NationStates Jolt Archive

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=healthNews&storyid=2006-04-24T123028Z_01_L23721062_RTRUKOC_0_US-POPE-CONDOMS.xml

As a Catholic myself, I strongly support this policy change. It could help to save millions of lives. Furthermore, the Theological reasoning behind the policy change is completely consistant with the Church's views on the nature of the sexual act.

Finally, and most importantly, I would like to gloat in my prediction of this policy change. A week ago, I posted this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10782790&postcount=69). In the third paragraph, I outline why I believe condoms should be allowed to prevent AIDS. A week later, the policy change is about to be put into effect.

Obviously, I have some sort of metaphysical power over Catholic Church policy. The question is, how should I use this uncanny ability next?

condoms don't stop AIDS, the aids virus is WAY smaller than the sperm cell and it could slip through the condom easily. . . . however there is the fact that it is SOMETHING so i guess it could help :P

Well...about time for that change. And how to use your power next...think of the possibility with catholic school girls.

As I catholic I also support this change. About time I say.

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=healthNews&storyid=2006-04-24T123028Z_01_L23721062_RTRUKOC_0_US-POPE-CONDOMS.xml

As a Catholic myself, I strongly support this policy change. It could help to save millions of lives. Furthermore, the Theological reasoning behind the policy change is completely consistant with the Church's views on the nature of the sexual act.

Finally, and most importantly, I would like to gloat in my prediction of this policy change. A week ago, I posted this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10782790&postcount=69). In the third paragraph, I outline why I believe condoms should be allowed to prevent AIDS. A week later, the policy change is about to be put into effect.

Obviously, I have some sort of metaphysical power over Catholic Church policy. The question is, how should I use this uncanny ability next?
How about you make them stop being stupid about all the other issues they're being retrograde dinosaurs about?

Like the ordination for women, laying off gays and lesbians, actually doing something about world poverty with the billions they have, etc.?

Well, for starters you could have the pope get into a fist fight with Jacques Chirac.

condoms don't stop AIDS, the aids virus is WAY smaller than the sperm cell and it could slip through the condom easily. . . . however there is the fact that it is SOMETHING so i guess it could help :P
I hope this is sarcasm. If not, please get basic scientific education.

Condoms have been proven over 97% effective in preventing AIDS transmission. That "virus smaller than tiny holes in rubber" argument is bullshit that was published by CATHOLICS from a study that was funded by the CATHOLIC CHURCH, which opposed the use of condoms. Of course, we all know they'd never dare give out erroneous or even false results, now don't we? :rolleyes:

Catholic School Girls, I think I can manage something with regards to that.

Fight to the death between Chirac and Pope Benedict XVI, no problem.

Female priests, not even I am THAT powerful.

Female priests, not even I am THAT powerful.
Pity. You'd think that 50 years after the rest of the frickin world realized women and men are equal, the church would BEGIN to get the idea.

Sadly, no.

Pity. You'd think that 50 years after the rest of the frickin world realized women and men are equal, the church would BEGIN to get the idea.

Sadly, no.

If women want to be priests, then they reject catholicism.

Where's the problem?

Allowing people to wear condoms to prevent AIDS is like allowing people to keep a bottle of brandy around for medicinal purposes. All you can do is just wink and smile.;)

:rolleyes: Wow, your Catholic church is SOOOOO progressive! (dripping with sarcasm):rolleyes: Does this mean the priests can wear condoms now when they rape their altar boys?

How about you make them stop being stupid about all the other issues they're being retrograde dinosaurs about?

Like the ordination for women, laying off gays and lesbians, actually doing something about world poverty with the billions they have, etc.?

Not to mention their archaic views on women in general. The reason the catholic church is against condoms is because contraception is a sin. It prevents the formation of a new life, and therefore you are killing an unborn child. Such bullshit!!! Maybe the Pope should ADOPT these unwanted kids, or sell some of those priceless works of art in the Vatican Museum to fund social programs, most of them are stolen anyway. Fuck the Catholic church. :upyours:

How about you make them stop being stupid about all the other issues they're being retrograde dinosaurs about?

Like the ordination for women, laying off gays and lesbians, actually doing something about world poverty with the billions they have, etc.?

Ordination for women is a long way off, sadly. Let's see if we can't get the Church to allow priests to be married, and then work on ordaining women.

Laying off the gays and lesbians...we'll see. I'm pretty pissed about the way homosexuals get treated by the Church too, particularly the denying them communion. But I doubt it'll change any sooner than allowing priests to marry.

As for poverty, do some research on the amount of charitable work Catholic organizations do around the world. While I'm quite sure there could be some improvement and some redirection of funds to more..practical efforts, it's not as if the Church does nothing to help anyone.

If women want to be priests, then they reject catholicism.

Where's the problem?
A lot are doing just that.

Catholocism has the right to reject the idea of woman priests

Just as both us and them have the right to point out how stupid and sexist it really is

I think several people here are unaware of the Jesuits.

Meh. This aint gonna make much difference. Why? Because to quote the BBC:
But last week, a retired archbishop backed the use of condoms for married couples to prevent Aids transmission.
Married couples.

So how in the ell is that gonna stop the spread of Aids?

Isn't every sperm sacred? (Monty Python - Meaning of Life)

Married couples.

So how in the ell is that gonna stop the spread of Aids?
Well, this is the problem summed up in two sentences. People like to think that the Catholic Church bans the use of condoms because it is 'backward', 'stuck in the dark ages,' '(insert uneducated and unhelpful anti-religious comment here)'.

But, actually, the problem with the Church's teaching on condoms would never have been a problem if people were actually, er, following the Church's teaching. That is to say that AIDS is a sexually transmitted disease; if married couples (generally the men) were being faithful, then they wouldn't be catching the disease in the first place. Instead, they are ignoring the teaching of the Church on monogamy but then complaining that the 'Church doesn't let them wear condoms' when they pass on their infection to their wives, and then their children, and so on.

Because the infection is so widespread now and so many children have it then it is sensible that the Church changes its policy. However, to claim that the Catholic Church was responsible for the spread of AIDS is ridiculous. If people had actually followed the teaching of the Church then they would not have been in a situation where they needed condoms in the first place.

Well, this is the problem summed up in two sentences. People like to think that the Catholic Church bans the use of condoms because it is 'backward', 'stuck in the dark ages,' '(insert uneducated and unhelpful anti-religious comment here)'.

But, actually, the problem with the Church's teaching on condoms would never have been a problem if people were actually, er, following the Church's teaching. That is to say that AIDS is a sexually transmitted disease; if married couples (generally the men) were being faithful, then they wouldn't be catching the disease in the first place. Instead, they are ignoring the teaching of the Church on monogamy but then complaining that the 'Church doesn't let them wear condoms' when they pass on their infection to their wives, and then their children, and so on.

Because the infection is so widespread now and so many children have it then it is sensible that the Church changes its policy. However, to claim that the Catholic Church was responsible for the spread of AIDS is ridiculous. If people had actually followed the teaching of the Church then they would not have been in a situation where they needed condoms in the first place.

Thats not the point. Church policy has to take account of reality, and that reality is that people are going to have sex, whether you want them to or not. So telling them they cant wear condoms is just stupid. You'd think they'd have had long enough to learn this.

Thats not the point. Church policy has to take account of reality, and that reality is that people are going to have sex, whether you want them to or not. So telling them they cant wear condoms is just stupid. You'd think they'd have had long enough to learn this.
No, Church policy is to preach that people should not be having sex, at least not with anyone other than their married partner. If you are monogamous for life you should have no need for condoms. It is a consistent policy on the part of the Church.

Well, it's about fucking time.

No, Church policy is to preach that people should not be having sex, at least not with anyone other than their married partner. If you are monogamous for life you should have no need for condoms. It is a consistent policy on the part of the Church.

I know thats what they preach, i did read your post. But the point is, no matter how they preach it, sex is one of humanity's most fundamental instincts and people are going to do it whether the priests want them to or not.

The abstinance position is consistent with itself, i agree. But it doesnt translate well to reality.

I know thats what they preach, i did read your post. But the point is, no matter how they preach it, sex is one of humanity's most fundamental instincts and people are going to do it whether the priests want them to or not.

The abstinance position is consistent with itself, i agree. But it doesnt translate well to reality.
Yes, but if you accept the consistency of the Church's teaching, do you not see the underlying hypocracy in blaming the Church for the spread of AIDS in this case? A man goes and sleeps with someone, gets infected, infects his wife and children, and then claims it's "not my fault, the Church told me I couldn't wear a condom."

Yes it is your fault matey boy; you can't choose to ignore one part of the teaching of the Church and then blame another part for your problems.

Yes, but if you accept the consistency of the Church's teaching, do you not see the underlying hypocracy in blaming the Church for the spread of AIDS in this case? A man goes and sleeps with someone, gets infected, infects his wife and children, and then claims it's "not my fault, the Church told me I couldn't wear a condom."

Yes it is your fault matey boy; you can't choose to ignore one part of the teaching of the Church and then blame another part for your problems.

Ok, thats one way of looking at it. How about this: in one part of africa the people are preached the catholic doctrine, the place becomes riddled with AIDS, since the population doesnt have access to drugs to treat it, they become ill easily and die quickly and contribute to keeping the country in poverty.

In another part of Africa they are given a decent sex education focusing on contraception, I dont know what would happen here but I think the rates of AIDS would be significantly decreased.

which is better?

The point being missed here is that it's not about what people do, but about what they should do.

This is also not the first time the Roman Church has allowed condoms. I forget the year, but they did the same for a syphillis epidemic.

For the record, I'm not Roman Catholic.

Yes, but if you accept the consistency of the Church's teaching, do you not see the underlying hypocracy in blaming the Church for the spread of AIDS in this case? A man goes and sleeps with someone, gets infected, infects his wife and children, and then claims it's "not my fault, the Church told me I couldn't wear a condom."

Yes it is your fault matey boy; you can't choose to ignore one part of the teaching of the Church and then blame another part for your problems.

That's right for the guilty one, but the partner and sons have made no fault but due to the church policy it's not allowed to use a condom so She /He gets the aid. Bad luck? I think not, it's a criminal policy towards the believers

condoms don't stop AIDS, the aids virus is WAY smaller than the sperm cell and it could slip through the condom easily. . . . however there is the fact that it is SOMETHING so i guess it could help :P

I seriously hope you are joking. Condoms do stop HIV. You know, HIV? The virus that causes acquired immunodeficiency syndrome? You do know there is no such thing as "AIDS virus?"

-snip-
I personally have no problem with people using condoms, and I think that the Church should lift its ban on them for several reasons. It was not my intention to argue that condoms shouldn't be used; just that it is unfair to blame the Church for the problem of AIDS. It's not the fault of the Church that people are picking and choosing which teachings they choose to follow.

:rolleyes: Wow, your Catholic church is SOOOOO progressive! (dripping with sarcasm):rolleyes: Does this mean the priests can wear condoms now when they rape their altar boys?

This comment is very uncalled for. I sense insensitivity here.

I personally have no problem with people using condoms, and I think that the Church should lift its ban on them for several reasons. It was not my intention to argue that condoms shouldn't be used; just that it is unfair to blame the Church for the problem of AIDS. It's not the fault of the Church that people are picking and choosing which teachings they choose to follow.


Why shouldn't they? The church does.

As for condom usage does this mean that the church will stop screaming bloody murder every time they're even mentioned in school health or sex ed classes? That's why the church is blamed, because people who aren't even Catholic are losing out on the chance to learn how to protect their own health. Then there's the church's massive dissemenation of anti-condom materials to AFRICA.

Now, I realize being religious it's in their very nature to bury their head in the sand as to reality and believe whatever they like, but humans are sluts. You can't pretend that folks are going to wait til marriage to have sex when you damned well know they aren't.

Why shouldn't they? The church does.

As for condom usage does this mean that the church will stop screaming bloody murder every time they're even mentioned in school health or sex ed classes? That's why the church is blamed, because people who aren't even Catholic are losing out on the chance to learn how to protect their own health. Then there's the church's massive dissemenation of anti-condom materials to AFRICA.

Now, I realize being religious it's in their very nature to bury their head in the sand as to reality and believe whatever they like, but humans are sluts. You can't pretend that folks are going to wait til marriage to have sex when you damned well know they aren't.
Very good point about the Church influencing sex ed where it simply shouldn't even want to have influence. Church teaching says you ought to be sending your child to a Catholic school anyway (if possible). So really, it ought to be of very little concern to the Church what is taught in public schools.

As to humans being sluts, I agree. I say we should teach teenagers that our policy against condom use assumes abstinance before marraige. If you can't abstain, you're already sinning anyway so you might as well use a condom, for practical reasons.

condoms don't stop AIDS, the aids virus is WAY smaller than the sperm cell and it could slip through the condom easily. . . . however there is the fact that it is SOMETHING so i guess it could help :P

Sorry do you actualy belive that to be true then?

Shit more examples of the evilness of the previous pope.

Pity. You'd think that 50 years after the rest of the frickin world realized women and men are equal, the church would BEGIN to get the idea.

Sadly, no.

Then Catholic Chruch cannot change nor modernise. If it did then it would have to admit that for almost a 1000 years it has been wrong. Now can you see the powers that be in the Catholic Church ever letting that happen? Nor do I belive they should change. Heheh because as the years go by it will become increrasingly easy for your normal man in the street to see just how bogus the faith is, and so even from it's inception it's death warrent has been signed.

If you can't abstain, you're already sinning anyway so you might as well use a condom, for practical reasons.

Heh Heh according to the Bible we're are all sinners anyway, from the day of our birth. Yet if we die as a child our place in heaven is safe?? Naaaa like much of Cristian docterine it makes no sense to me.

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=healthNews&storyid=2006-04-24T123028Z_01_L23721062_RTRUKOC_0_US-POPE-CONDOMS.xml

As a Catholic myself, I strongly support this policy change. It could help to save millions of lives. Furthermore, the Theological reasoning behind the policy change is completely consistant with the Church's views on the nature of the sexual act.

Finally, and most importantly, I would like to gloat in my prediction of this policy change. A week ago, I posted this (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=10782790&postcount=69). In the third paragraph, I outline why I believe condoms should be allowed to prevent AIDS. A week later, the policy change is about to be put into effect.

Obviously, I have some sort of metaphysical power over Catholic Church policy. The question is, how should I use this uncanny ability next?


It was a Bishop who thinks this is a bright idea. However the Teaching Authority of the Church, the Magisterium, still dissagrees with it. It is still the prevention of life, and completely against Church Teaching. The Roman Catholic Church did not approve condoms. One Bishop like himself does not set the teachings of the Catholic Church. Until the Pope Benedict himself says it's a teaching of the Church it is still considered a grave sin to use birth control of any kind including condoms. Abstinence is the safest way to protect ones self from AIDS via Sexual Contact...

It was a Bishop who thinks this is a bright idea. However the Teaching Authority of the Church, the Magisterium, still dissagrees with it. It is still the prevention of life, and completely against Church Teaching. The Roman Catholic Church did not approve condoms. One Bishop like himself does not set the teachings of the Catholic Church. Until the Pope Benedict himself says it's a teaching of the Church it is still considered a grave sin to use birth control of any kind including condoms. Abstinence is the safest way to protect ones self from AIDS via Sexual Contact...
Last I checked, the Pope is seriously looking into this matter. Secondly, click on the second link in my original post and read the third paragraph. It explains why such a policy change would be consistant with the Church's doctrines on the nature of the sexual act.

condoms don't stop AIDS, the aids virus is WAY smaller than the sperm cell and it could slip through the condom easily. . . .

That's something the vatican says, and is completely untrue.

No, Church policy is to preach that people should not be having sex, at least not with anyone other than their married partner. If you are monogamous for life you should have no need for condoms. It is a consistent policy on the part of the Church.
And "Fuck" everyone else

You know I would not even have had a real problem with them except for not only did they "Not support" the use of condoms because of possible extramarital applications, they also purposly blocked the use of condoms as well as purposly spreading misinformation about them

Thats not just not condoning them ... that is an act of a fucked up organization

condoms don't stop AIDS, the aids virus is WAY smaller than the sperm cell and it could slip through the condom easily. . . .

Do you always talk such bollocks, or is this a special occasion?

No, Church policy is to preach that people should not be having sex, at least not with anyone other than their married partner. If you are monogamous for life you should have no need for condoms.You would if you were a life-long monogamous couple that did not want children (or rather, you would need some form of contraception).

But then, much of the point of the Church being against contraception is that it seems to think it has the right to tell people that they must procreate :rolleyes:

However. This is a positive development, definitely, but there is a long way to go before any organised religion is a bastion of fairness.

The Novus Ordo mass is a sacrilige. This is just another example of the evil men that have infiltrated the catholic church since vatican II leading further and further away from the true catholic church that christ founded. If you doubt the evil of the New Order then read this http://www.dailycatholic.org/issue/05May/may12tim.htm

If the church is not above Christ then why don't they follow his teachings?

I count at least five people with a broken Sarcasm Detector(tm).

Interesting point with regard to the use of condoms in sub-saharan africa. The countries that see the greatest improvement in AIDS rates are not the countries with the most condoms. Rather the countries where the government takes a strong stance on abstinance and prostitution have the greatest success in turning the tide. Countries that focus on condoms actually experience an increase in their aids rate. Uganda is the perfect example of why condoms are only a minor issue. http://www.usaid.gov/pop_health/aids/Publications/docs/ugandareport.pdf

If the church is not above Christ then why don't they follow his teachings?
Dude you take life way too seriously. I'm not any kind of catholic, but I attended a traditional latin mass last sunday. The views on the New Order church are straight from that the traditionalists. I found them to be extremely entertaining. Even more entertaining was the sermon http://www.sgg.org/sermons/060423.m3u take a listen at around eight minutes into the sermon to hear some classic catholic Jew hating.
I love crazy religious zealots.

Then Catholic Chruch cannot change nor modernise. If it did then it would have to admit that for almost a 1000 years it has been wrong. Now can you see the powers that be in the Catholic Church ever letting that happen? Nor do I belive they should change. Heheh because as the years go by it will become increrasingly easy for your normal man in the street to see just how bogus the faith is, and so even from it's inception it's death warrent has been signed.

Exactly. In fact it is entirely contradictary for ANY catholic doctrine to be changed, because of papal infallability. This has to be the most messed up of all church doctrine, because popes themselves prove that it isn't true, when they contradict their predecessors. Examples include: the church officially apologizing for the Spanish Inquisition (which nobody expected); the declaration that Limbo in fact DOESN'T exist after all; and the institution of the doctrine of Mary's ascension. Even the policy of infallability itself hasn't been around forever, which raises a rather interesting paradox.

This comment is very uncalled for. I sense insensitivity here.


Really? So is the Catholic church going to deny priests around the world raping children? I guess that makes sense, since you already deny women are EQUAL to men. Fuck your "infallible" pope with a big rusty crucifix.:upyours: