Elisabeth, You raise some interesting points (and welcome to the list!). I believe that there are at least two distinct issues here: 1. Government intrusion--a slippery slope indeed, as you point out. 2. The rights of an uninfected partner in a case where one partner has HIV/AIDS.
The second issue is the more serious micro level concern, and this is where I think the government has chosen to help, rather than intrude. Your comparison between AIDS and Hepatitis is an unfair analogy--hepatitis doesn't bring with it the death sentence that AIDS does. A marriage might not occur if one partner discovers that the other has AIDS. At the end of the day, why should one partner's privacy rights trump the other's right to know that a future life partner carries a deadly infectious disease? Will the government be doing right by its citizens if it can prevent a single case of AIDS and chooses to turn a blind eye to it? Peter D'Souza ----- From: Elisabeth Carvalho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [Goanet] Re: HIV test to be made mandatory for marriage registration in Goa « But no matter how you dice it, it is in the end an invasion of personal privacy. It's a slippery slope to what the government can legislate in our personal lives. Ultimately however, we have to answer the question, will this pretesting for AIDS prevent AIDS or its spread?»