Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Supreme Court of Canada rules you donít have to tell your sex partner if you have HIV
Life Side News ^ | 10/8/2012 | Thaddeus Baklinski

Posted on 10/09/2012 5:21:51 AM PDT by IbJensen

OTTAWA, October 8, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com) - In a landmark decision last Friday, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that people who are HIV-positive do not need to tell their sex partners they have the disease, as long as they have low levels of the virus and use a condom during sexual intercourse.

The 9-0 ruling says that the “realistic possibility of transmission of HIV is negated” if the infected person has a “low viral load and uses a condom”, superseding a 1998 decision.

Under the previous law, HIV-positive people who did not tell partners they had the virus could be charged with aggravated sexual assault, with a maximum penalty is life in jail.

According to a Canadian Press report, Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin, well known for activism on Canadian social issues, questioned prosecutors whether a requirement to disclose the disease to sex partners places too onerous a burden on HIV-positive people in light of medical advances in treatment of the incurable infection.

Friday’s unanimous ruling came from appeals of two separate cases involving convictions under the previous law.

(Clato Lual Mabior, who was deported to Sudan, did not tell a 12-year-old he had AIDS before intercourse.)

In 2008, former Winnipeg resident Clato Lual Mabior was charged with nine counts of aggravated sexual assault based on his failure to disclose his HIV-positive status to nine plaintiffs—one of whom was reportedly only 12 years old—before having sex with them.

The trial judge convicted him on six of the counts and acquitted him on three, sentencing him to 14 years in prison. An appeal court overturned four of the six convictions, on the basis that he had sexual intercourse using a condom and had a low viral load, which negated any risk of harm. The Crown appealed the acquittals, although Mabior was deported to Sudan in February 2012 after serving a reduced sentence.

In the other case, a Quebec woman, identified only as “D.C.” in court documents because of a publication ban, was convicted of sexual assault and aggravated assault for failing to disclose her HIV status to her former spouse. Her convictions were later overturned the Quebec Court of Appeal based on the fact that medical treatment had reduced her viral load to a negligible level.

The Supreme Court concluded in Mabio’s case “no realistic possibility of transmission was established,” but added that “does not preclude the common law from adapting to future advances in treatment and to circumstances where risk factors other than those considered in the present case are at play.”

The Crown’s appeal of D.C.‘s acquittals was dismissed by the Supreme Court with the reasoning that, “To convict, it was necessary to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that D.C. failed to disclose her HIV status to the complainant, where there was a significant risk of serious bodily harm.”

“The critical issue on the trial,” the court ruled, “was therefore whether a condom was used on the single pre-disclosure act of sexual intercourse between the complainant and D.C.”


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: canadasupremecourt; hiv; homosexualagenda; pedophiles
This ruling along with the promotion of homosexuality, pedophilia, eugenics and not least, abortion, are all designed by the "Elite" as they call themselves.

That group of men and women who want a Global Government with them ruling and controlling it. They have sai(ala Mao Zedong) that it is "necessary" to cull the worlds' population of a few billion and that they'd do it gradually, by implementation of laws. They control the decisions made in the UN. They are godless, cruel, extremely wealthy and power-hungry.

What Canada and the United States are allowing to emigrate contributes to the problem. These nations from whence these emigrees come are mostly muslim nations that look not unkindly upon sex with children. This sin, described in this article is one that cries to heaven for vengeance as well as a millstone.

1 posted on 10/09/2012 5:22:00 AM PDT by IbJensen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

Horrible. Condoms are not 100% effective


2 posted on 10/09/2012 5:24:30 AM PDT by TigerClaws
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

must protect the butt pluggers at all costs !


3 posted on 10/09/2012 5:26:03 AM PDT by TexasFreeper2009 (Obama lied .. the economy died.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009

So if a Canandian fires a gun at you, it’s ok as long as only a few of the chambers contain bullets. That reduces the probability that you’ll be killed. Plus, he could be a lousy shot. Plus, even if he hits you, you might survive. Plus, he may not have intended to kill you.


4 posted on 10/09/2012 5:31:21 AM PDT by generally (Don't be stupid. We have politicians for that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009

the pluggers, but apparently not the plugees.


5 posted on 10/09/2012 5:32:24 AM PDT by HerrBlucher (Praise to the Lord the Almighty the King of Creation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

Protecting the rights of QUEERS by endangering the innocent. How sick and twisted!


6 posted on 10/09/2012 6:11:19 AM PDT by MrDem (Founder: Democrats for Cheney/Palin 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrDem

Who are these “innocent” people you speak of?


7 posted on 10/09/2012 6:15:57 AM PDT by LearsFool ("Thou shouldst not have been old, till thou hadst been wise.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: TigerClaws
"Horrible. Condoms are not 100% effective"

Last I heard they were only 80% effective for pregnancy and a sperm is a lot larger than the HIV virus. Imagaine a bottle with 10 asprin in it. Now imagine that someone tells you two of those "asprin" are really deadly cyanide poison but look exactly like the 8 asprin they nestle among. If you had a headache would you feel safe taking one of the "asprin"?

8 posted on 10/09/2012 6:19:03 AM PDT by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen
Liberal decisions are always unclear and undefined:

as long as they have low levels of the virus and use a condom during sexual intercourse.

This is not enforceable. You can already see the problem: define "low levels of the virus"?

Liberalism puts the onus on the wrong party. Transparency and logic would lead to the opposite conclusion and ruling .

9 posted on 10/09/2012 6:22:51 AM PDT by 1010RD (First, Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigerClaws

I’m female.
I used to chat with my male friends about their bragging of going out chasing woment and their one-night stands.

I would always ask, “If you saw a woman who was extremely beautiful, but you knew for SURE she had HIV, would you have sex with her?” They always answered NO.

Yet they’d go have sex, often unprotected, with women they didn’t know. Never made sense to me.


10 posted on 10/09/2012 6:27:28 AM PDT by a real Sheila (RYAN/romney 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LearsFool

A 12 year old?


11 posted on 10/09/2012 6:43:36 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: LearsFool

Why don’t you start here - “one of whom was reportedly only 12 years old”


12 posted on 10/09/2012 6:44:04 AM PDT by MrDem (Founder: Democrats for Cheney/Palin 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MrDem; onedoug

Was this 12-year-old raped? I didn’t see that in the article.


13 posted on 10/09/2012 7:01:28 AM PDT by LearsFool ("Thou shouldst not have been old, till thou hadst been wise.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: TigerClaws

Yep.

I friend of mine, who practiced “safe sex”, and later discovered her “boyfriend” was a switch-hitter, was diagnosed with HIV in the mid 90s. She developed full-blown AIDS in 2004. The boyfriend died before she found out she had contracted the disease from him. She found out when she went to give blood, and the blood bank called her in to discuss her donation. She told me that she saw the form with her name on it, and it was stamped “Condemned”.:(

Unbelievably, she is still alive, even after a stroke and being revived from flatlining. She has been using a walker and wears a diaper, and she is only in her late 40s.

Yep, those condoms sure protected her!


14 posted on 10/09/2012 7:08:58 AM PDT by Shelayne (Even so, come quickly, Lord Jesus!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LearsFool

No you are right, 12 year-olds are old enough to give reasoned, mature consent and we should change the age of consent down to 10 to make people like you happy that they can’t claim to be victims of predators. /sarcasm


15 posted on 10/09/2012 7:20:30 AM PDT by MrDem (Founder: Democrats for Cheney/Palin 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MrDem

Oh, so your only objection to this ruling is that it doesn’t protect minors?

News flash: There are already laws protecting minors from sexual predators.


16 posted on 10/09/2012 7:27:36 AM PDT by LearsFool ("Thou shouldst not have been old, till thou hadst been wise.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: circlecity

Or, imagine a 10-cylinder revolver. Would you feel safer playing Russian Roulette with IT than a standard 6-shooter?


17 posted on 10/09/2012 7:30:37 AM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: LearsFool

Don’t change the subject. YOU don’t consider a 12 year old a “ victim” unless they were raped. You have problems, get help.


18 posted on 10/09/2012 7:41:27 AM PDT by MrDem (Founder: Democrats for Cheney/Palin 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: MrDem
Protecting the rights of QUEERS by endangering the innocent.

Those are your words. That's your summary of this ruling.

If the "innocent" you refer to is the 12-year-old, this ruling does nothing whatsoever to endanger him, since there are already laws to protect him and to punish the sexual predator.

No, you didn't mean the 12-year-old when you said "innocent". You meant the person who got AIDS by engaging in perverse sexual acts with the person who has AIDS.

Innocent, my eye.
19 posted on 10/09/2012 7:51:30 AM PDT by LearsFool ("Thou shouldst not have been old, till thou hadst been wise.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen
Supreme Court of Canada rules you don’t have to tell your sex partner if you have HIV

What next? A cab driver doesn't have to tell you he's been drinking before you get in his cab??????

20 posted on 10/09/2012 7:54:57 AM PDT by massmike (The choice is clear in November: Romney or Caligula!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LearsFool

You very, very specifically asked whether the 12 year had been raped, implying that if they had not, they were not innocent. You need help.


21 posted on 10/09/2012 8:13:15 AM PDT by MrDem (Founder: Democrats for Cheney/Palin 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: LearsFool

A twelve year old cannot give consent to sex. Therefore, yes, he or she was raped.


22 posted on 10/09/2012 8:35:41 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: fwdude
imagine a 10-cylinder revolver

It would probably be .22 caliber. A 10-cylinder revolver of higher caliber would be too cumbersome.

23 posted on 10/09/2012 8:43:23 AM PDT by Jeff Chandler (Romney vs Obama, Round One: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyNxHOZiQPA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: MrDem

Don’t change the subject. YOU don’t consider a 12 year old a “ victim” unless they were raped. You have problems, get help.
*********************************************

I’m not saying I agree or not, but I seem to recall years ago (1950s, 1960s, ?) that the age of consent in Arkansas (and more states?) was 11 or 12. Who needs help?


24 posted on 10/09/2012 8:48:06 AM PDT by Ex-Democrat Dean
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Ex-Democrat Dean; MrDem

In the eyes of some, until a person’s 18th birthday, he is “innocent” and pure as the driven snow. And if he gets AIDS from engaging in sodomy, it’s because he was forced.

Oh, and apparently there are no laws to punish the over-18 pervert who “raped” him, right? So instead we have to make do with charging the pervert for not warning him about the risk of AIDS from being “raped”.

(And then they say I’M the one who needs help. Go figure.)

No, the fact that the man wasn’t charged with rape signals that the 12-year-old was a willing participant in the sodomy, and judged capable of doing so.

“Innocent”? By no means.

A victim? Certainly. No 12-year-old who decides to engage in sodomy comes up with the idea on his own. He got it from somewhere.

But the minimum age for suffering the consequences of one’s decisions is a lot lower than 12. That’s determined not in a court of law, but in the world governed by the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.

I wish this kid had chosen differently, just as I wish he’d grown up in a world where this depraved behavior need never even be discussed in public.


25 posted on 10/09/2012 9:58:04 AM PDT by LearsFool ("Thou shouldst not have been old, till thou hadst been wise.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: LearsFool
No 12-year-old who decides to engage in sodomy comes up with the idea on his own. He got it from somewhere.

And the person or persons who planted the idea in his head need to be either expelled from our communities or executed. The destruction wrought on our children by this evil makes the playground drug pusher look like Mr. Rogers by comparison.
26 posted on 10/09/2012 10:11:40 AM PDT by LearsFool ("Thou shouldst not have been old, till thou hadst been wise.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Shelayne

Suddenly sex sounds less and less desireable.


27 posted on 10/09/2012 11:47:38 AM PDT by POWERSBOOTHEFAN (Keep on keepin' on. And that ain't no jive. Stuck in the Seventies and loving it! 1976,baby!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson