News

FDA Considers Lifting The Ban On Gay Blood Donors

308 Comments

When first clusters of AIDS cases appeared in 1981 in the US, they left the medical professionals reeling and with a feeling of helplessness. This mysterious disease ravaged the immune systems of the afflicted, turning overnight these vibrantly healthy young men into withered old husks that begged to be put out of their misery. Doctors and nurses could only watch silently, unable to offer any remedy. Without a cure or a treatment, the next best thing was damage control.

Initial countermeasures

aidbw

The FDA reacted surprisingly quickly and instituted an outright ban on all gay blood donations in 1983. Men who admitted to having even one incident of gay sex were banned from giving blood for life. Ten years later, this ban was softened and replaced with several redundant layers of risk factor evaluation, such as questionnaires and prolonged deferment.

This wasn’t directed at gays specifically, since donors with other questionable life habits were also either rejected or deferred indefinitely, meaning their blood was collected and stored yet never used for transfusion.

There is a solid body of proof that supports the gay blood ban. Gay men comprise only 2% of the US population but account for two thirds of all HIV-positive cases. In addition to HIV, hepatitis and syphilis occur at a much greater rate among gays. In short, the fact is that they are much more likely to have debilitating blood-borne diseases, so it makes sense to reject blood donations from them. Although tests were invented and perfected to help with the screening of blood samples, there is always a chance of error.

Let’s presume that all HIV testing methods currently employed on blood donations in the US have a combined accuracy of 99.99%, meaning that 1 in 10,000 infected blood donations slips through the cracks. According to the Red Cross statistics, there are 15.7 million blood donations in the US in a year, which means 1,570 HIV-infected blood samples are given to unknowing patients.

How accurate are the tests? Nobody can tell, and that’s the profound irony—the blood screening system is invisible when it works.

But now, the gay-friendly Obama administration pushed for FDA to reconsider its gay blood ban and on July 14 we will finally get to know if and in what manner blood donations from gays can be accepted. The most likely outcome is that the lifetime ban clause is replaced with a one-year ban, counting from the last incident of gay sex. Again, this “countermeasure” relies on the candor of a group known for their promiscuity and numerous illicit liasons.

Trapped under guilt

In the UK, the same ban was lifted in 2011 because it was in violation of equality legislation, even though it is possible for HIV in blood to be completely invisible to all known HIV tests for a certain length of time, which is the so-called “window period.” Even when the ban was in place, the relevant UK authorities estimated that around 7% of gay men lied about their sexual history and still donated blood.

In Northern Ireland in 2013, a born-again Christian gay prostitute challenged the lifetime gay blood ban in court on the basis of prejudice, prompting the judge to order the ban lifted. The reasoning given in the verdict was that England, Wales, and Scotland have already lifted the bans themselves, so the increase in risk will be “very minimal.”

Then-minister of health, Edwin Poots, was pelted with criticism because he was unable to provide his own studies and research material justifying the ban.

Creeping equality

03_12_ACT_UP_12_LRG

As you might imagine, the Democrats in Congress have smelled blood and are already pushing for more equality. In a letter sent to FDA and penned Tuesday (July 14th), senators Elizabeth Warren and Tammy Baldwin demand that more steps be taken towards full equality when it comes to donating blood. The letter states:

Neither our current blood donation policy, nor the proposed one year deferral for MSM (men who have sex with other men), allows the many healthy gay and bisexual men across America to donate blood. This serves to perpetuate the stereotype that all men who have sex with men pose a risk to the health of others

The letter also suggests that criteria for accepting blood donations from transgender persons be considered next.

No escape

In this situation, gay people are being used as ammunition by the progressive left to affect change in the medical profession and society at large, contrary to all facts and reason. It doesn’t matter that the consequences are far-reaching and potentially disastrous to the public health, as long as gays gain even a smidgen of perceived “equality.”

The actual victims of lifting the gay blood ban are the random people and innocent bystanders who desperately need blood transfusions: babies undergoing surgery or car accident victims. In a nutshell, this is what the push for equality is all about, it’s not to uplift the gays, but to bring everyone down to their level — if gay people have HIV, hepatitis, and syphilis, so should everyone else.

Read More: 3 Fundamental Truths About The Universe You Learn From Lifting Weights

308 thoughts on “FDA Considers Lifting The Ban On Gay Blood Donors”

    1. Sir, I will admit that I enjoy your comments. LOL Keep up the good work. #NOhomo

      2. Hey! How do you know about that? Who you been talking to? Stop watching me!

      3. When I cant sleep, I listen to Coast-to-Coast on the radio. One night, a guest claimed Hughes was bananas for a few yrs, returned somewhat to being sane, and used his nuttiness as a cover story for his move to Vegas to be closer to area 51….

        2. EVERY night? Im not sure if you have the coolest girl ever or youre both bonkers 😉

        3. Yup, comes on at 9 p.m. here. Got her hooked when we started dating. Perfect to fall asleep to. She still won’t disown that Oswald acted alone…

    4. Couldn’t be any worse than getting some of Keith Richard’s longevity blood pumped in your system 😀

        4. Does it matter? They get 72 male virgins upon being “entered in paradise.” I bet that pulled pork sandwich in NYC is looking pretty good to the 9/11 bombers in hell.

        5. 72 male virgins? Are you sure? And use in the context of the joke it matters.

        6. No, it is female of course. But I think it would be funny if these guys found out their god was gay.

      3. Careful there, Elizabeth Bathory insisted on virgins blood and she was sealed away for the rest of her life.

    7. If I was dying, I would happily accept blood from just about anyone. “Gay blood” can be screened quickly for HIV now, unlike in the early 80s.

      1. People who are dying are desperate. They’ll hold on to anything that saves their lives. That, however, doesn’t mean that we give them blood containing HIV.

      2. If you are dying any chance is better than no chance but that is not the point. We shouldn’t be increasing people’s chances of dying just for political reasons.

        1. Problem is American blood supplies are rather low, especially for people with less common blood markers. Given that we are more educated about HIV/AIDS and can effectively screen for it we might as well accept blood donations from gay males as the benefits of increased blood supplies would outweigh the very minimal risk of infection.

        2. Is there a free market in blood supplies in the US? How many people go without transfusions because of low supplies?

      3. It’s about lowering the likelihood of infected blood. Lower risk of such cases with the current pool of donors. Why increase expenditure jumping through more hoops trying to account for more risk when one can already do it at the administrative level? It’s turning around in circles to get to a point when a good straight line will do.

    8. When I went in for knee surgery in made damn sure only donors from my family were used. Didn’t wind up needing it but my surgeon was more than acomidatIng.

    9. I was thinking exactly the same. A pint of blood a day and in 8 months you’re set.

    10. Actually, my roommate has a very rare blood type that can only be matched by the same. So he gives blood like clock work. He has a rotating supply of his blood on hand just in case.

  2. I met a gay guy a couple weeks ago. He was my age: 29. We talked and became friendly. I asked him bluntly how many guys he’s been with. His answer? 300-400 dicks sucked and 30-40 in the pooper. No, don’t allow gays to donate blood.

      1. They all probably aren’t like that but I could only imagine how rampant the world would be with STD if women had the sex drive men.

    2. Well that;s interesting and certainly totally consistent with what the researched numbers say.
      But how in the world do you get to asking such a question???
      I mean, how do you go from ‘Good game eh’, to ‘what is your gay sexual history?’

      1. Do you think a dude who has sucked 300+ dicks is shy about talking about his sexual history? I’ve known a lot of gay dudes throughout the years and it only takes a beer or two before they are talking sexual exploits (usually with the motive to start challenging your straightness). In the words of Conan the Barbarian, they are all sluts.

      2. I would bet money the gay guy brought sex up in the first place. They can’t seem to stop themselves from mentioning it when in the company of straight people, especially if it’s a fairly large group.
        They absolutely love how shocked we are to hear them casually throw out a number in the hundreds, and how horrified and confused we look when they tell us about the weird sexual shit they do/have done

        1. Yep. I remember this young guy telling me about how he went to see Django Unchained with his partner when it was released but they didn’t watch it all because they went off to the toilet to blow each others cocks etc. I told him I had no interest in hearing about his sex life and just wanted to hear about the film.
          I didn’t ask for that info, he just put it out there. My gay cousin always tells me when he gets laid as well, which is like every other day. What the fuck is wrong with most gays? What do they have to prove?

    3. Bell and Weinberg, in their classic study of male and female
      homosexuality, found that 43 percent of white male homosexuals had sex
      with 500 or more partners, with 28 percent having one thousand or more
      sex partners.[13]
      In their study of the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexuals published in the Journal of Sex Research, Paul Van de Ven et al. found that “the modal range for number of sexual partners ever [of homosexuals] was 101-500.” In addition, 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent had between 501 and 1,000 partners. A further 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent reported having had more than one thousand lifetime sexual partners.[14]

      http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=IS04C02

    4. I’ve met a few and this seems to be a common thing among them.
      Not only that, but they love to talk about it. And about how sexually repressed heterosexual people are

  4. Who cares if a baby gets aids? FDA regulations are not about safety and logic, they should be about “fairness”

    1. well, babies are barely people anyway to most SJWs, more like nuisances, accessories, or political pawns. When you think about it: the only difference between most abortions and infanticide is whether the victim ever saw the light of day.

      1. To Modern Women, babies are tools and weapons for divorce proceedings, and guaranteed 18-year annuities afterwards — nothing more.

        1. Asked a women once if the young girl sitting next to her was her daughter. She laughed and replied it isn’t mine. ‘Nuf said.

        2. ” ‘IT’ isn’t mine.” THAT’s ‘interesting’…and makes me glad that I never married nor fathered children!

      2. To SJW’s, feminists and liberals babies are hurdles that hold women back from achieving their full potential.

    2. If you still trust the FDA, or any branch of the USGOV or mainstream media, then you’re a part of the problem, not the solution.

  5. I never thought that 5 activists in black robes would sneeringly spit on their obligation to the law of the land, or that of the 36 states with homosexual marriage prior to that, the 22 who had had bans passed by majority vote of the residents would be over-ruled by a singular federal judge either, so who knows what could happen?
    Imagine this scenario:
    So, your three year old daughter needs an emergency transfusion, now because there are no screenings or safeguards, she is given HIV positive blood and later succumbs to the illness.
    As her parent, you sue, but are told having sued has marked you as a homophobic bigot which comes with a stiff fine and gender sensitivity classes. After a week or so of mocking in the media, having your daughter’s grave vandalized, and reading internet boards about how she must have contracted it through sex or drugs, you let lose a tirade directed at the nearest TMZ reporter and spend the rest of your days in prison. Yeah, can’t wait.

      2. The main reason you keep hearing the Progressive Socialists calling for “gun-control.” They don’t want you to be able to do anything about it. While they fear the often final use of weapons, they know most sane people wouldn’t turn to that, and so they are also trying to negate your vote with hordes of illegals at the polls and stacking the court system in their favor with appointed judges. Soon inaction won’t be a choice, but a way of life.

        1. The present socialist crap that the so-called “progressives” are pushing can be also be found in the early history of the Soviet Union; become familiar with that history, because it is coming in the future — courtesy of the Leftists, socialists, and “Useful Idiots” (feminists, gays, minorities, illegals, SJW’s, criminals, etc.) who support the Democratic Party.

        2. It’s common tactics for all socialist/communist regimes Nazi Germany, USSR, China, Cuba, North Korea etc. The real truth of it is, we are infected and have been since about 1900-1910, (the Nazis and Hitler were even openly adored here in the US prior to WW2), we were on the path then toward global communism/totalitarianism, but we applied some band-aids around the Great Depression, fought two world wars, and have been limping on ever since. However, never cured of the disease in all that time, our later stability/excesses have led to the disease growing and becoming stronger. We may have to amputate soon or risk losing the patient.

        4. The Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is dead. The Left isn’t going to like the results, ha ha.
          Let’s just say, action will be an option, thanks to the death of this treaty.

        6. He wasn’t big on immigration either unless he was the one who decided where you moved to.

        7. I’m just looking forward to the time when I can print my own nukes from home.

        8. History has proven that ‘gun control’ is ALWAYS followed by ‘people control’. The biggest lies that government tells is that they will ‘protect’ you and that they are there to ‘help’ you.
          Educate yourself about how the Founding Fathers felt about government and its dangers. Washington himself said (paraphrasing) that government was like a fire — it was best kept small and always under control.

        9. Most likely after they had served their purpose as “Useful Idiots”.

        10. Marx opposed gun control.
          “any attempt to disarm the workers must be frustrated, by force if necessary.”

      3. It’s stuff like this, The Cathedral pushing for AIDS infested blood, that makes me glad that the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is on its way to its death.
        The solution to the Social Justice cancer is radiation therapy.

      4. Yeah if one of my kids got HIV from a transfusion there would be a trail of corpses from the CDC to the NY TIMES office.

      1. The really frightening thing is: 10 years ago I would have considered all my comments on this entire site and site network to be the fucking insane ravings of a madman.
        Sincerely, there are times when I wish I could wake up and I was just the madman all along. But, unfortunately, there are reasons I chose the screen name.

        1. Been through that journey, too. I was more of a libtard a decade ago. I started moving further away from that after Obama got elected and the liberals weren’t going after him for doing the same things Bush was doing.

        2. I’m started to believe the world is becoming upside down and backwards.
          “The exact contrary of what is generally believed is often the truth.” ‒Jean de La Bruyère

        3. If I was an advance alien species looking to make contact with another race, I would look at our planet, watch the news, and then leave. No intelligent life here.

        5. it is unfortunate that really reasonable stuff gets mixed up and put into one category with kooky conspiracy theories. imagine that intellectual guy in the bar talking about the benefits of capitalism and then about e.t. and reptilians. as if the left was creating these hired madmen whose job it is to make the good stuff look like madness.

        10. i read part of his book. he wrote that he spent years observing the parliament, only to come to the conclusion that you can achieve nothing in there and that you go in there only to lose your soul.

        11. I can’t even get my hands on the book in Germany. Officially due to copyright reasons, as the federal state of Bavaria holds the copyright.

        12. wrong, actually. i saw a little release party around the corner some weeks ago. copyright expired in 2015.
          you can also get a copy on amazon.co.uk without problems.
          it seems you can not sell it on ebay, though.

        13. I could read fragments of it in school, but not the entire book. The copyright expires at the end of this year.

        14. i am a german, too. they did sell it around the corner here. anyway, the internet is your friend – as always. school probably preselected the fragments you were able to read, i myself just randomly picked 10 places and read something in there.

        17. Maybe you’re right, because I’m about ready to gas the kikes and race war now.

        18. You only feel crazy because most people would rather talk about why Kim Kardashian and whoever the fuck broke up.

        19. Have you seen any of Hitler’s speeches? I believe there are a few on Youtube. If I remember correctly, they are indeed pretty close to what the left preaches today.

        20. I saw the same things happen when Clinton was in office and the feminazis didn’t go after him — all Leftists are hypocrites.

        21. He became ” Hitler” because the left ruined things so badly that a pseudo right wing strongman stood up and promised to fix things in exchange for absolute power.
          Hitler actually did fix things for a while, but made the mistake of believing his own propaganda, and started a war with almost the entire world.
          He was a brilliant politician, and a lousy general.

    3. Exactly. I wish your comments could be considered insane.
      But they are perfectly in line with the direction that is being pushed.
      When it comes to ‘Diversity’—- “Don’t ever be the first to stop applauding.”

    4. So what if children die from the transfusion of HIV positive blood of gay men? Lives don’t matter. Feelings do. It’s important not to ban gays from donating blood, lest their feelings be hurt.

      1. But what if it’s an African refugee who dies from blood given by a cis-white gay man?

    5. You’ve got very good grammar for someone who was clearly typing that one-handed while furiously making your own donation of bodily fluids.

    6. Situations like that is why we have guns. There comes a point where enough is enough.

    7. BS.
      The court did exactly what it should have done.
      If you want to see an idiotic court decision, look at hobby lobby, what kind of a moron do you have to be to think that a corporation should have religious rights ?
      The first amendment separates church and state.
      The eleventh forbids discrimination
      The fourteenth guarantees equality under the law.
      the inbred hillbilly ” majority” cannot vote away someone else’s rights.
      It is called the bill of rights for a reason.
      It is the courts job to protect the minority from mob rule.
      “god” is not the government, and the bible is not the law, the government not only has no authority to enforce bible rules, but is forbidden to do so, READ THE FIRST AMENDEMENT.
      Try reading the 1960’s civil rights laws.
      Put the bible down and read a book on civics and american government, any high school kid who paid attention in civics and history classes should know this.
      Your attitude is a perfect example of why religion needs to be banned from the school system.
      You want bibles in classrooms to illegally spread more religious poison to impressionable school kids, but do not want them to learn american history, government and the constitution.
      You whine about prayer in school, but but want to teach FACTS.
      This kind of stupid crap is why I hate christianity the way I do.
      This kind of stupid crap is why conservative candidates do not get elected.
      This kind of stupid crap is why we have the worst president in history desecrating the white house today, and hillary will be even worse.
      Christians are nothing but hypocrites and pharisees, truly the american taliban.
      And no I am not gay.

      1. Lol obvious troll is obvious and if you are serious WHY WOULD GAY MARRIAGE MATTER WHEN MOST ARE “OPEN” MARRIAGES

    8. “now because there are no screenings or safeguards,” – You did read the article, right? That they have more safeguards and screenings now, in 2015, than they did in the 80’s?

      1. you did read that the phrase in quotations was in the context of a fictitious scenario not a comment of the current now, but the potential future now? hopefully one that will never come to pass, the point being that the country seems to be operating mostly on some form of chaos theory (paraphrased: that which can happen will).

  6. They always could. Just tell them you are not gay lol. You don’t give a shit about the patients, you just want to bully them since they are the only ones weaker than the greasy haired fuck on the profile photo.

  7. Make donors and blood banks legally liable for their blood. I give regularly and there are a bunch of tracking numbers on every part of those bags so I imagine if a person was infected by a transfusion they could trace the blood back to the donor.

    1. They test the blood for any pathogens and then use that ID to inform the donor of any irregularities. From there the blood is destroyed and the person is moved to an intelligible donator list.

  8. Unrelated, but if you are not a blood donor, consider starting. Blood is always needed and its an easy way to build up some extra cosmic karma. It only takes about 1/2 hour and only 5-10 minutes of that is actually time with a needle in your arm.

    2. Yes, some places even reward you with points which you can redeem for stuff since payment is illegal.

  9. This is SJW politics putting peoples lives at risk, same as lowering standards of firefighters and military to let in more “wimmins”. I fucking hate when governments puss out and put feels before people’s lives.

    1. Yup, your life is more at risk now because a gender studies major thinks feelings are more important than your life.

        2. Yes.
          It will go something like: “It’s okay for an 18 yo to date a 16yo.” The age will lower over time (perhaps quicker when some rich/powerful person is the pedo or related to one). We’ll hear public outcry, people who like cougars and such will be raised up as examples of one age preference being accepted and the other oppressed. Some term will come out to paint those in opposition as terrible bigots. Pedophobics or something. Social Justice crusaders eager to have a meaningful battle equal to the mythic civil rights issues of the mid 1900s will lead the charge as their lives will be otherwise filled with emptiness (vapid self-book posting) or servitude.
          By the current trends, we’ll also likely see transsexualism, a rise in omni-sexuals & asexuality, polygamy, incest, and possibly necro & zoophilia acceptance by 2100 or so, provided we haven’t blown ourselves up or been conquered by then. Think of it this way, if it can be taxed, it will be government approved.
          Oh, but two consenting adults! Right, so why are we discriminating against two related consenting adults, then, why two? why discriminate against three or ten or more, why do they have to be alive to consent (is a dead person still a person? a fetus isn’t a person but a corpse is?), we need younger conscripts, booze drinkers, and taxpayers better lower the age of consent (a relatively modern concept in itself as even in the US you could be married much younger than 18 at one time), and so on. Now that a universal emotional argument has been accepted, it can and will continue to be applied universally for each “oppressed group.”

        5. Can’t see it happening. If anything there’s full-blown paedo hysteria right now.

        6. Which is simply conditioning your mind to adjust to normalizing the sound and concept of the word. Desensitizing, I think it’s called, hit you with the most extreme and mind-numbing instances until you no longer cope (one of the purposes Law & Order SVU serves).
          Your grandkids likely won’t find it as disturbing a topic and their grandkids will probably participate in it (thinking of you with great pity for your “archaic bigotry” and suppressed sense of sexuality). After all, if around 4% can affect the changes we’ve seen in the past decade or so, what will happen when dealing with a number closer to 30%? When “they” are your relatives and friends, or even you?
          Guarantee there are at least that many people right now with a bare minimum of urges for younger partners who are held in check solely by the current laws.
          Hell, there is even an international market for it, as of yet unhindered, who do you suppose all those buyers are? Bet they have money and status. And for them it as normal as for drug or gun runners.

        7. Your average moron believes whatever they’re told by the media. If they slowly start pushing a narrative that pedophiles are OK and can’t help their cravings and anyone who victimizes them is a bigot that will eventually become the norm. Just like how most people think being a transvestite is something to be proud of nowdays because the media tell people to think that when it’s actually a mental illness. Or how everyone suddenly agrees with gay marriage due to a big a media and Hollywood push.

        8. The bravest people in the universe are pedophiles who have their desire under control. 😉

        10. Pedos have been there for quite awhile- especially in public schools. Unfortunately you will only hear about it on the local news unless it’s a catholic priest– then it’s nationwide press and the old tropes about the catholic church.

        11. very interesting theory, the desensitizing part.
          i do find some girls attractive from 13, 14 upward.
          i have read that pedophilia was quite normal in late rome.

        12. Yep that’s the sort of propaganda media can make people believe. It may be tongue in cheek but if people hear that enough and TV shows promote it and they shame people who disagree then most people will go along with it.

        13. It’s definitely coming. Some months ago, I read an article on cracked about “non-offending pedophiles” These individuals were painted as angels for controlling their urges and not fucking kids. They were portrayed as beacons of morality, and of course there was a talk about “understanding” them. Next, I guess, people will be told to sympathize with them, and they will become another victimized class. Oh yes, and they may even start asking for “rights” to express their sexuality.

        14. Agreed. Twenty years ago, the thought of gay marriage would’ve been repulsive to people. But now, most people are okay with it.
          It all depends on how the media and the government portrays a specific group of people. Indirectly they begin to tell people what to think. They use schools, colleges, and the media to further their agenda, targeted primarily at the youth. And suddenly the next generation readily embraces the beliefs that their parents would’ve found idiotic.
          Voila! the elites succeed in their brainwashing campaign.

        15. That, however is not pedophilia. These girls, most likely have entered puberty, and have developed secondary sexual characteristics. Thus, as an animal, you are evolutionarily wired to find them attractive.
          In fact, I would say that if you didn’t find them attractive, then, it would mean that as a heterosexual man something is wrong with you.
          Pedophilia, is when someone is attracted to individuals who have not entered puberty. These children haven’t developed secondary sexual characteristics, and thus it is biologically wrong to be attracted to them, as they are do not give an indication that they are ready for reproduction.

        16. That’s exactly right, what is acceptable and unnaceptable is dictated to people because your average person doesn’t think independently.

        17. “Yep fuck your kids safety you’re just being a pedophobe.”
          Being a pedophile will be a requirement of being a teacher (day care worker, or anything involving children), since they’ll be supervising and leading the sexual abuse of even newborn babies. Heck, they will be demanding you commit incest pedophilia with your own children to retain custody of them (or else the state will seize them to ensure their proper socialization). Brave New World (Mystery Babylon) here we come:
          https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/german-government-publication-promotes-incestuous-pedophilia-as-healthy-sex
          Booklets from a subsidiary of the German government’s Ministry for Family Affairs encourage parents to sexually massage their children as young as 1 to 3 years of age. Two 40-page booklets entitled “Love, Body and Playing Doctor” by the German Federal Health Education Center (Bundeszentrale für gesundheitliche Aufklärung – BZgA) are aimed at parents – the first addressing children from 1-3 and the other children from 4-6 years of age.
          “Fathers do not devote enough attention to the clitoris and vagina of their daughters. Their caresses too seldom pertain to these regions, while this is the only way the girls can develop a sense of pride in their sex,” reads the booklet regarding 1-3 year olds. The authors rationalize, “The child touches all parts of their father’s body, sometimes arousing him. The father should do the same.”
          Canadian author and public speaker Michael O’Brien who has written and spoken extensively about the crisis of culture in the West spoke to LifeSiteNews.com about the shocking and extremely disturbing phenomenon. It is, he said, “State-encouraged incest, which in most civilized societies is a crime.” The development is, he suggests, a natural outcome of the rejection of the Judeo-Christian moral order.
          […]
          Rzeczpospolita reports that the Eckhardt Scheffer of BZgA claimed that before releasing the manual the organization consulted parents, educators and child psychologists. 93% of whom gave a positive evaluation.
          Even for a Western nation, Germany’s billboards and television ads push the limits of public pornography. Last year LifeSiteNews.com reported that a very popular teen magazine in Germany publishes nude photos of teens in sexual positions which would be in almost any other nation illegal child pornography.
          With a licentiousness as the new morality of the secular materialist establishment and homeschool a forbidden practice, parents in Germany may well wonder what will transpire in public education.
          “Will those children who are not liberated by their parents have special classes in their schools where they’re introduced to these practices,” asked O’Brien rhetorically. “If the state intervenes in this way, what won’t it intervene in?”

        19. It’s pretty interesting how the only ‘group’ with fewer and fewer ‘rights’ (but PLENTY of responsibilities and ALL accountability) are straight white males.

        20. ONLY if the pedos are white males. Female teachers get the Pussy Pass.

        22. The great irony is that everybody is made to believe that they are thinking independently.

        23. Or being made to think they are morally superior when they are just parroting opinions they are told to think.

        24. Problem is that pedophilia is not the same as homosexuality. Two adult homosexuals are able to consent to sex. However in a pedo relationship, one partner will always be a minor. How can we expect minors, with limited brain capacity to consent to sex? It all boils down to this.
          Moreover which parent will be willing to let their child have a relationship with an adult? I guess if pedophiles get their “rights”, parents who object to their child having a relationship with an adult will be shamed publicly, and called pedophobes, bigots, uncaring and other shit, and while the sick parents who don’t object to it, but actively encourage this shit will be praised.

        25. They are being made to think that they are morally superior because, that makes them feel good about themselves. Overtime these people begin to crave that feeling of being praised by others, and they do and say things that will make people say that they are morally superior. It’s like they become addicted to the drug of being praised by other people, especially the elites and the media. The people get the feeling of being do gooders, and that is what they want, while the state gets more people who can support and vote for it. That is what the state wants.
          Rarely do these “morally superior” people realize the truth.

        26. Judaeo-Christian ‘morality’ is a propaganda term, like racist, homophobe, misogynist, et al.
          Judaeo morality consists of male genital mutilation and rabbis sucking the blood off of infant male penises.
          You can pretend that isn’t happening and call me another propaganda name “anti-semite” and it won’t change the facts or phase me one bit.
          Christian morality is against pedophilia, genital mutilation, homosexuality, usury, and sex between unmarried people.
          What is Jewish morality against? Who runs our media and largest banks, along with our government?
          What religion birthed feminism and embraced homosexuality?
          Does the media support homosexuality, diversity (how diverse is Israel and what is their immigration policy LOL), and all other manner of ideas that our destroying our country and culture?
          Again, who owns that media? What is AIPAC and why does every major American politician seek AIPAC’s endorsement or approval?
          Why does the USA allow dual citizens to be senior members of the US government? Couldn’t those dual citizens place their loyalty to that other country over their loyalty to the US (hint: Rahm Emmanuel’s military career)?
          Why does the USA allow foreign governments to lobby our politicians and influence their decisions (Hint: AIPAC et al)?
          Don’t be duped and confuse Judeao morality with Christian morality and try to conflate the two.
          They are not the same.
          This country’s downfall began, IMO, after the Union won the CW, and accelerated with the creation of a private central bank called the Federal Reserve (who owns the Fed again?) that was given control over US currency, and hit full speed under Franklin D. Roosevelt.
          Once Nixon removed the gold backing from the US dollar in 1973 (hint; at who’s urging again?), the USD began it’s inevitable decline into the toilet as government debt skyrocketed and continues to increase to this day (hint: what are unfunded liabilities?).

        27. The definition of marriage USED to be with a man and woman only. Then the definition changed to include man and man and woman and woman.
          Our current definition of consent doesn’t include children (or animals). I strongly believe that in a few years that definition will change to accomodate these perverts. Because “all love is equal”, you pedophobe bigot!

        28. Yes, it’s possible. The definition of everything has been expanded to unimaginable limits, love, marriage, consent, and rape, being stark examples. So yes, the could expand the definition of love to include pedophilia.
          And I guess they will try to convince the masses, pedophile love goes two way not one way. By that I mean they will say that some children also do want to have sex with adults. Let me explain. When I was about six, I had a huge crush on a few of my school teachers. A lot of boys did, and a lot of young boys and girls, do have crushes on adults, like teachers, and movie stars, for example. People sympathetic to the pedophile cause could manipulate this and say, that the children also do have “feelings” for these adults, or that children also love these adults and sex is an expression of love. It may seem insane, right now, at this time, but it is possible. A few decades ago, the idea of homosexual marriage seemed impossible, but here we have come to witness it with our own eyes.

        32. Yes, I know, my friend. But I often discuss human carnal instincts like this. I only bring God into discussion when discussing with people like you, who I know, by your other posts, will appreciate it.
          When engaging in discussion with other strangers, I often do not bring in religious stuff, not for the fear of being called a Christian nutcrack (I’m willing to take the insult for Jesus), but because I know people often begin to ridicule God, and the discussion shifts from what was being discussed formerly to an argument about theism and atheism.

        33. We’ve reached a point, where nothing sickening amazes me. I mean, today we live in a society that considers, murdering, innocent, unborn children as a right. That’s quite sick. It gets more sickening when you consider, that it’s not a stranger murdering these children, but their mothers themselves! And then, it gets more sickening, when you see women wearing, “I had an abortion” T shirts. Not only do they kill their children, they are proud of it, and the society doesn’t bat an eyelid, when the show how proud they are of murdering their children.
          The murdering of children and glorifying it, makes pedophilia blush with innocence.

      1. The feelings and rights of a few come before the safety and the rights of the many.

        1. It usually happens in a society that is directed by emotion and not logic. Anyone using logic will be hounded by the society.

  10. I have surgeries all the time and need blood almost every time during the procedures. This is worrying. People still get infected now even with all the technology and safety rules, but we are about to enter a new phase of medical issues.

    1. This will be especially worrying when a lot of these people doing these procedures are now some affirmative action Laqueesha or Consuela who couldn’t care less about quality control.

  11. FUN FACT: All jobs suck. That is a fact of life. But we all have to work so you need to make sure to find a company that won’t send you over the edge and put a shotgun in your mouth. So, make sure when you are looking for a new job, to use the bathroom after the interview. You can tell alot about a company by the toilet paper they stock the stalls with. If they have good toilet paper, then you know that the company is flexible with some budget and cares about their employees. I currently work for one of the largest corporations in the world. Guess what kind of toilet paper they use…..yup….good ole John Wayne toilet paper. “Rough, Tough, and doesn’t take shit off no one.” Unfortunately, the start-up I worked for got bought up by this corporation and I am stuck working for X amount of time in order to get my fair share of the purchase price. But you can bet that when that time is up…I am moving on to a new company.

    1. this reminds me of once when a representative of one of the big german automobile clubs came to visit our company. when he left, there was a stink in the bathroom. somebody found slippers full of shit in the bin for used towels.
      and yeah, not everything is always fun. that’s the whole idea about discipline. you have to know that it is all for a reason.

      1. again, Im not sure what you are talking about. A VP dropped a deuce in a pair of slippers? Really? Are you german? Do you enjoy heavy metal? Do you relate to this

      2. Would it be that deep down in their psyche they know what they are practicing is unnatural and they have a deep seated hatred of themselves?

      1. Guess you get to pick your poison…
        Much higher rates of sexual degeneracy with the gays, or much higher rates of verbal and physical abuse with the lesbians.

        1. Physical abuse is also more prevalent among homosexual men than among normal couples. There’s no chivalry there.

    3. I watched that clip. Reminds me of the stories I would hear about gay orgies. I was told that they simply threw mattresses on the floors and just raw dogged any stranger.

  13. Let’s do this: allow gays to donate blood, but keep a record of their donations and if they transmit any disease to a person, then they will criminally charged.
    Since we are going for equality, let’s apply this standard to everyone. It won’t be difficult to do really since these donations are tagged with all sorts of information. Just tag them with a name and SSN as well.

    1. Good idea. But donors should also receive a substantial compensation for their blood. Why should everybody profit economically from this transaction except the donor?

    3. It will definitely get more weirder, and I’m prepared for it. Hell, the way shit just gets weirder, I’m prepared for anything.

  15. This is backwards land, we as a people are going down the drain. The simple facts are this homosexulity is an occult ritual, these people worship the devil. Anything that is sacred to you they will spit on and destroy. And it’s not voluntary they are going to take Over religion, the schools, the government every thing. Till this is sodom. , they are letting transgenders in the millitary and using tax funds to at for their surgerys. I bet in a couple years these pervert teachers will be molesting some kid and convince him or her to get a sex change and if the parent complains, call child services lock them up. That’s why they really don’t want God mentioned anywhere, you thought it was about science no becuase evolution is about passing on genes homosexulity is purely about pleasure a sick version but that’s it.

  16. All of this, ALL of it is completely analogous to the terror and insanity of the
    USSR. Social justice not ‘working’, equality not ‘achieved’, outcomes not equitable???
    The cause is obvious: WRECKERS. (Racists, sexists, homophobes, capitalists)
    Those evil wreckers. Just like the show trials of the 1930’s.
    Can’t draw money from a stone, or move 10 million tons of earth/day with a pickup truck. Someone dies from a homosexual spreading a blood born disease. The cause???
    All those BAD attitudes of WRECKERS!!!
    And the SJW elite are so smug. They are just evil, bullying Soviets in new uniforms!!
    http://img10.deviantart.net/678a/i/2009/115/8/c/rainbow_stalin_by_vash10887.jpg

  17. How utterly stupid if this comes to pass. I’m a regular blood donor (Type O) & the reams of documents & checklists I had to go through (as with all donors i imagine) years ago can be near off putting to an honest first time donor. No fresh tattoos a year or less old. No red flag lifestyle issues or a known carrier of diseases. You have to be a certain weight & age etc.
    The fact that feelings are being considered over the reality of health & safety is near unthinkable.
    I have enough faith that good ol’ fashioned common sense will prevail.
    If not..

    1. I was with you till you said that common sense will prevail…if everything else that’s been happening in this twisted world is anything to go by, i kindly doubt it.

    2. No tattoos, dang the millenials are going to be needing blood bad when the old timers go away. It seems like a favorite pass time for them to tattoo crap on their bodies. Even the girls are starting to look like carnival freaks.

    3. “I have enough faith that good ol’ fashioned common sense will prevail.”
      Dude.. the US Supreme Court just ruled that two homos butt-fucking each other is on the same plane and carries the same societal weight and importance as the union between a man and a woman.
      What fucking common sense is there in that??
      What is considered “common sense” changes over time.. and not necessarily for the better. Little things like facts and statistics about high rates of gay male promiscuity and much higher rates of HIV infections and other STDs and that “open relationships” are very common among gay men aren’t allowed to be uttered. Everything must be sacrificed in the name of “equality.” I’m afraid this is what passes for “common sense” these days in the modern, liberal, feminist West.

      1. True.
        I’m just hoping even that monumental blindspot has its limits.
        I’d like to think rational concerns for public health & safety still holds sway over the rainbow tinted feelz.
        They’ve chipped away at the cornerstone (not the pillar it once was to be fair) of matrimony in the name of freedom & personal rights. This next one, if it passes, chips away at the pillar of public safety & order. That’s a bridge too far. It damn well better be.

  18. @Derek
    Please correct your otherwise good article for language: correct English is “male homosexual(s)”. The SJW PC euphemism is “gay man (or men)”. Thanks.

    1. Dictionaries disagree.
      But let me guess, ‘Big Gay’ has got to them too!

  19. This is just like the tuberculosis (TB) outbreak in California (most likely caused by Mexican illegals bringing it in with them) which the MSM is not reporting. Google it for the latest info.
    All that matters to the Demoncrats is illegal voters to keep them in power; they could care less about the health and safety of the American population*.
    *They’ve proven that with their reckless release of criminal illegals, as well as this outbreak of Third World disease that they don’t want to acknowledge.

    1. But we must all allow our children to be stuck with 10’s of vaccinations, and are not allowed to hold vaccine companies liable if our children are damaged from an adverse reaction.
      What can I say but:
      AMERICA: FUCK YEAH!

      1. No, the measles are from crystal-twirling woo-followers who neglected their children by not getting them vaccinated.

  20. This world is fucking sick. Here in my state, a gay faggot homosexual senator Matt McCoy basically decriminalized the known transfer of HIV to another person. Obviously pandering to the diseased faggots as now they only get a slap on the wrist for knowingly transferring HIV to another person, instead of prison. Fucking sick world, we need Armageddon to happen. The planet needs cleansed of the homo disease, among a myriad of other things.

    1. In my view “the homo disease” is merely nature’s way of telling us that we are on the wrong path. If we decided to and succeeded in fixing the most fundamental problems, homosexuality would wane away.

      2. Well, except it’s been with humanity for its entire history and seems, from what we see in other intelligent, gregarious mammals, to be a fairly common variant.

        1. By “the homo disease” I referred to the almost exponential rise in the number of homosexuals, especially gay men. I would estimate that historically probably 1% of men were gay, whereas nowadays it seems to be around 10%, maybe even more.

        2. There’s no reason to think incidence of same sex attraction has increased. The simple answer is that men who previously would have married for appearances, or gone into the Church where being unmarried would not be mentioned, now can find a partner and not live a lie. Plus the rather large number of bisexual men who would have only had relations with women in less tolerant times now have sex with men too.
          It’s an increase in practice, not in attraction.

      3. So homosexual women must be loved by nature then since they have the lowest infection rate.

        5. To call me stupid is a weak argument. Even if my statement is wrong, it does not mean that I am stupid. We are all wrong sometimes.
          Is alcoholism a disease?

  21. The math posted is wrong. Thats the number of HIV blood samples that would make it through the screening IF all 10million donors had HIV in the first place.
    Either way I dont like it, but having funny math in our articles makes our points weaker.

    2. It also ignored the “window period” where the tests are ineffective for months following exposure.

    1. Speaking generally about the whole medical community.They(Leftists) want public funded medical for a reason. Besides it giving them control over life and death a.k.a. being able convince people to do what they want, they also need to to be untouchable by the general public. If it was privatized, people would start arguing against this everyone is the same B.S., because they would realize if you laid on your ass all day you might not be able to afford that emergency medical procedure etc…. Making everything the sole domain of government equalizes the longterm planners and the short term planners in how much they could influence society through accumulation of wealth. When the short term planners votes are worth the same amount ,because the government prevents the longterm planners from using wealth they are prevented from accruing then society will slowly change toward communism.

  23. This is a shit article. Derek, you should be fucking embarassed with your sloppy research.
    1) The two statistic sites would have given you much more information if you dug a little deeper.
    2) No mention of the chronic, decades old blood shortage that the Red Cross reports EVERY FUCKING YEAR.
    3) This article presumes that testing is still based on 99.99% accuracy. I doubt that number was based on having even a passing conversation with anyone that has MT, MLT, or MD after their name.
    As for you commentors:
    Fact of the matter is if you wanted the ban on gay donors to remain in place it was up to you, heathly heterosexual males, to donate as frequently as possible.
    You didn’t. You brought this on yourself.

    1. Please, ridiculous logic. Homosexuals comprise around 1% of the population.
      Their effect on the need for blood donors is negligible. Their potential effect on disease transmission risk is HUGE.

      1. Funny how you guys cant even decide what percentage homosexuals are of the population.

    3. I’m sure the huge number of gays who will donate blood when the ban is lifted will solve the shortage that the other 90% of the population just couldn’t quite take care of lmao

    4. Pay donors the full market value for their blood, and the shortage problem practically disappears.

  24. I believe they are trying to lift the ban on “shit for blood” (Trainspotting quote) in Ireland also. Guess which particular sexual orientation the Minister for Health of Ireland adheres? He’s a bum chum…..up the bum in public conveniences….. isn’t it part of their culture?

  25. Possibly will be a means to reduce the general popularion if agenda 21 goes ahead as planned

  26. I actually don’t know why they wouldn’t accept it from gays. Don’t that screen all blood for aids and other stds? You can get it from straight people too… and how many people are gay and just don’t tell them they are and give blood anyway? The rule seems kind of pointless.

  27. More san francisco residents have been killed by AIDS, than the number of san francisco residents killed in all US wars combined.

    1. What gets me is that such a fine and beautiful city as San Francisco was claimed by the fags and designated as a fag ‘mecca’ back in the early 70’s. It wasn’t always a fag-topia. It was an ordinary heterosexual place throughout the 50’s and 60’s. But why ‘Frisco?? Why, fags can’t even pronounce the damn thing. They say ”Thaffa-Thithco”. They can’t even say the shit right. What’s with the stupid lisp anyway? For half the fags, it’s a put-on. They really don’t have atrophied tongues. Or maybe they do from tonguing ass holes.
      S.F. was once a fine American city and the fags ned to get out. I’m sure there would be better suited places to send the fags, places with fitting names like:
      1).Anus, France
      2).Dikshit, India
      3).Gayville, South Dakota
      4).Ramsbottom, England
      5).Wank, Germany
      6).Cockintake, England
      7).Buttzville, New Jersey
      *(these are real places)
      I’d pick Dikshit, India as the place to send the fags, but the list goes on.
      Source:
      http://thejetpacker.com/69-towns-and-cities-with-funny-dirty-names/

  28. Bad math.
    “Let’s presume that all HIV testing methods currently employed on blood donations in the US have a combined accuracy of 99.99%, meaning that 1 in 10,000 infected blood donations slips through the cracks. According to the Red Cross statistics, there are 15.7 million blood donations in the US in a year, which means 1,570 HIV-infected blood samples are given to unknowing patients.”
    If gay men comprise 2% of the US population, and roughly half of them are HIV positive*, then gay men with HIV make up 1% of the population. So if HIV positive gay men are proportionately represented in the number of annual blood donations, then 1% of donations are tainted (15,700,000 *.01 = 157,000).
    So if, as the article states, 1 in 10,000 infected blood donations slip through the cracks, then we are looking at roughly 16 (rounded up from 15.7) HIV-infected blood samples being given to unknowing patients. Not 1,570.
    *Source: http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/statistics/basics/ataglance.html

    1. Fair enough. So is this acceptable to you then when it could have easily been avoided?

      1. Exactly. On one hand, progressives will say “we need to ban XXX” because if it saves one child, it’s worth it.
        But what about children who will undoubtedly contract HIV from a gay donor?
        The children only matter when they can be used to push the agenda.
        We can’t smoke a cigarette in our car with kids now in some states, but we can certainly allow them to receive a blood donation from a gay man because that is far less risky than Junior getting a whiff of a cigarette.
        Why, that makes perfect sense!
        FUCK YEAH!

  29. Filthy faggots.
    Why stop there? What about the “rights” of the IV drug using whore?
    I swear to Thor that if I became infected with a faggot disease from tainted blood, I’d walk into a ‘gay rights’ organisation and express my discontent with an AR15.

    4. Fun fact, Norse culture was fine with homosexual acts until Christian influences changed that.
      So swearing to Thor might not be your best bet here.

  30. Wait until we get Gay Blood Parades! They will hand out papers about using blood as lubricant and walk around with bloody, foam cocks. So liberated and courageous!

  31. The more I hear about this, the more I realize that leaving this nationwide lunatic asylum is probably the sanest thing at the time

  32. If I was dying, I would happily accept blood from just about anyone. “Gay blood” can be screened quickly for HIV now, unlike in the early 80s…

    1. Maybe, but he was gay too so that could just be a saving face story.

      2. His synthesis of character would suggest a possibility of homosexuality, although his physicians claim his heart/kidney failure as a result of HIV infection via transfusion. What are your sources?

  35. there is options on a personal level to minimize this problem. Educate yourself on all available non-transfusion procedures. take time to store your own for scheduled operations, make better use of volumizers such as saline solution, Utilize drugs that increase red cell production, use technology such as a cell salvager ( machine that takes your pooled blood, cleans it and loops it back into the body). etc

    1. Don’t be so prejudice. They are entitled to donate blood like anyone else.

      1. When you’re done, use it to make blood sausage and keep it out of the blood supply.

      2. Sure. They can donate it, and we can reserve it for lefto-faggot like you.
        As long as gay HIV blood is given exclusively to other lefto-faggots, I am for it. Darwinian evolution in motion.

  38. Disgusting fucking faggots. I hope they catch some horrible disease….oh, wait

  39. There are more heterosexual people in the USA with AIDS than homosexuals … and since homosexuals are such a small % of the population I don’t see the point in banning healthy gays from donating blood when they are HIV-negative. Blood is always in short supply and there are more HIV-negative homosexuals than not.

      1. True, I just disagree that allowing donation is a public health threat moreso than allowing myriad straights to donate without making the same assumption about their HIV status.

        1. Considering gay people parcipate in a sexual activity that increases their chances of HIV an a myriad of other dieses I think it’s a risk. Sure there’s straight people who are a risk but why increase that risk with gay people?

    2. “There are more heterosexual people in the USA with AIDS than homosexuals”
      Pretty bold statement. Prove it. Aids.gov and the CDC say, outright, gays both a higher transmission rate and numerical numbers of infections.

    3. Now there’s an oxymoron for the ages:
      Healthy Gay.
      HA
      HAHA
      HAHAHA
      HAHAHAHA
      HAHAHAHAHA
      ROFLMAO

    4. “There are more heterosexual people in the USA with AIDS than homosexuals …”
      Lie.

  40. the thought of fags wanting to donate blood (when they know what kind of lifestyle they engage in) absolutely makes me vomit literally.
    FDA might as well tell us to accept accept swine blood.

    1. If they were sufficiently lobbied with enough $$$, they would (hint: aspertame — Former FDA Director Donald Rumsfeld)

  41. If The Cathedral has to give some innocent people AIDS because Narrative, tough breaks. Insane.

      1. The Cathedral is the red-pill name for the Leftist “elites” narrative as pushed by government, business and media. I believe it was originally coined by blog Chateau Heartiste.

      2. It’s likely from Mencius Moldbug. I can’t imagine why anyone would use the pinnacle of European civilization’s architectural beauty as a synonym for evil. Synagogue would be more appropriate.

  42. Nature tells you that gay sex is unnatural and unhealthy. When you think about it, a fart is just a turd honkin’ for the right-of-way.

  43. Ok gay marriage it has no immediate harm to me but this does.
    Does anyone not know that there are homosexuals that deliberately give AIDS or HIV on others just to fuck up their lives?
    Imagine these fags donating blood. People should not be fighting tooth and nail for gays to donate blood what should be fought for is enforcing tests on blood donors before it’s processed through that means a significant amount of blood loss due to the screening discouraging donors but hell I’d rather die of blood loss from an injury rather than get HIV from who knows what
    Even if you win on suing these blood storing institutions you still have HIV for life.

    1. “Ok gay marriage it has no immediate harm to me but this does.”
      It may not have an “immediate harm” but make no mistake about it: over the long term, gay marriage will undermine and further cheapen marriage as an institution and serves as a Trojan Horse to dismantle and destroy marriage and family as a key societal institution.

      1. If your marriage is harmed by someone else getting married, it wasn’t that strong to begin with.

  44. “Let’s presume that all HIV testing methods currently employed on blood
    donations in the US have a combined accuracy of 99.99%, meaning that 1
    in 10,000 infected blood donations slips through the cracks. According
    to the Red Cross statistics, there are 15.7 million blood donations in the US in a year, which means 1,570 HIV-infected blood samples are given to unknowing patients.”
    This “calculations” would be correct only if 100% of donors were HIV positive.
    No offence but author of this article seems to be writing about things he has completely no idea and does not understand even the most elementary maths.

  45. This is insane. Gays (not lesbians) but men who have sex with men (msm) are the vast majority of people who have HIV. In addition MSM also have huge increases in disease like Hepatitis C and syphills and Hep B. All of these are blood borne. We don’t have shortages of blood so why this move to let gays give blood ? It has nothing to do with needing blood products but rather , again, it is all about legitimizing gay lifestyles. The gays will not tolerate anything that might taint their reputation or lifestyle. What is odd is that the gay exemption is all on the honor system based on a questionnaire. A gay dude would have volunteer his sexual preferences and his sexual history. A gay dude could just answer no to his sex preferences and give blood if he was determined to do so. Apparently gays want to be “out ” on all things despite endangering people’s lives….

    1. Equality for all, all must fall to the lowest common denominator. The other 98% must accept the risks of the 2% in order for everything to be equal.

    1. That was an amusing description – wondering if anyone can a logical honest explanation of what one is.

  47. Gays are 2-3% of the population. There is no need for their blood. This is even before one takes the disease factor into account.

    1. I would argue the fact that we go out of way to give extra protections to 2-3% of the population as if it is worth more than the rest, despite not even being self sustaining is in itself a sign of how perverse society has become.

  48. Friend of mine died from infected blood and this was before the UK ban was lifted.

    1. So did Isaac Asimov, Arthur Ashe and Tom Fogerty. All back before a ban existed.

        1. My point: Cool people die because homos have lots of disgusting relations with each other and can’t be bothered to be responsible about it.

  49. Great since the homos are mad that God placed this curse of death upon them they just had to share it with others.
    Such humanitarians. Is this some disgusting ploy to normalize HIV on everyone too?

    1. Well, it does have the potential to infect more straight people,so maybe those gay infected numbers in comparison will look better. The Left is a virus on humanity.

  50. Ok let them donate but there should be a code on each homosexual donation stating that it came from a turd burglar, when you are getting your blood transfusion the person should be asked if they would mind if the blood is from a shirt lifter. See how many people will accept the blood………. let the lefties accept it for fear of being homophobic…..

  51. The ARC specifically wants donors to call back after there donations if they start to feel unwell, say a cold, flu or other symptoms arise. Why? Because testing the blood doesn’t always pick up on pathogens inside the donor’s blood (for cold and flu it doesn’t register at all). Meaning if that blood weren’t identified and destroyed those same pathogens would be passed onto the recipient. Potentially getting that patient sick or worse. Which is a catastrophic problem for people who are already sick.
    Preventative measures save lives.
    And this positive discrimination isn’t just about homosexuals. People that go to Western Europe can come back and donate. Go to Africa, or central America or China you have to wait an extended period of time. Not cuz raycism, cause malaria is a serious disease.
    How long til that gets revoked cause muh feels hurtz bout discrimination.

  53. If you end up with HIV due to a transfusion resulting from a car accident, you know whom to blame for it. Same for Hepatitis and syphilis. Indeed, the risk of the latter two are much higher than that of HIV. Gays and transgenders have higher rates of infection of the latter two than the hetero-normal population as a whole.
    What is really needed is a synthetic blood that makes donated blood obsolete.

  54. Hey, I’m all for gay rights. I really don’t care if homosexuals get married, and I wouldn’t want the state to discriminate against homosexuals.
    I had a gay roommate for a while. Pretty cool dude, never came on to me, mentally stable, stayed with one dude and as far as I knew didn’t man-whore around.
    That said, why the fuck are they lifting this ban?
    If you engage in behavior that substantially increases your risk of contracting blood-borne diseases.. Whether it be skipping through the Amazon or shooting heroin, you shouldn’t be donating blood.

  55. So, the obvious flip side of this is that blood collection agencies face a perennial shortage of donors. Put your money where your mouth is and donate, and maybe you can help prevent them from having to resort to accepting gay AIDS blood.

  57. My grandmother died from a blood transfusion from a donor with AIDS.
    As others have said, get it from a family member if you need it – preferably one who isn’t a pole-smoker.

  58. “In a nutshell, this is what the push for equality is all about, it’s not to uplift the gays, but to bring everyone down to their level — if gay people have HIV, hepatitis, and syphilis, so should everyone else”
    To put a proper twist on an old Winston Churchill quote: “progressivism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”
    This is what the drive for equality is truly all about: an equal share of misery. As you basically stated, the progs believe that if homos have particularly pernicious diseases, it’s only fair for heteros to have them as well. The whole reason HIV and AIDS are even a factor of concern to heteros is because of homosexual bisexuals, or males who have sex with both males AND females. These males are the vector by which hetero females are infected with these STD’s and they in turn end up infecting straight Men during the course of their lives. Of course even with that, you’d have to be an especially successful promiscuous male to run the risk of catching something which your typically promiscuous homosexual male can catch with as much ease as a non homo does with the common cold. Lifting the ban on homo blood donations however, would rectify that. Nice.
    The progs would like us all to believe that medical science is so effective that it can EFFECTIVELY screen out HIV and AIDS with near absolute accuracy. This to put it mildly, is rhinoceros shit. Even the most advanced blood plasma screening methods can’t COMPLETELY screen for HIV or AIDS because of their remarkably effective methods of avoiding detection during the initial stage of infection. Your average red cross or state certified blood plasma donation center doesn’t have access to the most sophisticated medical equipment out there, only what’s been deemed “acceptable” to detect the viruses, diseases, etc that are most commonly found in blood and can render one ineligible for future donations (the deferral list) So basically, if the HIV viral load is just below detectable levels and the screening process therefore doesn’t pick it up, your blood/plasma is then considered acceptable and it goes through the system where it eventually ends up in someone else’s body (if not caught)…and that person ends up infected as well.
    Homos aren’t just notorious for promiscuity, they also make for pretty good liars as well.
    How else to explain that even with the screening process in place, things like this happened as recently as 7 years ago?:
    “Donor. In June 2008, a man in his forties donated whole blood at a blood center in Missouri (Figure 1). He was a repeat blood donor who reported no HIV risk factors on the routine eligibility screening questionnaire. He was not compensated for his blood donation. His whole blood donation was screened at a reference laboratory for HIV by enzyme immunoassay (EIA) (Genetic Systems HIV-1/HIV-2 Plus O EIA, Bio-Rad Laboratories, Redmond, Washington) and by nucleic acid amplification testing of minipools of plasma specimens (MP-NAT) from 16 donations (Procleix HIV-1 Nucleic Acid Test, Gen Probe, San Diego, California); both tests were negative. Components from this donation later were transfused into two recipients. No specimens from this donation were stored. In November 2008, the man donated blood again at the same blood center and again reported no risk factors on the routine eligibility screening questionnaire. At that time, his blood tested positive for HIV by EIA, MP-NAT, and indirect immunofluorescence assay (Fluorognost HIV-1 IFA, Sanochemia Corporation, Vienna, Austria). The man was placed on the list of donors who are indefinitely ineligible for future donation, all products from this donation were destroyed, and the man was notified by the blood center of his probable HIV infection. The Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services (MDHSS) was notified of this case on December 4, 2008. Because of the rare possibility that the donor might have been infected shortly before his June 2008 donation and donated blood that contained HIV at a concentration too low to be detected, an investigation was initiated to determine whether recipients of the June donation had been infected with HIV, consistent with regulatory requirements to investigate such events.
    Initially, the donor declined repeated contacts by MDHSS to be interviewed. In April 2009, he agreed to a brief interview with MDHSS, and an OraQuick rapid HIV test (OraSure Technologies, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania) was performed. This test was reactive and confirmed by a positive Western blot at MDHSS. During his interview, the donor reported he was married but had sex with both men and women outside of his marriage, including just before his June 2008 donation. He indicated that the sex often was anonymous and occurred while he was intoxicated.”
    See the key sentence there? I’ll re post it here: “During his interview, the donor reported he was married but had sex with both men and women outside of his marriage, including just before his June 2008 donation.”
    Not only did this cocksucker likely infect his Wife, but all the females outside of his Marriage, to say nothing of the people he put at risk for contamination through the blood donor process.
    The end result? He ended up infecting at least 2 people. One of them died from an unrelated surgery a month later so the infection could not be confirmed, and the second (nearly a year later) eventually showed signs of HIV infection but only after MULTIPLE testing was done. Mind you, this was only 7 years ago.
    http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5941a3.htm
    Think that this is an isolated incident or simply a case of an isolated slip through the cracks? Think again. This is from TWO YEARS AGO.
    From Japan:
    “A man in his 60s contracted HIV after receiving blood donated by an infected man that slipped through safety checks by the Japan Red Cross Society, the health ministry and the Red Cross said Tuesday.
    In 2003, there was a similar case of a patient being infected with HIV-tainted blood used in a transfusion, prompting the Red Cross to strengthen its safety checks the following year.
    The man was found to be HIV-positive during blood screening in November but had also donated blood in February that slipped through the checks and was provided to medical institutions. It is possible the infected blood slipped through the virus-detection system because HIV levels are low during the early stage of infection.
    After the virus was detected in November, the man admitted he had had risky sexual contact shortly before he donated in February, but had lied about this earlier.”
    http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/11/26/national/blood-of-hiv-infected-man-used-in-transfusions-source/#.VakOrqRViko
    It doesn’t say if the male was homo or not, but if I was a betting Man I’d say the odds were pretty good that he was, especially given the high CDC numbers for their transmission rates.
    Back to the US and from LAST YEAR:
    “An Elkhart (Indiana) Man admitted to police that he donated plasma even though he knew he was HIV positive. The company has preventative measures in place though, and they say they caught his donation before it was given to anybody. He told police he did it for the money. He tried donating plasma at the biolife in Elkhart on December 23rd and 24th last year and again on February first of this year (2014)”
    The only reason this piece of shit was arrested is because in some States it’s a criminal offense to willingly attempt to infect a person or persons with HIV and a criminal offense to successfully do so, as it is in Indiana. It is NOT however, a criminal offense to be caught lying on a medical questionnaire when ATTEMPTING to donate plasma for monetary compensation anywhere in the US (which is the main reason most people do) which means homos have virtually no consequence other than being deferred for repeatedly attempting to donate potentially infected blood that they would not be allowed to donate anyway because their lifestyle alone makes them end up on the deferral list. Someone at the plasma center probably called the cops after seeing his name pop up in the system for repeated one day deferrals and after seeing his later donation slip through the cracks. Nice huh? This doesn’t even speak to the possibility of him having infected a recipient. The plasma center’s remark that they “caught it in time” is highly suspect, because it should never have slipped through the cracks in the first place had everyone been doing their jobs properly. Until someone actually comes forth and tests positive for HIV or AIDS and it is traced back to the Elkhart plasma center, we will never really know if they themselves are being honest or not.
    http://www.wsbt.com/news/local/hiv-positive-man-arrested-and-charged-after-donating-plasma/27369512
    This is just 3 examples I found through a FEW minutes of research. THREE. As the article indicates, 15.7 MILLION people donate blood every year…let that sink in for a moment and then ask yourselves…what about all the “accidental” infected donations that don’t make the news? How many people would know if something like this was going on in their community if it isn’t reported on and they didn’t personally investigate? Scary.
    If the US ban on homos donating is lifted, expect the “accidental” rates of recipients of blood and plasma donations to increase, and increase substantially. If 2 out of every 3 homo males who donate have HIV or AIDS, how much more likely is it for them to slip through the cracks through screening incompetence or misleading viral counts? Sickening.
    Finally, regardless of how efficient medical tech has become, expect there to be a near equivalent of what happened with Canada in 1983, when DOZENS OF THOUSANDS of people became infected thanks to HIV and HEP C infected blood donations, largely due to male homosexual/bisexual blood/plasma donations in Canada AND overseas. The documentary “Factor 8” details how the prison system of the State of Arkansas continued to sell tainted blood for nearly 2 decades (to places like Canada and others in the world) even AFTER the documentation of HIV and AIDS during the time of Bill Clinton’s governorship. Males in prison populations tend to be males who have sex with males even if they don’t outright identify as homo, so there’s no surprise there that their blood would be infected. It’s believed that several thousand people worldwide (if not more) became contaminated because of this, but we will never truly know the numbers because not everyone infected may have become aware of it or would have sought treatment for it (due to being perceived as homos or because of the stigma involved)
    http://www.encyclopediaofarkansas.net/encyclopedia/entry-detail.aspx?entryID=3732
    The consequences of the Canadian tainted blood controversy were so similar to radioactive fallout it took Canada decades to successfully conclude that all the contaminated blood had been removed from the main supply. This travesty became known as the “Canadian tainted blood scandal.”

    And now, despite historical evidence of what homosexual blood can do to the main donation supply in circulation here and in the rest of the world, despite the prevalence of high promiscuity among homosexuals (25-100 on the low end, 100 to 500 in the median, and over 500+ on the high end- see Bell and Weinberg’s study) despite their fondness for unprotected sex (barebacking) despite their intentional contamination through sexual initiation rites (bugchasing) or HIV + males looking to have sex with HIV + males with an equal or similar serostatus level, despite the ease with which STD’s are transmitted through the anal orifice, despite ALL THIS…the FDA is STILL considering ending the blood donations?
    You can thank that piece of bisexual shit Obama as well as his equally fecally fond friends for all of this. The US is nothing more than a social experiment to them. They’re all in a race to see who can kill it first.

      1. And just in case any troll in attendance wants to say “not all homos would do this and you only posted one example”
        they need look no further than the reddit remarks of a bunch of homos talking about this very subject.
        Just to quote from a few:
        DAMIMOO:
        “Does anyone else lie about being gay in order to donate blood? Because I definitely do. Last time I went to give blood, I saw a gay friend get turned away for answering, truthfully, that he has had sex with men. It was horribly embarrassing for him, and for everyone around him. I found out the first time that I had to lie in order to contribute to the blood supply. And while I’m not a horribly rare blood type (A+), I still feel like I should donate regularly, and so I do.
        So do any of you all do it, too? And do you feel a sense of moral shame about it?”
        JRESSING:
        “blood drive is coming up. I am in your situation. Still can’t decide if I should or not.”
        KCINIC:
        “I don’t lie. I don’t like to and if they won’t change it sucks but I can’t do anything about it. I do however go in every now and then and get denied. Only when they have free time and I’m not slowing anyone else from donating but if everyone is willing to just lie to get around it or they feel like none of us visibly want to give why would anyone bother to change it?
        (the guy doesn’t like to lie yet still goes to donate…SMH)
        SHANTJ:
        “I have, once. I don’t plan to again. Needles terrify me.”
        KARAKARA16:
        “I have O- blood. I’m a universal donor. I’m HIV-. I get tested on a regular basis. I know it’s illegal to lie and if I get charged so be it, I’ll deal with that if it happens. But my mom is alive because of a blood transplant and this is my way of returning the favor.”
        (DELETED USER):
        “I haven’t actually had anal sex, and I’ve only given oral twice. So, if it was only oral, I’m not sure I would be turned away, regardless. Probably not, seeing as how women and heterosexual men can still donate blood.”
        (this moron doesn’t realize oral sex with a male is still sex with a male)
        DECKSTER23:
        “I’ve never donated blood, but I donated plasma for money all through college and lied every time.”
        THEREALANDREWR:
        “I lie on the form. Yea, I have sex with guys, but only with a condom and I know how to be safe so I have an almost 0% chance of every getting HIV (nothing is ever 0%).
        Doctors (which I’m training to be) and politicians (which I used to work for) make these decisions based on aggregate numbers. But I make the decision to donate because the individual needs blood”
        CLEMSONTIGER1:
        “I do. Saving a life is more important to me than morals, and I know for a fact that my blood is clean so it’s not hurting anyone.”

        Does anyone else here lie about being gay in order to donate blood? from gaybros


        There you have it folks, the remarks on blood donations from 9 homo males. The breakup is as follows: 4 homos who go donate regularly, two who did in the past, one who isn’t sure if he would be turned away because he only does “oral,” one who doesn’t like to lie but goes in “every now and then” and one who isn’t sure if he should.
        Again, this was just from a FEW MINUTES of online research and from homo males who had a conversation about it online.
        Since there are roughly 319 million people in the US, and since self professing homos make up about 2-3% (let’s say 2% just to give a low end number) and if homo males were to make up about half of those percentages (the other half being homo females) you’re looking at almost 3.2 MILLION homosexual males…and if 2/3 of those (about 2.13 million) are as promiscuous as most studies take them to be…you start to see just how seriously dangerous lifting a ban on their donations can be…WILL BE.

        1. The narcissism of those who embrace the homosexual lifestyle in this manner damns not just them, but those around them.
          **************
          Again, thanks for your good work.

    2. Definitely a stellar piece of information. Well done Sir. I was nursing during the tainted blood scandal here in Canada. I also worked in the ICU of a large teaching hospital when the first Aids patient showed up dying of a lung infection. We stood around saying “what is it?” A Senior Resident who had just come back from a medical rotation at a San Fran hospital told us “this is just the beginning”. He reported that in SF most of the ICU beds were being taken up by these strangely infected dying gay guys. Even more than troubling is the complete lack of concern by Canadian Red Cross officials to do anything when the alarm bells were going off about a problem with tainted blood. Don’t trust gays? Don’t trust officials.

      1. Its why AIDS was once commonly known in the US as GIDS or “gay immuno deficiency syndrome”
        Your words about officials are also correct. One wonders if the end goal of politicians in lifting the ban on homo blood donations is so that HIV/AIDS preventative care can become a staple of universal healthcare in order to get more taxpayers to subsidize it by force.
        This of course, keeps the politicians employed by having the infected masses depend on them for their literal survival. (at least those too poor to afford the expensive rx’s like combivir out of pocket)
        Oh and thanks by the way!

        1. I don’t know about the US, in Canada HIV drugs is fully supplied by the Government.

        3. Astronomical. At 43% we are taxed up the ass. If they could tax you for taking a dump they would.

        4. And yet the average Canadian spends less on healthcare than the average American.

        5. Healthcare is basic, very basic. Our system is crumbling with the aging population, budget cuts and lack of service.

        7. Only because, in my opinion, if I have a massive heart attack, I won’t receive a bill to pay $250K. After care is another matter.

        8. I figured as much. Whenever the government has “universal” “free” “equitable” healthcare the tax rate tends to be ridiculously high.

        9. Actually I’m talking about when you compare it overall. Not that Canada actually ranks all that high. There are other social health care systems that do though.

  60. If gay men are liars, as this article more or less proclaims, then they’d give blood regardless of the ban wouldn’t they? Why would they obey the current one but not a one year one?
    And let’s get it right, a ban that says you can’t have had sex in a year is still catching almost all gay men. The guys actually freed up by this would be men currently in relationships with women who had had a gay experience sometimes in their lives. Though again, most of those probably just donate anyway now

  61. I could be wrong, but your stat on blood donations seems faulty.
    You state that therefore 1500+ donations have to be faulty if our methods of collection and detection are 99.99%. In actuality, this would be inaccurate. At least, it seems to me.
    First off, what percentage of the donors are gay?
    Let’s take the bigger percentage. Out of 100% of the population, let’s say 3% (the larger side of the guess) are gay. That means, out of 1000 people let’s say, thirty are gay. Then you have to preclude lesbians. What percentage of gays are they?
    I’m assuming they are the statistical minority. But let’s say they are a low end thirty percent. That means they are only 9 out of a thousand. Since they don’t have anal sex with a real penis, we can reject them and their numerical number.
    So, that means that you have 21 males per 1000 people.
    So let’s say you have one million donors. Divide by a thousand. You have one thousand. Then, multiply by 21. You have 21,000 males who should be not be included for transfusion purposes.
    A very low number.
    The strongest thrust, hehe, of your argument is that they constitute 2/3 of all HIV cases, yet are as little as perhaps 2% of the population.
    The US is over 330 million people now I think? So, 330 million * .03% = 9.9 million.
    Minus 30%= roughly 3 million lesbians. So almost 6.9 (hehehehe) million gays.
    Out of them, that equals nearly 2/3 of all HIV cases. One of the most common methods of spreading the disease is blood transfusion.
    Unfortunately, I don’t think any fool these days is going to care until enough people get HIV, or some other sort of blood pathogen through the American Red Cross.
    Imagine what it would be like if gays were actually ten percent of the population like most think?
    Yet they are under 3% of the population, and have amassed so much. LOL
    Yet no amount of logic is going to matter. Ever since they got their inclusion as a pathology shot down from the first DSM in I think the fifties, they have been a long “march” to through the back door of government.
    Apparently, a lot of politicians seem to favor their services as character assassination specialists. They really like to screw their detractors in the rear!

  63. I ran the numbers one time and if gay donors do so in proportion to the populations, then several infections will be inevitable each year. The risk is small on a per-person basis, but when you look at numbers in the millions, then it is clear that a few people will die as a result of a more liberal policy.

      1. The tests are not perfect so you will get the occasional false negative. It is just asking for trouble to have an identifiable group of people with an infection rate that is 50 to 100 times that of the rest of the population donating blood.

        2. Even with accuracy rates over 99.9%, that policy change will basically guarantee a tainted donor will slip through the cracks every year.

  65. Crackers are inherently gay that the reason of their smaller penis and less sexual performance

  67. I have no disagreement with the position the author is advocating. But his hypothetical showing the potential for HIV to slip into the general population assumes not only the effectiveness of the test, but also that all 15.7 million annual donations come from an HIV+ donor. Obviously that is not the case.
    Assuming generously that there would be 1,000,000 HIV+ donations annually—CDC estimates only 1.2m carriers—that would mean 100 annual instances of HIV+ blood transfusions. Still inexcusably high, and a valid reason to justify the exclusion, but not the figure he throws out.

  68. Let’s say you’re the FDA and you know that MSMs are lying and donating even though they’re a threat the the blood supply. What’s even worse, is studies show a growing number MSMs believe it’s okay to contaminate your supply to fight for their “rights” and end your “oppression”. Answer: you tell them they’re welcome to donate. Truthful surveys. Once the blood is collected, bags marked as high risk can be thrown away into the biohazard bin. Problem solved.

  69. As now as of Dec. 21st, it has happened; the FDA lifted the ban. Everyone make sure you never get in a car wreck.

    1. Honestly, in a pinch, I’d take anyone’s blood, so long as it’s clean. I understand weeding out the riffraff, but if they’re letting bloody anal sexers through, they should let me through. I’m mad cow disease free 20 plus years! I can’t donate blood for fear of spreading mad cow disease… Just because I lived in Germany for 6 years, 20 years ago. I haven’t engaged in any needle sharing, or homosexual relationships ( a little anal sure, hehehe-but nothing gay!) I want to give blood but they won’t except it. I feel slighted.

Comments are closed.