Switch to boring english
60
requiere que los pornostars usen condones
En resumen
Si se aprueba, estrellas del porno tendran que usar condones (durante las escenas con relaciones sexuales) en misionero hasta anal y todo lo de en medio.
Escúchame, hablame como si fuera un estudiante de 5º grado y tengo 1 minuto.
Si se utilizan, los condones podrían proteger mejor al a los actores contra el SIDA y otras infecciones de transmisión sexual. Como era de esperar, la industria del porno se opone enérgicamente, diciendo que las prácticas actuales de prueba están muy bien, y las necesidades de condones hará que la industria se vaya a otros estados o incluso se conviertan en negocios clandestinos.[4] Soportes dice la ley ya existe pero no se ejecutan en la práctica. Y, clamidia y la gonorrea es rampante.

Casi todo el mundo se opone al apoyo, incluyendo SF y el Partido Democrático de California, el partido republicano de California, y la Fundación SF SIDA. De hecho, a excepción de los que propusieron la prop, no hay grandes partidarios.[2]
¿Por qué se incluye en la boleta?
Cal/OSHA (the workplace safety folks) already require that, in general, a worker be protected from blood-borne pathogens, but when it comes to porn, Cal/OSHA has only enforced complaints, and they also recently rejected a regulation similar to Prop 60, creating specific additional regulations around porn. This regulation was proposed by the same people who wrote Prop 60, the AIDS Healthcare Foundation.

LA ya cuenta con un requisito de condones llamada Medida B.[2] La Fundación AIDS Healthcare quiere hacer esta ley estatal ya que falló en la legislatura estatal.
This is the debate
Why you gotta hate? Condoms protect performers from HIV and STIs, which are all over your stars.
That study was conducted by you guys. Testing is already done every two weeks, and studios check the results right before a shoot.
But testing doesn't prevent transmission. Condoms do.
There hasn't been a case of HIV transmission on screen in more than 10 years!
There was just a case in Nevada.
He wasn't in the database we have. Performers can go to condom-only studios if they want, and besides, porn isn't going to stop. It'll just make filming go underground. Look at LA since 2012.
No one is going anywhere. California and New Hampshire are the only states that are legal to film porn.
Other states are vague about it and don't pursue porn studios. It's filmed all over.
The way the proposition is worded ANY Californian can sue offenders. They can't sue performers, I know, as long as they don't have a financial interest in the film, but in this age of media, many performers also act as producers.
OSHA rules should already force performers to wear protection, but they can't regulate every studio, so that's why we give that power to Californians.
Whoever it is, if they produce and distribute unsafe porn, then they are breaking the law.
Más cosas para leer
Última actualización: 12 Oct 2016

Información mas o menos imparcial
[1] Full text of the proposed proposition (page 35/105)
[2] Ballotpedia entry
[3] LA Times: on context for the proposition and LA's Measure B
[4] Review Journal: on the current safety practices
[5] Judge rules that those who can be sued from Prop 60 may include performers. Confusingly, both sides consider it a win.
[6] Legalislative Analyst's Office
[7] Politifact: would this cause a legal bonanza?
[8] KQED: live podcast debate
Argumentos a favor de la Propuesta 60
[9] Bakersfield Californian Editorial
[10] The study's paper mentioned in [6]
Argumentos en contra de la Propuesta 60
[11] SF Chronicle Editorial Board
[12] Sacramento Bee Editorial Board
[13] Mercury News Editorial Board
[14] The OC Register Editorial Board
[15] LA Times Editorial Board

Nota: se omite intencionadamente los argumentos oficiales que se encuentran en la guía oficial de votantes. Creemos que exageran las reclamaciones, engañan con las emociones, y utilizan MAYUSCULAS irresponsablemente.