FDA is considering lifting ban on sodomites as blood donors

Rate this post

HIV is transmitted from person to person via bodily fluids — blood, semen, and to a lesser degree, saliva.
From the beginning, most people with HIV/AIDS have been homosexual males. They are called by the politically-correct term, “men who sex with men” or MSM. But a more descriptively correct and, therefore, more appropriate term is “sodomites,” which denotes specifically men who have anal sex with other men — a sexual behavior that is highly risky for HIV and other infections because anal penetration tears the delicate skin of the anal cavity, which is not biologically designed for sexual penetration.
According to the FDA in 2009, “Men who have had sex with men since 1977 have an HIV prevalence . . . 60 times higher than the general population, 800 times higher than first time blood donors and 8000 times higher than repeat blood donors.”
After the explosion of HIV/AIDS into a national (and global) epidemic, in order to protect the safety of America’s blood supply and the lives of people who receive blood transfusions, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) sensibly installed a lifetime ban on homosexual males as blood donors.
That policy began to change less than a year ago.
As reported by Tony Perkins for FRCAction, the legislative affiliate of Family Research Council, the FDA first did away with the lifetime ban on homosexual males as blood donors, and replaced it with a ban or deferral on only men who had had sex with men in the past year.
Now, even that ban is being challenged.
The challenge is spearheaded by freshman Congressman Jared Polis (D-Colorado), who self-identifies as “gay,” after the mass shooting on June 12, 2016, at Pulse gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida, which killed 50 and wounded 53.
As reported by Colorado’s 9News, Polis was outraged that many of the friends and family members of the wounded were prevented from donating blood because of the revised FDA regulation banning blood donation from men who had had sex with other men in the past year.
Playing the victim card, Polis calls the FDA regulation “a relic of the stigma that LGBT people faced.” He told 9News:

“I’m … hopeful that we can remove the ban that the FDA has on gay people donating blood, because guess what? Many of the spouses and loved ones of the victims who need blood can’t even donate blood right now. It’s just a double tragedy that so many are facing the shortage of blood.”

Polis instead argues that restrictions on donating blood should be based on behavior rather than sexual orientation:

“It really doesn’t matter whether you’re gay or straight, what matters obviously is if you’ve used drugs or you’ve had unprotected sex. Those are the risk factors. It has nothing to do with whether you’re gay or straight.”

But Polis’ assertion of “a shortage of blood” is simply not true.
According to an Orlando Sentinel story on the afternoon of the shooting, within hours of the shooting, hundreds of Central Floridians had lined up that morning at the OneBlood blood center on West Michigan Avenue. Overwhelmed by people wanting to donate, OneBlood actually asked donors to stop coming, and instead schedule appointments over the next few days.
The FDA has invited the public to submit comments on Polis’ proposal to abolish the ban on homosexuals as blood donors altogether. Instead, the FDA would ask potential blood donors about specific high-risk behaviors. The FDA claims its decisions will be based on “scientific information” and declares that “the process must be data-driven.” But the FDA’s own statistics that the incidence of HIV is 60 times higher among sexually-active homosexual males than in the general population should be sufficient “scientific information” to reject Polis’ proposal.
By the way, there are compelling reasons that the Orlando shooting was a false flag. See “Orlando shooting: How we know it’s all a lie”.
WASHINGTON, DC - JANUARY 20: Congressman Jared Schutz Polis, D-CO-02, son Caspian Julian, and partner Marlon Reis attend 2013 Green Inaugural Ball at NEWSEUM on January 20, 2013 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Taylor Hill/Getty Images)
Freshman Congressman Jared Schutz Polis, 41, is Jewish and one of the wealthiest members of Congress with an estimated networth of $387.86 million. He made his fortune from a series of very lucrative business ventures that he later sold, including:

  • American Information Systems, an internet access provider, co-founded by Polis when he was a college student.
  • Bluemountain.com, a free electronic greeting-card website.
  • ProFlowers, the California-based online florist.

Polis and his husband, Marlon Reis, have a son, 5, and a daughter, 2.
See also:

H/t John Molloy

Please follow and like us:

21 responses to “FDA is considering lifting ban on sodomites as blood donors

  1. Which one gave birth,or did they just take turns? Since he’s so sure it’s safe,I’m sure he won’t mind undergoing a transfusion under his stated directive,to PROVE it’s safe to get blood from Sodomites.

    • “I’m sure he won’t mind undergoing a transfusion under his stated directive”
      Given his multimillion $, I’m sure Congressman Polis (and probably all members of Congress) has his own (safe) blood supply.

  2. Democrats: political correctness is more important than a safe blood supply to them.

  3. Shameful of the FDA!! Our True GOD Created Adam and Eve for each other!!
    I hope and Pray this goes Viral and everyone knows about this post!!
    Love Always and Shalom, YSIC \o/
    Kristi Ann

  4. The older I get, and I am on the south side of sixty now, the more I come to understand that the miracles of modern medicine may not be such a miracle after all. I believe it is the Christian Scientist that do not believe in blood transfusions. Given the topic of this article, now maybe more people will realize that this religious group just might have a point and just might be right. Organ transplants is another modern medicine miracle that should not ever be done. You disagree? Just think of all those who are being killed just to get organs for those who have more money, more status, etc. I do not know of that happening here in the states – yet – but it happens very often in the rest of the world. The USA has had those who felt dissed because they could not get a transplant. One incident that comes to mind is that of a young girl who was to young for an adult organ and no child organ’s were available. The family raised an absolute ruckus about it and got the rules changed. How much longer will it be that all the rules and procedures put in place for organ transplants also go out the window in the name of political correctness? in the name of inclusion? in the name of fairness? in the name of diversity? in the name of Black Lives Matter? and so on? How much longer will it be before all safe guards are lifted because they will undoubtedly diss at least one person?

  5. Well this is great. But I suppose if you were pulsing, then HIV is part of the experience no matter how it is injected. The problem is that politician’s force their opinions on the rest of us, and manipulate laws to suit their own “preferences”. Politicize everything. Make homosexuality political by tying medical treatment to it even though it is incredibly risky behavior. So if MSM stands for sodmites what is the abbreviation for main stream media. Maybe it’s cool cause most of them are sodomites anyway.
    Hey speaking for myself, I think I’ll pass on any transfusions no matter how serious it is. It was pretty well accepted for a while the blood banks were tainted already.
    God only knows with what.

  6. Time to store our own blood. No other way is safe.

  7. As someone with severe anemia, this is not good news.
    I have had six pints worth of transfusions in the last 2.5 years – four of them at one time, and had I not received those four pints, I would have been dead by the next morning.
    This is pretty damned scary.

    • I totally understand that blood transfusions can save lives. The question I have been asking myself for the last many years, is at what cost does saving a life come at? There are a lot of families who are just one medical crises away from bankruptcy. At what cost do we pay to save a life? At the cost of another person’s life (as in my case)? At the cost of bankruptcy (again from personal experience of being on the very brink of bankruptcy)? At the cost of becoming homeless? Being homeless by yourself is one thing. Being homeless with a family is another. At the cost of ruining your partners life (again personal experience)? At the cost of ruining family relationships? Just exactly at what cost do we save lives. Sometimes the money involved, although the medical debt and prescriptions to stay alive maybe huge, is the smallest price to pay.
      If a person is right with the Lord, know beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are going to Heaven, I assure you there are worst things than death.

      • I have a myriad of things here on this rock I still want to experience.
        I’m not ready to just give up and go Tango Uniform just yet.

      • MA in MO,
        Your response to Dave is unbelievably cruel. I’d asked you this question months ago, to which I received no answer:
        If you are the one with a chronic illness that requires extended medical care, would you choose death to save your family from the medical costs to keep you alive?

        • Dr. E. I am sorry you think I am cruel. The answer to your question is Yes, I would more than gladly give my life to save some one else. No, I will not seek medical treatment for much of anything and I definitely will not allow extreme measures to be taken to keep me alive. The pressure, stress, strain on relationships that a chronic illness causes is not worth it. Especially when that stress, pressure, and strain causes someone else’s death that you also love dearly, because they were unable to cope with the situation. God has a plan and when we as humans go against that plan, we will pay the price. There is a Bible verse that goes something like this — “there is no greater love hath any man than for him to lay down his life for his brother……”

          • No, I will not seek medical treatment for much of anything and I definitely will not allow extreme measures to be taken to keep me alive.
            God gave us intelligence for a reason, and I am pretty sure it was not to go against God’s wish that we should all have life, and have it more abundantly, at that.
            Kind of hard to do that when you’re deader than frozen dog-squeeze in Siberia.
            I don’t really think that God is going to smile upon those who, in effect, are committing what amounts to a post-natal abortion on themselves, especially when there are many remedies available to prevent it.
            Chronic illness has touched my family many times in my 52+ years on this rock, and as stressful as they could be, (not to mention inconvenient at times) I am still thankful that the doctors were able to keep them around a little longer, even if it was a pain in the ass at times.
            I lost my maternal grandmother and my dad to Alzheimer’s, and my mom is descending into Alzheimer’s as I write this.
            But that doesn’t mean I want her dead because she might become “inconvenient.”
            Many women justify abortion by saying that a child – normal or requiring special care, are inconvenient.
            Hell, most people on this planet can be inconvenient.

  8. I would suspect this is coming from higher ups. 10 years ago, this would never have been considered.
    Now, instead of health, it is all about the money, thus look at the drugs being allowed onto the scene that have not been tested completely or are riddled with dozens of warnings. Big pharma is also guilty of putting money over safety.
    The FDA is promoting many unsafe actions including unsafe vaccines.
    More people are dying from unsafe legal drugs than could ever be killed by guns.
    The FDA is not working for the safety of the people any more, and hasn’t for some time now.

  9. MAKE NO MISTAKE: This is an attempt to poison our Nation’s blood supply. The FDA has been thoroughly politicized since Bill Clinton was President; Now Obama has come to finish the job.
    This is not about unfair discrimination against gay people: It is another plank in the EUGENIC AGENDA: It is yet another EXTINCTION PROTOCOL. And gay people, corporately—what Randy Engel calls the “homosexual collective”—is being used to drive the thin end of the wedge into this area of our healthcare.
    Mrs. Engel has done a tremendous amount of pioneering work in documenting the “homosexual collective” as a subterranean political/cultural front. This is not to rage against the individual gay man or woman; It is about the Ruling Elite’s never-ending divide-and-conquer games. In the end, Eugenics is NOT about “improving the stock” or improving the “race”: It is about ENDING IT. This is yet another plank in what Alex Jones has correctly identified as the “soft kill” of the Eugenic Agenda: They cannot march us all into the gas chambers—people would rebel outright. The Ruling Elite cannot hit us square in the jaw, so they have to resort to attacks from the side.
    And make no mistake: This IS about discrimination—fair and just discrimination. No one is openly advocating torturing and killing homosexuals: Let them live their lives. But the libertarian prerogative is not good enough for the Ruling Elite: They would use any group of people as a wedge against another (or the collective whole). Gay men and women are not hunted down in the West (not yet, at least: Islam hasn’t gotten to that stage—YET). It is about protecting healthcare, something that homosexual behavior’s results have proved, throughout history, to be medically documented to be inimical towards. So this is a political decision, based on expediency, in order to cater to what Mrs. Engel calls the “collective,” in this case represented by the “Party Line.”
    I do not yet trust Donald Trump to reverse this decision if he should be elected: Even if he can be trusted to do so, the word has already gone out, and a difficult job has now been, effectively, made to be IMPOSSIBLE.
    This is the Left for you: No matter what we do, they can always “raise our wager one”: This is why they always win. AGAIN: The biography to study, unto its minutiae, is Vladimir Lenin: He is the pioneer of Modern Evil. All of history has been replaying his autobiography out, over and over, since he ascended to power, institution by institution, department by department. No single human being or political movement has ever been able to arrest it, let alone reverse it. (And that includes Ronald Reagan and John Paul II).
    We are in an uphill battle.

    • Great article. So true. Every time I write about the fact that the price of medical care may be to high to pay — in relationships, someone else’s death, the huge monetary debts — I literally get zinged. There is coming a time, and in some cases it is already here, when a person will need to choose either medical care or death. I assure any one reading this that there are worse things than death. Hitler used healthcare services as a weapon. The one and only thing a person needs to have settled is ‘where will you spend eternity.’ Anything else in this world is temporal.

    • True Steve, and you can bet the scum surrounding this have stored their own blood for emergencies.

  10. We’ve known for a long time that the FDA is nothing but a self-perpetuating bureaucracy, but THIS is an outrage! Thank you for exposing it, Dr. Eowyn!


Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.