Skip to main content

View Diary: UPDATED: Pat Robertson accuses gays of wearing special rings to intentionally spread HIV (161 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  In fairness to Robertson, his first statement (0+ / 0-)

    seems quite reasonable.

    “What to say if you’re driving an elderly man whose got AIDS? Don’t have sex with them,” Robertson said, “unless there’s a cut or some bodily fluid transmission, I think you’re not going to catch it.”
    And what, exactly, is wrong with that?  This seems totally correct and reasonable.  You should not worry about associating with HIV+ people, but you should probably not have sex with them and you're not going to get AIDS unless there is a cut or some bodily fluid transmission.
    In my own experience, our organization sponsored a meeting years ago in San Francisco where trained security officers warned me about shaking hands because, in those days, certain AIDS-infected activists were deliberately trying to infect people like me by virtue of rings which would cut fingers and transfer blood.
    In the early years of the "gay plague" there were certainly people who suggested that surreptitiously infecting politically powerful people, especially those who did not support spending money on AIDS and who wanted quarantines and similar restrictions on HIV+ people would be an effective way to change attitudes.  

    I am not aware of anyone who actually did this, but there were definitely cases like Kimberly Bergalis.  Everyone remember her?  I think there is little doubt that her dentist deliberately infected her and six other of his patients.  (Indeed, if the infections were accidental then that would mean that AIDS could be easily transmitted from HIV+ health care workers to their patients and we would need to have public health regulations preventing HIV+ people from performing many tasks.

    Obviously, we will never know what Robertson's security staff told him, but having that fear for Robertson in San Francisco back in the 80s or 90s would not have been completely delusional.

    •  Oh... and see this... (0+ / 0-)

      http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...

      Edward Parsons, a nurse from Miami Beach, gave sworn testimony that his close friend, David Acer, might have deliberately infected patients to draw attention to AIDS. Parsons had no proof - just a gut feeling.
      Whether or not Parsons was correct, any security person would need to consider this motive - imagine the attention AIDS would have gotten if Robertson had been infected.
    •  wrong. Not "reasonable" (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MBNYC, terrypinder, Cassandra Waites
      You should not worry about associating with HIV+ people, but you should probably not have sex with them and you're not going to get AIDS unless there is a cut or some bodily fluid transmission.
      First place you don't "catch" AIDS.  Please understand that there is a distinction between HIV and AIDS.  Second - there are plenty of people who have HIV poz partners who are negative who safely have sex.  

      This kind of statement tends to reenforce stigma....the "unless there is a cut" remark

      A cut where?  Bodily fluid transmission? How?  Vague.

      Join us on the Black Kos front porch to review news and views written from a black pov—everyone is welcome.

      by Denise Oliver Velez on Wed Aug 28, 2013 at 12:57:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  This is kind of silly. (0+ / 0-)
        irst place you don't "catch" AIDS.  Please understand that there is a distinction between HIV and AIDS.
        That's like saying that you don't catch paralytic polio, you just catch the poliomyelitis virus.  It is a distinction without a difference.  
        Second - there are plenty of people who have HIV poz partners who are negative who safely have sex.
        True... but does not change the fact that this is a high risk activity.

        I really don't see what you are trying to make a fuss about.  He's telling this woman "You can associate with HIV+ people without being at risk as long as you don't have sex with them, get their blood on you, or otherwise exchange bodily fluids."  I think that's a pretty enlightened attitude - I would not have been surprised if he had told her not to touch him.

        This kind of statement tends to reenforce stigma....the "unless there is a cut" remark

        A cut where?  Bodily fluid transmission? How?  Vague.

        Does it matter where the cut is?  

        As for the bodily fluid transmission, are you seriously expecting him to give a lecture on the different levels of risk from saliva, blood, semen, urine, and feces?

    •  Um. (4+ / 0-)
      In the early years of the "gay plague" there were certainly people who suggested that surreptitiously infecting politically powerful people,
      I am not aware of anyone who actually did this,
      You're not aware because there is no known instance of this happening.

      There is no question that there are poz folks who are irresponsible with the virus. But for the vast majority of us, rendering the former at best statistical noise, HIV is a huge responsibility. I don't have sex with neg guys, with or without protection, period, because I don't want that hanging over my head. Not even if they're naked, hard and begging, and yes, this has happened.

      Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

      by MBNYC on Wed Aug 28, 2013 at 05:45:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Shrug... Pat Robertson's security were presumably (0+ / 0-)

        unconcerned with the majority of HIV+ people most of whom would have had no interest in having anything to do with him.

        They were presumably concerned with the people in that "statistical noise".  

        A quick Internet search finds plenty of such people.  For example: http://www.whas11.com/...

        A Greenwood, Indiana man is in jail on accusations that he knowingly and intentionally spread the AIDS virus to hundreds of women.
        •  Do me and everyone else a huge favor (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Denise Oliver Velez

          and drop this line of inquiry. It's ipso facto bigoted and serophobic.

          You're a new user here, if you think this is a good way to establish a benefit to this community from your presence, it's not.

          Some people here, including myself, live with this virus. We can either argue with you, or go the easier, quicker route, which is hiding your comments and getting your ass banned. You're very close to that line, I suggest you not cross it.

          Thanks.

          Fuck me, it's a leprechaun.

          by MBNYC on Wed Aug 28, 2013 at 07:52:05 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

  • Recommended (146)
  • Community (72)
  • 2016 (57)
  • Elections (47)
  • Environment (46)
  • Media (42)
  • Republicans (39)
  • Hillary Clinton (37)
  • Trans-Pacific Partnership (34)
  • Law (33)
  • Iraq (32)
  • Civil Rights (32)
  • Barack Obama (32)
  • Culture (32)
  • Climate Change (30)
  • Jeb Bush (30)
  • Economy (25)
  • Labor (25)
  • Bernie Sanders (21)
  • Congress (20)
  • Click here for the mobile view of the site