Sunday, April 11, 2010

The Progressive's Newest Human Right

This is utterly outragous. The progressive's newest human right is one you won't within the text of the Constitution. According to International Planned Parenthood, each person has a right to a "fun, happy and sexually fulfilling lives" and that, within the penumbra of that right, those with AIDS or HIV have a right to engage in sex without informing their partner that they are infected. This from CNS News:

In a guide for young people published by the International Planned Parenthood Federation, the organization says it opposes laws that make it a crime for people not to tell sexual partners they have HIV. The IPPF's “Healthy, Happy and Hot” guide also tells young people who have the virus that they have a right to “fun, happy and sexually fulfilling lives.” . . .

“Some countries have laws that say people living with HIV must tell their sexual partner(s) about their status before having sex, even if they use condoms or only engage in sexual activity with a low risk of giving HIV to someone else,” the guide states. “These laws violate the rights of people living with HIV by forcing them to disclose or face the possibility of criminal charges.”

Under the heading “Sexual Pleasure and Well-Being,” the guide declares that it is a human right and not a criminal issue as to whether a person decides if or when to disclose their HIV status, even if they engage in sexual activities.

“You know best when it is safe for you to disclose your status,” the guide states. “There are many reasons that people do not share their HIV status. They may not want people to know they are living with HIV because of the stigma and discrimination within their community.”

The guide continues: “They may worry that people will find out something else they have kept secret, like that they are using injecting drugs or, having sex outside of marriage or having sex with people of the same gender. People in long-term relationships who find out they are living with HIV sometime fear that their partner will react violently or end the relationship.”

“Young people living with HIV have the right to sexual pleasure,” the guide states under the heading “Sexual Pleasure; Have Fun Explore and Be Yourself.” . . .

I wrote in a post here that when morality becomes unmoored from the Judeo-Christian ethics, then the left is able to invent all sorts of new "rights" based on whatever they choose to define as the greater good. This is a prime example. In this case, the left is elevating the desires of infected individuals above all others, disregarding an innocent partner's right to make an informed choice as to whether or to refuse sex in order to prevent possible transmission of a fatal virus. No person has a "right" to endanger the life of another for their own personal pleasure - unless, of course, you are making up your own morality as you go along.


OBloodyHell said...

> I wrote in a post here that when morality becomes unmoored from the Judeo-Christian ethics...

I think it is potentially ethnocentric to assume it is only JC ethics which are the source of an acceptable ideal, but, there's no question the whole position put forth by the Left, esp. in the arena of homosexuality and its connection to HIV, is morally bankrupt.

Luckily, that's mostly self-infecting, as anyone with JC ethics isn't all that likely to get or spread HIV (not saying they CAN'T, just that it's more a result of their own practices that it spreads at all well, it's a particularly ineffective transmitter, esp. via "normal" vaginal intercourse).

The much better complaint is the idea that those who don't engage in risky practices are on the hook for the medical bills of the ones who do.

Tim D. said...

I can't read the PDF of the guide from IPPF, but if the quotes in that article are correct, then that is certainly a disturbing view on AIDS/HIV prevention.

FTR, I identify as a left-leaning centrist; however, I do not support views like the one presented in that document. I understand what your point is and I basically agree that this is an irresponsible way to manage the spread of AIDS/HIV, but I really do believe it's a bit hasty to blame "the left" for this. IPPF is an organization that does not necessarily represent the views of every person on the left.

just that it's more a result of their own practices that it spreads at all well, it's a particularly ineffective transmitter, esp. via "normal" vaginal intercourse).

That's really not true. Anywhere on the body where there is moisture and membranous tissue has a greatly-increased risk of transmission of venereal disease, whether it's HIV/AIDS or something else --- the mouth and the vagina, for instance, have very similar likelihoods of becoming infected during a sexual act. In fact, one could make a case that it's actually *easier* (in a biological sense) to get AIDS/HIV from "straight" sex than from gay sex. The statistics of gays being more prone to HIV/AIDS is due more to the reputation that gays have for being promiscuous than it is specifically related to anal or oral sex acts.

GW said...

Tim: Thank you for your response. The point you raise regarding "the left" is valid to a point. You are a comparatively rare breed - an intellectually honest person left of center. I had thought that group near extinct after the passing of Daniel Patrick Moynihan - a man whom I would have voted for any office.

With that in mind, perhaps my use of the word "left" is overbroad and, if so, I do apologize. But if not "left," what would you suggest I substitute? Far left? Unfortunately, my perception is that the "far left" of yesteryear is now the dominant portion of the "left" today. But I would solicit your thoughts.

At any rate, my ultimate point in drafting this post was part of a much larger belief of mine that the "socialist left" / "far left" has long sought to rip religion from the public square and insert a relativist morality in its stead - something I believe very dangerous to our nation indeed. I have explained this theory in a post, The War On Religion.

And as to how that has been carried out in the U.S., The AP Goes APE. Perhaps those posts will give you a fuller idea of the ultimate point that I am trying to make in this post.

My issue is not with intellectually honest people "left of center," but it is in a larger sense with those on the left who are attempting to move our nation far from its roots.