  |
Posted on 06/14/2012 9:48:20 AM PDT by fwdude
Isn’t all donated blood tested for HIV?
Allowing homosexual blood into the supply chain without warning the downstream customers is criminally insane.
I had to get vaccinated for Hepatitis C before matriculating to college. I gave blood sometime shortly after the last dose, and my blood was flagged. I went back to donate a few months later, and they actually would not allow me to donate; my name was flagged.
I called the blood service to inquire, and I had to go to their downtown headquarters, sit in a room and have a nurse condescend to me for having Hepatitis C. I asked her, “Do you check for Hep C or the antibodies?”
“Antibodies.”
“Well, I was vaccinated for Hep C prior to college. Would that show up as the same?”
“Oh... well, yes. I suppose it would.”
I was allowed to donate again from that point on. However, if this was a homosexual with HIV/AIDS, they would likely never be able to donate unless they provided fake identity information during the pre-donation screening.
I will give gay men one thing: they’re almost always thin and dress well. I’m 6’2”, 325 lb. and can’t tell the difference between my blue socks and my black ones. I often find myself wearing one of each. At least I never get hit on by them!
As an 18 gal. donor I know the drill. Last year I saw one of our local militant gay activists donating. This is a flaming homo who wears a shirt that says “smile if you like getting it in the ass” I turned him in.
Piercings AND tattoos are disallowed for 12 months after receiving one.
Also, anyone who has been in the general population of their county or state prison for more than a few weeks is disqualified.
If the Homo’s can give blood why can’t the Cancer patients?
I never heard of anyone contracting Cancer from a transfusion.
Pray that the next administration and congress will have the plain common sense and sanity to undo all of these proposals, but I have exactly ZERO faith in Romney doing so.
It’s devastating to the quality and integrity of the regional blood supply if HIV/AIDS/Hepatitis infected blood is allowed into the system. By pre-screening homosexuals, they’re eliminating a large portion of the risk.
Homosexuals think they’ll just donate to get tested. If they turn up positive, they’ll know. If they don’t, they feel like they’ve “given back” to the community.
Like some have said, HIV/AIDS can take months to show up in standard blood panels, and as such, someone could contract the disease from a tainted blood transfusion.
It was just this morning that my local blood bank emailed asking me to schedule another donation. I think that I’ll ask them what their plans are to counter this.
If homos are allowed to contaminate the pool then I will stop donating - and I’m a 2-gallon guy.
From my understanding, there is an initial cursory test for HIV. But it is a fact that there is an "occult" period after initial infection during which the virus is virtually undetectable.
In fact, the latest goal of HIV infected homosexuals is to get their viral load down to "undetectable levels."
Kind of horrifying, isn't it?
It really is. Thanks for the info!
How the hell does an unelected bureaucrat have so much power?
Great suggestion! Kerry could then put himself up for a purple heart in the war against homophobia. Perhaps Nancy Pelosi can receive one from one of her more “flamboyant” constituents.
Years ago, in my Crusading Reporter days, did a story on this issue.
The leading advocate of No Donations - Ever for gay men was an openly gay physician who said he wanted to be able to donate blood, but knew that to do so would endanger the entire blood supply.
At least 400 Canadians died from tained blood from the Arkansas prisons when Slick was Gov there.
How many more have to die for another feel good, suicidal social experiment?
|
I was just thinking about this topic the other day and realized that the policy will *have* to change based on the political climate. You can’t continue with a platform of “being homosexual is just fine and normal” when active gay men aren’t allowed to give blood - because it requires the “why” question.
Now we have politicians risking our health because of gay activists. We need to cite the health statistics - loud and clear.
It only stands to reason that when 2% of the population is having (mostly) promiscuous sex with that same 2%, any time a disease is introduced into that population it will spread at a much greater speed than in the rest (98%) of the population. I have gay friends that complain about the lack of monogamy with gay men, they just don’t see the connection at all (to health vs. rest of population, they just deny it).
One who abstains from all same sex sexual activity is the only kind I can think of.
That’s right - like if an office were donating and someone felt like they had to join in or be shamed.
You really gotta’ get in touch with some lab rats and mice. They get injected with cancer all the time ~ and get it!
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.