i’m on your side on this one. I think that anyone that does the risky behaviors should be banned. I’d rather get blood from a gay guy that only does oral than a girl that is into rear entry or a guy that shares needles, but the policy makes sense.
They don’t ask if you’re a fag. They ask if you’ve had sexual intercourse with a fag. I
I’ve lied. I knew I was clean, and I sure as hell am gay, so I told the cunt that I hadn’t. Why? I wanted to help. Since I can’t befriend another gay and feel good about myself, unless it’s a gay that listens to Cascada (they need all the help they can get), giving blood is a great alternative.
If safety is the top priority then they should only be able to accept donations from people who have been tested recently. The whole point of the original post was to point out the safety of blood donations, and how being “politically correct” may transcend the safety people who accept blood. So why are you putting your faith into a questionnairre if what you really care about is safety? It’s moronic because there are better alternatives.
Nice comma splice by the way. I’m the sweetest gay around. Also, I don’t give a fuck if people “discriminate”. I hate the opposite - treating gay people like they are fine china (and the gays that gobble this up). Ugh.
i dont assume…its blatently obvious.
if government dictated policy based on statistics then all blacks would be put in jail because they are more likely to commit a violent crime and all whites would have their children taken away cause they are more likely to kill their child due to neglect.
Meh, you had me until the end.
High risk activities rule you out. If you do not participate in a high risk activity, then there is not a reason to rule out the entire population. The criteria are the same for herto and homosexuals alike in my mind. If you have unprotected same sex intercourse, or have multiple partners / promiscuity, or if you have unprotected opposite sex intercourse you are exposing yourself to the same high risks. You’re all out. Being a homosexual itself is not “high risk” in and of itself.
Hrm, I seemed to have lost a post. I’m more arguing the arguments, rather than the end point. Some of the people in this thread suck though.
Didn’t see this until it was quoted because you are on the IL, but I wholeheartedly agree. I think treating anyone different in an effort to “reverse” the discrimination or prevent it is fucking moronic.
I never said anything about what they did. I was elaborating on the fact that it is true that nearly 1/2 of HIV positive males contract it from homosexual conduct. That is just a statistic number. No discrimination in it.
i wasnt referring to you as an asshole for stating a statistic. i quoted you because the statistic didn’t change the fact the policy was discriminating.
FUCKING LOL!
[SIZE=2] Put down your blocks for a second so you can concentrate. Its Half of HIV infected people not half the population of the United States you fucking retard.
Half of the people that have HIV got it from male to male contact (that means gay)… From this you can infer that male GAYS have a VERY high risk of carrying HIV. Half the US does not have aids. The SAMPLE group that is giving blood is the Population of the US. The probability of a random person giving blood, having HIV is low. The probability of a GAY MALE giving blood, having HIV is HIGH.
u fail
[/SIZE]
sigh
You can’t even follow along and remember your own train of thought…
How do you expect to understand mine?
It works like this. You take a shot, I return it ten fold and cut you to pieces.
Action - Reaction
ACTION:
REACTION:
Unclassified:Wahhh, u r mean BITCH Whining (when you yourself initiated the exchange)
Stop acting like a dumb fuck and you wont be treated as one.
Don’t throw insults and you wont be insulted in return.
Pretty simple
ps: don’t whine
That is EXACLTY what it is about… and they are. I have been going through all kinds of statistics. We can argue the details of the percentages all day long but it all is all still comes down to the fact that gay men are significantly more likely to contract HIV.
Its also amusing how you are comparing issues of LIFE and DEATH HEALTH to stupid shit like social trends.
That shows a serious lack of responsibility and common sense.
:bloated: Watching you argue a point is like watching a 3 legged dog try to hump someones leg.
The OBJECTIVE of people collecting blood to SHARE with others is to make sure its as SAFE as possible. IE- eliminate as many chances for infection as humanly possible. If it is known that a certain group has a very high probability for carrying a disease then that group SHOULD be eliminated from participating… to reduce probability of infection.
There don’t have to be analytical tests for everything. They just have to do THE BEST THEY CAN to keep the blood supply safe.
That includes simply asking someone “do you have sex with men?” , “Do you have HIV” , Do you have Diabetes?" “Are you Anemic?”
Any intelligent person would not give 2 shits about making anyone feel bad or discriminating when it comes to public health.
Disease control is more important then any of that. God forbid a untreatable epidemic (like the black plague) breaks out and we have stupid fucks like you saying “don’t discriminate against the sick people” let them out of quarantine
dude…calm down…
lets just say it like it is… youre affraid of catching the gay…
way to fuck up the experiment. i wanted to see if he would post 30 in a row to fill page 4.
:loopie:
if you’re really that angry, and still live around the block from me…i can come over and let you punch the Civic…always cheers me up 
I think these are more worried about contracting “gay” than AIDS. They are worried about the homo blood getting put into them. Ignorant fucks.