Posted on 01/29/2026 1:01:31 PM PST by fwdude
The Pentagon has ordered a pause on training new recruits living with HIV. What’s more, military leadership is considering reinstating a ban that prohibits Americans who are HIV positive from enlisting in the Armed Services altogether, reports CNN. A decision is likely to come down “in the next few weeks.”
(Excerpt) Read more at poz.com ...
Absolutely! Some years ago I was planning to have my first hip replacement...at a large,famous,hospital. The surgeon said that it was unlikely that I’d need blood during,or after,the procedure but he suggested that I give my own blood beforehand so it could be stored and given to me in case he was wrong. I did so...IIRC I gave two pints.
It’s crazy as hell to have HIV-positive people in the military.
I k3an,didn’t you have to be physically fit to join the military?...flat feet could keep you out.
“General”?
If they played by the rules and performed honorably under the rules and regulations that applied - no need to punish people for the errors of others.
I heard that in WWII, if you had defective vision they would put right up close to the front so you could see everything.
The access to medication puts them on "nicer" deployments which is unfair to other military members who then get sent through the sandbox repeatedly.
It also means high risk for them if they were to be captured in battle. In addition, the U.S. would be forced to negotiate for their release at a severely disproportionate political disadvantage.
My club feet kept me out.
They let butt bangers with aids in?
Makes me want to puke.
IIRC “General” is not considered a negative rating. I’m not sure but I think that,among other things,you’re still eligible for the same veterans benefits you’d get if your discharge was “Honorable”.. If I’m wrong perhaps I’d have to rethink my position.
Yes, that just proves that it's "all about them," not for military readiness of the organization as a whole. It's supreme selfishness, made policy through political manipulation.
It also means high risk for them if they were to be captured in battle. In addition, the U.S. would be forced to negotiate for their release at a severely disproportionate political disadvantage.
I never thought of that aspect of it, but that just piles on the existing reasons to never allow permanently diseased people into the military.
Also seldom mentioned is that the very meds used to keep the virus suppressed do a number on the body, creating various sub-optimal health conditions. Weakened bones and liver and kidney issues being two big ones.
The decision to relax this critical requirement for donors was purely political and came after many years of pressure from the Gaystapo and their Democrat allies. It make NO sense medically to wade into the population MOST PRONE to this disease for blood donations in order just to make them feel "less stigmatized."
Homosexuals remain, after 45 years, the most HIV-prone populations by far, the second most affected group is a very distant 2nd. The stats are deliberately obfuscated by including race and "trans woman"-status in the mix, but it still boils down to man-on-man sex.
I've read studies that found that of the homosexuals who contracted AIDS, over 60% contracted it from their main, "committed" sexual partner. That destroys the argument that "monogamous" homosexuals are safe as donors.
Its not quite as it used to be. Much of what people believe in regards to that is from stories from WWII. The bar the military recruit changes depending on the size of forces the military is trying to achieve and to fill career areas that are always short.
I was one of the first in my career field so needless to say that at that time if you could score very high on logic tests then they would consider letting you do what I did.
When I inprocessed at MEPS, there was a guy who was almost entirely deaf. The military was critically short on reefer techs and he had previous experience so he was in.
Im certainly not suggesting we start letting people carrying plagues into the military, just that the old standards dont necessarily have much bearing on what is needed today. One of these days soon video game champions regardless of their physical condition is going to be exactly what we need.
Good points, but the point of these courts obliterating the ban on HIV-infected recruits have nothing to do with special skills of those who are infected. It it making the rule instead of allowing for exceptions.
Like I said, no plagues, just flat footed pigeon toes.
HIV also causes HIV-infected to age 14 years. I presume this means they die at least 14 years early. Check keyword hivaging.
I think the meds are half of the problem, besides the lingering damage of the infection. The drugs used to keep the virus suppressed are very high powered and do a number on a lot of the body’s systems. Most alarming is bone loss and liver and kidney damage.
I used to websearch lots to get information about the ill effects of the HIV meds. Where do you find this info?
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.