Harvard Homosexual Leader Urges Others To Lie When Donating Blood

Toogood Reports ^ | October 2, 2001 | Rev. Louis P. Sheldon

[Octar]

Clifford Davidson and his followers need life-ending procedures performed before their irresponsiblity kills another innocent hemophiliac or other person who needs a transfusion.

[JimRed]

Does anyone else remember a homosexual activist back in the late 70's-early 80's who said (on some late night radio program) that they planned to make AIDS a problem for straights by contaminating the blood supply? They figured AIDS would get more research bucks that way.

[cricket]

"Sounds like conspiracy to commit murder to me!"

Worse; it is 'terrorism'. . .; more specifically, in this case a 'germ warfare'; a biological threat. . .

How might Clifford 'feel' about that.

Beyond dispicable, people who would target the innocent and unsuspecting; men, women and children, already suffering. . .without a thought for the consequences he might be responsible for.

As to terrorism in America. . .you are either part of the problem Clifford. . .or part of the solution. . .

[A CA Guy]

People forget homosexuality was considered a part of abnormal psychology before it became a political movement. If they lie, they should suffer the full wrath of the law.

[constitutiongirl]

Good point.

[supercat]

When I've given blood in the past, I had to remove one of two barcoded stickers from a sheet of paper and apply it to the bag. One of the stickers would mark the blood suitable for donation, while the other would not; while I didn't examine multiple stickers to determine if they were identical, there was no way for a casual observer to tell which sticker had been applied to the donated blood.

If someone who is at risk of HIV or other diseases, for whatever reason, wants to be seen as giving blood, I have no particular problem with them making the donation and then putting on the "do not use" sticker. On the other hand, I fail to see how it is infringing upon the rights of such a person to ask that they mark their 'donation' as do-not-use. After all, they have no expectation of benefit from the future use of their blood, so marking their blood "do not use" denies them nothing.

[KC Burke]

Your frank comment is commendable.

[alnick]

>>How can they keep their private life private if they're asked about it on a form when they want to help other people?! Doesn't that seem like a contradiction to you? << Oh come on now. It's clearly obvious to any fool that a question like that on a blood donor form is ABSOLUTELY NECESSEARY in order to reduce the possibility of spreading AIDS. It's not like someone sat there and said, "Oh, I think that I'll discriminate against homosexuals and reject them as blood donors because I don't like those people."