Homosexual men allowed to give blood but sex banned for decade

[sianrose]

The ban on gay men donating blood is being lifted because it was decided that the rule could be discriminatory and might breach equality legislation.

However, gay men will only be permitted to donate if they have not had sexual intercourse for a decade. Homosexuals who are or have recently been sexually active will continue to be barred from giving blood.

Anne Milton, the public health minister, is expected to announce the changes within weeks and she is understood to be backed by Andrew Lansley, the Health Secretary, and Lynne Featherstone, the Equalities Minister.

Donated blood is screened for HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases but a tiny number of infections are missed because there can be a time lag before they show themselves.

The current system is based on trust. There are no checks to ensure donors are telling the truth about their sexuality and around seven per cent of sexually active gay men are thought to give blood despite the ban.

full article

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8441054/Homosexual-men-allowed-to-give-blood-but-sex-banned-for-decade.html

2 X readers comments...

"How on earth will the blood transfusion service be able to determine whether a homosexual man has or hasn't had sex for a decade? A ridiculous move, which will have a detrimental effect on public health."

"The ban on gay men donating blood is being lifted because it was decided that the rule could be discriminatory and might breach equality legislation".

Quite right! I demand the right to catch HIV from a homosexual as to catch it from a heterosexual is discriminatory and breaches my human rights."

[Precision]

Sian, For many years even in the world these topics where not even discussed in the open or in the newspapers. Hollywierd has recently been

injecting subtle and outright complacancy with the "alternative lifestyle" and it seems we are being bombarded everywhere to accept their agenda.

Years ago other forums started out wholesome, an upbuilding but subtlely topics such as these and others started creeping in.

I personally feel that there is no place on this forum for this type of subject, especialy from outside sources, If you want to read about

these topics elsewhere thats fine, but please don't share them here.

I am not interested in speculating the bones of a gay from 5000 years ago or any other such themed topics. We get enough of this

information in the world already, It's nice to be able to invite anyone from the congregation and young ones to this forum , However

I feel that this information is not appropriate for this otherwise encouraging and upbuilding forum.

[destiny]

It's nice to be able to invite anyone from the congregation and young ones to this forum , However

I feel that this information is not appropriate for this otherwise encouraging and upbuilding forum.

you know i have never thought about young one being on this forum, that's a good point.

Our Public Talk today was on this same issue with the young ones being bombarded with all kinds of filth, and how we the older ones need to protect them. that being said, Is there an age limit on this forum?

[ava]

In defense of Sian, I think she was posting an article not to discuss homosexuality, but to discuss more evidence as to why our defense of no blood is a good one.

[BlaqueCalalilly]

I totally agree.......

[Sunnyside]

This can serve as information not as encouragement.

I personally felt disgusted by how the world is going with everything. May Jehovah help us all!!

[sianrose]

In defense of Sian, I think she was posting an article not to discuss homosexuality, but to discuss more evidence as to why our defense of no blood is a good one.

thank you Ava and the others who could see the reason for the post...the issue is blood....but that the fact that homosexuals are allowed to give blood is causing a stir...and can lead into inroads to witness about the blood issue...

[bohemian]

One might as well suggest that such matters not be discussed in the magazines. We are not glorifying actions which are counter to Jehovah's laws. These matters are publicized often in the "Watching the World" and such parts of the Awake! and also in main articles.

I appreciate such news items as they do often lead to opportunities to witness, but only if we aware of them.

[Sunnyside]

All said i think it is just another area where the conscience draws a line for each individual.

My dad (non witness) accepted blood some months back out of spite of our no blood stand. Next time the topic comes p I will mention the HOMO blood thing and watch his reaction!!!

[sunshine]

Sian, For many years even in the world these topics where not even discussed in the open or in the newspapers. Hollywierd has recently been

injecting subtle and outright complacancy with the "alternative lifestyle" and it seems we are being bombarded everywhere to accept their agenda.

Years ago other forums started out wholesome, an upbuilding but subtlely topics such as these and others started creeping in.

I personally feel that there is no place on this forum for this type of subject, especialy from outside sources, If you want to read about

these topics elsewhere thats fine, but please don't share them here.

I am not interested in speculating the bones of a gay from 5000 years ago or any other such themed topics. We get enough of this

information in the world already, It's nice to be able to invite anyone from the congregation and young ones to this forum , However

I feel that this information is not appropriate for this otherwise encouraging and upbuilding forum.

I do understand what you mean -- maybe we can have a system where the title is more discrete and has a *warning* that the content might not be appropriate for very young children.

That having been said, I recall a WATCHING THE WORLD recently about homosexual buddist monks wearing tight robes and makeup so what is happening in the world is not something we should completely avoid (although yes, we shouldn't find entertainment in titlating subjects or shocking reports)....

I see where you're both coming from though.

S

[sunshine]

In defense of Sian, I think she was posting an article not to discuss homosexuality, but to discuss more evidence as to why our defense of no blood is a good one.

thank you Ava and the others who could see the reason for the post...the issue is blood....but that the fact that homosexuals are allowed to give blood is causing a stir...and can lead into inroads to witness about the blood issue...

That's how I saw it... I think its also intersting that the only *safe* blood they will accept is from people that have been celebate (not those that have used protection). Ha, if they find a homosexual that hasn't had sex in 10 years, they shouldn't take his blood they should put him in a museum.

[Brother_Bliss]

Ha, if they find a homosexual that hasn't had sex in 10 years, they shouldn't take his blood they should put him in a museum.

Too funny!

Anyhow, there is no age limit to this forum, per se. We allow publishers to join, baptized or not, as all publishers, baptized or not, are considered Jehovah's Witnesses. From time to time someone will register saying that they are neither baptized, nor a publisher, and we handle these on a case by case basis. Outside of that, if you are a young kid let loose on the internet unsupervised, there are a billion web pages far worse than this forum to end up on.

In regards to the topic about blood that happens to also have to do with homosexuals, the fact that homosexuals can donate blood is so very irrelevant. Homosexuals are not more diseased than immoral heterosexuals are.

If you try to bring up that homosexuals can donate blood, as if that made it more nasty, not only does your argument lack the extra credibility that you thought it did, you are completely missing the point as well.

Accepting blood, regardless of the source, is immoral and should offend you.