Moderator: Community Team
jay_a2j wrote:hey if any1 would like me to make them a signature or like an avator just let me no, my sig below i did, and i also did "panther 88" so i can do something like that for u if ud like...
Some people will protest anything, but why do you say I am wrong? I never said there were no complaints, I said that there is no mandate here. Some people have tried to say things like "gays are legally forbidden from donating". That is just plain false. Fact is, anyone who wants to can flat out lie on those forms without any real recrimination.pimpdave wrote:Well then why are gay groups organizing boycotts of the American Red Cross, which in turn reduces the blood supply to people in dire need?
You're just plain wrong Player. There is an issue, and it's one created by only 2% of the fucking population, and they're convincing well qualified donors to keep from going.
LOL.. I have donated too, though not just to the Red Cross. I am also a universal donor (not just O , but O negative) and my mother and father each always donated. Plus, I have volunteered with the Red Cross (not in blood services, but with the people who do work blood services).BigBallinStalin wrote:I donate because my father did, and he said he did it because it was his civic duty to those in need (plus, we're both universal donors). And now some whiny entitled crybabies with a persecution complex come along and declare the Red Cross evil for trying to mitigate a serious health concern under the banner of civil fucking rights. A lot of people I know who regularly give blood resent those assholes, and it seriously decreases any empathy.
jay_a2j wrote:hey if any1 would like me to make them a signature or like an avator just let me no, my sig below i did, and i also did "panther 88" so i can do something like that for u if ud like...
jay_a2j wrote:hey if any1 would like me to make them a signature or like an avator just let me no, my sig below i did, and i also did "panther 88" so i can do something like that for u if ud like...
jay_a2j wrote:hey if any1 would like me to make them a signature or like an avator just let me no, my sig below i did, and i also did "panther 88" so i can do something like that for u if ud like...
If the risk of AIDS from anal fissures is the problem, then why not ask all potential blood donators if they engage in anal sex? If they yes, then they shouldn't be allowed to donate blood, right?pimpdave wrote:Yeah, but anal sex transmits disease so much more easily (anal fissures). That's why AIDS still so much more common among homosexuals than heterosexuals. Same with people who share needles.
It's still a massive waste of resources to have to collect and dispose of HAZMAT though. It's safer and more efficient to do some screening first. Apparently homosexual blood causes problems too often to be worth it. Same as people who have sex for money or share needles. So the onus is really on homosexuals, prostitutes and junkies to just not donate. They can do other things to support the Red Cross if they really want to.
They don't need to make it harder for the Red Cross to save lives just because they want something to feel persecuted about.
That IS one of the screening questions, however, they have to be a tad discreet in how they ask it.BigBallinStalin wrote:If the risk of AIDS from anal fissures is the problem, then why not ask all potential blood donators if they engage in anal sex? If they yes, then they shouldn't be allowed to donate blood, right?pimpdave wrote:Yeah, but anal sex transmits disease so much more easily (anal fissures). That's why AIDS still so much more common among homosexuals than heterosexuals. Same with people who share needles.
It's still a massive waste of resources to have to collect and dispose of HAZMAT though. It's safer and more efficient to do some screening first. Apparently homosexual blood causes problems too often to be worth it. Same as people who have sex for money or share needles. So the onus is really on homosexuals, prostitutes and junkies to just not donate. They can do other things to support the Red Cross if they really want to.
They don't need to make it harder for the Red Cross to save lives just because they want something to feel persecuted about.
They do ask, but they have to be a tad discreet. The questions I have seen are usually "have you had unprotected sex with multiple partners", etc.BigBallinStalin wrote:Where are you getting this information? I have never heard any such suggestion, except by anti-gay individuals/organizations.pimpdave wrote:Yeah, but anal sex transmits disease so much more easily (anal fissures). That's why AIDS still so much more common among homosexuals than heterosexuals. Same with people who share needles.
It's still a massive waste of resources to have to collect and dispose of HAZMAT though. It's safer and more efficient to do some screening first. Apparently homosexual blood causes problems too often to be worth it. Same as people who have sex for money or share needles. So the onus is really on homosexuals, prostitutes and junkies to just not donate. They can do other things to support the Red Cross if they really want to.
They don't need to make it harder for the Red Cross to save lives just because they want something to feel persecuted about.
That said, homosexuals are no longer the primary spreaders of AIDS. Heterosexual women have the highest numbers now. Partly, its because of education (and the fact that those who did not learn died off), partly its because there are just not quite as many homosexual men as heterosexual women.
BigBallinStalin wrote: If the risk of AIDS from anal fissures is the problem, then why not ask all potential blood donators if they engage in anal sex? If they yes, then they shouldn't be allowed to donate blood, right?
They are not excluded, at least from volunteer donations like the Red Cross, even assuming they answer the questions accurately (which is a whole other issue). Some locations may publically request that individuals engaging in risky behavior refrain from donating, but it is the behavior, not the person, targeted.BigBallinStalin wrote: Since that settles the issue, then why explicitly deny homosexuals* from donating blood?
..
jay_a2j wrote:hey if any1 would like me to make them a signature or like an avator just let me no, my sig below i did, and i also did "panther 88" so i can do something like that for u if ud like...
Except, you have yet to present evidence that this is truly happening on any scale. I mean, you will find people whining about all sorts of things. The biggest campaign against Red Cross has to do with administration costs, also there are issues with the cost of blood through the Red Cross and, to some extent, how the blood is allocated to various areas. None of these have to do with any homsexual whining, though. If this is such a wide-scale issue, I am wondering why its not more widely known.pimpdave wrote:Which just emphasizes the problem, which is that homosexuals, under the guise of "civil rights activism" are attacking one of the greatest, most life saving charities in world history.
And then they whine and cry about how persecuted they are, and demand sympathy, as if they deserve any.
jay_a2j wrote:hey if any1 would like me to make them a signature or like an avator just let me no, my sig below i did, and i also did "panther 88" so i can do something like that for u if ud like...
Where in PA? Have not heard of anything at State College, Edinborough, Slippery Rock, Carnegie Mellon, etc.pimpdave wrote:They keep organizing boycotts of blood drives on college campuses. They've succeeded at several campuses in Pennsylvania .
jay_a2j wrote:hey if any1 would like me to make them a signature or like an avator just let me no, my sig below i did, and i also did "panther 88" so i can do something like that for u if ud like...