-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
A
Someone hasn't been listening. You're continuing to make false assertions even after your false assertions have been refuted. It's always and continues to be about protecting the nation's blood supply so that people don't get infected with deadly viruses and diseases.
What part of "Anyone who understands how blood safety incidents happen realize that a single mistake can cost a life or lives. But often it is a chain of events (even worse). That's why the rule should not be changed. We can't rely only on testing alone because, like anything else, it has a failure rate and there is a period of time which diseases homosexuals so often carry (HIV/AIDS, hepatitis B, etc...) are not even detectable and yes accidents and human errors occur." is so unclear to you that you would put innocent people at risk of contracting deadly viruses and diseases unnecessarily?
What part of "Anyone who understands how blood safety incidents happen realize that a single mistake can cost a life or lives. But often it is a chain of events (even worse). That's why the rule should not be changed. We can't rely only on testing alone because, like anything else, it has a failure rate and there is a period of time which diseases homosexuals so often carry (HIV/AIDS, hepatitis B, etc...) are not even detectable and yes accidents and human errors occur." is so unclear to you that you would put innocent people at risk of contracting deadly viruses and diseases unnecessarily?
Just to clarify both bags are blood are the same. Human blood. There is no such thing as Gay blood. Just clarifying this.
Also, how do Lesbians have unprotected anal sex again? In fact what I heard is that Lesbians contract less STDs than straight couples.
So by the logic of this thread, should we look for the purest lifestyle in terms of no STDs and only accept blood from lesbian women???
Also, how do Lesbians have unprotected anal sex again? In fact what I heard is that Lesbians contract less STDs than straight couples.
So by the logic of this thread, should we look for the purest lifestyle in terms of no STDs and only accept blood from lesbian women???
You talk like every member of the gay community has aids and straight people don't get it.
Gay people already give blood, by doing that thing where, oh .. em .. that .. whatya call it .. oh yea .. lying about their sexuality. And besides, for the amount of good blood that would be put out there, and with screening efficiency ever increasing, the number of potential saved lives by far outweighs the slight risk of cross-infection.
Gay people already give blood, by doing that thing where, oh .. em .. that .. whatya call it .. oh yea .. lying about their sexuality. And besides, for the amount of good blood that would be put out there, and with screening efficiency ever increasing, the number of potential saved lives by far outweighs the slight risk of cross-infection.
Last edited:
A
Yes but it's currently rare and an important reason for that in the U.S. is because high risk populations are not allowed to donate blood. In other countries that use the same testing processes but allow high risk groups to donate blood they consistently have cases of transmission occur for the reasons I've given.
Here's a case that occurred about a month ago in India, for example, where seven people now have HIV after receiving blood transfusions at a state-run hospital in Assam, India because of one HIV infected donor whose blood got through the screening process:
Newsfeed : 7 People Contract HIV From Blood Transfusions in India
I just chose it at random. There are many more currently. How would you like to be one of those seven people? You go in for a minor operation and come out with HIV. Thanks for nothing.
Here's a case that occurred about a month ago in India, for example, where seven people now have HIV after receiving blood transfusions at a state-run hospital in Assam, India because of one HIV infected donor whose blood got through the screening process:
Newsfeed : 7 People Contract HIV From Blood Transfusions in India
I just chose it at random. There are many more currently. How would you like to be one of those seven people? You go in for a minor operation and come out with HIV. Thanks for nothing.
Ok for a start, India is far more undeveloped than the United States, and secondly, you're saying 'high risk populations' shouldn't be allowed to donate. Well here's some statistics for you.
Black people in America have six times as much HIV infection as white people, collectively. And the majority of HIV carriers in the US are (in order) white gay men, black gay men, hispanic gay men, then black heterosexual women, black heterosexual men, white heterosexual women, hispanic heterosexual women, black male drug users, black female drug users and hispanic heterosexual men.
Notice that white heterosexual men don't even get a place on the list.
So, the majority of HIV infection is carried by white gay men, black people in general, and heterosexual women of all major races. That's right, heterosexual women, collectively, in America, carry as much HIV as black gay men. So should heterosexual women be disallowed to donate blood?
And likewise, lesbians of ALL races' rates are so low they aren't even on the list. SO why can't they donate? They are cleaner than heterosexual women are.
Black people in America have six times as much HIV infection as white people, collectively. And the majority of HIV carriers in the US are (in order) white gay men, black gay men, hispanic gay men, then black heterosexual women, black heterosexual men, white heterosexual women, hispanic heterosexual women, black male drug users, black female drug users and hispanic heterosexual men.
Notice that white heterosexual men don't even get a place on the list.
So, the majority of HIV infection is carried by white gay men, black people in general, and heterosexual women of all major races. That's right, heterosexual women, collectively, in America, carry as much HIV as black gay men. So should heterosexual women be disallowed to donate blood?
And likewise, lesbians of ALL races' rates are so low they aren't even on the list. SO why can't they donate? They are cleaner than heterosexual women are.
A
As I stated, black people in the U.S. come from different sub populations. The high risk sub populations are barred from blood donations while blacks not in high risk sub populations are not barred. You appear to be ignoring the data in my posts.
Now the rate of HIV infection amongst lesbians is slightly higher than that of heterosexual women but this is primarily a result of intravenous drug use in that population being higher than among heterosexual women. Obviously men pass HIV far more easily and frequently than women do (one of the reasons male homosexuals should be excluded as a group regardless of race for blood donations).
I agree with you that the lesbian population should be reexamined as possible blood donation candidates assuming they are not intravenous drug addicts, a member of another high risk barred population, and meet all other eligibility requirements.
Now the rate of HIV infection amongst lesbians is slightly higher than that of heterosexual women but this is primarily a result of intravenous drug use in that population being higher than among heterosexual women. Obviously men pass HIV far more easily and frequently than women do (one of the reasons male homosexuals should be excluded as a group regardless of race for blood donations).
I agree with you that the lesbian population should be reexamined as possible blood donation candidates assuming they are not intravenous drug addicts, a member of another high risk barred population, and meet all other eligibility requirements.