How many closet homos are really out there? You can pretty much tell whos the gay and who isnt these days. No1 is trying to hide it. Who really wants to donate blood that bad they guna lie and say their straight just to donate blood. Makes no sense.
its just something for the gays to bitch about. hey you cant discriminate wah wah wah! I know if I needed blood and they said Bag A had blood from a straight guy and Bag B had blood from a guy who takes it up the ass without flinching…I’d want Bag A…How about you?
Discrimination!?! Discrimination!?! Discrimination!?!
Why, because they didn’t get a free cookie after donating blood?
Give them a fucking FREE cookie and tell them to STFU.
:lol: @ people thinking that the Red Cross is a high security unit. If you’ve ever given blood you’ll know that the requirements are scarily simple:
Above minimum weight & age; no drug use; no promiscuous activity, etc.
This thorough & complete background check is looked over by a middle aged volunteer who may spend all of 5 seconds reviewing it. Then you sit down & get poked.
The blood is screened before its sent to mass storage. Last I checked, accuracy rates were in the 98% range.
As far as gays being @ higher risk of STDs & HIV / AIDS, stats don’t lie.
Although, awareness & “prevention” are far higher now then 10+ years ago - so, this should be reviewed with current data, not data going back to the 80s, to be fair.
As much as I love logical arguments there are a few flaws here.
You quoted the wrong numbers
If you do the math, the “male to male” AND “male to male plus injection drugs” represents 55% of the population. That is hardly a statisticaly significant “majority” when they are clearly labeled as estimated
On top of that. 52% of the new cases are from non male-male contact. Add in that these stats are now 3 years old, and that awareness these days is far different than when AIDS initially came on the scene and began to spread and you’ve got a completely different picture.
If you want to whittle down the population on numbers alone, why not say “No blacks should donate because you may catch the AIDS, they represent the largest population of AIDS owners”? How is that any less of a legitimate statement.
I don’t think that anyone would argue that male/male intercourse puts you at a higher risk of contracting a STD (AIDS or otherwise) due to its nature, but using that as an argument to say that it makes sense to exclude that portion of the population doesn’t seem to flow.
People that donate blood are typically giving / responsible people, not drug addicts and people running around having unprotected sex. If you are going to make assumptions about a portion of the population, why can’t it be a two way street? In my experience the G/L community is far more giving in terms of voulenteering etc than their straight counter parts. You can argue that many people don’t know they are carriers, but thats just as true for their straight counterparts. Seems short sighted to turn them away on that basis alone. :shrug:
this isnt about whether gay men are more likely to contract AIDS. its about an obvious case of discrimination. this isnt some horse shit PC situation, like public servents barking about saggy pants or balls hanging off SUV’s. its just another example of Christian policy in our government. this isnt what the USA is about. all your ancestors fled to this country to escape the same exact discrimination that exists at these blood drives.
The problem is most of the non male to male aids case would already be denied blood donation under the current system. Their high risk drug injection or high risk heterosexual activity would preclude them.
I agree, the typical donor is a more conscientious person but that doesn’t exclude them from having a sexual past. As you admitted, the pure physics involved in homosexual intercourse leads them to be at a higher risk for hiv transmission. To put it bluntly, tab A was never meant to fit in slot B.
If they are higher at risk, and the screening test isn’t 100%, I just can’t agree with the idea that they should be allowed to donate. Find a screening test that is 100% accurate and no problem.
And before any of you label me as some conservative homophobe I support gay marriage, have gay friends, support health insurance coverage for “domestic partners”, and support gay adoption. What I don’t support is putting our blood supply at increase risk, even slightly increased risk, so we can “feel better”.
What I don’t support is putting our blood supply at increase risk, even slightly increased risk, so we can “feel better”.
Exactly. But, you know, numbers & statistics don’t belong in the realm of public safety. Leave that sort of thinking to the multi billion dollar corporations who’ve proved it time & again.
You have to answer about 100 questions when you are admited to hospital, they should ask if you want gay blood if you need a transfusion.
How much blood from gays do you think would be used?
If you are going to exclude “high risk” sexual behavior, homo or otherwise, then it doesn’t really matter, the whole argument takes care of itself. If you loped off the whole population based on sexual preference alone then its a bit different.
Peg A in Slot B is a lot less of a factor to me than a persons behavior/ethics/etc. You can have all the butt plugging you want, but if you are monogamous, or even just smart/safe, you are far less likely to contract something than sally club whore fucking every johnny 2 inches in the bathroom at da club with no rubber.
Because clearly gay blood means you’ll get the hiv. :cjerk:
I think I’d rather have the .0005% chance of getting aids as opposed to the
“man, your husband survived the first 10 hours of surgery to bring him out of his 4 month coma, but we ran out of blood and had to let him go… good news though, he died with none of those faggy red blood cells in his system though” :bloated:
