If public health is improved more by the ban, than it is reduced by decreasing the supply of blood somewhat or increasing the cost of testing, then it is totally irrational to insist the ban be removed (assuming your goal is to maximize public health).
That being said, I've never taken a stand on the morality or efficacy of questionnaires (and I definitely don't support a lifetime ban, neither does the red cross by the way).
I do however, think that labeling a public health policy as hateful is counter productive.
Hateful implies that the doctors and policy makers who instituted the ban hate men who have sex with men (as well as IV drug users, sex workers, and people from high risk countries). I don't think that's true.