Apparently, it may be illegal to have an STI in Oklahoma soon...
@Heucuva8 Why does their stupidity hurt me so badly?
y’all lol.
♥️
intentionally or recklessly spreading an infection or disease is assault that can badly impact someone’s life forever.
“If signed into law, House Bill 3098 would criminalize the intentional or reckless spread of STIs”
I think, of course, there will be cases with gray areas where somebody may be wrongly convicted, but overall a judge needs to see definitive proof to convict somebody of this, overall I think it’s a good thing. It’s this way in California, @JGNWYRK @Heucuva8
Define "reckless". A religious zealot may define it to mean "anyone having sex outside of marriage".
Still think it's a good idea?
@Heucuva8 @Armchaircouch @JGNWYRK
This interested me, and apparently there are laws in my state -- and people have been prosecuted -- if a person knows their HIV status is positive and engage in sexual behavior that poses a significant risk of transmission.
They can face felony charges for assaulting someone using bodily fluids with intent to transmit, failing to disclose their HIV status with needle-sharing partners or failing to disclose their status before donating blood or body tissues.
@Heucuva8 @Armchaircouch @JGNWYRK
So I think the laws have to be written in a very specific and precise way? Right?
I mean.... that makes sense to me, sort of. It is more precise than "reckless".
In the law recklessness is specific. ie:
“Recklessness is different–and more serious–than mere negligence. Recklessness refers to a situation where a person knowingly does something dangerous or willfully disregards the safety of other people or property. It may also be called gross negligence or willful or wanton behavior”
some people may not now get tested when symptomatic (yuck, yikes!), but there will be Dr. records when others have go for symptoms.
@janallmac @Heucuva8 @JGNWYRK
I definitely do however, that does not mean that people who recklessly spread diseases should not be charged with assault.
@Heucuva8 @janallmac @JGNWYRK
Imagine you're a VERY CONSERVATIVE Christian. That description is exactly how they would describe anyone who has sex outside of marriage, or more specifically, outside of deliberate procreation. Now apply it to a gay couple, who are CLEARLY not trying to make babies.
See how it would be politically abused?
@Armchaircouch @janallmac @JGNWYRK