or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Vatican: condoms don't stop Aids
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Vatican: condoms don't stop Aids - Page 5  

post #161 of 380
The Pope, infallible?

You're having a laugh. When the Pope, or someone at the Vatican claims that condoms don't stop AIDS, they are wrong. They have failed.

Was the church wrong when it said that the world was flat?

I mean, come on. We can have a semantic / theological argument about 'truth' or 'fallibility' but the fact is the Church has a fantastic history of talking shit and claiming faith as justification. The Earth is round. It goes round the sun. Get that wrong and you just put science back by a few years; I don't really care (while we're at it Man and elephants have a common ancestor).

Say that condoms don't prevent AIDS and millions die.
meh
meh
post #162 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
You've GOT to be kidding, right?

They said that using condoms increases the risk of AIDS.

What did they lie about? Where is your brain?

If you buy into the theory that condoms increase sexual permiscuity, then it does increase your risk. I buy it. Hardly a lie.
post #163 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius

The Bible itself contradicts itself with monotonous regularity on verifiable historical data (amongst a myriad of other issues) which to any thinking person would strongly suggest the possibility of error in one of the proposed viewpoints.

reference?
post #164 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by 123
And, doesn't it? Let's see:

- No sex.
- Sex with condoms.

Which one increases likelyhood of infection over the other? Where's your brain? Try to use it sometimes.

The amount of intelligent posts in this thread is so low, it's amazing. Read alcimedes' post, I think it more or less explains the church's stance (Purpose of Sex == Children, nothing else). I think they completely lost touch with reality, but that doesn't mean they lie or their logic is flawed, the premises are (in today's world).


Now for you, Math Hero:



a*x + b*x = c

=> (a + b)*x = c | distributive law

if a + b == 1

=> x = c


Maybe you need some numbers:

(28/30)*leak_rate+(2/30)*leak_rate=.01

=> (28/30 + 2/30)*leak_rate = 0.01
=> 1 * leak_rate = 0.01

NOW SOLVE THAT EQUATION!!

What does that tell us? Nothing, I'd say.

I suppose I should have pointed out the obvious of the equation for those less mentally fortunate...

(28/30)*leak_rate*x+(2/30)*leak_rate*y=.01

x=0 (0% chance of getting pregnant)
y=1 (100% chance of getting pregnant)

I suppose sometimes leaving out the obvious is not good for the mathematically challenged.
post #165 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
If you have sex, using a condom is safer. If you don't have sex, that's safest of all. The unifying factor isn't the condom, it's if you do or don't have sex. The church is skipping that part of the equation and fabricating their answer.

No, its not. condoms=more sex, thus when you take that into account, condoms are bad.
post #166 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
The fact is that the Church ... are opportunistically seeing a chance to gain some support on their anti-sex obsession.

You mean God's anti-sex obsession. Thats your opinion. God sees sex as the ultimate form of intimacy, to be shared with your spouse. You see it as a playground. You rule out anything that could inconvenience you because your ego far overshadows your sense of logic.
post #167 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by murbot
I guess I'll never understand the church.

If I'm happily married and have 4 kids, but can barely afford to keep food on the table and clothes on their backs, I can't use contraception of any kind. Never mind that more kids will drastically reduce the quality of life for my family, I just have to suck it up and keep pumping out the kids. Oh well, I can always go on welfare.

In this case, I would be using a condom so I could make love to my wife without financially ruining our family, not ****ing around.

Well, you have a few choices:

1) self control
2) Natural Family Planning (which, despite what a bunch of forum biggots might thing, is 99.9% effective and a minimal inconvenience)...
post #168 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
[The Vatican] should come out and say sex is bad unless you're married and that you shouldn't use condoms because they're against the reproductive rules of the church. This is not what the Vatican is doing and they're being irresponsible.

Actually, they do say this. The problem is thatyou are getting your doctrine from an anti-Catholic, irresponsible media.
post #169 of 380
Quote:
anti-Catholic, irresponsible media.

Dear feakin GOD, now the media is anti-catholic too? Hey now! We quote - unquote know the media is liberal and is run by katie couric and the la times but jesus christ. where do people get this shit?

anti-catholic?
post #170 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
To you have a Biblical reference of that from Jesus Christ. I'd like to see it.

When you fail to find one perhaps you could give us your take on why sex for pleasure is a sin. Theologically.

Don't criticize what you don't understand. I'm not going to waste an hour of my time defending Christianity against a flippant comment by someone who obviously has no clue.

1) Jesus said that he would not remove any Jewish law,
2) Jesus gave Peter's office the power to bind moral doctrine on earth (what you bind on earth will be bound in heaven).
post #171 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by Kirkland
A 'church' that lets its priests screw little children and then protects them from the law is obviously a fake.

A country that kills indians and keeps slaves is obviously a spawn of the devil.
post #172 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
Me. I am talking about changing the rules because the Catholic Church is demonstrably in direct opposition to the teaching of Christ on almost all issues and should get back in line or secularise itself.

You bastard! You killed Martin Luther King!!!! You're an American right? Well those twisted Americans demonstrate their hatred of blacks.


Quote:

Non sequtur - look it up in your dictionary. They are only infallible because God makes them so. They are as such subordinate to God and cannot over rule Him. If they conflict with God's ralleged revelation (and they do) God must be right or else it invalidates the authority that granted them infallibility (allegedly). That's a philosophical and metaphysical impossibility. Doesn't matter though coz it's all bollocks anyway.

Btw - the Church is not infallible as you state. Only the Pope is and then only under certain circumstances. I'm beginning to realise you know very little about Catholic theology. The Pope is not infallible as an individual but only in his ex cathedra pronouncements. This was only defined in 1870 and since then there has only been one such pronouncement. It wasn't about sex.

Perhaps he just didn't want to blubber on and on about something that neither supports or diminishes the credibility of his argument.

Quote:

Why ? You're wasting everyone else's.

Oh and I'll gladly give you any Biblical reference you like. Just choose a Catholic teaching and prepare to obfuscate. Do you feel lucky ....?

Last time I checked, responding to a message wasn't an involuntary response. Why don't you start, hot shot. Give a biblical reference that you would like to discredit and we'll defend. You feel lucky?
post #173 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
No, what we're talking about is how the church is now saying that the virus can pass through a condom.


Which, ironically, is an argument inherently supported in the failure rate provided by the manufacturer.
post #174 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by Harald
The Pope, infallible?

You're having a laugh. When the Pope, or someone at the Vatican claims that condoms don't stop AIDS, they are wrong. They have failed.

Was the church wrong when it said that the world was flat?

I mean, come on. We can have a semantic / theological argument about 'truth' or 'fallibility' but the fact is the Church has a fantastic history of talking shit and claiming faith as justification. The Earth is round. It goes round the sun. Get that wrong and you just put science back by a few years; I don't really care (while we're at it Man and elephants have a common ancestor).

Say that condoms don't prevent AIDS and millions die.

None of which was said Ex Cathedra.
post #175 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by keyboardf12
Dear feakin GOD, now the media is anti-catholic too? Hey now! We quote - unquote know the media is liberal and is run by katie couric and the la times but jesus christ. where do people get this shit?

anti-catholic?

The article doesn't even try to hide their bias.. Its presented as a "Those Bastards!" article.
post #176 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
1) Jesus said that he would not remove any Jewish law,

Do you keep kosher?

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
post #177 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
condoms=more sex

up=down.
post #178 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
No, its not. condoms=more sex, thus when you take that into account, condoms are bad.

Sex with a condom isn't safer than sex without a condom? You're actually saying that the failure rate + alleged increased promiscuity = more dangerous than sex without a condom? You're just not correct.

Everything has a failure rate, even monogamy and abstention*. Some condoms will fail, some will burst, some will slip, but in the end (no pun intended) it's still safer than sex without a condom.

And no, I'm not getting my doctrine from anywhere. In this thread we're talking about an assertion from a media source, including quotes from The Vatican. If the source article is incorrect in their quotes of what The Vatican said, prove it. If this really is what Il Vaticano is supporting, then your arguments in support ring hollow. You're failing to make a case that overall sex with a condom increases the risk of AIDS when compared to sex without a condom.

*dirty blood transfusions et all.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
post #179 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
None of which was said Ex Cathedra.

I see. Get something wrong and it wasn't said ex cathedra. YAY! ANOTHER STUPID LOOPHOLE!

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
post #180 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by BR
Do you keep kosher?

Go back and read #2
post #181 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by ShawnJ
up=down.

So if condoms didn't exist, you would just say the hell with it and have unprotected sex with every woman you dated?
post #182 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
You're an American right?

Wrong. Yet again. Sigh.

Quote:

Perhaps he just didn't want to blubber on and on about something that neither supports or diminishes the credibility of his argument.

Why did he then....?


Quote:
Last time I checked, responding to a message wasn't an involuntary response. Why don't you start, hot shot. Give a biblical reference that you would like to discredit and we'll defend. You feel lucky?

Ok. Luke's Gospel states that Herod was 'King of Judea' during the time that Qurinius was governor of Syria. We know now as an absolute fact from historical records that Herod died 10 years before Quirinius was governor and the two were not (and could not have been) contemporaries.

There are at least 5 other significant problems associated merely wioth this one statement of 'Luke', not least of which is that we know from Roman records (that are complete) that there was no taxing or census under Herod in any event. These facts are undisputed by any historian, archaeologist or academic in any institution anywhere.

The facts (that you will not face) are that the Church has no 'divine right', there is no 'apostolic succession', the Church as it stands has no connection to the original teaching of Christ and is now merely the last refuge of a medieval life-denying narrow minded clique that is nothing but a dinosaur slithering senilely into extinction.

It has in fact been sidelined by history and we should all be grateful for this latest outrage because it will only hasten the demise of this immoral, uneccessary and hidebound institution which is an offence to rational thought on any level but on the 'religious' one is nothing short of a brawling obscenity.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
post #183 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
Sex with a condom isn't safer than sex without a condom? You're actually saying that the failure rate + alleged increased promiscuity = more dangerous than sex without a condom? You're just not correct.

This is exactly what I'm saying. Care to provide evidence contrary?
post #184 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
God sees sex as the ultimate form of intimacy, to be shared with your spouse.

Did God give you a phone-call to told you this personally ? I find quite disturbing to speak at the place of god. A better sentance would have been : " according to the catholic church, god see ..."

What said the catholic church is miss-informations. Asking people to not have sex is irrelevant, it will work only for a few peoples, and will lead the others to problems by not using condoms.

A moral guideline cannot be compared to health prevention. The main goal of health prevention is to be effective. Doctors know that asking for sex abstinence will not work. Their advice is to use condoms. Condoms are not 100 % proof (nothing in the medical field is 100 % proof), but are far more reliable than nothing. Condoms are dangerous only when they breaks. Tiny holes can let pass the virus throught them, but i will not bring virus in the body, because in order to let them enter, there must be micro-wounds in the skin or mucosae of people. And condoms prevent this micro wounds to happen. No case of aids transmission dispite the use of a non broken condom have been reported.
No case of infection via surgical gloves have been reported also. If it was the case i will stop my job.
post #185 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by segovius
Wrong. Yet again. Sigh.

Ever heard of an analogy?



Quote:
Ok. Luke's Gospel states that Herod was 'King of Judea' during the time that Qurinius was governor of Syria. We know now as an absolute fact from historical records that Herod died 10 years before Quirinius was governor and the two were not (and could not have been) contemporaries.

There are at least 5 other significant problems associated merely wioth this one statement of 'Luke', not least of which is that we know from Roman records (that are complete) that there was no taxing or census under Herod in any event. These facts are undisputed by any historian, archaeologist or academic in any institution anywhere.

The facts (that you will not face) are that the Church has no 'divine right', there is no 'apostolic succession', the Church as it stands has no connection to the original teaching of Christ and is now merely the last refuge of a medieval life-denying narrow minded clique that is nothing but a dinosaur slithering senilely into extinction.

It has in fact been sidelined by history and we should all be grateful for this latest outrage because it will only hasten the demise of this immoral, uneccessary and hidebound institution which is an offence to rational thought on any level but on the 'religious' one is nothing short of a brawling obscenity.

I would love to see some references. Are these references as openly biggoted and prone to irrational conclusions as yourself?
post #186 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
This is exactly what I'm saying. Care to provide evidence contrary?

No, but GOOGLE does. I only clicked on the first choice and it was already good enough to support my point.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
post #187 of 380
segovius, off topic but have you read the the davinci code by any chance? A very good read as some of its aspects are similar to this thread.


Jukebox Hero, don't read the the davinci code you won't like it.
post #188 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by Powerdoc
Did God give you a phone-call to told you this personally ? I find quite disturbing to speak at the place of god. A better sentance would have been : " according to the catholic church, god see ..."

does the readership of this discussion really need that much help?

Quote:
What said the catholic church is miss-informations. Asking people to not have sex is irrelevant, it will work only for a few peoples, and will lead the others to problems by not using condoms.

The Catholic Church cannot support anything that is morally reprehensible, despite the unproven possibility that it might save lives. If they did say "go for it", then it would just weaken their position on all moral issues. They have no choice but to answer the way they have...
post #189 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by BR
I see. Get something wrong and it wasn't said ex cathedra. YAY! ANOTHER STUPID LOOPHOLE!


It is either Ex Cathedra or it isn't. It can't change afterwords. So there is no loophole.
post #190 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
No, but GOOGLE does. I only clicked on the first choice and it was already good enough to support my point.

<sarcasm>Google is the best way to find reliable, credible research. It is especially credible on issues where emotions run high. Thanks. Wow. </sarcasm>
post #191 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
<sarcasm>Google is the best way to find reliable, credible research. It is especially credible on issues where emotions run high. Thanks. Wow. </sarcasm>

This coming from someone that's quoting and defending the Catholic Church. Irony.

EDIT: Obviously the article I linked to isn't written by Google, so your sarcasm is really just a diversionary tactic. Lame. Increased use of condoms in Thailand has reduced HIV infections. It's the exact support you asked me to find, and I found it in about thirty seconds. Feel free to refute it.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
post #192 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero



The Catholic Church cannot support anything that is morally reprehensible, despite the unproven possibility that it might save lives. If they did say "go for it", then it would just weaken their position on all moral issues. They have no choice but to answer the way they have...

As a doctor saving life is my priority. Do not save lives in the name of morality is criminal. And avoiding to make a campaign against condoms will not weaken any position.


For the unproven possibility that it might save lives : its false. Condoms have proven their efficiency.

They just can say : we are for sex within the marriage, however for people who are sinfull in this way, using condoms is better than helping in the transmission of aid.
post #193 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
This coming from someone that's quoting and defending the Catholic Church. Irony.

Catholic Church=single source
Google=multiple source

Perhaps I need to reevaluate the readership....
post #194 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by Powerdoc
As a doctor saving life is my priority. Do not save lives in the name of morality is criminal. And avoiding to make a campaign against condoms will not weaken any position.

This is where we diverge. Thats such a modern-day fallacy. I cannot disagree with this statement more.

2 people die and go to heaven = eternal life
2 people die a little older but violate Gods law = eternal death
post #195 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
EDIT: Obviously the article I linked to isn't written by Google, so your sarcasm is really just a diversionary tactic. Lame. Increased use of condoms in Thailand has reduced HIV infections. It's the exact support you asked me to find, and I found it in about thirty seconds. Feel free to refute it.

The response is still valid. You're arguing that an arbitrary source off of google is more credible than the Catholic Church. I obviously disagree.
post #196 of 380
I've beaten everybody into obscurity with their arguments. I tire of this. Please try to have a brain. Goodbye.
post #197 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
This is where we diverge. Thats such a modern-day fallacy. I cannot disagree with this statement more.

2 people die and go to heaven = eternal life
2 people die a little older but violate Gods law = eternal death

So you think that a 20 years boy who have severed sexual intercourse will merit an eternal death. Perhaps it discribe the god of the bible, but it do not like Jesus Christ. Christian God is love, not revenge. It's a forgiving god, not a terrible god, who consider us poor humans as slave, obey to my laws or you will be eternally doomed.

I had some sexual intercourse while i was 24 before i was married, sure i merit an eternal death.
post #198 of 380
70 year old murder, rapist, criminal finds god in last 6 months goes to heaven
70 year old widow loses faith in god after her husband's death and commits sins in last 6 months of her life, goes to hell?\
post #199 of 380
Quote:
Originally posted by Jukebox Hero
I've beaten everybody into obscurity with their arguments. I tire of this. Please try to have a brain. Goodbye.

I see first, god speak to us via your own mouth, and no because we disagree with you , we have no brain. `

Congratulations. You help the popularity of the catholic church. Luckily i know many catholic people, so i have a difference advice than the one i should have considering what you wrote here.
To your credit, perhaps you where deeply annoyed by the anti-catholic bash of some posters here, but your job of advocate was very poor.
post #200 of 380
Powerdoc wins gold star.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
This thread is locked  
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Vatican: condoms don't stop Aids