THEOCRACY WATCH!!!: Gay Men not allowed to father babies - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-06-2005, 06:58 AM   #1
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,475
Local Time: 08:32 PM
THEOCRACY WATCH!!!: Gay Men not allowed to father babies

honestly, how would you feel? this is such blatant discrimination, such homphobic nonsense rooted in mythology ... this is so inexcusable, i now feel as if my sometime constant harping on these issues is fully justified. there are people out there who want us to go away, disappear.



FDA to Implement Gay Sperm Donor Rules By DAVID CRARY, AP National Writer
Thu May 5, 5:31 PM ET



To the dismay of gay-rights activists, the Food and Drug Administration is about to implement new rules recommending that any man who has engaged in homosexual sex in the previous five years be barred from serving as an anonymous sperm donor.

The FDA has rejected calls to scrap the provision, insisting that gay men collectively pose a higher-than-average risk of carrying the AIDS virus. Critics accuse the FDA of stigmatizing all gay men rather than adopting a screening process that focuses on high-risk sexual behavior by any would-be donor, gay or straight.

"Under these rules, a heterosexual man who had unprotected sex with HIV-positive prostitutes would be OK as a donor one year later, but a gay man in a monogamous, safe-sex relationship is not OK unless he's been celibate for five years," said Leland Traiman, director of a clinic in Alameda, Calif., that seeks gay sperm donors.

Traiman said adequate safety assurances can be provided by testing a sperm donor at the time of the initial donation, then freezing the sperm for a six-month quarantine and testing the donor again to be sure there is no new sign of HIV or other infectious diseases.

Although there is disagreement over whether the FDA guideline regarding gay men will have the force of law, most doctors and clinics are expected to observe it.

The practical effect of the provision — part of a broader set of cell and tissue donation regulations that take effect May 25 — is hard to gauge. It is likely to affect some lesbian couples who want a child and prefer to use a gay man's sperm for artificial insemination.

But it is the provision's symbolic aspect that particularly troubles gay-rights groups. Kevin Cathcart, executive director of Lambda Legal, has called it "policy based on bigotry."

"The part I find most offensive — and a little frightening — is that it isn't based on good science," Cathcart said. "There's a steadily increasing trend of heterosexual transmission of HIV, and yet the FDA still has this notion that you protect people by putting gay men out of the pool."

In a letter to the FDA, Lambda Legal has suggested a screening procedure based on sexual behavior, not sexual orientation. Prospective donors — gay or straight — would be rejected if they had engaged in unprotected sex in the previous 12 months with an HIV-positive person, an illegal drug user, or "an individual of unknown HIV status outside of a monogamous relationship."

But an FDA spokeswoman cited FDA documents suggesting that officials felt the broader exclusion was prudent even if it affected gay men who practice safe sex.

"The FDA is very much aware that strict exclusion policies eliminate some safe donors," said one document.

Many doctors and fertility clinics already have been rejecting gay sperm donors, citing the pending FDA rules or existing regulations of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine.

"With an anonymous sperm donor, you can't be too careful," said a society spokeswoman, Eleanor Nicoll. "Our concern is for the health of the recipient, not to let more and more people be sperm donors."

However, some sperm banks, notably in California, have welcomed gay donors. The director of one of them, Alice Ruby of the Oakland-based Sperm Bank of California, said her staff had developed procedures for identifying gay men with an acceptably low risk of HIV.

Gay men are a major donor source at Traiman's Rainbow Flag sperm bank, and he said that practice would continue despite the new rules.

"We're going to continue to follow judicious, careful testing procedures for our clients that even experts within the FDA say is safe," said Traiman, referring to the six-month quarantine.

The FDA rules do not prohibit gay men from serving as "directed" sperm donors. If a woman wishing to become pregnant knows a gay man and asks that he provide sperm for artificial insemination, a clinic could provide that service even if the man had engaged in sex with other men within five years.

However, Traiman said some lesbian couples do not have a gay friend they know and trust well enough to be the biological father of their child, and would thus prefer an anonymous donor.

Dr. Deborah Cohan, an obstetrics and gynecology instructor at the University of California, San Francisco, said some lesbians prefer to receive sperm from a gay donor because they feel such a man would be more receptive to the concept of a family headed by a same-sex couple.

"This rule will make things legally more difficult for them," she said. "I can't think of a scientifically valid reason — it has to be an issue of discrimination."

___
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-06-2005, 07:02 AM   #2
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,979
Local Time: 08:32 PM
I'm no expert, but that definitely has to be based upon bad science, and that sure seems like discrimination to me. So straight guys who are sleeping w/ tons of women aren't subjected to the same restriction?

What about donating blood, what are the guidelines for that now? How is that any different?
__________________

__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline  
Old 05-06-2005, 07:13 AM   #3
Acrobat
 
Maggie1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: a place by the sea
Posts: 343
Local Time: 09:32 PM
I think this is something more sinister other than concern for spreading HIV. I wonder if the religious right might be behind these rules. It would be just like them to maybe think that gay people would produce gay babies.
__________________
Maggie1 is offline  
Old 05-06-2005, 07:23 AM   #4
pax
ONE
love, blood, life
 
pax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Ewen's new American home
Posts: 11,412
Local Time: 09:32 PM
A policy like this would be okay if they were screening out any man who had had unprotected sex in the last five years. It's patently unfair to have two separate sets of standards for straight and gay men.

__________________
and you hunger for the time
time to heal, desire, time


Join Amnesty.
pax is offline  
Old 05-06-2005, 08:27 AM   #5
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
dandy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: styrofoam peanut commune
Posts: 4,310
Local Time: 10:32 PM
deep had posted this article in the "Question of the Day" thread, but it didn't get much attention. he also had some entertaining comments about how they could go about enforcing this.

wouldn't they have to check each and every donation anyway to ensure it wasn't an infected sample before using it to impregnate a woman? if the proper safeguards are in place, this shouldn't be an issue for anyone, regardless of sexual orientation.

blantant discrimination. i don't get where people get the balls to make these kinds of ridiculous justifications--do they not realize how preposterous they sound? do they think we won't see this for what it really is?


__________________
dandy is offline  
Old 05-06-2005, 08:44 AM   #6
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 01:32 AM
This isn't fair. It's not based on reason, it's based on fear. I'm getting awfully tired of all of this homophobia.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 05-06-2005, 09:39 AM   #7
New Yorker
 
the soul waits's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: belgium
Posts: 2,528
Local Time: 03:32 AM
I am absolutely baffled by this.
__________________
the soul waits is offline  
Old 05-06-2005, 09:42 AM   #8
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 08:32 PM
Re: THEOCRACY WATCH!!!: Gay Men not allowed to father babies

Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
"This rule will make things legally more difficult for them," she said. "I can't think of a scientifically valid reason — it has to be an issue of discrimination."
Bingo. And all it serves to do is to spread the stereotype that all gay men have AIDS, which is clearly not true.

How about a ban on blacks? Don't they all have AIDS too? :P

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 05-06-2005, 09:54 AM   #9
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,475
Local Time: 08:32 PM
Re: Re: THEOCRACY WATCH!!!: Gay Men not allowed to father babies

Quote:
Originally posted by melon
How about a ban on blacks? Don't they all have AIDS too? :P


you know, i thought about this very same thing this morning.

i think African-Americans are as much, and growing, an at-risk group for HIV than gay men are, especially African-American men who have been in prison.

but we all know racism is bad.

homophbia, however, is TOTALLY COOL!!!
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-06-2005, 09:55 AM   #10
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 08:32 PM
Re: Re: Re: THEOCRACY WATCH!!!: Gay Men not allowed to father babies

Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
homophobia, however, is TOTALLY COOL!!!
Oh yeah. And you're a bigot if you don't let these people be homophobic.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 05-06-2005, 10:02 AM   #11
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
ILuvLarryMullen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: in the sunshine
Posts: 6,904
Local Time: 05:32 PM
They should be testing all donations for HIV, people lie on those questionaires and even if they don't and have not had sex in a year they might be infected and not know it. The fact that they don't would make me very wary of using a sperm donor at all (not that I'd want one).
__________________
ILuvLarryMullen is offline  
Old 05-06-2005, 10:28 AM   #12
Blue Crack Addict
 
joyfulgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 16,615
Local Time: 06:32 PM


blatantly homophobic
__________________
joyfulgirl is offline  
Old 05-06-2005, 10:35 AM   #13
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 05:32 PM
do they fear the passing on of the "gay gene"?

and my taxes go to this idiot's salary
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 05-06-2005, 10:39 AM   #14
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,475
Local Time: 08:32 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
do they fear the passing on of the "gay gene"?


i was thinking that too ... it's weird, part of the argument is that it isn't genetic and that no one is born gay, so there can't be a gay gene; yet, if you want to stop gay men from reproducing, then perhaps the biological component of homosexuality presents something of a fear to such people? so, they're admitting, in effect, that it is at least partly genetic?

oy, this gets complex...
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-06-2005, 10:39 AM   #15
Blue Crack Addict
 
starsgoblue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Looking for direction to perfection
Posts: 17,828
Local Time: 08:32 PM
__________________

__________________
starsgoblue is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com