This week, Norris University Center hosted another blood drive. As is the case with blood drives, some students were not allowed to donate-notably, men who have had sex with other men and women who have had sex with a man who has had sex with another man.
As has happened in the past, some students at Northwestern have a problem with the policy. They are joined by a number of prominent American policy makers. Sen. John Kerry (D- Mass.) recently wrote the following in an op-ed in “Bay Windows,” an LGBT newspaper in New England: “This won’t be easy, but I’m convinced we can make a change. Look at what we did with the discriminatory ban on travel and immigration for those infected with HIV. We gained the support of every major public safety organization in the country and worked to pass legislation lifting that ban. It is now time to apply the same fair and educated re-evaluation to blood donation by ending the lifetime ban on donations from healthy, gay Americans.”
The Daily does not have nearly enough information or perspective to take a side on whether or not the Food and Drug Administration should change their policy. However, the fact that so many Americans-not to mention former presidential candidates-think the policy should be reconsidered makes us believe that a thorough reappraisal of the policy is in order.
We are more concerned with the issue as it pertains to NU. The Daily is impressed by the way the students who were upset chose to demonstrate against a rule they felt was unfair. This quarter has been a busy one for protests on this campus-between this and the situation with Students for Humanistic Inquiry and FreeThought, NU students have been particularly active.
The Daily thinks the distinction between the actions of those against the blood rule and those of SHIFT is clear. SHIFT had an issue, and it expressed its opinion. This is not a problem, but the fact is that SHIFT did not consider the third party that could be hurt by its actions-Muslims on campus who were offended by their depictions of the Prophet Muhammad.
The students protesting the rule on blood donations did consider the outside parties their protest could affect-companies that collect blood and patients who need the blood to save their lives. With Memorial Day coming up, more traffic accidents will mean more blood needed for life-saving operations. For this reason, the students protesting the FDA rule did not disrupt the blood drive-on the contrary, they encouraged their fellow students to donate blood. This was a productive, mature decision that didn’t punish innocent people for a rule that they had nothing to do with.
Whenever you’re planning a protest, consideration of everything and everyone involved is good. Where SHIFT failed, The Daily thinks the students protesting the FDA rule succeeded. We still defend both groups’ right to protest however they deem fit. However, when one group protests in a way that is tactful, responsible and adult, and the other chooses to go for provocativeness and maximum shock value, it’s clear which is more likely to get the attention of those in power. We hope the culture of political activeness continues on campus, and we sincerely hope it takes a tone that is respectful and helpful rather than needlessly offensive.
