Southern U.S. Needs To Do More To Address HIV/AIDS Among Hispanics

“Demographers have noted that the South is one of the regions that have seen the most rapid influx of Latino workers,” Marisa Trevio, who writes the blog “Latina Lista,” writes in a USA Today opinion piece. She adds, “So with a steady influx of Latinos, and a growing number of them contracting HIV/AIDS, why aren’t states making inroads via aggressive public awareness campaigns in attacking this preventable and treatable disease?”

According to Trevio, a recent study from the Latino Commission on AIDS “found that HIV/AIDS cases are rising at alarming rates among the two million Latinos in Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee.” She adds, “Prevention education isn’t keeping pace.” Trevio writes that public awareness efforts likely are not having much effect among Hispanics because the “targets of these messages — which include legal and undocumented workers — don’t trust the messenger.” A report from Progressive States Network found that “every state identified by the study, with the exception of Alabama, has passed policies criminalizing undocumented immigration,” according to Trevio. “These laws intimidate people from seeking any assistance,” she writes, adding, “For example, South Carolina passed a series of laws that include establishing a hotline to report suspected nonresidents and making it a crime to transport or harbor undocumented immigrants.” The report found that as a “result of this anti-immigrant climate and the high rate of people without health insurance,” many HIV-positive Hispanics do not “seek medical attention until they are in its late stages,” Trevio writes.

However, some “states are trying to confront this crisis,” according to Trevio, who adds that North Carolina in October “conducted a bilingual campaign to encourage people to get tested. Even so, the report found that these states didn’t have enough bilingual professionals to address the crisis.” Trevio writes that the study “made several recommendations, all rooted in communication. Whether it’s utilizing more Spanish-language media to market prevention programs, training more people to speak Spanish, partnering with Latino organizations to replicate their successful programs or connecting with Hispanic religious and community leaders, it all comes down to opening lines of communication to a population that has been forced to stay in the shadows of society.” She concludes, “For their health and for the health of the country, these Latinos must come forward — and the sooner the better”

Gay Marriage & Social Evolution

What is Social Evolution?

Sociocultural evolution is the combination of theories of cultural evolution and social evolution, which is how cultures and societies develop over time. Social evolution deals specifically with theories of social change from which human societies move from simple to more complex forms of organization. Some of the leading theorists are: Herbert Spencer, Talcott Parsons and Emile Durkheim.

Applying the principles of social evolution, we will trace how the institution of marriage has not remained the same institution over the millennia. It has grown from a simple arrangement made by parents, to include an elaborate system to include many forms of marriage.

Dowries

 

 

Dowries made their appearance in Europe after 500 B.C. The “worth” of the bride was directly related to the financial status of the family, including land holdings. Future “worth” of the bride would be decided prior to her birth, and often parents promoted future couplings when the children were at a very young age. This would involve negotiations and espousal contracts, and betrothal rings were exchanged.

Puritans

 

 

Anglicans brought several customs to the New World; in Scotland love knots on the bride’s dress were untied to ease the pain of future childbirth, in Holland “banns” (announcements) were posted for three days before the wedding could proceed, and in France, chefs began adding icing to cakes, the forerunner of the bridal cake. But, Puritans believed that these customs were excessive, and that marriage was not an unbreakable union blessed by God. It was a civil contract, without rituals and could be dissolved by humans. To them, it was true love that was the foundation of a good marriage.

Quakers

 

 

Marriage was meant to be based on common belief, condemned marrying outside of their religion and marriage between first and second cousins was forbidden. A marriage would also have to be accepted by the families and entire Quaker congregation.

The Victorian Era

 

 

Finding the best beau was one of the very few ways in which a woman could move up in society, and etiquette dictated exacting rules of courtship, to ignore which would be unforgivable. For example, you could not kiss until you were engaged. The minimal amount of time between engagement and the wedding was three months. To be unmarried by 30 was an economic hardship to the family.

19th Century South

 

 

The English traditions and standards were the norm, with parents still playing a role in developing couplings and promoting that love would follow after marriage. First cousin marriages and prenuptial agreements were also part of the norm. April would become a favorite wedding month as this is when jasmine and camellias would bloom.

American Wild West

 

 

With land to be tamed, there was little time for courtship, and a few weeks was good enough. To avoid peak farming months, weddings were held in very early spring or the winter. The wedding itself was a simple affair, often lacking enough food to go around. Dancing became the focus of the party.

Mail Order Brides

 

 

The early settlers of the American continent were mostly men, seeking a bride from Europe. And during WWII many soldiers wrote to ladies back home seeking engagements also. By the 1980s, Western men began seeking outside their own country, many times to Asia, seeking a wife. Once the Iron Curtain fell, Russian brides became available. During the same time period, the introduction of the internet replaced the older paper catalogues.

Divorce

 

 

Divorce existed back to ancient Mesopotamia but during Roman times, it was believed that “marriages out to be free” (matrimonia debent esse libera). Either a husband or wife could seek to dissolve the union, where prior a magistrate held this power. During the reign of Christian emperors, the divorce laws were relaxed the upheld in varying degree. By the 10th century in Europe divorce was out of favor, but annulments were common. Civil courts had no power over annulments, which were determined by the Church. Divorce was granted only because one party had violated a sacred vow. If both had broken vows, the divorce was denied. The Church lost it’s power in the 1920s, when civil courts regained their control of divorce laws in America.

Polygamy

 

 

The history of Mormon polygamy begins with claims that Mormon founder Joseph Smith received a revelation from God on July 17, 1831 that some Mormon men would be allowed to practice “plural marriage”. Polygamy was illegal in the state of Illinois so a splinter group, led by Brigham Young, moved to Utah. What had been kept private from the rest of the country was revealed in 1852 when the Apostle Orson Pratt began preaching sermons of plural marriage. By 1856 the Republican Party’s platform was to “prohibit in the territories those twin relics of barbarism, polygamy and slavery”. By 1862 the Congress and White House issued the Morrill Anti-Bigamy Act. The LDS Church believed that plural marriages were protected by the Constitution, but lost their 1878 Supreme Court case (Reynolds vs. United States). Penalties of ignoring the act could include disincorporating the church and seizure of church property. Members fled to both Canada and Mexico. In 1890 LDS President Wilford Woodruff issued a Manifesto announcing the discontinuance of the practice. The LDS Church now ex-communicates members found practicing polygamy, however it is estimated that 18,500 Fundamentalists still maintain plural marriages (Salt Lake Tribune).

Interracial Marriage in the U.S.

 

 

During the years of slavery, “marriage” was not acknowledged between a couple of slaves. Seen as property of a master, blacks could be sold to separate owners, splitting up couples and families.

Interracial marriage was illegal in 19 states until 1967, when the Supreme Court ruled in Loving vs. Virginia, a landmark civil rights case, that Virginia’s “Racial Integrity Act of 1924” was unconstitutional, thereby lifting any restrictions on race in regards to marriage.

Will gay marriage be the latest step in social evolution in the U.S. view of marriage?

 

 

Attitudes are rapidly shifting in regards to gay marriage.

2008 Polling question: “Should gay and lesbian couples be allowed to marry, giving them full legal rights of married couples, or not?” In a June poll, 42% replied should. In an August poll, 47% replied should. (pollingreport.com)

A Harris Poll released in early 2000 shows 57% oppose gay marriage, while 15% approve.

In 1996, the Gallup Organization found that 68% of American adults opposed gay marriages; 27% were in favor.