midkiff@uiucdcsb.CS.UIUC.EDU (02/11/86)
/* Written 4:44 pm Jan 30, 1986 by rrizzo@bbncca.ARPA in uiucdcsb:net.motss */ /* ---------- "AIDS virus in prison evaporates bas" ---------- */ >In case anyone doubts how little basic rights are respected concerning >AIDS, NPR's "All Things Considered" tonight told of an inmate in a >Kansas City prison who's being kept in isolation merely because he >tested positive to HTLV-III! The prisoner is in effect serving a >sentence he wasn't given, ie, one of solitary confinement. The rationale >is, even if the prisoner never develops AIDS (he doesn't even show signs >of ARC), he might still be capable of transmitting the virus to another >who could subsequently come down with full-blown AIDS. The warden added >an even lamer excuse: he was protecting said prisoner against the violent >reactions of other prisoners who fear AIDS. Why is quarantining someone with the ability to transmit a fatal disease the ability of someone being able to transmit a fatal disease a lame excuse? I keep reading things that say, in effect "why do anything about people infected with the virus since the they may not develop aids?" The point that is missed with this idiocy is that most people are not opposed to individuals walking around with fatal conditions, but rather to individuals walking around who can give them a fatal condition. I know of no one who thinks heart patients, emphysema patients, etc. should be quarantined, even though the may drop dead at any moment, because their afflictions cannot harm others. Nevertheless, many states restrict people with active tuberculosis from holding certain jobs, and restrict people with untreated epilepsy from perfroming certain task, because their afflictions can harm other people. If AIDS was not contagious, or if people with full blown AIDS were not contagious, society would probably be a lot less concerned about people with AIDS walking about. But the odds are that anyone who tests positive to HTLVIII is infectious, and possibly more infectious than individuals who are symptomatic. Therefore whether an infected individual ever actually comes down with AIDS or ARC is beside the point to society at large. Studies in some prisons have shown that much less than half of the inmates have been exposed to the virus. Although it may be unfair to make someone who sells heroin spend a few years (or maybe months, giving sentencing in this country) alone because he has been infected, it doesn't seem as unfair as sentencing another inmate to death when he is gang raped by one or more infected individuals. When you commit crimes one of the chances you take is that you will be deprived of some basic freedoms - one of those freedoms being the ability to murder by infecting other people with your fatal diseases. /* Written 6:05 pm Feb 7, 1986 by mgdlin@violet.berkeley.edu in uiucdcsb:net.motss */ >over the winter, I heard (also on NPR) about the Denver jail >using color coded uniforms to distinguish Gay prisoners from >others. The same lame argument about protection was made, but >it sure sounds like Pink Triangles to me. > >(Pink triangles were the badge used by the Nazis to designate >Gay prisoners in the concentration camps, is case you haven't >read about it. An excellent book is The Men With the Pink >Triangles.) Gary Lindsay /* End of text from uiucdcsb:net.motss */ Although some people might claim that all homosexuals, whether criminal or not, are equal, I am astonished to see someone purporting to be pro-homosexual make this claim. The Nazis used pink triangles specifically to sort out people for death and slave labor. Admittedly the ACLU and their ilk would like the rest of us to believe that we are either on the verge of, or have slipped into, the horrors of fascism in this country, but we are thankfully a long way from it. It is an insult to those who died under the Nazis to equate their ordeals with the inability of convicted criminals to dress as they want. Sam Midkiff {ihnp4 | pur-ee}!uiucdcs!midkiff
rrizzo@bbncca.ARPA (Ron Rizzo) (02/13/86)
What in the world is "murder by infecting others?" Would Sam quarantine all carriers of hepatitis, herpes, HTLV-III (millions of them just in the US)? If not, then why (selectively) quarantine prisoners? Because under law as prisoners they forfeit some rights? On prison clothes: The issue is clearly not one of a right to freedom of wardrobe, but coercively identifying & stigmatizing people on the basis of a group characteristic (which is also despised), PRECISELY what the Nazis did in their camps with colored triangles. Sam would be entitled to to his indignation if he could think or reason clearly. Unfortunately, he can't. Ron Rizzo
blueskye@sun.uucp (Tim Ryan) (02/13/86)
In article 2492, posted 11 Feb 86 19:14:00 GMT, midkiff@uiucdcsb.CS.UIUC.EDU writes > > > /* Written 4:44 pm Jan 30, 1986 by rrizzo@bbncca.ARPA in uiucdcsb:net.motss */ > /* ---------- "AIDS virus in prison evaporates bas" ---------- */ > >In case anyone doubts how little basic rights are respected concerning > >AIDS, NPR's "All Things Considered" tonight told of an inmate in a > >Kansas City prison who's being kept in isolation merely because he > >tested positive to HTLV-III! > > Why is quarantining someone with the ability to transmit a fatal disease > the ability of someone being able to transmit a fatal disease a lame > excuse? It's an extremely lame excuse. It is a breach of someone's fundamental civil rights without due process, and without supporting scientific evidence. Period. > > But the odds are that anyone who tests positive > to HTLVIII is infectious, and possibly more infectious than individuals > who are symptomatic. Therefore whether an infected individual ever actually > comes down with AIDS or ARC is beside the point to society at large. > Garbage. There is *no* proof or evidence to show that anyone who tests HTLV3 positive is infectious. There is evidence to suggest that those who test HTLV3 postive have between a 10 and 15% chance of being diagnosed with one or more of the opportunistic infections associated with AIDS within 5 years after testing HTLV3 positive. Pretty low odds! This *fact* is not beside the point. It has further been shown that HTLV3 is *very* difficult to transmit, and that it probably requires multiple exposure to get the retrovirus. > > When you commit crimes one of the chances you take is > that you will be deprived of some basic freedoms - one of those freedoms being > the ability to murder by infecting other people with your fatal diseases. > What crime has someone who is infected with HTLV3 committed? If you mean to imply that all HTLV3 exposed people are homosexual, and that homosexuality is a crime, you are wrong. Not all HTLV3-positive people are homosexual men. Fact. And consensual acts between adults are not illegal in many states, and for that matter, a lot of what goes on between heteros is statute illegal. That you think that anyone who has committed a crime is to be deprived of the basic right to life, you are one sick puppy. > > The Nazis used pink triangles specifically to sort out > people for death and slave labor. > Wrong. The Nazis used pink triangles specifically to single out homosexuals in concentration camps, just as they used stars of david to identify Jews and cirles to identify "intellectuals." Everyone was at risk for death in the concentration camps. > > It is an insult to those who died under > the Nazis to equate their ordeals with the inability of convicted criminals > to dress as they want. > We're not talking about the right of people to dress in their Calvin's in prison. We're talking about the singling out people for the soul reason that they may be infectious, they may be homosexual, they may be diagnosed with AIDS/ARC. There is nothing to support any of those contentions in being diagnosed HTLV3 positive. There is no relationship between HTLV3 and one's sexuality, gender, race, color, creed, religion, eye color, national origin, IQ, or food preferences. NONE. Viruses don't discriminate, people do.