How tolerant are we really?

[Guest]

So your saying the an uninfected gay person's blood is inferior to an uninfected straight person's blood?

Correct?

I don't see how anyone can answer yes, unless they are completely prejudice.

I would put someone who regularly engages in sex with several dozen, or hundreds of, people per year in the same category as a Chinese bird farmer.

I'd take his or her blood and put a discrete red X on the label.

<shrug> No offense intended at all. Just the facts.

[elliott20]

So your saying the an uninfected gay person's blood is inferior to an uninfected straight person's blood?

Correct?

I don't see how anyone can answer yes, unless they are completely prejudice.

I would put someone who regularly engages in sex with several dozen, or hundreds of, people per year in the same category as a Chinese bird farmer.

I'd take his or her blood and put a discrete red X on the label.

<shrug> No offense intended at all. Just the facts.

don't they usually screen you for number of sexual partners prior? seems to me that if the issue is the number of partners, you really should be screening for that.

[Guest]

So your saying the an uninfected gay person's blood is inferior to an uninfected straight person's blood?

Correct?

I don't see how anyone can answer yes, unless they are completely prejudice.

I would put someone who regularly engages in sex with several dozen, or hundreds of, people per year in the same category as a Chinese bird farmer.

I'd take his or her blood and put a discrete red X on the label.

<shrug> No offense intended at all. Just the facts.

don't they usually screen you for number of sexual partners prior? seems to me that if the issue is the number of partners, you really should be screening for that.

Every country and donation centre is different.

According to the American red cross:

You should not give blood if you have AIDS or have ever had a positive HIV test, or if you have done something that puts you at risk for becoming infected with HIV.

You are at risk for getting infected if you:

* have ever used needles to take drugs, steroids, or anything not prescribed by your doctor
* are a male who has had sexual contact with another male, even once, since 1977
* have ever taken money, drugs or other payment for sex since 1977
* have had sexual contact in the past 12 months with anyone described above
* received clotting factor concentrates for a bleeding disorder such as hemophilia
* were born in, or lived in, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Equatorial Guinea,Gabon, Niger, or Nigeria, since 1977.
* since 1977, received a blood transfusion or medical treatment with a blood product in any of these countries, or
* had sex with anyone who, since 1977, was born in or lived in any of these countries.

[Guest]

No doubt some gay rights advocacy group will force the volunteers at the American red cross to take blood from those at risk, rightly so, and that blood is useful. It will never see the inside of another human being though. It will sold to pay for the charitable works of the donation centre. Maybe the UK gay advocacy groups will force the UK to purchase gay blood from other countries?

[Scott L. Martinez]

You do realise that the 'gay promiscuity' argument is a myth?

It was known to be a myth even before HIV/AIDS was known about.

You just have to use simple logic, just because you are attracted to the same sex, why would that make you more sexually active? It's bullshit!

Though, since you are such fanatics, I'll try and get some proof for you.

[Guest]

You do realise that the 'gay promiscuity' argument is a myth?

It was known to be a myth even before HIV/AIDS was known about.

You just have to use simple logic, just because you are attracted to the same sex, why would that make you more sexually active? It's bullshit!

Though, since you are such fanatics, I'll try and get some proof for you.

I wish you good luck with that, however I suggest you start with the study from the Netherlands or the USA or Australia on male homosexual promiscuousness. They are on-line and have excellent backup data.

Male homosexual promiscuousness isn't much of a myth. I don't find anything wrong with having as many partners as you want or can. I just don't want your blood afterwards. Nothing more and nothing at all less.

[elliott20]

You do realise that the 'gay promiscuity' argument is a myth?

It was known to be a myth even before HIV/AIDS was known about.

You just have to use simple logic, just because you are attracted to the same sex, why would that make you more sexually active? It's bullshit!

Though, since you are such fanatics, I'll try and get some proof for you.

I wish you good luck with that, however I suggest you start with the study from the Netherlands or the USA or Australia on male homosexual promiscuousness. They are on-line and have excellent backup data.

Male homosexual promiscuousness isn't much of a myth. I don't find anything wrong with having as many partners as you want or can. I just don't want your blood afterwards. Nothing more and nothing at all less.

apparently, this claim is consistent with findings from the CDC.

[Guest]

No doubt some gay rights advocacy group will force the volunteers at the American red cross to take blood from those at risk, rightly so, and that blood is useful. It will never see the inside of another human being though. It will sold to pay for the charitable works of the donation centre. Maybe the UK gay advocacy groups will force the UK to purchase gay blood from other countries?

That's and idea!
Ship all the gay blood to the UK for cash!
I shalL write my congressman!

[Guest]

Not very, but too much.

[noodles]

Every country and donation centre is different.

According to the American red cross:

You should not give blood if you have AIDS or have ever had a positive HIV test, or if you have done something that puts you at risk for becoming infected with HIV.

You are at risk for getting infected if you:

* have ever used needles to take drugs, steroids, or anything not prescribed by your doctor
* are a male who has had sexual contact with another male, even once, since 1977
* have ever taken money, drugs or other payment for sex since 1977
* have had sexual contact in the past 12 months with anyone described above
* received clotting factor concentrates for a bleeding disorder such as hemophilia
* were born in, or lived in, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Equatorial Guinea,Gabon, Niger, or Nigeria, since 1977.
* since 1977, received a blood transfusion or medical treatment with a blood product in any of these countries, or
* had sex with anyone who, since 1977, was born in or lived in any of these countries.



*****''ANYONE'' WHO HAS 'EVER' HAD UNPROTECTED SEX IS AT 'RISK' FROM HIV.*****

[Guest]

*****''ANYONE'' WHO HAS 'EVER' HAD UNPROTECTED SEX IS AT 'RISK' FROM HIV.*****

So no one should give blood? What's your point?

I'd rather statistically reduce the chance of infected blood and then test the heck out of it before allowing it into another human.

[Scott L. Martinez]

Perhaps you'd like to explain why countries that don't allow gay people to give blood...

still have large quantities of infected blood?

It doesn't take a genious to realise it's come from a straight person!

But it's much easier just to blame the gays!

[noodles]

Im not trying to prove a point - merely discussing the subject matter. I think that some of the examples are unrealistic and possibly a hinderence 'not' a help with regards to blood donation. For example:

Sexual intercourse with 'anyone' without a condom puts you in a 'high' risk zone. Comdoms are the only way with intercourse to prevent the virus from entering anothers stystem. I think they need to look at who donates and who doesnt, I dont disagree that measures need to be implemented.

If blood wasnt tested for example, and i needed blood or id die, id rather risk the blood of a gay or straight person whos been in a monogomous relationship for 10 years than 'anyone' who's had an unprotected one night stand in the last 10 years. In fact id rather have the blood of a gay man whos had 15 one night stands 'with' protection than a straight single man who doesnt use comdoms as 'routine'.

[Guest]

Perhaps you'd like to explain why countries that don't allow gay people to give blood...

still have large quantities of infected blood?

It doesn't take a genious to realise it's come from a straight person!

But it's much easier just to blame the gays!

Firstly, have you ever heard the term "down low"? Many men arrested for solicitation of homosexuals are married "straight" men. It's extremely common in repressed societies, such as the USA. It's less common in homosexual countries such as the UK.

Secondly, I don't care if any one is gay. When I say I don't care what you do in your own bedroom or in the street for that matter, I mean it from the heart. I don't care, it doesn't impact me in any way. Oh, I can find humour in the confusion a transvestite lesbian must have, because of all the labels they are trying to wear at once. I can also find a bit of sick humour in a married man cheating with homosexuals, because of the betrayal of themself and their spouse. That is far removed from caring about who they have sex with.

Thirdly, I'm not "blaming" anyone, I'm playing the percentages. We play the percentages every time we get on an airplane or cross the street. There's no reason not to play percentages at the blood bank and every reason to. If 16 year old children with too much time on their hands were the primary carriers of HIV, I wouldn't want their blood in my veins.

Yes heterosexuals have HIV, yes babies fresh from the womb have HIV, but the chances are lower than a homosexual male having it. Subject to change at any time based on new facts.

[Scott L. Martinez]

If 16 year old children with too much time on their hands

I don't have too much time on my hands, I'm recovering from an injury. I'm not usually on the web this much, unless it's doing research, revision or something.