Condoms NOT the Answer...

[Misty_Morning]

to Aids?

"You can't resolve it with the distribution of condoms," the pope told reporters aboard the Alitalia plane heading to Yaounde. "On the contrary, it increases the problem."





Dude....I wonder how many lives are lost from from this BS you spew.

Yeah, John Paul II said abstinense was best but .......condoms increases the problem?!?!

Get a grip...I was gonna say ..get a fucking grip but..ya know...


I don't mean to bash anyones religion, but this dude needs to realize what century this is.



Just saying.

 

[MagicaPractica]

to Aids?

"You can't resolve it with the distribution of condoms," the pope told reporters aboard the Alitalia plane heading to Yaounde. "On the contrary, it increases the problem."





Dude....I wonder how many lives are lost from from this BS you spew.

Yeah, John Paul II said abstinense was best but .......condoms increases the problem?!?!

Get a grip...I was gonna say ..get a fucking grip but..ya know...


I don't mean to bash anyones religion, but this dude needs to realize what century this is.



Just saying.

I think that was Benedict, not John Paul. Benedict is much more hard line old school.

 

[Misty_Morning]

I think that was Benedict, not John Paul. Benedict is much more hard line old school.

what I meant was JPII was more along the lines of abstinence. He never said condoms create more problems.

This current Pope Dude...has said...condoms INCREASE the problem.

 

[MagicaPractica]

what I meant was JPII was more along the lines of abstinence. He never said condoms create more problems.

This current Pope Dude...has said...condoms INCREASE the problem.

Ahhh, gotcha. Sorry, guess I need to go get some sleep.

 

[Misty_Morning]

Ahhh, gotcha. Sorry, guess I need to go get some sleep.

No, I just didn't make it clear.

Fingers always have trouble keepin up with the brain.

 

[PrincessErin]

.....

 

[ILBurbsGuy]

The only positive thing I can think to say to this is that he is consistent and this is awfully close to what is taught in those schools that teach that abstinence is the only path one should follow. A conservative Catholic friend recently told me that using contraception was one of the mortal sins - so either a Catholic will ignore the teaching and suffer the "guilt of sin", turn away from the religion or just have sex without protection and risk the spread of AIDS. I guess there is the chance that the person will follow the teachings of the church, but I wouldn't be confident about it.

 

[PrincessErin]

.....

 

[3113]

It's certainly problematic that the Pope's opinion should be taken as valid, given that it's a bias source. I mean, he can say, "Our religion says you can only be chaste or faithful, no condoms." But to say that condoms "increases" the problem without any factual evidence to back this up makes him ridiculous and untrustworthy. It's also problematic that a man who, we presume has not had sex since before he joined the priesthood is arguing that abstinence and faithfulness are the answer. We will grant that if everyone were to follow his advice it would work, but come on! This is rather like him saying, "If I can do without sex so can all of you." And finally, it's problematic that this western leader is talking to Africans who are composed of many different tribal cultures.

What I mean by that is that Latin American culture has always valued virility as a sign of masculinity. If the Catholic Church, so strong there, wasn't able to overcome cultural bias and make men faithful to their wives in Latin American countries, how can it work on a continent where it's not so powerful? You really have to alter the culture if you're going to suddenly get men to forego sex before marriage and stay faithful after marriage (and, no, I'm not saying that only men are unfaithful, just that the culture may define masculinity as having an active sex life).

All a man has to do is know that a condom can keep him from getting AIDS so that he'll wear it if he has extramarital sex. At which point, he won't infect his wife or produce babies with AIDS if he doesn't wear a condom at home.

 

[sr71plt]

I think that was Benedict, not John Paul. Benedict is much more hard line old school.

Right. If we heard from John Paul on that at the moment, he could be declared a saint early as he would have fulfilled his miracle requirement--and it should make all of us very, very nervous, as he would have changed his stance after having a chance to talk directly to God about it in heaven.

 

[amicus]

http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/features/?id=31048

"The church's solution is sexual fidelity," Vatican expert Sandro Magister said. "In its view, the condom is not a solution because it gives a false sense of security that continues to encourage sexual promiscuity."

~~~

I haven't been a friend of the Catholic Church since before the Bishop of Honolulu threw a book at me across the interviewing table during a live radio program. Our disagreement was over 'The List'; books Catholics were forbidden to read.

Someone pointed out the consistency concerning abstinence, but that is hardly an explanation.

One cannot deny the substantial increase in sexually transmitted diseases and out of wedlock births in the United States at least, and many attribute that to the more, 'liberal' attitude towards promiscuity, infidelity and same sex encounters.

It is that same liberal/feminist point of view that fuels early sex education in the schools, greater availability of all birth control methods and is certainly the motivating force behind the US and UN support of supplying condoms to Africans in hopes that education and usage will counter the increase in STD's because of increasing sexual activity at all levels.

Someone needs to tell these fruitcakes that sex is not the absolute center of the Universe and that there is actually life without promiscuity and dozens of partners in and out of marriage.

But then,what do I know?"

Amicus...

 

[SweetPrettyAss]

I have mentioned this story to others on many occasions. I am not making this up (no way I am that creative.) I'm a teacher at a Catholic High School and a couple who had been dating for quite some time found themselves pregnant. What had happened was that the guy wanted sex and the girl agreed although he did not want to use contraception because that was against the church teachings.

I seriously was in shock when I heard this and of course the rest of the students thought this was hilarious, especially the girls who are on the pill because they are sexually active and to quote one of them "don't want to get knocked up and ruin my life."

That seems so strange. I'm not a Catholic but I can't help thinking that fornication would be a greater sin than contraception. Personally, I see nothing wrong with either of them. If they were such devout members of the Church, they would have waited until they were married.

And if they couldn't wait that long, they both have mouths.

 

[PrincessErin]

.....

 

[ishtat]

I know a lot of people get very solemn in response to any edict by any Pope but I am finding it increasingly difficult to accept that this Pope is anything other than a complete idiot.

My opinion saddens me much as it would many of his supporters, nonetheless i think it's a reasonable assessment.

 

[rengadeirishman]

i was raised catholic, and you might be surprised how many people will fornicate without protection and then use, as their excuse, "the church says contraception is a sin". I've seriously known several people who say that and it stuns me, then when i say "the church says fornication is a sin too" and they ACTUALLY say "but that's different..." and then i say "you're an idiot then."

in the words of a guy on the dave chappelle show "Sex isn't wrong, but you've gotta be right, if you're hitting the sheets, then wrap it up tight."

 

[Safe_Bet]

This is just another example of organized religion's blind adherence to dogma and doctrine. Fuck it that it might save untold lives, "it is in conflict with what we said, so it must be condemned."

Oh, well, it's only a few million more deaths laid at religion's doorstep!

I really hate these motherfuckers.


BTW, if you are Catholic and you DON"T denounce him for saying shit like that then you are agreeing by virtue of your silence.

 

[ILBurbsGuy]

I could be more forgiving if this was the first position that he took that was reprehensible. He's managed to insult both Muslims and Jews, I wonder what religion will be next. Also, in this case if it wasn't that many people will die as a result of not using condoms then we could ignore him.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

When Benedict was first elected, I was having a conversation with a friend who is a "cafeteria Catholic", i.e. one who ignores the dogma that just doesn't make any sense . . . like most of the American catholic population. I swore to her that it looked like that under Benedict's "leadership" the Catholic church was going to shrink drastically because of the really hard line the man was taking. Her response was there is a body of opinion in the church that thinks that this would be a good thing. Go figure.

 

[3113]

Oh, well, it's only a few million more deaths laid at religion's doorstep!

If the religion is calling certain shots and using its muscle, you're absolutely right. That is, like in the U.S. if religious notions inform what should be taught in school about birth control, or making sure, in certain parts of Africa, that there is no money for free condoms or for educating people on condom use. At that point, the religion and it's leaders are, literally, murdering people.

And we will agree, too, that there is too little education in certain parts of the world and someone in religious authority saying, "It increases the problem" could be taken as fact rather than fiction. Just as it was taken as fact when some stupid magician told some men in Africa that having sex with a virgin would cure AIDS and there was a terrible rash of rapes of young girls.

But at some point we do have to hold certain adults responsible for their own reckless actions, like the man who says "it's a sin to use a condom" and the woman who agrees and the two of them end up pregnant. Using ones religion as an excuse to have what one wants, or adhering to it at all when there's a choice and you can make the smart one--and you know what the smart one is, does make it as much your fault as that of the religion.

 

[amicus]

Thinking about this thread, following an idea with a little research and adding other commonly known items...I know beforehand that this post is highly inflammatory..but I suggest it need be discussed or thought about before the insults and outrage begins.

I went looking for documentation of the original cause of HIV/Aids virus.

I thought of the phrase, "The Gay Disease", not popular on this forum.

I thought of the Catholic Churches scandal with homosexual priests and lesbian nuns assaulting children.

And of course, the Popes proclamation on condoms and promiscuity.

Do your own research, of course, for confirmation or rebuttal, there are thousands of sources.

http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/jsoforum.htm

http://www*****sitenews.com/ldn/2006/oct/06100404.html

In 2005 US health officials reported an alarming eight percent increase in HIV infection rates in one year alone among homosexual and bisexual men. The Center for Disease Control also warned that a survey of 15-29 year old men who engaged in homosexual activity “reported that the proportion of unrecognized HIV infection was as high as 77 %.”

A report by the Public Health Agency of Canada, released in August 2006, revealed a sharp increase in HIV/AIDS infections, with 51 percent of infections found in men engaging in homosexual activity.

Amicus....

 

[freshface]

Thinking about this thread, following an idea with a little research and adding other commonly known items...I know beforehand that this post is highly inflammatory..but I suggest it need be discussed or thought about before the insults and outrage begins.

I went looking for documentation of the original cause of HIV/Aids virus.

I thought of the phrase, "The Gay Disease", not popular on this forum.

I thought of the Catholic Churches scandal with homosexual priests and lesbian nuns assaulting children.

And of course, the Popes proclamation on condoms and promiscuity.

Do your own research, of course, for confirmation or rebuttal, there are thousands of sources.

http://www.virusmyth.com/aids/hiv/jsoforum.htm

http://www*****sitenews.com/ldn/2006/oct/06100404.html



Amicus....

It started as an African disease, when it made the leap from primates to humans. Long roads into the African interior increased the contact with primates and increased the number of prostitutes servicing the truck drivers. The first documented case in the US has been identified in tissue samples collected in the 1950s, from a teen aged boy who died of unknown causes. It smoldered in the population for a few decades before it was recognized as a cause of immunodeficiency. In Africa, it's always been a heterosexual disease.

Oh, and your statistics are meaningless, at least in the context you present them. We need denominators for the first paragraph to make sense of them. The Canadian stats simply show that 49% of the infections are not in gay men.

 

[amicus]

Most of the history of the disease is stated in the first link, although it is apologetic and convoluted by insisting that the actual cause of HIV/Aids was of little importance.

One might consider also, that hunting monkeys for food in Africa was common place centuries ago and is not just a 'new' occurence that might account for the virus and the species transferral.

For those who can wade through the piece, the transmission of the disease from male to male and male to female is differentiated to display the transferral from female to male with more difficulty.

I am speculating of course, but it may well be that the Catholic Church is using this advice to perhaps limit the homosexual and lesbian activity within the Church within the concept of abstinence.

Amicus...

 

[PrincessErin]

.....

 

[Safe_Bet]

The idea that marriage is a union between a woman and a man existed long before AID's came in to play.

John Boswell … has discovered that, whereas the church did not declare heterosexual marriage to be a sacrament until 1215 C.E., one of the Vatican Library’s earliest Greek liturgical documents is a marriage ceremony for two persons of the same sex. The document dates to the fourth century, if not earlier. In other words, nine centuries before heterosexual marriage was declared a sacrament, the church liturgically celebrated same-sex covenants.

Cite: Virginia Ramey Mollenkott, “Overcoming Heterosexism - To Benefit Everyone” in Siker, Pg. 148

Ummmm, no. Not quite...

 

[Guest]

One might consider also, that hunting monkeys for food in Africa was common place centuries ago and is not just a 'new' occurence that might account for the virus and the species transferral.

Amicus...

Viruses mutate, Ami. Cross-species transmission may well have occurred countless times in the past, but if the virus(es) weren't viable in humans, no infection.

This is from 1999 and it's still referenced by the CDC:

NIAID-Supported Scientists Discover Origin of HIV-1

"...As it turns out, the three isolates from the Pan troglodytes troglodytes chimpanzees strongly resemble the different subgroups of HIV-1, namely groups M (responsible for the pandemic), N and O (both found only in west equatorial Africa). Their investigation also revealed that some of the viruses resulted from genetic recombination in the chimpanzees before they infected humans.

"Their other significant find, Dr. Fauci notes, is that the natural habitat of these chimpanzees directly coincides with the pattern of the HIV-1 epidemic in this area of Africa. Putting all these pieces of the puzzle together, Dr. Hahn and her colleagues conclude that Pan troglodytes troglodytes is the natural reservoir of HIV-1 and has been the source of at least three independent occurrences of cross-species virus transmission events from chimpanzees to humans."