Posted on 12/23/2014 12:16:17 PM PST by reaganaut1
...
Currently, the FDA bans men who have had sex with other men “at any time since 1977 (the beginning of the AIDS epidemic in the United States)” from giving blood based on their heightened risk for HIV. Because it still takes about two weeks after exposure to detect HIV—and up to several months in rare cases—the HHS recommends the one-year deferral period to be safe, following in the footsteps of the U.K., Sweden, Australia, and Japan.
The new rule would be a step in the right direction from a government that has long clung to outdated conceptions of HIV and homosexuality. But by mandating that gay men face a twelve-month deferral, the FDA wouldn’t be shedding those stigmas and misconceptions. They would still be perpetuating the offensive notion that the nation's blood supply must somehow be protected from gays.
Think about it this way. The one-year deferral ruling would put gay and bisexual men on the same footing as these two groups of people: heterosexuals who have had sex with someone who is HIV positive, and heterosexuals who have had sex with a sex worker. Those people are judged entirely based on their risky choices rather than their identity. To lump gay men in with them is to suggest that all gay sex is just as risky, which is not borne out by facts. Under these new provisions, two gay men in a stable relationship—married, even—would never be allowed to donate blood even though they have the same low risk of infection as monogamous straight couples. Heterosexuals who have had multiple sexual partners or don’t practice safe sex aren’t prohibited from donating blood at all.
(Excerpt) Read more at newrepublic.com ...
December 30, 1983 I had to have a transfusion of two units of blood at a DC hospital. No one in the public knew about AIDS at the time. A week later I delivered twins.
A year or so later, I read about a woman in Wheeling, VW, who’d had a transfusion that same day and died of AIDS. He I received the blood she did that day, not only I but my two sons would have been infected.
Messing with regulations affecting the national blood supply is incredibly foolish. Untold numbers of people will be infected and of them, many will die, all for the cause of political correctness and thanks to the power of the gay lobby and a POTUS who caters to that constituency.
No it’s not. I don’t consider it discrimination that they refuse to take my blood due to my pulse being too high. That is something that has about nothing to do with my behavior. Their whining about all the kinds of stuff makes me sick.
It is not just death, and here’s the real kicker: You will be sentenced to an expensive drug regimen for life to slow down and suppress the progress of HIV nowadays, even with the reductions thanks to being insured, it’s anything but cheap. So now, they want you to have a disease that financially will screw you for the rest of your life, in addition to already screwing with our national economy.
That’s not neccessarily good, if you get a strain of the virus from someone else taking HIV medication, then you are incubating a new strain in the recipients’ body that is resistant or immune to the drug treatments.
I know what you mean — but, it most certainly is “discrimination”. What it isn’t is “unfair discrimination”, or “unwarranted discrimination”, or “unreasonable discrimination”, etc.
Most of us have five senses precisely so that we can discriminate. We discriminate between things that are harmful and things that are helpful to us. We do that continuously, as a matter of survival. Our whole species depends on our powers of discrimination.
There is no “right” to donate blood. They must discriminate against high risk lifestyles for the sake of the people receiving the blood or WHAT IS THE POINT of getting it?
many people will now be refusing transfusions
They are just so selfish that they would rather put sick people at risk in order to rid themselves of the “high risk” label. But truth is still the truth even if liars deny it.
“many people will now be refusing transfusions”
or, more likely getting designated donations, or putting aside their own blood for future transfusions. I.e., churches will have a drive, or call for volunteers to donate and designate their blood donation for a member, rather than have the member taking from the general pool of blood donations. It doesn’t eliminate the cost, just the risk.
It is irrational to even attempt to debate or argue with them. A "no" will be much better understood by them if it is accompanied by a good beating, and it should probably include the warning that they'll get another, and more severe if they dare suggest such a thing again.
But alas I think we have become a nation of pansies who will not object strenuously enough to any suggestion, no matter how destructive or insane.
Clinton tainted the Canadian blood supply back in the mid-90’s; remember that?
1 in 5 Gay me. Have HIV and half don’t know it.
What could go wrong?
http://www.m.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/news/20100923/1-in-5-gay-bi-men-have-hiv-nearly-half-dont-know
Because I was stationed in Germany more than thirty years ago, I am forever banned from donating blood.
But the faggies make their demands to infect the blood suppply & call those who object “homophobic”.
Geez....!
Let’s see if I have this right.
It is a woman’s right to do as she wishes with her own body when it comes to abortion.
It is a drug addicts right to put whatever they choose in their bodies.
It is everybody’s right to know what ingredients are in any food we consume and put in our bodies.
It is our right to refuse vaccinations being put into our bodies.
But, we have no right to know where blood being put into our bodies in a hospital came from??
I'd have to be practically dead before I'm taking any faggot blood into my body. AIDS isn't half the story - hep C and other kinds of nastiness that are blood borne.
Also, it is possible to bank your own blood. Ask the red cross for info.
Thas a Fact!
I don’t want their diseases, thank you, but NO!
I don’t thing homosexual/bisexuals should be donating blood as a rule.
It is a dangerous and unhealthy lifestyle. THey will infect many non-homo’ with aids, which is the whole point.
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.