatment especially if treatment is not free.Not only this....the poor wife is expected to look after this ass till she can while no one comes to the rescue of this poorwoman whose only fault is that she married this man. And most of these wives do not even have guts to ask their husbands to use protection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 Arrey baba, focussing on the issue on how to control/reduce transmission rate is useless if thought on from the 'use protection' angle. Relax attitudes towards premarital sex and the need for prostitutes somewhere down the road in life is cut away in most people. Thus the interaction of society with people that have a tremendous amount of partners (ie, prostitutes) is restricted and their impact is on a far smaller sector on society. Its far far better to have sex with 5-10 people, who've had sex with 5-10 people, who've had sex with 5-10 people etc etc, than to have the 'indian model' of sex with 1 person -->sex with someone who has slept with 3482390483290482309485 people --->back to sex with one person--->back to sex with the person with 349873620948290348 people etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beetle Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 1. You realize that many people don't like using protection/can't do it with protection because it is 'less tactile' than without a sheath of rubber on ? So that is good excuse for taking someones life? 2. Protection is not 100% garantee. If you are a prostitute and you insist on condoms, you are still extremely likey to catch HIV in your lifetime. Simply because while condoms reduce the risk down to 0.1 % or 0.01 %, you are still having sex with 1000s of people in your lifetime. Probability is also a question of repetititon here. At least there is an attempt. anyways CC I refuse to debate this issue with you if you are going to justify .......degree of pleasure for infecting a poor unsuspecting person. You have so much sympathy for the "infector" but have shown no concern for the poor innocent victims.You would make a good "human rights guy" who can never think of the victims but always jump to the rescue of the abuser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 So that is good excuse for taking someones life?I dunno, i don't care. This is not a question of right or wrong, its a question of logistics and functionality. Bottomline is, if you can't do it while wearing rubber, you arnt gonna use it. Period.Not with wife, not with friend,not with prostitute. Same with many girls- they don't like the rubber vagina condom thing. Regardless of what morality questions you throw out there, this fact is not going to change. Guilt-tripping or trying to play the 'guilty-concience' card doesnt solve the problem in this instance one bit. You have so much sympathy for the "infector" but have shown no concern for the poor innocent victims.Yes because the infectors would not be infectors in most cases if it wernt for the stupic fcuked up Indian society with sexuality! The problem is not with infectors, its with indian society. Castigating the 'infector' does nothing when the 'infector' too is a clear-cut victim and product of the society ! You taking whatever measures against infectors will not stop because the factory that is producing them (society) has not stopped production! You would make a good "human rights guy" who can never think of the victims but always jump to the rescue of the abuser.Congratulations then on failing to understand one iota of what i am saying. Your approach to this problem is completely wrong- you should be asking in the first place why indian people on average are far more likely to go to prostitutes than western people. Solve that problem and your prostitution-related STD problems become a non-issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beetle Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 >>>>Your approach to this problem is completely wrong- you should be asking in the first place why indian people on average are far more likely to go to prostitutes in the first place than western people. And there is less prostitution in the west????or are people just a little more worried about getting infected. Besides we are both debating different issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 And there is less prostitution in the west????or are people just a little more worried about getting infected.Yes. Far lesser in the west (but in contrast, howmuch ever is there, its in open view, not hidden away or hush-hush like India so its much more evident). Besides we are both debating different issues.Same issue is being debated here, your angle is completely different (and in my opinion, flawed). We are both ultimately discussing about the problem posed with spreading HIV infection and how to contain it/what to do about it - which is the crux issue in this thread! You are dealing with the symptoms, i am with the cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beetle Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 No i am just talking about how the selfish @#$$%^^ who are responsible for bringing misery and death to their own family willingly andknowingly deserve to be equated with murderers.I see no difference between a guy who infects his family from a guy who takes a gun and shoots at his family.There are no excuses.If you can't keep your pants on and risk someones life...you should be ready for the consequences which should be the same as for murderers. Your solution may seem practical to you but not so to most in India....it might happen some day....but it is not the short term immediate solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beetle Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 I am with you on this one.. How about those who do it with normal fun-seeking gals not prostitutes Any one who has unprotected sex with another person should get tested before indulging in fun with someone else.Holds true for both sexes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 No i am just talking about how the selfish @#$$%^^ who are responsible for bringing misery and death to their own family willingly andknowingly deserve to be equated with murderers. Utterly baseless to equate them with murder, simply because you CANNOT be a murderer if there was no intent for murder. It can at best be equated with a driver losing control due to a car malfunction and hitting a pedestrian at best. Ie, small level homicide. I see no difference between a guy who infects his family from a guy who takes a gun and shoots at his family. Ridiculous ! Then you see no difference between accidentally killing a person in a bar-fight and shooting a person in cold blood. Your solution may seem practical to you but not so to most in India....it might happen some day....but it is not the short term immediate solution. This problem has no short-term immediate solution. And if the sexual aspect of the hippie movement in the west is any indicator, the sexual uptightedness factor can be changed rather radically in 5-odd years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beetle Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 If you equate a man knowingly infecting his family with losing control due to car malfunction .......then there is not much to say...the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 If you equate a man knowingly infecting his family with losing control due to car malfunction .......then there is not much to say...the end. 'knowingly' infecting ? A man doesnt 'plan' for his condom to fail. Neither does a man 'knowingly' goes out and gets HIV. It happens because of either ignorance of the issue or some equipment malfunction - just like you hitting someone after losing control of car is due to an equipment malfunction. Culpability is a question of intent, knowledge and act. If only the latter is present, its nothing more than an accident/homicide of the lowest levels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beetle Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 You have unprotected sex with a sex worker ...or any sex with a sex worker or anyone else .....you put your family at risk.How difficult is that to understand...........?????????????????:mad::mad::dontknow::banghead::banghead: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted June 4, 2007 Share Posted June 4, 2007 You have unprotected sex with a sex worker ...or any sex with a sex worker or anyone else .....you put your family at risk. Agreed. However, equating it with murder is pretty stupid too. How difficult is THAT to understand ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts