Vatican: condoms don't stop Aids
Well, I'm a bit speechless really, after reading the latest stupefying stuff to come out of the Vatican.
Vatican: condoms don't stop Aids
Yes, everyone knows that AIDS is growing because of those goddamned condoms. Ban them!
Yeah, I'd feel much safer as an HIV infected man, shooting a full load into my wife. I'm not about to take a chance that my condom isn't 100% effective! Better to get it all in there... if she gets infected, it's god's will, right?
Condoms laced with AIDS... uh, not sure what to even say about that one.
Interesting read.
Vatican: condoms don't stop Aids
Quote:
The church opposes any kind of contraception because it claims it breaks the link between sex and procreation - a position Pope John Paul II has fought to defend.
In Kenya - where an estimated 20% of people have the HIV virus - the church condemns condoms for promoting promiscuity and repeats the claim about permeability. The archbishop of Nairobi, Raphael Ndingi Nzeki, said: "Aids... has grown so fast because of the availability of condoms."
The church opposes any kind of contraception because it claims it breaks the link between sex and procreation - a position Pope John Paul II has fought to defend.
In Kenya - where an estimated 20% of people have the HIV virus - the church condemns condoms for promoting promiscuity and repeats the claim about permeability. The archbishop of Nairobi, Raphael Ndingi Nzeki, said: "Aids... has grown so fast because of the availability of condoms."
Yes, everyone knows that AIDS is growing because of those goddamned condoms. Ban them!
Quote:
Sex and the Holy City includes a Catholic nun advising her HIV-infected choirmaster against using condoms with his wife because "the virus can pass through".
In Lwak, near Lake Victoria, the director of an Aids testing centre says he cannot distribute condoms because of church opposition. Gordon Wambi told the programme: "Some priests have even been saying that condoms are laced with HIV/Aids."
Sex and the Holy City includes a Catholic nun advising her HIV-infected choirmaster against using condoms with his wife because "the virus can pass through".
In Lwak, near Lake Victoria, the director of an Aids testing centre says he cannot distribute condoms because of church opposition. Gordon Wambi told the programme: "Some priests have even been saying that condoms are laced with HIV/Aids."
Yeah, I'd feel much safer as an HIV infected man, shooting a full load into my wife. I'm not about to take a chance that my condom isn't 100% effective! Better to get it all in there... if she gets infected, it's god's will, right?
Condoms laced with AIDS... uh, not sure what to even say about that one.
Interesting read.
Comments
(and understand, i don't agree with them AT ALL on this one)
in theory, if everyone were to follow the church's teachings about sex (not until marrige) the spread of AIDS would grind to a virtual halt. sure, needles and misc. would still spread AIDS to some miniscule extent, but it wouldn't really be the problem it is now.
problem is, theory and reality often don't mix. people will have sex and so should use condoms.
as for the AIDS virus passing through, my understanding was that the virus itself is small enough to fit through the latex, but since it's immersed in fluids it never actually does.
a kernal of truth wrapped in misleading information. who'd have thunk it.
Originally posted by tonton
The church leaders should be tried for genocide in an international court.
And people balked when I compared the Pope with Bin Laden. Let's see, both believe they know the true will of god, both endorse policies that result in massive death, both consider themselves infalliable, wait... no... that's just the pope.
I think that the one who claimed that condoms have holes, have some holes int their brain ...
The fact that something is not proof at 100 % but only at 99,99999 % , is not a reason to avoid it.
As a doctor i may have aids, just by blood contact with let's say my eyes or via needles wounds. Is it a reason to stop my job ?
Many people die for car accidents : should i avoid to take my car, and just walk ?
The vatican should not talk of a subject that they ignore : sex.
In fact most of that money is probably funding just this kind of misinformation.
Here's a related link:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2708089.stm
Originally posted by segovius
Powerdoc, can you or anyone else here (perhaps some of our Catholic posters) hazard the remotest guess why the Christian religion has this massive hang-up about sex ?
No other religion has it as a dogma (ie that sex is somehow dirty or sinful) - I genuinely can't understand where a belief in God (which is to be repected) became intertwined with a belief in the sinfulness of sex (which is not). I mean murder, rape, stealing etc - these are universal 'sins' and rightly so but sex what the *** are they on ???
Frankly i don't know, i can suggest some explanations, but in fact i have not any clues.
This one of the thing that i canno't buy from the catholic church, and that in fact many catholics do not buy also.
Perhaps this way of thinking appeared in the middle age.
Originally posted by Nordstrodamus
And people balked when I compared the Pope with Bin Laden. Let's see, both believe they know the true will of god, both endorse policies that result in massive death, both consider themselves infalliable, wait... no... that's just the pope.
Yep and i will continue.
It's not because i strongly disagree with the attitude of the vatican about condoms and sex in general that i will buy your analogies.
As Alcimedes stated (he also disagree with the Vatican on this one), if nobody practice sex, nobody will have aids (at least via sex). This is logical in a theorical point of vue. Of course knowing the nature of people this type of advice is totally clueless and stupid.
But making stupids (read irrealist) advices don't make you a criminal.
Thus your comparison is totally lame.
I'm a Catholic, and I use condoms. I think the majority of American Catholics do. We're kinda a burr under the Vatican's saddle that way.
The thing is, the Catholic Church was on the cusp of some new thinking back in the 60's. John XXIII convened Vatican II and initiated all sorts of reforms in the church (no more Latin, trying to heal the rift with the Protestant churches), and if they had stayed on that course we might have seen women as priests or married priests by now. Unfortunately, when John died they elected a conservative Pope and put the brakes on. After John Paul would appear to be more of the same.
Originally posted by alcimedes
in theory, if everyone were to follow the church's teachings about sex (not until marrige) the spread of AIDS would grind to a virtual halt.
And what of those of us who are currently barred from marrying the person we love, in part thanks to the teachings and efforts of the Church?
Originally posted by segovius
Well, you could only be barred from marrying in church, they can't stop other kinds of ceremonies.
Actually, no, I'm barred by law, because I'm gay. And the Catholic Church has teams of folks working overtime to make sure that that situation never changes.
Fellowship
However, the pop-culture "safe sex" campaign, where it seems to focus more on technology (ie, prophalactics) rather than behavior, probably has contributed to the persistence of AIDS. People don't want to hear that they might want to rethink that one night stand, so the technological argument often trumps the behavioral one. AIDS thrives on behavior/practice, not really protection or the lack thereof -- which is only one part of behavior/practice.
The developed world is a different story from the 3rd world, but still, there are cultures that might want to rethink "prostitution, polygamy, and their medical practices aswell.
As for the Church, I thinnk it's pretty clear, that they've completely lost the plot when it comes to sex.
Should we stop handing out condoms? No, absolutely not. But, we've been handing out condoms for quite a while and AIDS is still with us, so maybe there are other factors to consider too?
You may believe that the third world is just too ignorant, it's possible, but I don't believe it's insurmountable. We should be handing out condoms AND good information, AND challenging social establishments (wherever they are)
burning at the stake Giordano Bruno and other "Heretics" who disputed the Earth was the central sphere
excommunicating Galileo and refusing to look through his telescope at the Proof of Jupiter's Moons
the same band who delivered such logic-stomping hits as "Genesis says it was 7 days",
"What Big Bang?" "Dinosaurs and humans coexisted" and "There is no such thing as evolution"
now planning their first tour since Torquemada and Pisarro knocked the natives dead in the Americas, and potentially reprising their monumental Crusader tours through the Mid-East, Inquisition fans everywhere are asking for more facts.
of course, they're not asking about the potential cause and effect relationships between celibacy, repressive sexual thinking, and sin as applied to a shocking number of cases of pedophile priests and young children. nor are they asking why the "trust us, we're in with the big guy" mentality hasn't led to the big guy punishing said pedophile priests, let alone the church taking actions other than ostrich.
so now the Vatican is caught fabricating bad science (and ethics) again.
willfully retarding intellectual progress by dogmatically promoting errors for ideological gain...
unsurprisingly absurd.
spooky to think they fund and run schools despite such demonstrable lack/denial of reason.
spookier to think this type of fundamentalist mindset survives/thrives in US politics today
tune in next week for our special King Canute tribute... "Tide won't come in."
Originally posted by Matsu
However, the pop-culture "safe sex" campaign, where it seems to focus more on technology (ie, prophalactics) rather than behavior, probably has contributed to the persistence of AIDS. People don't want to hear that they might want to rethink that one night stand, so the technological argument often trumps the behavioral one. AIDS thrives on behavior/practice, not really protection or the lack thereof -- which is only one part of behavior/practice.
You cannot separate one from the other, at least not cleanly. Getting guys to put on condoms was one massive change of human sexual behavior - maybe the most drastic in history. And where it took place, it promptly lowered HIV infections. Where it did not, infections are rising.
This shows that promiscuity is a necessary precondition for the spread of HIV, but it is no commensurate condition.
I believe that shaping behavior on the level of low-risk sexual techniques is indefinitely more easy than on the level of promiscuity vs. faithfulness. This is why the churches moronic ideas are so dangerous - they are bound to fail because they go against basic human nature (like it or not).
To the best of my knowledge, no disease has ever been eradicated via behavior change - the ones that have been exterminated (smallpox, SARS) or tamed (plague, syphilis) were beaten by medicine, quarantine and hygiene.
Originally posted by segovius
Well the law and the church are two different things - though both equally pernicious in some ways.
I have some gay friends who got married but they were in Canada so maybe the law is different. In any case, I'd still say the same - no-one can stop the ceremony. But I know there are rights issues too but at the end of the day marriage is in the head (or heart) and not on some legitimised piece of paper from some sanctified old fart.
It's legal in parts of Canada. Of course, I'd magically cease to be married the moment I returned to the States. And now the Republicans are even working on a "We Hate Gays" amendment to permanently reduce homosexuals to legal second-class pseudo-citizens. And, of course, abusive religious organizations like the Catholic Church are all behind this initiative.
Which is part of why I shook the dust off my feet and left Catholicism some time ago.
Originally posted by alcimedes
in theory, if everyone were to follow the church's teachings about sex (not until marrige) the spread of AIDS would grind to a virtual halt. sure, needles and misc. would still spread AIDS to some miniscule extent, but it wouldn't really be the problem it is now.
I'd have to check the statistics of this, but I'm pretty sure that pervasive HIV testing and treatment combined with widespread condom use would probably lower new HIV infections to the same point as widespread abstinence. If you combined that with legalized drugs (clinical dispensement for intraveneous drugs) and needle exchange programs (another evil liberal solution) you could probably do even better.
I think I remember reading somewhere that in developed countries people who know they have aides are far less likely to transmit aides than those who don't. In fact, I think it's illegal in most states to not inform a sex partner that you have HIV. Also, current drug treatments for HIV drastically reduce the titer of virus in a person, reducing the risk of transmission.
The simple fact is that the only hope for erradicating HIV is through technology. Testing and profilactics are the first step and vaccine research will hopefully be the last. The biggest behavoir modification we need to make is political and theological.