Posted on 07/14/2005 4:48:21 PM PDT by Aussie Dasher
WASHINGTON — For more than a decade, gay rights advocates have grumbled about a federal policy that forbids blood donation by men who have had sex with men.
They say that the policy, originally intended to keep HIV-positive blood from entering the nation's blood supply, implies gay men are inherently ill and that it prevents healthy people from donating.
Occasional protests and talks with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which oversees blood banks, have brought no change.
Now, some college students have taken up the cause, and they're taking a new tack. Instead of pressuring the FDA directly, they are going after the American Red Cross — the largest and highest-profile blood collector in the country.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Men who have sex with men, injection drug users, people who are involved with/have participated in commercial sex are all subgroups of the population that have MUCH higher AIDS/HIV prevalence than the rest of the population. Therefore, we don't use their blood. However, a legitimately abstinent gay man can give blood. So all these people need to calm down and shut up. It's not what you are that disqualifies you, it's what you do.
Exactly!
WOW! 8 Kids? Whew! I thought my Mom was busy with 4 of us growing up. Yea im feeling ok, meds keep everything A-ok.
I got back from Italy in July of 1980; the cutoff for donating bllod is June of 1980. 26 years with no mad cow symptoms and I can't donate blood because I missed the deadline by about 2 weeks.
The winner is NOT the public.
So let me see if I get this straight. Students, who are all so wise, are making the tainting of the blood supply a civil rights issue?
What about those that check line 30 on Mass Form 1, to pay at the 5.8% tax rate, rather than the lower 5.3 rate. Neither John F'n nor fat boy seem to do that.
I'm glad you're doing well. Worse than not being able to donate blood would be needing transfusions!
Lots of people are not allowed to give blood, including those who have travelled to certain countries. Are they discriminating against travellers?
later pingout.
Yea, I don't need a blood transfusion! LOL never had one of those thank God.
This is yet another battle the homos are going to lose.
Engage in risky and deadly behavior, deal with the consequences.
Yes, of course they are, just as they're discriminating against men who have sex with other men, illegal drug users, pregnant women, and people with anemia. And good on 'em!
No surprise here. As the main stream descendants of the Puritans - the United Church of Christ is moving to embrace the sexual deviations - their religious zeal and strictness will see the risk of contaminated blood as pious sacrifice on the altar of Political Correctness. The more havoc the more certitude of election.
A lot of Dimocrats in your precinct, I suppose.....
It looks like we're about 50-50, but it's a newly independent precinct, split off from the next one over because of new housing developments.
Oh, now I get it. I'm a little slow this evening :-).
For the sake of sensitivity and diversity. Let the whole society suffer so the perfect world is a little closer.
Somebody said they should start their own blood bank... and call it the Lavender Cross....
Yeap. Some people just won't look at the bigger picture and what is better for society as a whole. It is all about their feelings.
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.