> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:
> I told her suppose as I travel around town and see your signs in
> various places I automatically add the legend 'no homosexuals
> welcome'? She said "don't you dare!" and I told her then instead I
> would write letters to _everyone_ I can find at Red Cross from
> Washington, DC headquarters through the local Wichita office and and
> tell them what I think. As a matter of fact, my letter writing on
> this topic has caused a few internet discussions to start, and now I
> see where Red Cross is complaining they do not get enough blood in
> their campaigns. Good! I hope their blood bank dries up
> completely. PAT]
It might be more efficient to take that up with the source of the
policy:
http://www.fda.gov/cber/faq/bldfaq.htm#gm
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The Federal Drug Administration does
_NOT_ instruct Red Cross to be evasive and lie about it. My comment to
the various Red Cross offices when I wrote (and I continue to write on
this) is simply that: (1) Unlike 20/25 years ago, when blood testing
was not sufficient to test accurately for HIV/AIDS, today tests are
much more accurate. (2) Only a very tiny percentage of gay men ever
had HIV/AIDS, and even less than that now as gay men 'wise up' to
it. (3) Therefore, Red Cross is exhibiting bias by refusing to take
_ANY BLOOD AT ANY TIME_ from gay men, since the percentages are so low
and testing is available. Red Cross wishes to claim this is an 'FDA
problem' as in "Don't blame us for our homophobic bigotry, blame
FDA". But is there any reason Red Cross could not in their newspaper
advertisements seeking blood not state that 'homosexuals need not
apply', or any reason they could not state that in their posters they
put in the windows of every storefront in town? That way, a GLBT
person who read their _honest_ notice could simply walk on past,
rather than taking a cab to get there (this was before I had my
motorized chair), stopping in, getting humiliated by them and being
bribed with an offer of a free cookie and juice to keep quiet about it
afterward.
And if you question my claim of Red Cross' homophobic bigotry, please
note they do _NOT_ automatically refuse to accept blood from
prostitutes or their patrons, nor from drug users/abusers, but only
from gay men, whom they ignorantly claim are 'promiscuous'. I've told
our local Red Cross office (it is based out of Wichita but located
here locally on Chestnut Street) that if they continue to run ads in the
Independence Reporter and the Sunday churh bulletins asking for blood
donors _without_ including the 'no homosexuals need apply' caveat I
would consider suing them for false advertising. PAT]
panoptes@iquest.net