Posted on 07/26/2016 4:17:17 PM PDT by plain talk
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration opened the door on Tuesday to a change in its blood donor deferral recommendations, which currently prohibit donations from gay men for a year following their last sexual encounter in order to reduce the risk of transmitting HIV, the virus that causes AIDS.
In December the FDA overturned a 30-year ban on all blood donations from men who have sex with men, saying the change was based on science showing an indefinite ban was not necessary to prevent transmission of the human immunodeficiency virus.
The FDA is now signaling it may go further.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
BYOB (bring your own blood)
Gay men womhave not had sex the last year....
So, still no gay men eligible to donate blood.
The,only gay men who havent had sex in a year have been dead a year.
Still think a strong central government is a great idea?
The next generation is the Zika generation
due to Obama and Ryan.
And if that does not kill enough, they will
import more incurable tuberculosis and other
weaponized diseases. It has been their way.
The term is known propensity. A dog has a known propensity to bite but not all dogs do. Leash laws.
I just wish Governors would have the guts to say enough is enough. States created the Federal Government.
Can it be traced back for a lawsuit in case of buggers disease?
Yes...seems states would be wise to create their own blood banks with thoroughly screened donors
That is suicide. We are going to give babies that are not slaughtered by infanticide— AIDS? This is beyond satanic . These are last days. I was just looking at the walking dead creatures at the DNC . I have never seen such neanderthals. We are in the FINAL days before the return of Jesus.
No one knows when Jesus will come ... but if this isn't the end it is an awfully good warm-up act!
“Moving towards an individual risk assessment would provide for a fair, equitable, nondiscriminatory blood donation policy, one based in science that allows all healthy Americans to safely donate blood.”
Everyone can NOW donate “Safely” so this remark is such PC Lib BS.
What they are donating is the issue
So this would all be for the benefit of only those who wish to donate their blood when there are those would-be recipients of that blood who might not be comfortable knowing that it could indeed be tainted with a deadly disease? That would not be a good deal from the recipient’s point of view. So why then should it be such a good deal from the donor’s point of view?
I once dated a woman who was heavily involved with the Red Cross blood donation procedures. She said ALL blood is tested for HIV. She said their policy, at the time, for not accepting gay men’s blood was to protect the gay. Assume his aunt needed blood and asked everyone in the family to donate. He’d have to come out or be considered a selfish nephew.
I’ll stop giving completely if this persists....why should we buy into a system that is only going to hurt innocent people...
gays as a rule are not healthy...not only does their anal fixation open them up to every virus known to man, and bacterial infections, it also weakens their immune system generally, and destroys their rectal cavity...
As we slowly destroy our medical system here in the USA, look abroad to receive decent care.
Regardless what lawless Obama’s state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices wanted everybody to think about the constitutionality of Obamacare, the states have never delagated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate INTRAstate healthcare. So the feds cannot make policy for donated blood that doesn’t cross state borders imo.
Note that by giving the green light to Obamacare, Obama’s activists justices wrongly ignored that previous generations of state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified that the states have never expressly constitutionally delegated to the feds the specific power to regulate, tax and spend for intrastate healthcare purposes.
"State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress. [emphases added]" - Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
"Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States." - Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
"Inspection laws, quarantine laws, health laws of every description [emphasis added], as well as laws for regulating the internal commerce of a state and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c., are component parts of this mass." -Justice Barbour, New York v. Miln., 1837.
"Direct control of medical practice in the states is obviously [emphases added] beyond the power of Congress." - Linder v. United States, 1925.
"From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added]. ...” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
Also consider that by deciding policy for intrastate blood banks with no clear constitutional authority to do so that the corrupt feds are once again unconstitutionally expanding federal government powers in small, relatively unnoticeable steps which the founders had warned about.
”I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.” —James Madison, Speech at the Virginia Convention to ratify the Federal Constitution (1788-06-06)
”To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specially drawn around the powers of Congress, is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition.” —Thomas Jefferson, Jefferson's Opinion on the Constitutionality of a National Bank : 1791
”The system of the General Government is to seize all doubtful ground. We must join in the scramble, or get nothing. Where first occupancy is to give right, he who lies still loses all.” —Thomas Jefferson to James Monroe, 1797.
Remember in November !
Patriots need to support Trump by also electing a new, state sovereignty-respecting Congress that will not only work within its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers to support Trump’s vision for making America great again for everybody, but will put a stop to unconstitutional federal interference in 10th Amendment-protected state healthcare policy as evidenced by Obamacare and blood bank policy.
Note that such a Congress will also probably be willing to fire state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices.
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.