Credible science vs. Peter 'I'd prefer to export homosexuals from the United States' Sprigg
The American Medical Association vocally opposes the ban on gay male blood donation because the AMA knows that (a) medical science is at a point where all blood donations can be (and are) vigorously screened for HIV/AIDS and (b) being a gay man does not automatically put someone in a "high risk" category.
You can trust the AMA, or you can trust one of the most viciously anti-LGBT organizations working today:
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Family Research Council (FRC) Senior Fellow Peter Sprigg today testified at a hearing of a federal advisory committee which heard reports on the latest research related to blood donations by men who have sex with men (MSM). Currently men who have had sex with men since 1977 are barred from donating blood because they are at a higher risk for contracting HIV.
FRC Warns Against Proposed Changes to Blood Donor Policy [FRC]
FRC sent an "expert" who has admitted he'd like to either "export" or criminalize gay people. You'll have to forgive me if I roll my eyes at anything he says about my life, love, or blood.
Look, the fact of the matter is that I am one of the lowest risk individuals in America. I have been with only one man for over ten years, and will be with that same one man for the rest of my life. Yet despite this reality, despite the vigorous screen, and despite the allowance of many heterosexuals who are, in fact, in high risk groups, I am still banned from giving blood—for life. When a blood drive someday comes to my daughter's school, I'll have to explain to her that her daddies are not allowed simply because of who they are. There is no way to do that without it coming out as wrong and discriminatory. That's because it is.
***The shocking admission that I referenced in the headline:
comments powered by Disqus