rrizzo@bbncca.ARPA (Ron Rizzo) (01/31/86)
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. Considering that 1/3 of all prisoners have a history of drug use and addiction, that homosexual acts and rape are common in American prisons, it's clear many prisoners in every prison probably are infected with the AIDS virus, which makes the above inmate's isolation incredibly hypocri- tical. The real danger is not his probable infection but the mere public knowledge of it. Convicted criminals (he's in on a heroin charge) may forfeit many basic civil rights & liberties, but not all, & not their fundamental, or "human" rights (to life, to be free of torture, etc.). Nonprisoners would never tolerate such treatment. The difference seems to be power: American gays now have a fairly powerful political movement and other institutions to protect their interests; prisoners have none. So much for the alleged basic decency or even lawfulness of the "authorities"! What holds them in check apparently is simply countervailing power. The ACLU is looking into the Kansas City case. Cheers, Ron Rizzo
laura@hoptoad.uucp (Laura Creighton) (02/02/86)
In article <1679@bbncca.ARPA> rrizzo@bbncca.ARPA (Ron Rizzo) writes: >The warden added >an even lamer excuse: he was protecting said prisoner against the violent >reactions of other prisoners who fear AIDS. > I have some Gay friends who have been arrested in Toronto Ontario. When word got around that they were Gay, they were subject to a lot of violence in prison -- something to the order of -- ``he's gay, so it is fine to gang rape him -- after all, he loves this stuff.'' Solitary confinement sucks, but I don't think that this is a lame excuse. -- Laura Creighton ihnp4!hoptoad!laura hoptoad!laura@lll-crg.arpa
mgdlin@violet.berkeley.edu (02/08/86)
In article <1679@bbncca.ARPA> rrizzo@bbncca.ARPA (Ron Rizzo) writes: >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. > >Considering that 1/3 of all prisoners have a history of drug use and >addiction, that homosexual acts and rape are common in American prisons, >it's clear many prisoners in every prison probably are infected with the >AIDS virus, which makes the above inmate's isolation incredibly hypocri- >tical. The real danger is not his probable infection but the mere public >knowledge of it. > >Convicted criminals (he's in on a heroin charge) may forfeit many basic >civil rights & liberties, but not all, & not their fundamental, or "human" >rights (to life, to be free of torture, etc.). Nonprisoners would never >tolerate such treatment. The difference seems to be power: American gays >now have a fairly powerful political movement and other institutions >to protect their interests; prisoners have none. So much for the alleged >basic decency or even lawfulness of the "authorities"! What holds them >in check apparently is simply countervailing power. > >The ACLU is looking into the Kansas City case. > > > Cheers, > Ron Rizzo Unfortunately, Gays and prison do not make a happy mix. Sometime 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.) If we want to protect ourselves, we cannot rely on some sense of social justice from even our so called liberal friends. The only way to ensure that we don't end up in "protective" isolation is to kick the enemy in the balls. Don't forget that it was the drag queens (another unpopular group to the politically correct) who starte modern Gay liberation at the Stonewall. (As another aside, I an just finding out about this bulletin board. If this article doesn't make sense or fails to meet standards of the management, blame it on poor documentation at Berkeley.) Gary Lindsay