Issues for Discussion

[kybearfuzz]

Sorry for the double post for the day, but I just remembered two things of interest to share:

First, I was reading in benjiej's journal that Sheryl Swoopes has finallly come out as a lesbian. I read the attached article and Ms. Swoopes doesn't believe that people are born gay. Now, I know that this is a popular debate of sorts. Are we born gay or are we choosing to be gay? It's the standard breeding vs environment discussion. I've heard people give mixed views on this, including several friends. My view is a mix of both, that people are likely born with a gay predisposition and some environmental conditions may trigger it early on. I have no doubt in my mind that I was gay from childhood, having had an attraction to men as early as age seven or eight before I knew was sex was. The theory doesn't fit the varied experiences I've heard of, so maybe the answer isn't so black and white. Your thoughts?

Second, and this strikes a bit closer to home, my office is having our annual blood drive. I dread this every year because of their exclusion of people of "high risk behaviors" for HIV, meaning me and my penchant for sleeping with men. Even though I practice safe sex, the very fact that I have had sex with a man puts me on the permanently deferred roster (not officially as I just don't bother trying to donate anymore). This practice does bug me though. I think of my brothers, each of whom has had unprotected sex in the past and currently, and are perfectly acceptable by current regulations to donate blood, even though they are more likely to have contracted something. The blood mobile arrives next week, but I think I'll try to be working out of the office that day.. ugh... Your thoughts again?

Comments

[susobear.livejournal.com]

Well here in the uk it's not only being gay.. it's also, having a tattoo, or a piercing....
Of course it's quite ridiculous, but as one guy of the NHS here told me... It's just prevention, there are diseases other than HIV infection that can be transferred... like all the heps and stuff.. all of this takes a LONG time to detect (actually HIV testsrequire, as I've been told) to repeat the test after 4 months or so).

And... always from a uk perspective, i was told that except for the really rare groups, the estimated TTL of blood is like 4 weeks, and after that, the blood is trashed. The other rare groups are kept frozen or whatever they do to keep it healthy... but the common groups are just trashed.

What I don;t see very clearly is the discrimination part.. I mean.. of course there are gay people with AIDS , any of the hepatitis, or other STDs, but there are as many or more straight people having the same issues, but these latters's screening is done on a laboratory, not on a questionnaire... why?

Why can't I be screened and banned after doing lots of tests? why don't they do some kind of Donor Exam? a thorough exam of your blood, a thorough hematoanalysis, so they know that you are on the safe side?

And then, we hear there aren't many people giving blood... pfffff...

[kybearfuzz.livejournal.com]

Honestly, I think it will eventually end up that they'll have excluded almost everyone from donating and then the rules will have to be revised to let donors back in. It's just a matter of time really. :)

[susobear.livejournal.com]

It's just a matter of desperation when they will run out of ultraperfect donors.

so now.. the question.. would you LIE and say you are not gay in order to give blood and help to achieve that greater good?

[kybearfuzz.livejournal.com]

No I wouldn't. To do so would help hide the inherent problem with the system, giving them one more donor when they have trouble finding them. Besides, it is against the law, you sign the document that all of the answers you gave are truthful.

[susobear.livejournal.com]

There we go... a very good moral dilemma, constrained by the law.
The law says what we have to do.. but morally... maybe the asnwer is not so obvious, as this blood we're giving might help to save lives...