I have long argued that progressives do not care for the Bill of Rights or the Constitution. They claim some of its provisions — like the Second Amendment — are “outdated” and have gone from calling the Constitution a “living, breathing” document to dismissing it as antiquated in its entirety.
Instead, I believe that progressives believe in one supreme “right” and all other “rights” are contingent on whether or not they aid in the expression of that supreme right. Namely, that we have a right to sex — with whomever or whatever — whenever or wherever, without criticism, cost, or consequence. This is why they support abortion on demand (because pregnancy and a baby is a consequence of sex) and the forcing of religious affiliated organizations, groups, businesses and persons to fund contraception, sterilization, and abortion (the First Amendment be damned!).
Don’t believe me? Now there’s this, via the Washington Times (emphasis added):
Ramping up their fight to overturn a ban dating back to 1985 and the emergence of the AIDS crisis, gay-rights organizers are preparing an unprecedented “national gay blood drive” Friday to urge the federal government to change its donation policy and allow some openly gay and bisexual men to give blood.
None of the thousands of men expected to show up to blood donation centers is likely to be allowed to donate, but gay-rights activists are eager to show that the ban prevents countless units of healthy blood from being accepted into the blood banks.
On Friday, gay and bisexual men will have specific locations in more than 50 cities to offer to give blood.
They are expected to go first to an HIV testing unit — some of which will be parked near the blood donation center — and get rapid-response HIV testing, which is performed with an oral swab. Within 30 minutes, each man will receive his results. Those with negative HIV tests will attempt to donate their blood.
“As each donor is rejected, their test result will be collected, compiled, and delivered to the FDA — visually conveying to them on a national level how much blood the gay community could contribute to the blood supply should they lift their current policy,” Mr. Yezak said on the website gayblooddrive.com.
A fact sheet released at the end of June by the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) warns that HIV rates, already at epidemic proportions, are continuing to climb steadily among men who have sex with men (MSM).
“Gay and bisexual men remain at the epicenter of the HIV/AIDS epidemic,” says Jonathan Mermin, the director of the CDC’s division of HIV/AIDS prevention.
The CDC notes that while homosexual men make up only a very small percentage of the male population (4%), MSM account for over three-quarters of all new HIV infections, and nearly two-thirds (63 percent) of all new infections in 2010 (29,800).
“Men who have sex with men remain the group most heavily affected by HIV in the United States,” the fact sheet states.
US News reports that if HIV infections among men who have sex with men (MSM) continue to rise at the current rates, more than half of college-aged homosexual men will have HIV by the age of 50.
More than half of homosexual men will have HIV by the age of 50, which means the already small percentage of men who are gay (4%, as cited above) will be cut in half to 2% of gay men as potential donors. And this is going to provide “countless units of blood” to donation centers?
Additionally, the CDC also recommends that one get tested for HIV/AIDS three to six months after their last sexual encounter. The rapid results tests these men plan to take may provide a false negative report.
But we’re not supposed to put the health of those who need blood donations above a political agenda?
No, apparently not.
The inability to donate blood is a consequence of engaging in homosexual behavior. But since sexual behavior cannot have consequences, according to progressives, we should have to risk our health and chance getting HIV/AIDS so 2% of men can feel affirmed in being able to donate blood.