Reader Poll: “Does it concern you that the U.S. government is considering eliminating the now existing ban against blood donation by any man who has had homosexual sex?”

In AIDS, Homosexuality, Polls on August 12, 2011 at 2:15 pm

This is the question we asked our readers:

“Does it concern you that the U.S. government is considering eliminating the now existing ban against blood donation by any man who has had homosexual sex?”

Here is how they responded:

92 Percent           Concerns me, a ban is a prudent policy

8 Percent             No concerns here

0 Percent             Can’t decide

 In the U.S. the HIV/AIDS prevalence rate for men who have sex with other men (MSM)  is 60 times higher than the general population.  As the vast majority of the UFI readers have indicated, the policy banning any man who has had had homosexual sex from donating blood is indeed prudent.  Particularly when you consider that the incidents of “false negatives” in any given screening test is always a concern.  A screening test for HIV/AIDS that gives a “false negative” has life-threatening repercussions for those who might receive a transfusion from that blood.

It is not “homophobia” or a desire to discriminate against MSM that drives the ban on blood donation, but a desire to protect the donor blood supply of a nation.  If there’s a shortage of blood, as supporters of the removal of the ban claim, then let’s do a major public service campaign to increase donations from the rest of the population.  “Safety before political correctness” should prevail.

For clarification and answers to the FDA’s policy on blood donation, visit this link:

Blood Donations from Men who have sex with other Men:  Questions and Answers

You can also see a list of nations of the world and their policies on blood donation, click here.

  1. This is one more drop into the bucket of insanity that is the U.S. Government. No doubt the Founding Fathers are rolling in their graves, shaking their heads, and crying their hearts out over how we have completely reinterpreted and destroyed their God-inspired Constitution, the one they fought for, beld for, sweat for, and prayed for, and cried for. I am ashamed of what the current and past presidencies have done to this inspired document, going back at least 120 years!

  2. 8 percent said no concern…they were homosexuals.!
    Canada has banned any homosexual from donating blood. Any government who wants to open the doors to lawsuits better do the right thing and that is ban homosexuals from donating blood. Any lawmakers, or justices, or court judges, or supreme court judges who vote in favour of homosexuals giving blood…they should be the first to recieve blood from the homosexuals. In fact the blood should be saved for the court judges who do vote in favour. That should be enforced by the people and made sure it sticks. I am tired of perverted judges making laws for moral people.

  3. I understand the frustration, yet I’m different from these two in that I’m not sure it is really a government problem at all, but a cultural problem. Movies and books and educators preach messages about how life should be and what is better–and tradition/morality (carefully worded as “a negative stereotype”) is not highly valued in the media. We let this flood over to us and our court systems. Perhaps my theory is flawed, maybe our government is irreversibly corrupt/infiltrated and the people can’t change the tsunami of immorality. After all the government’s opinions here aren’t matching that of the people. I’m just not sure I’m ready to give up hope that things could change if the culture changed and returned to what it used to be. Looking at history I’m increasingly convinced that values and freedom and truth haven’t always been on a one-way ticket south since the beginning of time, they’ve fluctuated; look at the Great Awakening period in the US for example. I don’t know what made those people different, were they more determined, prudent, free, religious, or proudly intolerant of what is wrong? I don’t know. But I do know that the gay community wouldn’t have attempted get any special protections or privileges back then, yet today they feel gaining all rights are inevitable. They have no fear of propositions on the ballot or laws, they just plow right through them confident they will win in the end. Although activist judges are a concern–the real question MAY be what are we doing wrong as the people of the United States to allow bad behavior, not why is the government misbehaving?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 170 other followers