Pope states condoms aren't the answer to HIV

[tumbleweed41]

Oh God! Abstinence is contraception, if you obey there is no infected baby, no infected mother, Would you have sex with a HIV infected person? The condoms givers have the same aims in mind, no babies, no infected other. If the pope is irrelevant, why on earth are the godless so interested in getting him to joint in their little campaign? By the way there is general consensus here that he carries a lot of weight, responsibility is the issue, if you are thinking in engaging on risky sexual relations. Don't expect the church to give you free condoms if you get infected don't spread your curse to others:shout

As I have noted before in this thread, Abstinence Only Education has been proven infective!!
Facts
AIDS is spreading faster in Africa than on any other continent.
The largest number of newly infected are babies.
The largest christian denomination in Africa is the RCC.
There is no Biblical basis for banning artificial contraception.
The Pope has the authority to authorize artificial contraception to reduce deaths.

 

[linwood]

Not to derail but I have an analogy..My son told me about a situation I believe in Saudi Arabia..They have what is called the "religious police"..There was a school for all girls (of course)..the building caught on fire..The religious police arrived..and locked the girls in(from the outside) ..the fire and regular police argued to let the girls out..why are you doing this????..well the girls were not in full hijab they said..(they were not covered head to toe)..the girls burned to death.(I think there 14 dead and 50 injured).So God (I suppose) would have rather those girls died..than to have come out and survied in an "immodest" state of dress possibly "inciting" the men to lust. (specifically the rescue crew who would have to touch them)..

Now I will say..apparently the King had a problem with this...

Anyway..

Love

Dallas

True story, happened not long ago.

The king did have a serious backlash to deal with and fired the head of the religious police and installed another who is supposed to be a reformer.

So far, no reforms nothings changed, it`s actually possibly getting worse.

 

[linwood]

Why is it that the Godless worries so much about what we do with our money? I just give it to the Church that does great works, I can assure you you that it does not go to the purchasing of condoms to be distribute so people keep themselves slaved to sin. And where do you think it goes? Hey! you are easily nauseated, are you pregnant by any chance?

*** are you talking about?

I don`t think the money was the point of Alcestes post.

I think it was all that "special lovin`" going on in the rectory.

 

[Buttons*]

What's even more disgusting are the RFers who defend such things.

What's even more disgusting is RFers who ***** but dont' do anything about the problems they see in the world - simply to make others feel bad.

And it's also disgusting to tear down others for their point of view.

 

[Alceste]

And it's also disgusting to tear down others for their point of view.

I'll happily tear down any point of view based on made-up facts that can be disproven in a two-minute google trawl. You might find it disgusting, but I think it's fun.Ruining religious debates with facts is a public service that I provide free of charge, because I enjoy it so much. Plus I think it counts as "doing something" about the state of the world.

:beach:

 

[emiliano]

I'm going to take a wild guess and say you didn't even read my post. I don't care what your church does with your money, but you should. A huge portion of it these days is going to a huge community of childhood victims of sexual abuse by clergy.

Most people find child-raping priests nauseating, but in light of your unrepentant bootlicking I am not surprised to discover you are apathetic about these abuses yourself.

Again I find myself in opposition to your sense of right and wrong, "apathetic about these abuses ??????:" it you that think that the money that we give to the Church should be used to prevent then from ever been born, if they have been damaged in any way, I want to see them restored and compensated, what is your solution? and I must add that in addition to that I like to see the perpetrator prosecuted and punished to the full extend of the secular laws.

 

[Alceste]

Again I find myself in opposition to your sense of right and wrong, "apathetic about these abuses ??????:" it you that think that the money that we give to the Church should be used to prevent then from ever been born, if they have been damaged in any way, I want to see them restored and compensated, what is your solution? and I must add that in addition to that I like to see the perpetrator prosecuted and punished to the full extend of the secular laws.

If that's the case, you're in the wrong religion.

Anyway, nobody is saying the church needs to spend money on birth control. You'd be surprised to find how inexpensive not lying is these days. Compared to financial compensation to the victims of Catholic sexual predation, telling the truth about condoms is a bargain.

 

[Buttons*]

I'll happily tear down any point of view based on made-up facts that can be disproven in a two-minute google trawl. You might find it disgusting, but I think it's fun.Ruining religious debates with facts is a public service that I provide free of charge, because I enjoy it so much. Plus I think it counts as "doing something" about the state of the world.

:beach:

Sure, helping enlighten people is a noble cause, but tearing people down for fun is rather mean I feel

While I've done that a LOT myself, I realize that it's far less constructive than helping lead the horse to water, so to speak

 

[gnostic]

It's not the abstinence being the problem, it's the idiot Vatican head-boy saying you shouldn't use condoms. That's what people are complaining about the idiot pope being irresponsible.

And in country like Africa, abstinence is not likely to happen, so he shouldn't be telling people not to use condoms.

Only an idiot would not consider all the possibilities. For the church to argue that the condom is not a possible solution showed the arrogance of the church for what it is, an evil machine determine to kill as many people as possible just so it can gain dying converts to save their souls.

Church hypocrites!!!!

 

[Buttons*]

It's not the abstinence being the problem, it's the idiot Vatican head-boy saying you shouldn't use condoms. That's what people are complaining about the idiot pope being irresponsible.

And in country like Africa, abstinence is not likely to happen, so he shouldn't be telling people not to use condoms.

Only an idiot would not consider all the possibilities. For the church to argue that the condom is not a possible solution showed the arrogance of the church for what it is, an evil machine determine to kill as many people as possible just so it can gain dying converts to save their souls.

Church hypocrites!!!!

Even if the church did say USE CONDOMS... how would these people get condoms? Secular societies who promote peace should be getting their asses out there to compete with the "evil Pope" because just *****ing about his comments aint gonna help those people in Africa, and it sure as hell doesn't help anyone else.

Flying to Africa anytime soon to distribute condoms? You really should man, especially if you're going to all this trouble. *****ing and not doing anything constructive is just as harmful as what the Pope is doing. I could even argue that your resistance for doing anything about promoting condoms is actually causing the spread of AIDS! But that's really unrealistic and stupid IMO. I don't see why people don't understand that... but maybe I'm just close minded. If you really care, and I mean really care, do something about it

 

[gnostic]

Even if the church did say USE CONDOMS... how would these people get condoms? Secular societies who promote peace should be getting their asses out there to compete with the "evil Pope" because just *****ing about his comments aint gonna help those people in Africa, and it sure as hell doesn't help anyone else.

Flying to Africa anytime soon to distribute condoms? You really should man, especially if you're going to all this trouble. *****ing and not doing anything constructive is just as harmful as what the Pope is doing. I could even argue that your resistance for doing anything about promoting condoms is actually causing the spread of AIDS! But that's really unrealistic and stupid IMO. I don't see why people don't understand that... but maybe I'm just close minded. If you really care, and I mean really care, do something about it

Well, do you see the pope doing anything constructive, beside giving out useless and unhelpful decree???????

All he is doing is making everyone's works that much harder. Doctors and aid workers, who are working there, are complaining about his interference. It help no one, least of all the HIV victims.

Tell me something, buttons*:

• Do you think people shouldn't use condoms?
• Especially those in Africa?
• Would it not be better for victims to use condoms, if they refuse to abstain?
• Or do you like seeing HIV/AIDs to spread like this pope here does?

 

[Buttons*]

• Do you think people shouldn't use condoms?
• Especially those in Africa?
• Would it not be better for victims to use condoms, if they refuse to abstain?
• Or do you like seeing HIV/AIDs to spread like this pope here does?

* I think people need to understand that when you engage in any activity there are consequences. That's the first step. Then teaching people how to use condoms would be a much easier task! However, I'm not going to Africa anytime soon, so my words are unhelpful
* I think people should learn to be responsible.
* It would be better for everyone to use condoms even if they aren't 100% effective
* I don't think anyone likes seeing the spread of AIDS, not even the Pope.

Remind me, are you gonig to help these people anytime soon? Do you have the right to judge someone when you're not going out of your way to help either?

 

[gnostic]

I helped twice through donations, only.

One was about 7 or 8 years ago. And again about 5 years ago. The earlier one I had donated $65, and it was more than I could afford. The later was only $20. I don't know if the money went to help victims in Africa, though.

So the answer to you is "No", I didn't go to Africa to help.

Have you help at all, even if it is just donation?

I have not done much donations recently, because the last couple of years I have been struggling with my own financial struggle.

Totally unrelated, to the whole HIV and Africa's issue, I helped for a fortnight (late last month and early March) packing blankets, clothings and food into boxes for victims of the recent bushfire in Victoria (Australia).

Most of my donations are more locally contributed.

 

[Buttons*]

I helped twice through donations, only.

One was about 7 or 8 years ago. And again about 5 years ago. The earlier one I had donated $65, and it was more than I could afford. The later was only $20. I don't know if the money went to help victims in Africa, though.

So the answer to you is "No", I didn't go to Africa to help.

Have you help at all, even if it is just donation?

I have not done much donations recently, because the last couple of years I have been struggling with my own financial struggle.

Totally unrelated, to the whole HIV and Africa's issue, I helped for a fortnight (late last month and early March) packing blankets, clothings and food into boxes for victims of the recent bushfire in Victoria (Australia).

Most of my donations are more locally contributed.

I haven't helped at all. This is for two reasons: I don't have my own money, 2 I don't know that my money would get there to help where help is needed rather than going into someone's back pocket.

But here is the difference - While I don't think it's right for the Pope to lie to people, I also don't think that he really means harm, so I have no right to speak out against him. I don't contribute to helping people in Africa, not yet anyway. I don't even contribute to the economy at the moment, being a student and all. But if religious people are willing to help those who suffer in Africa, I respect it, because it's a hell of a lot more than I've ever done.

 

[gnostic]

I don't even contribute to the economy at the moment, being a student and all.

Well, I was student for the last 4 years (not counting this year), of which 3 of those years as a full-student.

I find that I've graduated, but with no one looking to hire right now. I've poor timing.

It's probably best for you to remain studying, until the economy picks up again.

As to contributions. I don't think less of you (or anyone else for that matter) if you don't help out or donate, because I know that not everyone can, when each have his or her own crisis to deal with.

As to the pope, he is public a person, and if he do or say something wrong, then people are entitled to rebuke him. Especially the people who are in there actually contributing, like the doctors, nurses, aid-workers and government representatives.

You say I have no right to speak out, then I think you are wrong. I do have the right to speak out, just as you do have the right to defend him if so you wish. To call it "*****ing" I find that a tad offensive.

 

[Alceste]

Even if the church did say USE CONDOMS... how would these people get condoms? Secular societies who promote peace should be getting their asses out there to compete with the "evil Pope" because just *****ing about his comments aint gonna help those people in Africa, and it sure as hell doesn't help anyone else.

Flying to Africa anytime soon to distribute condoms? You really should man, especially if you're going to all this trouble. *****ing and not doing anything constructive is just as harmful as what the Pope is doing. I could even argue that your resistance for doing anything about promoting condoms is actually causing the spread of AIDS! But that's really unrealistic and stupid IMO. I don't see why people don't understand that... but maybe I'm just close minded. If you really care, and I mean really care, do something about it

Buttons, one more time, telling the truth is not advocacy. The only reason people are so angry with the Catholic church is because there is a pan-institutional campaign going on to lie about the level of protection they offer.

Africa is already flooded with condoms. People aren't using them because:
a) they reduce sensation.
b) religious sadists like the pope are telling them they are worse than no protection at all.

The church doesn't have to hand out condoms, or tell people to use condoms, they just have to stop lying about condoms. The pope needs to remind Christians in Africa that it is against god's will to bear false witness (and by doing so, murder).

That would make the condom picture in Africa:
a) they reduce sensation
b) they are almost certain, if used correctly, to prevent the transmission of HIV

If they are in possession of the truth, fine: let people have their free will, sin, take risks, pay the consequences, repent, and return to God's grace, or whatever it is the pope wants to see. When the Catholic church gives them lies instead of truth to inform their choices, it's as good as murder.

 

[Buttons*]

As to the pope, he is public a person, and if he do or say something wrong, then people are entitled to rebuke him. Especially the people who are in there actually contributing, like the doctors, nurses, aid-workers and government representatives.

You say I have no right to speak out, then I think you are wrong. I do have the right to speak out, just as you do have the right to defend him if so you wish. To call it "*****ing" I find that a tad offensive.

I didnt' say you had no right to speak out, hell, anyone can say whatever they want. I think it's ESPECIALLY appropriate for those who do contribute and help to actually say something if they feel the need.

I don't mean to offend, the comment wasnt' completely directed at you. I've spent some time thinking about how I feel concerning this situation. I wonder if it's "right" to complain, or "right" to try and defend actions that I think (I don't know for sure, naturally) are of good intent. I also wondered about the point of pointing out the inherent flaws that the Pope's declaration could bring. Because if it DOES actually cause harm to people, then yes, someone who feels inclined to help those in Africa should say something.

But sometimes, especially in this context, it seems that most people are speaking out against the Pope's actions because of any number of the following reasons: they think he is lying to people, they think he is causing harm and spreading AIDS, they have problems with organized religion in the first place (especially Catholics), or that he wants people to die. I think that the notion that the Pope WANTS people to die is very harsh - and it doesn't even contribute to helping the problem!

If we wanted to fix something, we would go out and do something about it. Instead, we talk about how wrong something is because we think it's wrong, and any other opinion is misguided and full of evil. I don't subscribe to this view. It seems that many people in this thread are "*****ing" rather than speaking about what we can do correct this 'wrong' that the Pope has bestowed on the people of Africa. If someone really does care about the people in Africa, spending time talking about the Pope's flawed plan to help on a forum isn't the most efficient way to go about it.

And if we're claiming that doing something wrong, even if the intent is to help, is much worse than inaction.... well it just doesn't follow. For if we do nothing, people are still going to get AIDS. People will still die. This anger simply does not help. All we are doing is raising awareness to hate someone because he has done something we percieve to be wrong. We hate him, it's cool to hate the Pope. It seems that we are angry for the sake of getting angry, rather than caring about people in Africa - for no one actually does that much to help them. Taking ourselves out of the equation and saying, "That *******, he lied to these people... but instead of trying to counteract this problem, we will complain about it, but we won't actually do anything for the people that will still die with or without the Pope's influence," is just as irresponsible. At least , this is my view.

This is what I see happening, anyway.

 

[gnostic]

Of course the vatican want people to die.

They promised eternal life, and the only way to salvation is to die.

The more horrible way for people to die, the better for them. The Christian doctrine is a death cult. They have tonne-load of martyrs. That's the Christian way, even if they have to themselves inflict sufferings upon others, as they did with the so-called heretics and witches.

And why else would they say you would go to hell if you don't convert? It's their favourite fear tactic. They love using fear tactics, because it is in their sadistic-masochistic nature of the vatican, to exploit people's fear as they do now with condoms.

Since the world frown upon witch burning, they have resort to other means of getting their thrills - what better way to spread HIV/AIDs, then by using the fear of sin and eternal damnation by saying it is sin to use condoms.

 

[Buttons*]

Of course the vatican want people to die.

That doesn't make a lot of sense... the more people dead, the less membership the Church will have.

The more horrible way for people to die, the better for them. The Christian doctrine is a death cult. They have tonne-load of martyrs. That's the Christian way, even if they have to themselves inflict sufferings upon others, as they did with the so-called heretics and witches.

I see it completely differently. Many religious people are expected to die for their beliefs - it's part of being dedicated to a faith. It's not suicide though, the Bible is completely against suicide.

And why else would they say you would go to hell if you don't convert? It's their favourite fear tactic. They love using fear tactics, because it is in their sadistic-masochistic nature of the vatican, to exploit people's fear as they do now with condoms.

I don't see it that way, so this is probably the root of our disagreement.

Since the world frown upon witch burning, they have resort to other means of getting their thrills - what better way to spread HIV/AIDs, then by using the fear of sin and eternal damnation by saying it is sin to use condoms.

Since that's the only doctrine they actually pay attention to of the Pope's message....? It sounds like an epic conspiracy theory. *shrug* I don't subscribe to it

 

[gnostic]

As I said before, and I will say this one more time, I have no problem with the pope advocating for abstinence, but this is unrealistic.

My real problem with the pope (and the vatican and other churches) is that he is telling people NOT TO USE CONDOMS!!!

That's what people are angry with.

Regardless of his good intention, it would do far more damages, and spread the diseases further in Africa. That's the nutshell of this whole papal-condom fiasco.

And personally I don't like him. And I am not just talking about now. It goes all the way back I first of him when he was just one of the nominees. I think he was mistake back then, and this incidence only reinforce my view of the current pope.