Reader comments · Northern Ireland minister accused of homophobia over gay blood ban · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Northern Ireland minister accused of homophobia over gay blood ban

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Edwin Poots has always been a homophobe,

    He is a crazed religious extremists (I mean he opposes the theory of evolution).

    He is a member of the extremist DUP party – which is closely linked to the extremist Free Presbyterian Church – the church that former MP and wife of Northern Ireland’s First Minister – Iris Robinson was a member of.

    Iris Robinson called gay people an abomination.

    Meanwhile 59 year old Iris was f***ing the 19 year old son of her local butcher.

    Edwin Poots has never called for the stoning to death of Iris Robinson for fornicating with said teenager.

    Which is odd – seeing as the bible specifically sanctions the stoning to death of adulteresses.

  2. Jock S. Trap 23 Sep 2011, 3:38pm

    One thing’s for certain, while their are people like Edwin Poots in government things will never get any better.

  3. Spanner1960 23 Sep 2011, 5:05pm

    The man is doing the right thing, although possibly for the wrong reasons.

    I just hope his motivation for the ban is out of common sense and the foresight to realise that certain sections of the community are a higher risk than others, rather than some bizarre bible-fuelled bigotry masquerading as a public health matter.

    1. His decision is not consistent with scientific and clinical evidence and thus is clearly only motivated by being prejudicial on grounds of orientation

      1. Spanner1960 23 Sep 2011, 9:04pm

        What “scientific and clinical evidence” might that be?

        1. The WHO published data that heterosexuals are the main concern for transmission of HIV thus outdated prejudiced attitudes to LGBT people are inappropriate.

          The wealth of opinion from their own eminent scientists and other international experts who helped Italy, Spain, Latvia and Poland adopt a much more sophisticated system rather than one based on bias. The evidence that the English DoH has accepted to reduce the ban from a lifetime ban – alongside similar decisions in Germany, Argentina, and many other countries. This is an outdated approach based on ignorance of the facts. The only explanation to keeping it is based on examination of the motivation – which I perceive strongly to be grounded in prejudiced ignorance.

          1. Spanner1960 24 Sep 2011, 8:32am

            This was the same World Health Organisation that up until 1990 classified Homosexuality as a disease.

            Hardly what one might call progressive.

          2. Jock S. Trap 24 Sep 2011, 8:36am

            Actually Spanner.. I’ve come to see that your irrational fears and scaremongering is nothing to do with the LGBT community but everything to do with your irration fear and mistrust of the Health services of this country. Prehaps you need to take it up with them.

          3. @Spanner1960

            Firstly, WHO was only one organisation I mentioned

            Secondly, WHO no longer have the stance you talk about so your comment is redundant. Most of the data supplied by WHO is reliable and of high quality, no reason to doubt HIV figures and interpretation from them or other experts

          4. Spanner1960 24 Sep 2011, 3:03pm

            @Jock S. Trap: Well for starters WHO are an international organisation, and secondly, I have the utmost faith and belief in the NHS. It’s lying, cheating and downright dodgy gay men that I fear and mistrust.

          5. Due to your level of mistrust, that is why I refer you to the eminence of WHO and other reports and do not simply give you my opinion

          6. Jock S. Trap 24 Sep 2011, 4:32pm


            Actually your irrational scaremongering is explained. You clearly are living in the past. I live in the present, 2011.

            Despite what you think blood is check with the strictest guidelines and will continue to do so.

            Oh and newflash, while I’m sure as other countries the infection rate due to blood donations will drop, HIV is no longer the death sentence it appeared to be in 1990.

          7. Jock S. Trap 24 Sep 2011, 4:48pm

            “It’s lying, cheating and downright dodgy gay men that I fear and mistrust.”

            See you write it but I think it’s you that you talk about. I find it highly unlikely that you and the others like you are even remotely interested in giving blood. It’s more like the people who should be giving but because of behaviour Equality not sexuality.

          8. Spanner1960 25 Sep 2011, 1:26pm

            Newsflash.: The majority of people living with HIV/AIDS can’t afford the meds, so they still continue to die.

            There is no such thing as altruism, it is simply inverted selfishness. People do everything for a reason, and it almost invariably ultimately benefits themselves.

          9. @Spanner1960

            And the lack of ARVs in certain areas of the world has what relevance to the policy of blood donation in N Ireland …?

            Oh yes, silly me, that will be no relevance whatsoever, you merely want to push rhetoric that is negative that bears no relevance to the issue being discussed.

          10. Jock S. Trap 26 Sep 2011, 8:10am

            “The majority of people living with HIV/AIDS can’t afford the meds, so they still continue to die.”

            Erm, what know? We’re talking about the UK here of which Northern Ireland is a part of so most get meds from the NHS.

          11. Jock S. Trap 26 Sep 2011, 8:11am

            Exactly Stu… me think someones trying to clutch at straws, not very successfully I might add. He’s just blown his arguement right apart.

      2. Jock S. Trap 24 Sep 2011, 8:34am

        I have given Spanner the evidence (twice) that in both Spain and Italy people getting anything from donated blood reduced from between 25 – 30 a year before the ban was lifted to 1 – 4 people a year but as usual Spanner chooses to ignore for his own discriminating purposes so producing ‘evidence’ is pointless. He doesn’t do fact but prefers to scaremonger and assume just like a bunch of other bigots we all know about.

        I keep telling him that he shouldn’t judge all by his own slutty behaviour. There are many, many LGBT people who do not have risky sex just as much as their are plenty of straight people who do. He just prefers to single out.

        Apparently the large number of people catching anything when the ban is in place is to be ignored as he can’t blame the LGBT community until the ban is lifted. Nothing warped and twisted about that really….Not!!

        1. Spanner1960 24 Sep 2011, 3:09pm

          Well, it simply demonstrates how little you know about me.
          I haven’t so much as slept with anyone in at least five years, let alone had sex with them, so I think calling my behaviour “slutty” is stretching credulity, even by your pompous exaggerating standards.

          Look at this my way:
          If I am wrong, some gay men can’t give blood. Big fat hairy fcking deal.
          If you are wrong, people get ill and may even die as a result.

          You weigh up the odds and tell me who is being selfish and misguided here.

          1. No, you’re wrong …
            Why should we put at risk the victim of major trauma who needs numerous blood transfusions because the heterosexual who donated the blood they are to receive is promiscuous and risky in their behaviour? It is not just a question of equality but also a question of safety as to why we need to adopt a more sophisticated set of protocols for blood donation

          2. Jock S. Trap 24 Sep 2011, 4:36pm

            You are with your scaremongering misinformation but then that is what You are all about.

        2. Jock S. Trap 25 Sep 2011, 8:15am

          Actually Spanner1960, you are one massive hypocrite.

          According to you All LGBT people are selfish yet are all going to go give blood.

          Trouble is you don’t see the flaws in your argument.

  4. What a homophobe and a pootfer he is.

  5. “The health minister, who says he is “an opponent of the theory of evolution”, has been accused of homophobia.”

    Could not have put it more badly myself..!! Wakey Wakey Jessica….

  6. If you actually look at the statement issued by Edwin Poots you will see that he is not removing the ban because of the dangers of HIV infection and ‘other infections yet to be discovered’. For a Health Minister to base his decision on the fears of infections ‘yet to be discovered’ is just plain disgraceful scaremongering and marks him out as being unfit for purpose. How can any Health Minister retain any shred of credibility if he bases decisions on ‘yet to be discovered’, a reason which effectively undermines the entire blood donation system – those ‘yet to be discovered’ infections as just as likely to come from straight people as they are from gay people. As for HIV infection – there is now a greater risk from straight people than from gay people!
    Sadly it’s pointless calling for his resignation or removal – he’s merely pandering to the baser instincts of his Party and his electorate.

  7. Keith Farrell 26 Oct 2011, 9:58am

    Having returned to the UK from South Africa, where they have the same ban, a ban which does not make sence because in some areas the local hospitals are showing a 99.8%HIV+ rate yet those people are still allowed to give blood. I am Gay and have just had another full blood test which shows I am NOT HIV+ but because I am honest about who I am, there is a life time ban on using my blood to save someone’s life

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.