I personally believe that there are more hetro men who have std's and infections etxc than homosexual ... so I am totally against them refusing to accept the blood based on sexual orientation ... After all; ALL of the blood is TESTED prior to being given to a patient ... +5

My understanding is that they are not allowed to because of the increased likelihood of gays to have HIV/AIDS. Giving blood is not a right. It is kind of rude to shut them out but honestly if it's designed to help prevent people from contracting AIDS through transfusions it's hard to argue against it.

Well, not long ago The CDC, in search of a name, and looking at the infected communities coined “the 4H disease,” as it seemed to single out Haitians, homosexuals, hemophiliacs, and heroin users.[142] However, after determining that AIDS was not isolated to the homosexual community,[140] the term GRID became misleading and AIDS was introduced at a meeting in July 1982.[143] By September 1982 the CDC started using the name AIDS, and properly defined the illness - *The above is an excerpt from Wikipedia - But in my own words the latter speculations were'nt too long ago, and the stigmas are still very fresh. I think personally anyone in a high-risk group gays, prostitutes ect..should be ruled out in order to avoid contamination. Although if the proper screening is in place this shouldnt even be a discussion - *

The rules on donating blood shift somewhat from time to time, based on many different factors. Yes, blood is tested before it's used. But the fact remains that testing does NOT catch everything. And some things will not show up in a blood test for several months after an infection, based on the body's ability to detect a given infection and start manufacturing antibodies, for example. And blood isn't tested for EVERY POSSIBLE CONTAMINATION before use, either. The blood supply, like it or not, is based on the honor system. All blood donors are asked nearly 100 questions prior to donating and the decision on the suitability of the donor and their blood is based on this. One lie or mistake on those questions places the blood supply at risk. The BASIC requirements are these: -Be in generally good health and feeling well. -Be at least 17 years of age; upper age 60 (420d*). -Weigh at least 110 pounds (45 kg). -Pulse: 80 to 100 beats/min and regular. -Temperature: Should not exceed 99.5 (37.5c). -Blood Pressure: acceptable range is 160/90 to 110/60. -Skin: the venipuncture site should be free of any lesion or scar of needle pricks indicative of addiction to narcotics or frequent Blood donation (as in the case of professional Blood donors) You are NOT to donate for any of the following reasons: -You have ever tested positive for HIV, -You have ever injected yourself with drugs or other substances not prescribed by a physician, -You are a man and have had sex with another man, even once, -You have hemophilia or another Blood clotting disorder and received clotting factor concentrate, -You have engaged in sex for drugs or money since 1977, -You have lived in western Europe since 1980, -You have been held in a correctional facility (including jails, prisons and/or detention centers) for more than 72 hours in the last 12 months, -You were born in, lived in or had sex with anyone who lived in, or received Blood products in Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Niger or Nigeria since 1977 (this list changes frequently; updates are very important) or, -You are, or have been a sexual contact of someone in the above list. And currently, there is a special watch out for potential donors who have visited or lived in the UK from 1080 to 1999 and those who have lived and/or worked in Western Europe since 1980. And there are a whole host of other factors as well: http://www.bloodbook.com/donr-requir.html My point is that donating blood isn't about being FAIR. It's about providing as safe a supply of blood and blood products as possible. And the FIRST step in this is to screen the donors to minimize the risk of obtaining contaminated blood in the first place.

Unenforcible making it a non-productive debate.

I try not to stand on men at all. Where I come from that's considered impolite -- or football.

As a gay man, I appreciate your asking this question. . I have donated blood a grand total of one time, when I was 17 (in 1980). Turns out I'm B-negative, which is one of the more rare blood-types. My parents still get phone calls for me from local blood banks when they run short. . I'm HIV-negative and in a monogamous relationship. I personally know that my own risk is lower than a lot of other people, and I would like to help out. . But the Red Cross folks who run the blood drives don't have the luxury of time to get to know me personally -- each of the factors for which they ask people to exclude themselves are all aimed at reducing risk. . I don't take it personally. The whole idea of donating blood is to help someone else -- if any of the blanket category bans they've adopted prove to be presenting too much of a burden, they'll drop them or modify them. That's a complicated enough job without having them have to worry about hurting my feelings. . On the flip side, I have long maintained that if I ever have a friend or a relative who needs a bone marrow transplant or something like that -- that is the point where I put my foot down and insist that I (me, personally) be tested for compatibility and insist that they look at my HIV-negative status. And if I have to go live in a monastery for six months just to be sure (well -- to be safer it should probably be a nunnery), I'll do that. . And, actually, that's what the regulations say on organ and tissue donations. When things move beyond the kind of mass processing that's needed for blood transfusions, that's where much more individualized evaluations can be made, and they are made. And that's how it should be. . So do I like it? No. But do I understand it? Yes.

it's not just gay men it's people who were intravenous drug users, people with numerous tattoos who are also not allowed because those people as a whole are at greater risk. I think it's ok. my husband, a person not eligible to donate blood, asked me "If you needed blood and there were two people who you didn't know that you could choose from and one was a former intravenous drug user and the other was not, which one would you pick?"

i'm not too worried about it. i don't weigh enough & i have blood problems so i can't donate.

I don't believe that they are denied because they are gay but because of question such as -unprotected sex, needle usage, esposure to needles. Everyone are required to answer the same questions, gay or not.+5

If a gay person wants to give blood - I have no problem with the notion; but.... there would have to be major safeguards for the blood to be tested before using on someone else. Not being a medic - I vaguely remember that contaminated blood can still be utilized by breaking it down and extracting the plasma and dumping the rest. again - I'm not a medical type person and only vaguely remember what the Nurse told me when I was told I "might" carry Malaria after spending some time in Africa. PS=> I'm not Gay.

Considering that any guy is willing to lie their tush off if it means they get sex... If they're willing to lie about THAT... How can they be trusted to tell the truth about their blood donations?