Posted on 07/07/2014 2:19:34 PM PDT by nickcarraway
Let him or his family be first in line to get blood from an unscreened blood donor...
Just because gays account for 2% of the population but 78% of all new cases of HIV and their lifestyle of promiscuity causes all sorts of diseases that shorten their lifespans is no reason not to dump their blood in with the population at large. /sarc
This is sick.
You are seeing the radical leftist “mind” at work.
They would rather have millions of normal people die miserable deaths, than have one of their favorite constituents be embarrassed an not being able to give blood.
Are democrats capable of passing this? I think so.
Just another example of the government deciding that their agenda is more important than whether you live or die.
I would think even gays would not want this.
Bad idea. People who engage in risky behavior should not be allowed into the donor pool. I am turned away because of a false positive. I understand why they must do that.You have to keep the risk down as low as possible.
Just peachy. If any one knowingly donates blood contaminated with Aids, Hep C..etc. they will be charged with attempted murder. I suppose they forgot that part.
Yeah, but heaven help you if you visited the UK ten years ago.
“He says the ban is based on decades-old fears that have been discounted by science.”
I swear I’m almost ready to punch the next leftist that pushes something insane by hiding behind this “science said so” bulls*it.
The LGBT community will not rest until they have broken every obstacle to their being considered normal. Of course, with everything else (like gay marriage) there is no smoking run to prove that it harms others. But changing this policy certainly will. If it ever comes down, you will see homosexuals coming out in mass to give blood with the peep-show like atmosphere of a gay pride parade. Except, this time, most people will understand that their health is at risk.
Problem is that any real-life consequences will be papered over by the MSM and attributed to something other than this ban being lifted. Any health professional who says otherwise will sacrifice their career and reputation.
If you were in Britain for more than 3 months before Dec. 31st 1996, you cannot donate blood. I think there used to be an exception for vegetarians, but I am not sure now.
They might as well just stop screening altogether, and let recipients take their chances.
Oh, yeah, and force Christian bakeries to make cakes for them for after they donate.
There is only one way to make it fair. The government has to make sure the same percentage of straight people have AIDS as gay people.
Really? What science has discounted blood borne diseases from certain populations?
...and Mikee and his family get gay blood?
“He says the ban is based on decades-old fears that have been discounted by science.”
I swear I’m almost ready to punch the next leftist that pushes something insane by hiding behind this “science said so” bulls*it.
Tuburlosis and the black plague are hundreds of years old too but I damn sure wouldn’t want to get them
From the CDC website:
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/basics/ataglance.html
A chart with clear evidence that men having sex with men increases rate of infection.
And a statement (from our very own gubmint):
“Although MSM represent about 4% of the male population in the United States4, in 2010, MSM accounted for 78% of new HIV infections among males and 63% of all new infections”
(msm means men having sex with men)
Looking closer at the chart, being gay increases your risk by a factor of 12, over being a needle using junkie.
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.