To investigate examples in one critcal area where the promotion of gay rights surpasses the reasonable and the absurd , consider the subject of blood donation.(* Unless otherwise specified, all quotes are taken from the first two linked articles).
Catholic Insight reported in July 2010 that “Canada, the United States, France and Germany presently maintain a lifetime blood donation ban for men who have had sex with other men.”
In 2009, the
Australian Federation of AIDS organizations reported the Australian Red Cross Blood Services maintains its “policy of not accepting blood donations from men who have had sex with men in the previous 12 months.”
Statistics - based research say national blood banks were previously tainted with the AIDS virus and for hemopheliacs and infants , a lot of the time the consequences were fatal:
"For a time, Australia had the highest proportion of HIV cases acquired through blood transfusion of any western country. Some 30 percent of people with haemophilia who received blood products between 1980 and 1984 acquired HIV – most died…
…And in November 1984 when the Queensland health minister announced that three babies had died after receiving blood donated by a gay man, fears about gay men and AIDS went into overdrive."
There is some truth then, to the collateral fallout of a stigma being attached to those who engage in an actively gay lifestyle. But factors are factors. The collateral damage doesn’t change the factors.
Subsequently, with such disatrous results right in our faces, due to the exceedingly high risk factor of transmission among “men who have sex with men” (as they prefer to be called), even countries who are so wide open to gay rights that it amounts to reverse discrimination and the suppression of freedom of religion and of speech,continue to draw the line when it comes to blood donations.
Now, consider : " In Canada, Canadian Blood Services is suing Kyle Freeman, a sexually active gay man, who lied about his sexual history in order to donate blood a number of times. Mr. Freeman is being supported by the gay community in Canada and portrayed as a loving, compassionate man who wants only to do good things. Mr. Freeman is counter-suing, saying that the policy discriminates against homosexuals."
Then , similarly, “A long-running discrimination complaint against the Australian Red Cross Blood Service (ARCBS) by Tasmanian gay man Michael Cain was dismissed in May 2009. In 2004 Michael Cain’s blood was refused by the ARCBS in Launceston after he answered ‘yes’ to a screening question about gay sex.”
One part that appeared particularly disturbing was, "In comments that sound remarkably similar to those made by Michael Cain twenty five years later, Craig Johnston wrote in the gay magazine Campaign:
‘When blood collection agencies announce that they don’t want any gay donors because of the appearance of AIDS in some gay men,
I interpret that announcement as ‘all gay blood is bad blood’ … That offends my dignity."
And what of the “dignity” and “feelings” of those innocent victims who received a death sentence ?
One notices again, if one thoroughly reads the articles, that the gay activists resort once more to the cry of
"discrimination"… that ever re-emerging pattern ; unreasonable as it is, to the point where they’re insisting that their “rights” should abrogate individual and community health concerns ; that, in one sense, some should be given a license to deal a death sentence …
How can one make any sense out of that at all ? It would probably never have gotten to this point if some of the human rights tribunal judges had maintained a little more intestinal fortitude and tried to avoid taking a position more geared towards
Pontius Pilatesque job security.
They should at least acknowledge, as both linked articles do , the contributory cause of blood screening for HIV not being totally reliable .
Even with community health as the priority, one needs to feel a little sorry for the gay activists who would advocate what is being advocated in these two cases. If one peers below the surface, one discovers that this is a form of denial. And even more unfortunately, the repetetive crying over and over of
“discrimination” is a learned behaviour . The activists actually see this as their way of belonging in society. Some of these poor guys aren’t even being allowed to think for themselves.
To Michael Cain’s comment . ‘It almost felt like I was being accused of being a dirty person’ , I might recommend he read an article by Dr. John R. Diggs Jr., M.D.
** I would forewarn any member here at CAF who would like to read the article, that although the article is written by an M.D., and is presented at the
Catholic Education Resource Center website , it is graphic with a capital “G”. However, if one can read it through and survive , the article proves most adept in eliciting and augmenting sincere compassion for our gay brothers and sisters.
, What about the rest of the words in the sentence ?
]. The signs being carried by the tyrranists bore the words “***equality ***for all” … and there is nothing wrong with those words. Where the “wrong” happens is when their meaning is twisted to accuse good, loving people of being prejudiced and discriminatory and to try and intrude on peaceable consciences. That is known as psychological warfare.