I believe it is justified as homosexual blood is tainted with Aids as has been happening before when they donated blood to the blood donor clinics and the reason it is so very thoroughly screened today.
3 votes
Nov 6, 2015
Reply to this opinion
subscribe
share/challenge
flag
Discussion (2)
::unhide-discussion::
Not all homosexuals have HIV or AIDS (AIDS cannot be transferred, only HIV which causes AIDS if untreated) and some heterosexuals have the virus. As well, the Red Cross already screens for HIV so no "tainted" blood is ever given to another person, causing infection. So why can't a homosexual whose blood has no diseases be used to save someone else's life?
reply
subscribe
share/challenge
flag
::unhide-discussion::
0 votes,
Nov 6, 2015
because at one time when the screening wasnt so severe the blood was tainted and many got very sick. now they screen it by asking if you have sexual relationship of the same gender and or sexual relationships outside of marriage. I believe they are trying to screen out those that have multiple pardners, and not risk taking blood that can make people fatally sick So it is not just homosexuals they rule out but many others who are sexually involved with strange flesh. And why would you want to give blood knowing it can kill another person so why be angry about it, also I doubt if people who are heterosexual would give permission to be infused with the blood of a homosexual or someone who had multiple pardners not saying this is the reason but most heterosexuals would be abhorred by such an idea
reply
subscribe
share/challenge
flag
Challenge someone to answer this opinion:
Invite an OpiWiki user:
OR
Invite your friend via email:
@
click for template
OR
Share it:
Share this opinion via OpiWiki smartlink:
OR
Opinion's page
Click the @ to see full topic's discussion.
Status:
Active
Replies:
2
Main replies:
1
subscribe
For new main reply notification
Voting
(15 votes)