Posted on 03/16/2012 10:27:44 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration is inching closer to lifting the ban on gay men donating blood.
The Department of Health and Human Services said it plans to study alternatives to the 1983 ban on blood and plasma donations by men who have sex with other men.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
What could possibly go wrong?!
And so AIDS will become as common as allergies.
This is what gays want: to impose their poison on EVERYONE.
Why lift the ban?
I donate blood regularly. And there is a questionnaire you fill out each time you go to donate.
Among the disqualifying factors are, men having sex with men, men having sex with female prostitutes, females having been prostitutes, having spent time in the British Isles during certain years (due to being exposed to mad cow disease), using IV drugs, having gotten tattoos within the past year, and a few others.
The point is, homosexual men are not singled out by the current policy. There are a whole host of disqualifiers for donating blood. Homosexual male sex is a risk factor for spreading disease.
Nobody is saying that they can’t live their lives and do whatever they want to do. We’re saying that such people should not donate blood. How is this “homophobic” or “bigoted”? Trying to stay a step ahead of the liberals on this one, as I’m sure they will frame opposition to lifting the ban as homophobic.
oh, maybe this
http://www.sdadefend.com/Health/HIV%20blood.htm
I am not getting this (unless you count political correctness) 90% of people who have aids are homosexual men, why are “they” letting them donate blood.
Gee, ya think?
My blood boils EVERY SINGLE TIME I hear this...
I lost two good friends in the late 80’s-early 90’s to the The Great Hemopheliac Genocide that is politically-incorrect to talk about, because it was caused by gay-tainted blood.
200,000 Americans DIED, and it’s like they never existed, because you can’t say ANYTHING that might be offensive to gays, or their chosen promiscuous lifestyle.
“A notice about the study in the Federal Register this week explained that improved screening for HIV, Hepatitis B and Syphilis could still keep the blood supply safe.”
So they let them donate blood so they will FEEL better
and not FEEL discriminated against but will the blood be thrown out if it has HIV or will they give this tainted blood to the people on the death panels?
I am getting fed up with Obama and his admin he is an evil
son of a gun.
That is the invisible elephant no one wants to acknowledge: why are homos so adamant and eager about giving blood? Is there such a desperate shortage that only diseased homos can fill the gap??
This stinks, and someone without a liberal aganeda should expose what is going on here.
Over the years, I have donated many gallons of blood both in the U.S. and abroad. In the late 1990's I was banned from giving in the U.S. because I might be carrying Mad Cow Disease. I have even been stopped from donating during times of a severe blood shortage directly to a friend suffering from leukemia who had less than three months to live - when a transfusion would have given him another six to eight weeks according to his doctors.
Meanwhile, approximately 30 years later, my only symptom of lunacy is an almost pathological delight in irritating the hell out of liberals.
In a few weeks, I will still be banned whereas flaming homosexuals will be permitted to donate.
Go figure.
HEY!!!!!
Don’t piss off the gay pResident!!!!
That said, I think it is still a very bad idea to lift the ban. According to the 2010 CDC numbers, gay males have an HIV infection rate 44 times higher than straight males or women, and are infected with syphilis 46 times as often. Blood testing has gotten much more effective than it used to be, but it isn't foolproof. Accepting blood donations from such a high risk group just seems ethically and medically unsound.
Of course, medically sound thinking isn't what's driving Obama's thinking here. This is election year politics to make his base happy. It's also probably a calculated move to put Republicans on the defensive (i.e. playing the "homophobe" card).
May he receive the first transfusion.
May he receive the first transfusion.
There was a guy on my dorm floor who was HIV positive for that very reason. He was a hemophiliac who was infected by a tainted blood donation. This was early 1990s, so I don’t know how he’s doing, or if he’s even still alive. I remember the fear he had, though, that one day he would develop full-blown AIDS. He was a good kid, who sure deserved a lot better than he got.
Axe fermer prez BIlly Jeff. He sold a boat load to the Canadians.
Perhaps this is another way Barry can “cull” the population he despises. Abortion just isn’t fast enough for him, I guess.
But, remember; This is psychological warfare against conservatives. Barry’s minions come up with offal every 30 minutes to piss us off. He’s PRAYING to allah for a conservative to break and do something violent.
Let’s disappoint the fag. It’ll piss him off.
I'm sure that will be of great comfort to regrettable-but-necessary recipients of false-negatively tested products.
Well, we as conservatives have to fight back against the narrative that opposing lifting this ban is homophobic.
The left dictates terms of debate. They do this on so many issues.
If you oppose homosexual marriage, you are bigoted and homophobic.
If you oppose abortion on demand, you want women impaled on coat hangars.
If you oppose illegal immigration, you want, to paraphrase our president “a moat with alligators” at the border, because you are bigoted and xenophobic.
If you oppose affirmative action, you are racist.
If you oppose the whole Al Gore global warming story, you want pollution in the air and water.
If you oppose Obamacare, you want to see people suffer from lack of healthcare. You actually are in favor of people being stripped of health insurance, and then suffering and dying.
And so on. Any opposition to any liberal cause is because you are racist, sexist, bigoted, clinging to a gun or religion, not because of principled opposition to a point of view.
Here is the test. Let gays donate their blood with the proviso that it can only be given to homosexuals and lesbians and that blood donated by heterosexuals can only be given to heterosexuals. It's consistent with their notion of marriage equality. Heteros can be married. Homos can be married. Two distinct cultures claiming the same status.
My guess lesbians and uninfected homos will cry discrimination that they can't receive hetero blood.
Yep, you nailed it.
Once again, liberalism will kill you before it will suffer some discomfort.
It is why they won’t profile at airports, allow soldiers to dip bullets in pig blood or allow soldiers to defend themselves.
Your death is insignificant compared to their comfy self-important worldview.
>>My blood boils EVERY SINGLE TIME I hear this...<<
Don’t let that happen. Look at the article. infecting you with HIV/AIDS is perfectly OK to this administration.
I’m one of those banned from donating blood, due to my time in the military in the UK 20 some years ago. There is no ‘civil right’ to donate blood, but the homo lobby isn’t concerned with reason. All they want is for everyone to bow down to them...
Send that one to Rush, just in case he thinks he hasn’t caused enough of an uproar lately.
The Obama administration is inching closer to lifting the ban on conservative blood donors.
WHAT!?! (idiots might get infected!!!!)
You can bank your own blood in case of future need. Maybe it needs to start coming down to that if this happens. These people are ripe with awful STD diseases that are permanent.
Can we just remind them of Ryan White and so many others who contracted aids from tainted blood?
Nothing could go wrong for the leftits.
They would love to see a hetero AIDS outbreak turning into a crisis because it would justify big government intervention and spending.
Why would anyone want to have a friend who is homosexual?
Never let a good crisis go to waste.
I am not screaming that i should be able to give blood. Who are all these homosexuals that just have to give blood?
maybe he just wants to be able to donate himself?
In a hundred billion years, neither Pelosi, Obama, or any other democrat party hack politician in Washington will ever allow themselves to receive a gay blood transfusion.
We peons will be infected with AIDS infected blood for their PC pandering purposes.
That’s one way of spreading equality.
But I’d bet the politicians and bureaucrats carve out a spescial loophole for themselves.
risk factors are risk factors, based on behavior, not on morality.
MSM spreads HIV, and the HIV test does not turn positive for several weeks or even three months. So if you have had sodomy in the last three months, you are at risk to spread HIV to someone who gets your blood.
So maybe they should ask if you have had anal sex without protection, which spreads HIV, rather than MSM...there are other MSM sexual practices that don’t spread HIV, and women can be sodomized.
Excuse my blunt language.
Concur.
One would think gay men or those with high risk of contracting AIDS would want an untainted blood supply available to them in the event they contracted HIV.
Instead, it appears they want to spread their contagion so everybody is at equal risk from their immoral behavior. They’ve already accepted the fact they will likely die from their behavior, so now they want to murder others.
As long as they can keep the death losses down to the low thousands, and a few billions of dollars of medical costs, I guess they think that the public relations and politics are worth it.
Since the government is on a "roll" in connection with gay marriage and gay rights, they are again putting forth policies that increase risk to the mental and physical health and safety of the people.
There was a time when government advanced the health and safety of the public they had sworn to protect. But not anymore. If gays enjoy a shorter life span and more diseases, it is only "fair" for all to share in that misery in the name of equality for all and constitutional rights!
Is not this warped and twisted thinking pandemic?
And if they had enforced the ban in ‘86, rather than selling tainted blood overseas, we would still have our eldest daughter.
Sorry. I know we Christians are supposed to forgive. That, I can not.
Obama must have weak polling among the gay community for this to be considered.
I’m sorry to say this, but the country is sliding into hell. You’ve got to make connections through churches and other non-government associations for things like blood transfusions.
>BTW This is why they’re going after the Catholic Church. The Catholics have always had their own schools, hospitals, etc., never trusting the government here or any place else. While I don’t agree with the Catholics on everything, their independence of the state is commendable.
In my case, it was one church friend I knew as a teenager back in the 70s. I occasionally was in contact with his older brother and found out that way.
Ditto to blood boiling! I have been precluded from donating for many years due to living in Europe pre-mad cow detection methods. I was a regular donator prior to that administrative restriction. Now we all have the potential to dance with the devil.
I believe there are homo men and maybe women, prostitutes, etc. who lie about their orientation and give blood. Last time I might need blood during an operation, gave my own ahead of time. However, that, too, is problematic.
vaudine
Mine too! A dear friend lost both her sons - her only children - because they hemophiliacs who had received tainted blood in transfusions.
Obviously, their “right” to self esteem trumps everyone else’s right to life. And if you say otherwise, you’re a homophobic bigot.
Any infections caused by this new policy will be swept under the rug by the Medical establishment and the MSM.
Why the hell aren’t we using synthetic blood substitutes in the 21st century?!
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.