Genuflectimus non ad principem sed ad Principem Pacis!
Listen, O isles, unto me; and hearken, ye people, from far; The LORD hath called me from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath he made mention of my name. (Isaiah 49:1 KJV)
Posted on 06/14/2012 9:48:20 AM PDT by fwdude
(CNSNews.com) – Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Rep. Mike Quigley (D-Ill.) sent a letter signed by 62 other Democrats to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, supporting her agency's review of the policy that bans homosexual and bisexual men from donating blood.
The Democrats say the ban is “outdated,” and they called the HHS pilot study an important step in "assessing the feasibility of allowing healthy gay and bisexual men to donate blood while maintaining the safety of our blood supply."
“Patients across the country desperately need life-saving blood transfusions, yet perfectly healthy would-be donors are turned away based solely on sexual orientation,” Quigley said.
“Equality for the LGBT community is closer than ever but outdated and discriminatory policies like this must evolve to match advancements in science and technology.”
“We’ve been working on this a long time, and I applaud Secretary Sebelius for taking this important step toward ending the lifetime ban on gay men donating blood, and instead relying on the science of today, not the myths of twenty years ago,” Kerry said. “I’m confident that the findings of these new studies will pave the way to get this policy off the books.
The lawmakers said the study will at least provide an "informed evaluation" of what it will take to end the ban on homosexuals donating blood. Currently, any man who has had sex with another man since 1977 is banned for life from donating blood.
The HHS pilot study will look at alternative criteria for deferring donations from men who have sex with men.
In their letter, Kerry and Quigley asked HHS to explore ways of distinguishing "high-risk" homosexuals from "low-risk" homosexuals.
"For instance, the donor questionnaire could collect information on whether or not the donor is in a monogamous relationship or if the donor engages in effective preventive measures," the wrote. "In this way the donor questionnaire could assess the risk level of all potential donors, regardless of sexual orientation."
They also urged HHS to "be vigilant" in avoiding any "real or perceived unwarranted discriminatory treatment" of homosexuals in the process of conducting the pilot study.
This is the second letter Kerry and Quigley have sent to Sebelius urging a policy change on homosexual blood donors. The first was sent in June 2010.
Notice that the original proposal for a lengthy waiting period after the last homosexual "encounter" is now absent, and "how" homos engage in their behavior is now the focus.
May we please see John Kerry put his arm out for a safe gay blood transfusion to show the way?
Maybe from his (M)ass buddy Barney Frank?
The left is running low on radical AIDS victims to press for more funding to be sent to the DNC.
It’s just like they are running out of Homos in San Fran and need to teach it in school.
Even lab rats have higher moral values.
Who in H wants or needs their blood? Why do they want to “contribute” (i.e. pollute the pool)?
Sure, they should be able to donate. To each other. Period.
NO.
A thousand times; NO.
I’d like to see all ‘low risk sex offenders’ released into John F’n Kerry’s neighborhood.
I wanted to comment, but I don’t know what to say. I am utterly speechless. Have a good day.
Another attempt to 'normalize' homosexuality. The next thing will be a squabble over the definition of high vs. low risk followed by handwringing over the horror/shame/discrimination of being labeled high risk .... so to avoid hurt feelings and potential discrimination there will be no risk assigned and the general population will be the ones 'at risk'.
I thought it takes the HIV virus six months to show up in tests to be sure whether or not the blood is contaminated. Or is my information ‘outdated’ as well?
This has to be a stealth population control technique or something to reduce the ‘surplus’ population.
This is too timely. I donated plasma at work on Tuesday, and I was thinking about this very thing as I read through the “checklist” they give you.
One of the disqualifying questions reads, “*For Men* Have you ever had ANY sexual encounter with another man.” If you answer yes, you’re done. There are numerous gay men in this organization, and I’ve seen every single one of them donate blood at some point. They aren’t afraid to say they’re gay, but they lie on a blood screening, presumably to get a free HIV/AIDS/Hepatitis test. Sick!
So essentially they’re asking blood banks everywhere to spend more money on supplies and permit gays to donate despite the higher incidence of HIV/AIDS and hepatitis among gay men. Thus, blood banks are going to be wasting their time, money, and equipment to take blood and then have to throw it out because it’s contaminated.
Disgusting.
So they admit there is a risk.
Now, what is a low risk homersexual?
“Patients across the country desperately need life-saving blood transfusions, yet perfectly healthy would-be donors are turned away based solely on sexual orientation,” Quigley said.
Stinkin’ BASTARDS!!!
I had several blood transfusions in the early 80s due to major surgeries. To this day I have nightmares that eventually a test will turn up positive.
People advocating for homosexuals to donate blood should be tried and sentenced for endangering public health. And if they get their wish and someone turns a positive, then murder charges should be forthcoming.
For exactly the same reason they want "marriage" - to upset the applecart for everyone else.
Yes. Truth and plain common sense is outdated as well.
Message to Romney: Attack Sebelius. Attack. Attack. Attack.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.