The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

Should gay people be allowed to donate blood?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
iron31393 has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/14/2017 Category: Health
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 563 times Debate No: 105832
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)




Should gay people be allowed to donate blood?
This controversy does not only apply to those who identify as gay, bisexual, et cetera- but to men who engage (or have engaged in the past) in sexual intercourse with men. (MSM) Due to the aids and HIV outbreak in the LGBT community in years past, many MSM are not allowed to donate blood- rooting from the stereotype of HIV, hepatitus B and hepatitus C being common amongst LGBT communities. Some who recieve blood donations also refuse to take blood from MSM- though whether it is because of homophobia or prejudice cannot be determined, as the fear of the STD outbreaks may give people presupposed fear of diseased as those listed previously. And so we draw to the thesis, should gay men be allowed to donate blood?

Yes, they should.

Allowing MSM to donate blood can save lives. 10% of the American population identifies as LGBT- at least 10 million people.(2) STD's are not limited to the LGBT community- in 1980, over 12,201 heterosexual men were treated in STD clinics- while homosexual men were at a significantly lower number of only 5324.(3) However, a recent study shows that homosexual men are at a 39.4% rate of having an STD- while heterosexual men are at a slightly lower 32.0%.(4) To rebuttle these facts, HIV can be tested with a blood sample. Blood donations can be tested before being cleared for use- as urine and saliva have antibodies that can prevent infected samples from coming back positive.(5)

This is my first debate, and i welcome any opponant with unbiased and unprejudiced views on the issue!



No, they shouldn't.

The higher % of HIV cases in Homosexuals is NOT a stereotype. (Source:

I don't hold any prejudice but finding the reason why is simple: homosexuals can't have kids so they tend to NOT USE CONDOMS. This leads to higher chances of HIV infection. That's why they shouldn't donate. Its a simple STANDARD precaution. Its clear that you don't know how donations work, to donate you need to fit certain characteristics:

-not changing sexual partners in the last 3-6 months (most STDs can't be spotted immediately, there's a HUGE risk of giving infected blood without knowing it and it cannot be always detected)
-avoiding dangerous attitudes like doing drugs (especially needles lead to blood infections), alcoholism, prostitution (risk of STDs) or jobs in the sex business (porn star)

So, you are CLEALRY trying to put this discussion on a "moral level"; youa re trying to act like if its about their sexual orientation. Its really not! Ask any doctor! Its jsut standard SAFETY ROUTINE!!!! Changing the STANDARD implies ENDANGERING millions of people.

Are you really going to bargain the SAFETY and HEALTH of people due to your FACADE MORALISTIC CRUSADE? Donating blood is not a "right", it's a MEDICAL OPERATION. Let PROFESSIONIST decide which is the SAFEST STANDARD.
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you for accepting my debate!

You state that all donors be "not changing sexual partners in the last 3-6 month" and that "theres a HUGE risk of giving infected blood without knowing it and it cannot be always detected." But what you fail to recognize is that MSM and LGBT donors are held to further standards than heterosexuals. Men who have sex with men must be celibate for a YEAR to donate blood. This was put in place to make SURE that the blood is not infected, and can be tested with accurate results. Why dont those standards apply to EVERYONE? (The only reason a heterosexual man would be held to those standards as well would be if they had had sex with a prostitute. Only then would they be required to be celibate for 12 months.) MSM are also held to higher standards than heterosexual men who have been treated for chlamydia, syphilis, gonorrhea, venereal warts, and genital herpes within the past year.
[They] (professionists) can determine risk level for heterosexuals on a case-by-case basis, and doing it for MSM as well would only be fair. Assessing the risk, testing blood multiple times, and and treating everyone the same. It's really that simple.

The FDA's policy does not accurately identify the behaviors that cause HIV, either. This misinformation places stereotypes onto 'high-risk groups' instead of high risk activities and behaviors. For example, ALL donors must be questioned on travel history, recent medical procedures, smoking, tattoos, piercings, and drugs. So why shouldnt ALL donors be seen as a risk and held to equal standards in STD's? This is another matter of endangering millions vs saving millions.

And thus, I return the floor to Con- and hope my rebuttles are a worthy debate.

This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
This debate has 4 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.