The Pope thinks condoms increase the spread of HIV/AIDS

[Altherion]

[quote name='Maltaran' post='1722884' date='Mar 17 2009, 23.46']It's quite clear that he's saying condoms increase the problem of AIDS.[/quote]
This is correct, but it is not quite the impression conveyed by the title of the thread.

[Bronn Stone]

[quote name='Altherion' post='1722896' date='Mar 17 2009, 15.53']This is correct, but it is not quite the impression conveyed by the title of the thread.[/quote]

You are making a distinction between 'spread' and 'problem'??? The difference seems trivial to me.

[The_BlauerDragon]

Sounds like the same ricockulous B.S. that always comes from the mouths of those who thrive off of suppressing other humans (and each other). As a generally conservative individual (and an openly Christian one at that), it pains me to admit this... but most of the "religious [s]left[/s] [b]right[/b]" ( :blush: ) seem to be more concerned with repressing sexuality than they are with protecting lives... That's where I deviate from the rest of the left. I see no value in repressing anyone else's life. I think we should try to live our own lives, and let everyone else pursue their own happiness in accordance with their own ideas and desires. I say open discussion and accurate information is much better than scare tactics and outright lies. It's sad really, that someone who claims to have a concern for the lives and souls of other human beings would stoop to suggesting that the use of condoms might somehow increase the spread of venereal diseases.

[Lord of Oop North]

First off, he's not saying that condoms spread AIDs. As in, if you put on this condom, then you will become infected. That's pretty ludicrous. To him (and a large portion of the RCC), condoning condom usage is condoning pre-marital sex, which is already against the tenets that they believe in. To him (and others), by condoning the usage of condoms, they would be encouraging die-hard Catholics to engage in more pre-marital sex, which [i]may[/i] lead to an increase in the spread of AIDs.

That's why the title of the thread is misleading.

Of course, it's still a silly position, because people aren't going to stop fucking. It would also be pretty difficult to prove his theory. :dunno:

-

Personally, I think that the Pope and non-Catholics are both overestimating the influence that he has over Catholics.

[Matrim Fox Cauthon]

What's new, Khaleesi? I'm not sure what the point of this thread is apart from reminding us of the well-acknowledged idiocy of this particular pope.

[The Khaleesi]

[quote name='Lord of Oop North' post='1722860' date='Mar 18 2009, 11.25']As a sidenote, your thread title is really misleading.[/quote]

I think I've already explained why it isn't (IMO)

[The Khaleesi]

[quote name='Matrim Fox Cauthon' post='1722943' date='Mar 18 2009, 12.39']What's new, Khaleesi? I'm not sure what the point of this thread is apart from reminding us of the well-acknowledged idiocy of this particular pope.[/quote]

The point of the thread is to find out what other people think about this. Personally, I think it's irresonsible for the leader of a major world religion to ask its followers to not use condoms in a country where millions have died, and will die, from AIDS.
And I read this: "The pontiff, speaking to journalists on his flight, said the condition was "a tragedy that cannot be overcome by money alone, that cannot be overcome through the distribution of condoms, which even aggravates the problems"
as he is saying that condoms aggravate (ie: spread) the problems (of AIDS).

And, even iff the pope's "idiocy" is "well-acknowledged", does that mean we let a big thing like this pass?

[palaeologos]

[quote name='The Khaleesi' post='1722760' date='Mar 17 2009, 14.16']I can't help thinking that the Pope is potentially condemning thousands of Catholics in Africa to lives of misery, disease and death.[/quote]

I dunno about that.

He's being dumb, yes. But consider this : he's telling all those people not to have sex outside of marriage. He's also telling them not to use condoms. Do you really think they're going to ignore the first prohibition, but scrupulously follow the second?

Of course people are going to screw, because that's what they do. And they will probably not use condoms as much as they should, because they're lazy and selfish. But Benedict XVI's finger-wagging isn't going to be much of an influence either way.

[Altherion]

[quote name='Bronn Stone' post='1722913' date='Mar 18 2009, 00.08']You are making a distinction between 'spread' and 'problem'??? The difference seems trivial to me.[/quote]
Using "spread" makes it sound like HIV transmission is more likely during sexual intercourse with a condom than during sexual intercourse without a condom. This is patently false and almost certainly not what the Pope meant. Of course, it does not have to mean that -- you are right about there being no logical distinction -- but the impression conveyed is what is in my first sentence rather than what the Pope said.

[EHK for Darwin]

[quote name='Lord of Oop North' post='1722938' date='Mar 17 2009, 18.29']First off, he's not saying that condoms spread AIDs. As in, if you put on this condom, then you will become infected. That's pretty ludicrous. To him (and a large portion of the RCC), condoning condom usage is condoning pre-marital sex, which is already against the tenets that they believe in. To him (and others), by condoning the usage of condoms, they would be encouraging die-hard Catholics to engage in more pre-marital sex, which [i]may[/i] lead to an increase in the spread of AIDs.[/quote]

Which is still nonsense as any number of sex studies will show you. And when it comes down to it, it says the exact same fucking thing that Khaleesi said it did. The nuances of the reasoning behind it aren't terribly important. He's still saying 'promoting condoms increases AIDS'. It becomes no less wrong or dumb when you add the rest of it. The thread title is not misleading. The quote she used is the same quote Reuters used. In fact its right on point. And I can't help but think that objections to her entirely appropriate condemnation are little more than kneejerk religious homerism rather than anything else.

[quote]Personally, I think that the Pope and non-Catholics are both overestimating the influence that he has over Catholics.[/quote]

African Catholics, Latin American catholics, and many other non-western catholics tend to be much more observant and devout than your typical every other Sunday lazy American Catholic. Its quite likely that they do take his shit seriously. And even one more person taking him seriously could lead to another death by AIDS. Except that it won't be one person, it likely will be thousands. This is the Pope speaking after all. Thousands of more people are likely gonna die because of this speech, tens of thousands more due to the churches overall policy on the matter if not more. I find that incredibly offensive and intolerable. So when it comes down to it, I don't give a shit if the title is misleading or if there's more nuances to the Pope's position. They don't fucking matter. Because when it comes down to it, the position is as simple and worthless as Khali's title suggests. And there's nothing wrong or offensive with saying so. This is stupidity and its killing people. Anything that highlights how monumentally fucking stupid the Catholic church's position on AIDS in Africa is should be fucking applauded. So pardon me if I'm not terribly concerned about the uncomfortable handwringing of a few western catholics who may not like how a sentence is worded. Fuck that noise.

Edit to add: This is Africa we're talking about. Education about AIDS is limited. Misinformation about AIDS is rampant. Some of them still think that raping a virgin will cure them for christs sake. A prominent religious authority figure mentions that condoms aggravate the problem and you don't think some people are gonna take this seriously and perhaps come to the false conclusion that condoms don't help? Or simply that their faith's condemnation of condoms is reason enough not to use them? Examine the statement. Look for nuances. Say its standard Catholic doctrine. Do whatever the hell you want. At the end of the day, the Pope spoke and people are going to die because of it. Fucker should be hung.

[Altherion]

[quote name='The Khaleesi' post='1722957' date='Mar 18 2009, 00.55']The point of the thread is to find out what other people think about this. Personally, I think it's irresonsible for the leader of a major world religion to ask its followers to not use condoms in a country where millions have died, and will die, from AIDS.[/quote]
I think he needs to be clearer about what it is he is saying (this isn't the first time he did this). Whether or not it is irresponsible depends on whether or not he is right and I don't know the answer to this question.

[EHK for Darwin]

[quote name='Altherion' post='1722977' date='Mar 17 2009, 19.05']I think he needs to be clearer about what it is he is saying (this isn't the first time he did this). Whether or not it is irresponsible depends on whether or not he is right and I don't know the answer to this question.[/quote]

I think he needs to add a few notches to his bedpost to go with the thousands of others he should already have for each and every African he's helped kill.

[Brienne the Beauty]

[quote name='the Blauer Dragon' post='1722928' date='Mar 17 2009, 23.24']As a generally conservative individual (and an openly Christian one at that), it pains me to admit this... but most of the "religious left" seem to be more concerned with repressing sexuality than they are with protecting lives...[/quote]
I'm not so sure that Pope Benedict is exactly a left-winger. I don't know much about him but he seems to be more concerned with moral issues than economic ones....as you'd expect from a Pope. But that rather leaves him out of the left/right dynamic I think.

[The_BlauerDragon]

[quote name='Brienne the Beauty' post='1722988' date='Mar 17 2009, 17.12']I'm not so sure that Pope Benedict is exactly a left-winger. I don't know much about him but he seems to be more concerned with moral issues than economic ones....as you'd expect from a Pope. But that rather leaves him out of the left/right dynamic I think.[/quote]
I would agree. Thank you for pointing out my political dyslexia. I went back and fixed that. Sometimes I don't know my right from my wrong. Sorry for the confusion.

[IheartTesla]

Oh goody, Pope makes another controversial statement.

To a certain extent he is bound by 'dogma', that is, he cant say anything different from what RCC interpretation is. Of course, the question is what is the nature of his public persona, and what statements does he have to make to the world at large and Catholics in particular? He would just be going around asking people to live a life of piety and humility, which cant take up too much of his time.

I dont recall there being this much discussion about JP II. Or maybe the internet was in its infancy.

The thing is, in my personal interactions with Catholics in the US, most of them seem to not follow the RCC all that strictly. They seem to follow a more common-sense approach to the more rigid diktats of the church. They must remain adherents because of family tradition/ethnic background, and also internally decide that on the whole the RCC provides them whatever it is religion offers to the beleivers, and ignore the stuff that contradicts the other stuff.

[delete this account pls]

When he starts cranking the Sith Lightning at Mass, I'll do whatever he says.

[Lord of Oop North]

[quote name='EHK for a True GOP' post='1722975' date='Mar 17 2009, 20.04']Which is still nonsense as any number of sex studies will show you. And when it comes down to it, it says the exact same fucking thing that Khaleesi said it did. The nuances of the reasoning behind it aren't terribly important. He's still saying 'promoting condoms increases AIDS'. It becomes no less wrong or dumb when you add the rest of it. The thread title is not misleading. The quote she used is the same quote Reuters used. In fact its right on point. And I can't help but think that objections to her entirely appropriate condemnation are little more than kneejerk religious homerism rather than anything else.[/quote]
I don't know why you are fuckin' coming down like this. I clearly said I thought it was silly. I never said the thread title was offensive, so fuck all that other noise you brought on. I simply think it's a bit misleading. That's all. You're calling [i]me[/i] out for a kneejerk reaction? Look in the mirror, Christ.

[EHK for Darwin]

[quote name='cyrano' post='1723015' date='Mar 17 2009, 19.28']I dont recall there being this much discussion about JP II. Or maybe the internet was in its infancy.[/quote]

Could be that. Could also be that JPII was a much more progressive Pope more prone to words and gestures that are more acceptable to the civilized world. Granted its been years since JPII was around, but I can't recall him saying things this stupid near as often. The only time I hear anything about Palpatine is when he says something stupid. I'm sure that's partially due to bad PR, but I've yet to hear a single thing to recommend the fucker.

[EHK for Darwin]

[quote name='Lord of Oop North' post='1723036' date='Mar 17 2009, 19.40']I don't know why you are fuckin' coming down like this. I clearly said I thought it was silly. I never said the thread title was offensive, so fuck all that other noise you brought on. I simply think it's a bit misleading. That's all. You're calling [i]me[/i] out for a kneejerk reaction? Look in the mirror, Christ.[/quote]

This Pope and this church needs to be pistol whipped into reality, so negative reactions, kneejerk or otherwise, are more than appropriate. I apologize for going off on you directly. That was harsh and misdirected. I'm simply disgusted by the Pope and the church on this policy and let me feelings out on it. I do think these criticisms of misleading titles are off base and needless however, little more than semantic nonsense.

[Myshkin]

The Pope is bound by dogma. He can't change the stance of the Church on this subject. He made an argument in favor of the Church's stance; the same argument PTAs and parent groups all over the country have been making for years; the same stance most other Christian churches and organizations hold. But since he's the head of the Catholic Church he's the one everyone focuses their vitriol on. Is this particular Pope the greatest? No. But does that warrant calling him "Palpatine" or "fucker", and generally showing absolutely no respect for the Catholic Church, or Catholics in general? Somehow I doubt there would be so much venom and disrespect if this story were about a leader of another religion.