|
|
Post by Andy Turnbull on Mar 17, 2009 20:28:33 GMT
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7947460.stmHonestly, I just caught this on the news and couldn't stop shaking my head. It just made me angry, if condoms can help in the fight against aids in Africa, which when they have been introduced have managed to have some impact then they should be used. But no we instead have the typical attitude to contraception we've come to expect from the vatican over the years. Andy
|
|
|
|
Post by blueshift on Mar 17, 2009 20:54:41 GMT
Argh D:
In terms of 'people will preach one thing and then turn around and do another' sex is top of the list.
|
|
|
|
Post by Grand Moff Muffin on Mar 17, 2009 21:00:46 GMT
In terms of 'people will preach one thing and then turn around and do another' sex is top of the list. Yes, I'm sure most Catholics use condoms, and a good thing too. Though I have heard nothing to cause me to doubt the Pope's celibacy. I don't share his views from a practical standpoint, but can see his dilemma in that you don't need condoms to protect you from HIV if you're in a stable one-partner relationship, and you can't endorse the use of condoms in promiscuous relationships without effectively endorsing those promiscuous relationships - which a church that discourages sex outside marriage can't do. Furthermore, distribution of condoms without education can indeed increase the problem if it makes people think they are 100% safe from HIV if they use a condom (they're not), and therefore become even more promiscuous. It's not a straightforward issue. My view is that condoms should be made available but only as part of a strong education programme that hammers home the point that the surest way of avoiding AIDS is to stick to a single partner. Martin |
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Mar 17, 2009 21:24:21 GMT
I find the Vatican's position to be out of touch with reality and it saddens me greatly. I really wish they would indorse the use of contraceptives. Give people the choice. It would make a big difference to the numbers of people catching HIV in African countries.
-Ralph
|
|
|
|
Post by Grand Moff Muffin on Mar 17, 2009 21:33:00 GMT
They should come out with a strong statement that promiscuous sex with a condom is far preferable to promiscuous sex without a condom, without going so far as to say condom use makes promiscuous sex OK.
Martin
|
|
|
|
Post by KnightBeat on Mar 17, 2009 22:06:59 GMT
I notice that they're making vegetarian condoms now.
[insert your own vegetarian joke here]
|
|
|
|
Post by blueshift on Mar 17, 2009 22:16:42 GMT
Bah I am sticking to my good old MEAT CONDOMS
|
|
|
|
Post by karla on Mar 18, 2009 10:01:39 GMT
condoms don't really protect you against the HIV virus as...its a virus, untouchable, circumsicion protects to an extent but still risky.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Mar 18, 2009 10:47:40 GMT
True, but they do cut the risks down quite a bit and as many people look to the Vatican for guidance they won't use them of told not to.
-Ralph
|
|
|
|
Post by blueshift on Mar 18, 2009 11:09:29 GMT
condoms don't really protect you against the HIV virus as...its a virus, untouchable, circumsicion protects to an extent but still risky. They do to an extent in that they reduce the risk of cross bodily-fluid contamination. Also reduce the risk of overpopulation! I think the thinking is that if you tell people condoms are okay then they will go around and bonk like rabbits. However people are being told condoms are bad and they are STILL going around bonking like rabbits, so you might want to pull damage control. Its a shame, since IIRC (and I might be wrong) the Church seemed to be leaning towards that view regarding Africa in recent years. |
|
|
|
Post by Grand Moff Muffin on Mar 18, 2009 11:19:18 GMT
True, but they do cut the risks down quite a bit and as many people look to the Vatican for guidance they won't use them of told not to. The problem doesn't lie with those people who follow the guidance of the Vatican, because the people who follow the guidance of the Vatican will stick to sex within exclusive partnerships and so be safer than those who use condoms. The problem lies with poor education, resulting in people thinking that following part of the guidance of the Vatican (condoms not being the recommended solution to AIDS) is better than following none of it (using condoms and having promiscuous sex) - which it isn't, it's worse. So education is the key, so that people can make an informed choice between following the Pope's advice, keeping sex within marriage and being safer than those who use condoms instead, or continue to have promiscuous sex and rely on condoms to significantly reduce the risk - and _not_ take the stupid option of promiscuous sex without condoms. The Catholic Fund for Overseas Development (CAFOD) puts all its anti-HIV resources into this sort of education programme, and does not fund the distribution of condoms. I would say it's a good thing that _some_ agencies supply condoms, for those who still feel the need to bonk like rabbits after being informed of the risks, and those married couples who don't want any more kids. But choices have to be made how much money to put into supplying condoms, rather than using it to fund education. Martin |
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Mar 18, 2009 11:32:34 GMT
I agree that education is essential so that people can make informed choices. I also think that people have the right to bonk like rabbits if they want to. I personally don't think it's right to make moral judgements on that behaviour. What is acceptable for one person is unacceptable for another, and so on. So long as it's consensual people can do what they like sexually, in my book.
But I think condoms should be freely available along with education programmes. I don't think it's one thing or another.
-Ralph
|
|
|
|
Post by Grand Moff Muffin on Mar 18, 2009 11:35:41 GMT
You only have to be educated once - the need to supply condoms goes on indefinitely if that is the chosen solution. There is an inevitable trade-off there. The Vatican aren't saying, hand out fewer condoms and keep the money you save, it's saying, hand out fewer condoms and spend that money on education programmes. If the debate were reversed so that it wasn't the Vatican against spending money on condoms, but the Vatican's opponents against spending money on education, it would play very differently in the media.
Martin
|
|
|
|
Post by Andy Turnbull on Mar 18, 2009 11:42:51 GMT
But the issue is that none of the opponents of the Vatican's position are saying don't educate. The condoms go hand in hand with health campaigns and education from the various aid agencies. They are sensible enough to realise that the education program on it's own isn't working and there needs to be the availability of condoms in these areas.
The problem being is in the countries where they are heavily endorsing the abstinence only campaign that the number of cases of Aids is on the rise. So at this point in time education only isn't working.
Andy
|
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Mar 18, 2009 11:51:48 GMT
Also, literacy levels are pretty low in many of these areas so some of the education programmes are not accessable to the populace. It's a very complex problem!
-Ralph
|
|
|
|
Post by Grand Moff Muffin on Mar 18, 2009 11:52:16 GMT
AIDS is also on the rise in countries where the funding has nearly all gone on handing out contraceptives.
I suppose in some countries the balance is too far one way and in others too far the other.
Uganda has apparently been a success case.
Martin
|
|
|
|
Post by karla on Mar 18, 2009 13:57:58 GMT
it really is education, they don't know what AIDs really is or how it spreads.Maybe the witchdoctors will find a cure, love those guys!!
|
|
|
|
Post by The Doctor on Mar 19, 2009 11:49:52 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by karla on Mar 19, 2009 14:14:29 GMT
Its almost like a religous crusade, a little strong I know. The papa & vatican has been itching for this, to spread the word of the church onto a new continent with entirely good and pure intentions though, don't get me wrong. By converting them, no matter how much you suffer in this life, your reward will be in the life after, but you must obey the teachings of the church and papa by stopping all this fornicating and getting married.
they think they can survelience it through marriage and family trees.Of course not everyone will do this, but a big enough population will.
But they'd have to ask you if you have AIDs or are infected, or even better test you!
so what would they do with all this information on you, would your children be split up into schools of infected and not, would you be turned away by certian hospitals, carry a card or something or a tattoo to say you are infected, would castration or other operations be an option?And how will they get rid of your body after you die?
Luckliy Africa doesn't have enough money for this scheme heh heh
Sex is a huge part of thier culture, well of everyones culture!
I feel most for the prostitutes, they've done nothing wrong, they need the protection more than anyone.
|
|
dyrl
Empty
Transforming robots are no match for combat waitresses from the future!
Posts: 1,652
|
Post by dyrl on Mar 31, 2009 20:10:49 GMT
I think it's all a lot of hub bub over nothing. The press shouldn't be surprised that the Catholic Church preaches Catholicism.
This kind of thing just sells newspapers and gets people to click on articles.
It also really sidelines the real problem.
The problem in many parts of Africa is not that people have no access to information about condoms or that they don't have access to free or cheap birth control.
The problem is that many of their countries are impoverished, often run by dictators, plagued by coup d'etates, corruption, tyranny and that they often do not have free economies, but rather economies which are centrally planned or heavily centralized, which hinders economic growth.
Economic growth and wealth is the only path to acquiring greater liesure and consciousness.
AIDS is pandemic in Africa for pretty much the same reasons that Cholera is now pandemic in Zimbabwe.
Not because the people of Zimbabwe didn't get the memo from the WHO about washing their hands after using the toilet, but because their economy was completely trashed by the brazen stupidity of their ruling elite.
Westerners who get hissy about the Pope being against condom use forget that when war, ethnic cleansing and tyranny are the order of the day then it's extremely important to have someone be able to go and spread the message of peace and solidarity.
Heck - look at the name the Pope chose for himself: Bennedict. The last Benedict was Pope during World War I. The new Benedict took the name because, confronted with the Iraq War and the world moving towards self-destruction, he wanted to be the Pope of peace.
The criticism of the Pope over condoms, like the other criticism of the Pope that has erupted from time to time thus far is really just manipulating the African issue for domestic, western gains by secularist politicians against the Church.
I'm by no means an orthodox Catholic, I personally don't abide by Catholic dogma, and my Christianity kind of depends of the Weather - but I can't stand it when people expect a religious order that is peaceful and using persuasion and argumentation to change its' dogmas and when folks make a big deal out of a non-issue.
Condoms are not the issue in Africa.
Peace vs. War - that is the issue.
I'll be happy when the people of Africa have nothing better to worry about than whether using condoms will go against their religion.
Pete
|
|
