Vincent Walkem, now 30 years old, is currently being prosecuted for having sexual intercourse while lying to his partners about his HIV-positive status. You can read about the case here, here, and here. The chronology, in brief: girl meets guy (in a bar, no less), girl sleeps with him shortly after they start dating, girl finds out he's HIV-positive after he's assured her "he's fine" and that he doesn't need to use a condom (presumably she's on the Pill), girl then finds out she's HIV-positive, too. Oh, the humanity!Whoop-de-do.
She whines:
Pope Paul VI had it right when he wrote against contraception in Humanae Vitae:
"Responsible men can become more deeply convinced of the truth of the doctrine laid down by the Church on this issue if they reflect on the consequences of methods and plans for artificial birth control. Let them first consider how easily this course of action could open wide the way for marital infidelity and a general lowering of moral standards. Not much experience is needed to be fully aware of human weakness and to understand that human beings—and especially the young, who are so exposed to temptation—need incentives to keep the moral law, and it is an evil thing to make it easy for them to break that law. Another effect that gives cause for alarm is that a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection."Compare and contrast: "reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires" and "consider her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection."
And what, pray tell, did Vincent Walkem say when asked by the judge why he lied about his HIV-positive status?
"There's nothing I can say that can justify it. I wish it never happened," Walkem said. "I hope in the future to seek counselling to figure out why I made these terrible decisions."Uh-huh. Counselling?
Psst — hey Vincent, rent a clue: you're a sinner (like the rest of us).
Trouble is, Vincent bought the lies our culture tells us (about lots of things).
Vast sums of money are being spent on developing treatments for HIV/AIDS — it's all going down the drain so long as we don't get people to change their behaviour. We can only do this if we change our thinking. There are many serious problems in the world: for starters, we're killing millions of unborn children. Developing expensive treatments so we can indulge our self-destructive behaviours shouldn't be high on our priority list. AIDS prevention through chastity education is a better strategy. Don't take my word for it — listen to this guy.
And what of the (now) 23-year old woman who tested HIV-positive?
The woman described how she suffers from frequent colds, "night sweats," fatigue and fevers, as well as depression, panic attacks and insomnia.Because of these "permanent anxieties," she said in her victim impact statement, she's "unable to indulge in the relatively carefree life" of her friends.
Carefree life? Is that code language for immorality? Sorry, girl, game over. Think about using your situation to explain to others what sleeping around did to you. Otherwise, you're being as obtuse as the man who infected you.
We all are — unless we repent, and "Go, sin no more." (Jn 8:11)
3 comments:
Lets start with this:
Matthew 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged
As clearly you prefer to pick and choose which verse to use when writing your ignorant, incorrect and hateful words let me enlighten you.
The woman you speak of in this piece is a friend of mine and not only is she a very good and wholesome person she is neither "immoral" "sleeping around" or "obtuse" as you so kindly put it. She was very young when she was infected and he was much older than her. He took advantage of her trust in the goodness and honesty of humanity and she - and she alone - has paid the price for this.
It makes my stomach turn and my blood boil to read how nonchalantly you just write her off as someone deserving of a life full of anxiety, pain, illness, and loss. You say that next to God family is most important to you - do you not think that this woman has family and friends who love her? Do you think that these words are kind to them, not to mention to her? Where is your compassion for humanity? Where is you morality?
Perhaps you should put yourself in her shoes, perhaps you should think about what it would be like if you were taken advantage of, suffered a great deal as a result, and then had to read the malicious, deceptive, ignorant and foolish words of people like you.
Perhaps you should practice this motto: think before you type because I'm sure God does not look fondly on people who use his word to demoralize and defame others.
Smarten up.
An anonymous coward by the prideful and pretentious label "foesoftheignorant" lectured me:
"Lets start with this: Matthew 7:1 Judge not, that ye be not judged"
Many people like to take this verse out of context to use as a coverup for the fact that they don't wish to be held accountable for their actions. As I wrote in the conclusion to my post, Jesus admonished the adulterous woman: "Go, sin no more." Notice, He didn't say "Go and lead a carefree life." In other words, if she didn't repent, didn't seek God's mercy, didn't resolve to avoid sin and the near-occasion of sin, and instead continued to disregard and disobey His commands, she would bring judgment on herself.
You fumed:
"As clearly you prefer to pick and choose which verse to use when writing"
And you don't? You did the very thing you accused me of doing, by citing Matthew 7:1 out of context.
"your ignorant, incorrect and hateful words let me enlighten you."
By writing those words, you're judging me, so you've contradicted yourself and are not practicing what you preach. See, now that's called hypocrisy.
I think the person who needs to smarten up is you, not me.
God knows your name, even if by posting anonymously you're not willing to be held accountable for what you write.
You may be a coward, but you can't hide what's in your heart from God.
I shall pray for your discernment.
That was a great post, Victor!
But in regards to the story in general... once again, the "press" has totally messed up the facts. Vincent did have unprotected sex with ONE girl while he was aware of his status, yes, although he tried to be what he thought was "safe"(by not ejaculating), he was obviously mistaken that such precautions are actually effective(agreed, a pretty stupid theory to begin with). He did meet said girl at a BAR, but he had no idea she was 18(in a bar picking up guys at 18?) as she lied for much of the relationship about several facts(like the fact that she was doing cocaine and sleeping with other people for instance - more information that was revealed in the courtroom but never made it into the papers oddly - hmm). Apparently the media just prints whatever sounds more heinous, or what will sell more papers... or basically whatever the hell they feel like printing.
There's a reason Vincent only spent just over a year in a low security camp(more like a vacation I heard). It's because this case was NOT as bad as the press made it out to be, and neither is Vincent. He's a good person who made a stupid, terrible mistake. It's just too bad the crown had the judge and the media bought and paid for... then we might have actually heard the TRUE story.
There, now you finally have the facts.
Post a Comment