The HIV immigration ban is a good thing. (America, POV)

[Faint]

Originally Posted by Maize

Back on topic...

The ban on allowing HIV infected people into the country is, I believe, not so much a public health concern but an erroneous assumption on the part of some that still believe AIDS and HIV to be a gay disease. Banning HIV infected people from entering the country, these officials believe, will keep out more gay people - which is just wrong. This is course just my opinion based the way gay people are treated by the government in this country.

Ah. So it's an anti-gay conspiracy now? I think you're wrong. Here's why:

The policy is also obviously biased against non-Christians since non-Christians are fine with having premarital sex...and thus seem more likely to spread the disease through out-of-wedlock intercourse. The government must be trying to ban anyone who is not Christian.

On the other hand, unitelligent people are more likely to engage in high-risk behavior...like unprotected sex...so it seems that the government is likely trying to ban stupid people in an effort to make our nation more intelligent. This may be an example of eugenics and a secret plan to make our citizens into a race of super-brains. It may have something to do with Hitler and Neo-nazis and creating a master race.

Of course, that's all nonsense compared to the REAL reason HIV people are banned. You see, it's all a plot created by the Vatican to install Bono as an "Uber Pope Dictator for Life" in order to lead a new inquisition. Think about it...they want to keep the HIV+ people in destitute situations around the world so that Bono can have a reasonable excuse for meeting with world leaders...and thus secretly advance the Catholic church's cause (which is global dominion). If all the HIV+ people were happy US citizens, Bono would have to just go back to singing at sold out stadium concerts.

[Green Gaia]

Originally Posted by Faint

Ah. So it's an anti-gay conspiracy now? I think you're wrong. Here's why:

Given the way the government treats gay people, the reason I gave for this actually has merit, yours does not.

[Ryan2065]

Originally Posted by Maize

The ban on allowing HIV infected people into the country is, I believe, not so much a public health concern but an erroneous assumption on the part of some that still believe AIDS and HIV to be a gay disease. Banning HIV infected people from entering the country, these officials believe, will keep out more gay people - which is just wrong. This is course just my opinion based the way gay people are treated by the government in this country.

Ahh yes, the gay conspiracy! Never mind the fact that they do also ban people who have other forms of STD's...

Originally Posted by Maize

Which binational same sex couples cannot do because they are not recongized by the federal government as a couple by not being able to get married.

See! It is biased against gay people, because if a gay person has HIV they cannot get the waiver unless they meet one of the other requirements ([be an] unmarried son or daughter, or the minor unmarried lawfully adopted child of a U.S. citizen or permanent resident; or have a son or daughter who is a U.S. citizen or permanent resident).

But it is biased against gay people because of the marriage laws in the US, not because of the law itself. Change the marriage laws and you get this law to not be biased They cannot exactly say "We will recognize same sex marriages for immigration purposes" but then say they won't recognize these marriages in other aspects... To me it is either all or nothing.

Originally Posted by Maize

Which is why an organization like ImmigrationEquality.org (which I talked about here) includes HIV positive people in their fight for immigration equality. Be they gay or not, they are being kept out because of prejudice against gays and Africans.

Again, why would we keep out others with STDs? You don't seem to mention this anywhere... What is more probable:

The law makers all got together and were like "Damn them gay people, we need to keep them out! How are we going to do this? Ah, yea, they all have AIDs!"

or

The law makers got together to come up with a law that would keep people with certain diseases out of the country. They decide to word this bill as "communicable diseases of public health significance" but they do realize many people could argue that HIV does not count here... They decide that they think HIV does count so they decide to add in "And by the way, this includes HIV"

So two questions here...

1) Should people with STDs be allowed into the country in general?

2) Should immigrants with HIV be allowed access to the health care programs from the government like the Ryan White Care Act?
http://hab.hrsa.gov/history.htm

[Booko]

Originally Posted by Ciscokid

But if the main spread of the disease is sticking your johnson into a diseased crack whore then NO the Government isn't at fault at all.

That is not the main vector of the spread of the disease, and I would greatly appreciate it if you raised the level of your discourse, not to mention, go educate yourself on this subject, as you are only spreading misinformation and yes, bigoted nonsense.

[Faint]

Originally Posted by Booko

This is pretty much what a special deal for HIV looks like from my pov as well, thus my previous comments about it being designed to keep out gays and black Africans.

Don't forget mexicans. They're not allowed to immigrate here at all. Ask Victor about that one. Of course, that likely has NOTHING to do with HIV. Could it be there are other factors for the immigration service maintaining the guidelines it has been issued? Do you think that a majority of Africans might also be uneducated/unskilled? There's one variable for you.

Originally Posted by Booko

There isn't a valid medical reason for keeping someone out of the country just because they are HIV positive.

Yes, there is actually. It's called "contagion". Repeat after me, "C-O-N-T-I-G-I-O-N". Contagion. Here's a link if you're still confused: http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/contagion

Originally Posted by Booko

And if we were really serious about stopping the spread of HIV, there are a lot of things we could do in terms of public education. But certain religious fanatics still labor under the assumption that HIV is a "gay disease."

I agree with this. Yes, we could be doing a lot more. But one other thing that get's in the way is misplaced compassion and tunnel vision. You want to help people. You want to give HIV+ people a chance. Yet you are STILL ignoring the threat they pose to our citizens, and you are missing the big picture. This line of thinking puts more people at risk than it helps. That is the bottom line.

Originally Posted by Booko

Heck, even in this thread you can see the still common idea that everyone who gets HIV somehow deserves it.

Hmm...I've never said this, or implied it. I just think it's primarily bad luck. A certain amount of personal responsibility is also involved, but sometimes circumstances are beyond the control of the individual. If I was going to place blame, it would have to be on a case by case basis.

Originally Posted by Booko

Not only is that untrue, but one wonders why that sort of blame isn't affixed to, oh, say those suffering from other diseases, like heart disease and strokes?

Those aren't contagious, so it's irrelevant. Although, we could start a thread to debate whether or not fast food restaurants are "spreading" heart disease and whether they need to be held accountable for it.

Originally Posted by Booko

Funny how NO ONE goes up to a heart attack victim and says, "Well, you got yourself here, so tough luck and no help for you."

I might blame them for their own predicament. Did they eat nothing but junk food for thirty years? Did they shun cardiovascular fitness? Again, my blame would need to be on a case by case basis. But I agree with the point: yes, there is more of a stigma with HIV+ people, and yes people tend to blame them for their own predicament. But now that you mention it, what percentage of HIV+ people in this country can say they did not act irresponsibly when they contracted the virus? In other words, what percentage had no exposure to AIDS awareness education, or were raped, or duped by an unfaithful lover? I'm curious. Stats anyone?

Originally Posted by Booko

This law seems more designed as a sop to certain political constituencies than as a means to deal with a public health issue.

I'm sure it somehow ties in with Area 51 and the Illuminati.

[Booko]

Originally Posted by Ciscokid

I was focusing on the US, not Africa. I may have not made that clear at first...but the thread is about the US so I thought it could be assumed.

Oh. Are there many people with HIV immigrating from America to America these days?

I hadn't noticed.

[Booko]

Originally Posted by Faint

The policy is also obviously biased against non-Christians since non-Christians are fine with having premarital sex...and thus seem more likely to spread the disease through out-of-wedlock intercourse. The government must be trying to ban anyone who is not Christian.

Show us how non-Christians are fine with premarital sex.

You can start with the Muslims, I suppose. Yeah, they're really well known for their lax moral standards when it comes to banging.

[Booko]

Originally Posted by Faint

I'm sure it somehow ties in with Area 51 and the Illuminati.

I take it from this you have nothing substantive left to say.