February 22nd, 2008

Kassing statement on blood drives

SJSU President Don Kassing released a statement today affirming his decision to ban blood drives on campus.

“Please be assured I remain steadfast in my belief that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s lifetime blood donor deferral affecting gay men violates our non-discrimination policy. Our policy is much more than a regulation. It is an expression of values we all share, most notably our core belief that people must be treated as individuals, free of prejudice.”

SJSU’s blood drive ban has become a national issue, with critics raising concerns about the risk to blood supplies needed by area hospitals.

Kassing responds by saying that students and staff are still able to donate blood in other places.

“Like many of you, I am very concerned that our position will reduce the amount of blood available to people in need. I ask that you be guided by your personal responsibilities to family and community and by your own values in deciding whether to give blood off-campus while SJSU awaits the FDA’s response.”

Click here to read Kassing’s full statement.

Other Links:
Letter from President Kassing
Other links from the President’s office

This entry was posted on Friday, February 22nd, 2008 at 9:28 am and is filed under Latest News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

4 Responses to “Kassing statement on blood drives”

Bill February 25th, 2008 at 4:59 pm

I guess I do not understand why President Kassin must make this his personal political/social agenda item. The list from the FDA and Red Cross contain a significant number of guidelines designed to limit the risk of tainted blood entering the system. The only discrimination that can be read into this is in his personal opinion. His logic would also create a class for those with tatoos that are newer than 12 months or people who have piercing from states that don’t regulate such insistitutions. Or maybe he wants a special class of exceptions to be made for those folks who use illegal drugs. Or perhaps he has just crawled out from a rock and doesn’t realize that there is as much risk (if not more) in tainted blood from sexually active gay men as there is from some of these other folks. Please, wake up. Read your local paper, visit a web site or two and then try and form a policy that isn’t politically motivated by some small minority of the people albeit vocal and well connected to money.
Leif March 10th, 2008 at 1:17 pm

I believe in President Don Kassing–and his willingness to speak out against discrimination, because in fact, not allowing gay men to give blood is discrimination. Is blood not tested once it is given? Or, if you’re not a gay man–does everyone just assume that your blood is clean? Not true. So, President Don Kassing–thank you for taking this stance… and it’s really up to the FDA now to get blood drives back to SJSU. This isn’t a politically motivated issue–in fact, it’s an issue of civil rights, which is an ongoing struggle in our country. The comment above mine “politically motivated by a small MINORITY of people.” I believe that quote is in reality the root of this issue.
Bill March 14th, 2008 at 3:25 pm

whereas I am sure I do not agree on many things with Lief, I am sure I do not agree that giving blood is a civil right. The organizations that use it and the orgnaization that regulates it are not bound to give ‘that right’ to anyone - how silly to equate this with civil liberties - who are you kidding - you want your life style to be the one that is promoted not another. that is the issue. You have no problem claiming your rights are being violated when you don’t get something but you sure don’t want someone else getting something if it is against your moral beliefs. How hypocritical is that. I think my civil rights have just been violated…
Leif April 2nd, 2008 at 11:47 am

Ok. I didn’t want to–but I will rebuttle. I never said that giving blood was our civil right–instead, I said that excluding (from anything) individuals because of race, sexual orientation, etc.–is in fact, an issue of civil rights. Using the restroom isn’t considered a civil right–but when excluding certain individuals, based on race, from using certain restrooms–that is an issue of civil rights (people had to fight to use public restrooms at one point–now they must fight to give blood–progress?). Was that a simple enough example for you, Bill? And bill, thank you for having this discussion–I respect your point of view… mine just differs; that doesn’t mean our debate can’t be constructive.

Spartan Daily Blogs

February 22nd, 2008

Kassing statement on blood drives

4 Responses to “Kassing statement on blood drives”

Leave a Reply

About This Blog

Blog Archives

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Categories

Feeds