Ottawa police in Canada were just trying to do a good thing for groups like the Gay Men’s Wellness Initiative, by raising money with a pancake breakfast. Except the homos don’t want their blood money.
That’s because gay advocates there are furious with Ottawa cops’ handling the of Steven Paul Boone case, where the man was publicly outed as HIV-positive in the name of “public health”; anybody who had sex with him was told they were at risk, after Boone allegedly had unprotected exchanges with a slew of men without revealing his status — something that has him facing murder charges.
Brent Bauer, of the Ottawa Gay Men’s Wellness Initiative, said Boone was charged, not convicted, and was already in custody, posing no threat to the public. Bauer said Ottawa’s public health department should have handled the case.
By releasing the photo, Bauer said, police invaded Boone’s privacy, and spread fear among gays, who might now hesitate to get tested for AIDS.
Bauer said the gay community was particularly galled when the police department refused to discuss changing their policy. Many believe the law regarding HIV-positive disclosure is flawed, and guidelines are needed to help police decide whether to lay charges.
Not that the gay groups are really losing out on that much cash: the annual breakfast raises just a few hundred dollars every year. But for folks like Jay Koornstra, executive director of Bruce House, it’s the politics behind it: “Until such time that Police Services adopts a more conciliatory and consultative atmosphere (in handling HIV non-disclosure) … our position remains unchanged. We will not accept donations from Ottawa Police Service this year.”
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
Qjersey
“By releasing the photo, Bauer said, police invaded Boone’s privacy, and spread fear among gays, who might now hesitate to get tested for AIDS”
Yeah brilliant, and then the poor guys this asshole barebacked with won’t know to get tested.
His face should be on the front page of Manhunt “if you had bareback sex with this guy, you should get tested”
BP
Are you kidding me?!?!? That is the most ignorant thing I have heard in a while. If you have bareback sex with ANYONE you need to get tested… So many people just aren’t getting tested so they don’t (legally) have to stop having unprotected sex.
Cam
Fuck these groups. When Political correctness trumps people’s health and safety that is ridiculous. If he had ebola and was purposely infecting people would they be running around screaming about his privacy? Putting somebody in prison could be seen as an invasion of privacy if you took their argument to it’s ridiculous conclusion.
BP
Actually, I think it would do a great deal in lowering the HIV infection rate if the public were taught to assume responsibility for their own bodies. Being able to pass blame to people like the guy in the story, while then running all over the place barebacking with “negative-only” strangers is ridiculous. Keep in mind that someone can have HIV for years, but not be tested, and therefore claim to be “negative”, and go around fucking anyone and everyone, with absolutely no recourse. The second you get a positive test result, you are committing a felony in some states if you have sex. Bottom line, people have a responsibility to protect their OWN bodies, and until the passive population accepts this, HIV is going to be a growing problem. Period. That’s how I see it anyway.
PLAYS WELL WITH OTHERS
You are nuts if you are gonna BB, but at the absolute least if someone if going around infecting people with what is basically a dick of death and it is known that he is doing it there is nothing wrong with letting everyone know just what this little douchefag was up to………
Sorry the uninfected’s need to know the fact that they may indeed now be in the process of converting to posiitve status trump this assholes right to “privacy”
Cam
@BP:
This guy was purposely trying to infect somebody, if you read the reports, he didn’t accidentally pass this on. He was on a mission.
Joe
If this guy was purposefully infecting people, sure, let people know. My problem with this case (in Ottawa and other places in the U.S.) is that it is often treated quite differently by the police when it is a heterosexual who has HIV.
BP
Well damn, if that’s the case, yeah, he deserves some harsh punishment.
Jacob
Are you insane!
What about INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY!
This was caused because one guy ‘SAID’ he got infected. I was with this so called predator and he didn’t infect me! I know how to protect myself!
This is all “he said, he said” – nothing else! It’s not even gone to trial.
Queerty, thanks for proving you live in a perfect priviledged world by posting his picture again! We are so lucky to have you putting condoms on all of us.
All the perfect people and their right wing media have eviscerated him and sent him to the firing squad.
What if the poor victim is just a jilted lover?
I can’t wait to read your retractions and your apologies when it all comes out in the wash.
Jacob
tavdy79
@Jacob:
Saying something may well cost the police some face – but not saying something could shorten lives and increase the number of people with HIV, so which is the more responsible action? For me, the debate is over whether or not one man’s right to privacy is more important than the right of dozens of others to live, and to do so in good health. Irrespective of whether or not he was at fault, do you really think his right to privacy takes priority over their right to life?
Jacob
Thanks for the response TAVDY
I think that if this guy is guilty of purposely infecting people against their will, then for sure he should be charged with something.
But then, what about this guy (well, these guys) who’re having bareback sex … should we charge them with putting themselves in danger … maybe attempted suicide?
If this ‘victim’ is really a jilted lover, than the police and the press and the ‘right’ have ruined his life … Why not arrest him, like they did, contact his lover, which they did, and sort it out in court? Why did it have to be a media circus?
The law will not put a condom on you or your lover.
The law is not your protector. What happens now to this poor newly infected guy, is he now cursed to have the same reaction to him by a jilted X?
Do we reap what we sow? What are the next steps? Who is to blame? The top? The bottom? The barebackers? YOU? Me?
These are only questions.