At a time when 25 million in Africa have died of AIDS, and at least another 3 million are infected, I think it's reprehensible that Pope Benedict condemned the use of condoms to prevent the spread of AIDS in Africa.

AIDS in Africa is virtually 100% heterosexually spread through intimate contact. No gays, no needles. It's spread by the milennium old sexual customs of millions of tribespeople. Women are helpless to stop becoming infected because even if they are monogamous and HIV negative, their husbands need not be so.

Other than prolonging a rigid, un-Godly ideology that until only recently advocated burning hundred of thousands at the stake, there is no compassionate or logical reason to condemn the use of condoms by a married couple in a monogamous relationship where one partner is infected.

Benedict could have been courageous and taken the Church where it should be- helping to heal the sick by preventing illness in the first place.

To make this ideology even more absurd, the Pope reiterated his stand against saving the life of a mother under any circumstances, even when the pregnancy directly threatens her life. You can tell that decision was made by a male!

The Church ought to adhere to an ethic of Life that is not trampled on by ideologues of high stature or rooted in medieval superstition, whose exercise of power now officially contributes to the death of millions. The pope's actions will result in more African deaths than all the blood diamond conflicts in Africa combined.

Religious beliefs are cast in stone by many more then the Pope. And many with a lot worse ideology then the non use of condoms. Think about how the Muslim belief in dieing in the service of Allah allows mothers (decision made by a women) to strap bombs to their children and send them into places to die. Not disagreeing with your position, just being conscious of the reality of religious beliefs.

Do you know the % of Catholics who choose to ignore some parts of the religion but still consider themselves Catholic? It's a high number. And the religion doesn't crumble just because of it.

The bigger question in Africa isn't the use of condoms it is the availability. If the pope's stance effects that then is an outright shame. If they are available to the people and then they decide to abide by the Pope then that is still their individual choice. I don't think 100% of the African catholics don't use them because the Pope said not to.

Originally Posted by ptownrob

At a time when 25 million in Africa have died of AIDS, and at least another 3 million are infected, I think it's reprehensible that Pope Benedict condemned the use of condoms to prevent the spread of AIDS in Africa.

AIDS in Africa is virtually 100% heterosexually spread through intimate contact. No gays, no needles. It's spread by the milennium old sexual customs of millions of tribespeople. Women are helpless to stop becoming infected because even if they are monogamous and HIV negative, their husbands need not be so.

Other than prolonging a rigid, un-Godly ideology that until only recently advocated burning hundred of thousands at the stake, there is no compassionate or logical reason to condemn the use of condoms by a married couple in a monogamous relationship where one partner is infected.

Benedict could have been courageous and taken the Church where it should be- helping to heal the sick by preventing illness in the first place.

To make this ideology even more absurd, the Pope reiterated his stand against saving the life of a mother under any circumstances, even when the pregnancy directly threatens her life. You can tell that decision was made by a male!

The Church ought to adhere to an ethic of Life that is not trampled on by ideologues of high stature or rooted in medieval superstition, whose exercise of power now officially contributes to the death of millions. The pope's actions will result in more African deaths than all the blood diamond conflicts in Africa combined.

I agree - in this day and age, that type of thing is just barbaric.

Criticism of a religious leader for upholding what has been a standing precept of the religion despite a popular - and self-serving - demand by those who want to live with a "no-responsibility" policy is misguided.

Those who don't want to be Catholic can do what they want. Those who claim to be Catholic, but do not want to follow the precepts of the religion, are hypocrites.

Laws are laws, whether they are part of Canon Law, U.S. Constitutional Law, or Islamic Law (as practiced in several countries). You are either law-abiding, or you are not. If you don't want to follow the laws, nothing ties you to the religion, the nation, or the region.

I commend Pope Benedict XVI for his courage to maintain principles where others would say, "Gee, I wanna have sex on my terms, so please go along with the modern view of things."

He's not trying to pander to the public with a "Change" campaign, only to spin a different song afterwards.

Hey, maybe if there was more self-control, fewer folk would find themselves with HIV/AIDS? Oh, but that would require discipline and education, and how could we expect that......?

I hear you Steve but I do think that the Catholic church needs to upgrade a little.

Let's consider their stance:

They approve birth control if done through natural means such as basil temp, withdrawal etc.

They, obviously, condone anything that would destroy the unborn fetus thus their ban on stem cell research and abortion etc.

What I don't get is why would they assume condoms are different than not having sex on ovulation days? Condoms are natural barriers to sperm meeting egg - the same as withdrawal would be. Either way you are stopping a life from being created which is their stated goal. It's not about having sex on your terms.

I just feel that they need to upgrade their position in this area. These cannons were conceived (no pun intended) and written long before the advent of condoms. I can see them saying no morning after pill (RU84) or no spermicide etc but condoms are just barriers not destroyers.

Then again maybe this is why I stopped being a catholic despite going to a seminary high school!

i.e. core values, permissiveness, watered down rules, the majority used to rule, etc....I agree with Steve...the rules are the rules...if you don't want to play by the rules there are other options.

I do not subscribe to the watering down of beliefs...whether for religion, politics, disciplining children....and I certainly do not support the needs real or other wise of special interest groups over riding the good or the will of the majority.

That is my $4.97 (2 cents adjusted for inflation and useless dollars!!!).

BTK

The lesson is supposed to be one of self-discipline, rather than the "have it your way" with artificial assistance.

The Catholic Church has never been a "slave to fashion." It's goal is to provide a stability in times of flux where morality becomes challenged by convenience enhanced with technology, even if that technology is a latex bag with or without a user's manual.

I'm encouraged that despite the "free love contingent," the "having a child is an inconvenience, so let's kill it now" attitude, and the "it's merciful to kill the infirmed and old" expanding trend, that the Popes in my lifetime have been constant in the hope that humankind will try to live as creatures of discipline, rather than as free spirits of no conscience or self control.

Once that moral discipline diminishes, we become less human in all matters.

Originally Posted by SteveZ

Hey, maybe if there was more self-control, fewer folk would find themselves with HIV/AIDS? Oh, but that would require discipline and education, and how could we expect that......?

I have not posted in a few days and have stayed out of Political for a while...however this is a statement that I believe is very upsetting!

Most of these women are raped...not just once...but many, many times and are typically gang raped. Whether there was discipline or education....RAPE is a horrible thing and should not be blamed on either the discipline or education of the women and children suffering or the men (groups of) that are participating in the act!!!

I am surprised at this statement Steve. I agree with most of the post you wrote but this statement is disturbing. Look at the reality of the country we are speaking of....

I wouldn't call trying to save human lives "being a slave to fashion". Scientists, doctors and governments throughout the world have criticized his statements as being unrealistic, unscientific and dangerous. I read that the current Pontiff is the most extreme since Pius XII. Last week Catholics in Brazil were told they could be excommunicated if they had helped perform an abortion on a nine-year-old who had been raped, but, strangely, not if they had been involved in the rape that impregnated her. Everyone is entitled to their own religious beliefs, but for me, a leader of the Church who promotes dogma over saving lives, is not my idea of a good Christian. At the very least it shows just how out of touch he is. Any fool can see that condoms work - what is the problem with that?

Originally Posted by Taj44

I wouldn't call trying to save human lives "being a slave to fashion". Scientists, doctors and governments throughout the world have criticized his statements as being unrealistic, unscientific and dangerous. I read that the current Pontiff is the most extreme since Pius XII. Last week Catholics in Brazil were told they could be excommunicated if they had helped perform an abortion on a nine-year-old who had been raped, but, strangely, not if they had been involved in the rape that impregnated her. Everyone is entitled to their own religious beliefs, but for me, a leader of the Church who promotes dogma over saving lives, is not my idea of a good Christian. At the very least it shows just how out of touch he is. Any fool can see that condoms work - what is the problem with that?

Not that any rapist would stop and thnk to use one(a condom that is)....but I agree with you! I miss John Paul...

based on the issues with minority groups (not race).
Religions, laws, rules are made for the good of the majority. Of course there are always going to be special, emotional issues like rape, et al. But that does not justify changing the entire structure, nor should one be chastised for upholding what has always been an unpopular issue even way back when we had more values than people want to be held to today.

As the saying goes when one tries to make everybody happy one can ONLY fail!!!! Majority rules....always has....but steadily losing ground....along with our core values.

BTK

BTK

Originally Posted by Cassie325

I have not posted in a few days and have stayed out of Political for a while...however this is a statement that I believe is very upsetting!

Most of these women are raped...not just once...but many, many times and are typically gang raped. Whether there was discipline or education....RAPE is a horrible thing and should not be blamed on either the discipline or education of the women and children suffering or the men (groups of) that are participating in the act!!!

I am surprised at this statement Steve. I agree with most of the post you wrote but this statement is disturbing. Look at the reality of the country we are speaking of....

We're not talking about a single country - but several countries on the African continent. And the anarchy and other political problems there are legion. And again, the problem is discipline and education. Paramilitary rapists there don't carry condoms, and probably wouldn't know what to do with one or would consider it unmanly to use one - they carry ammunition and machetes instead.

Originally Posted by Taj44

I wouldn't call trying to save human lives "being a slave to fashion". Scientists, doctors and governments throughout the world have criticized his statements as being unrealistic, unscientific and dangerous. I read that the current Pontiff is the most extreme since Pius XII. Last week Catholics in Brazil were told they could be excommunicated if they had helped perform an abortion on a nine-year-old who had been raped, but, strangely, not if they had been involved in the rape that impregnated her. Everyone is entitled to their own religious beliefs, but for me, a leader of the Church who promotes dogma over saving lives, is not my idea of a good Christian. At the very least it shows just how out of touch he is. Any fool can see that condoms work - what is the problem with that?

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/be...erview_en.html - Interview of Benedict XVI during the flight to Africa, 17 March 2009.

Rather than the journalistic snippets presented by the press, suggest those who condemn or ridicule the Pope on this matter take the time and effort to read the actual interview, complete with the logic for the position taken. You might be surprised with what you hadn't heard or read via the commercial press. This Pope is far from being a fool, and is an educated, pragmatic academic who doesn't make idle statements. You may disagree with his logic, but his arguments are solid.

There's nothing wrong with dogma, especially when that dogma recognizes the frailty of the human nature and the inherent cultural impediments to understanding that nature. More importantly, that dogma recognizes that you just can't replace human behavior and responsibility with a piece of latex.

Originally Posted by Cassie325

..... I miss John Paul...

Pope John Paul II was a unique personality, having a charisma rarely seen in history for a Pontiff. However, from a theological standpoint, John Paul II and Benedict XVI are identical. Their writings corroborate this.

Originally Posted by SteveZ

Criticism of a religious leader for upholding what has been a standing precept of the religion despite a popular - and self-serving - demand by those who want to live with a "no-responsibility" policy is misguided.

Those who don't want to be Catholic can do what they want. Those who claim to be Catholic, but do not want to follow the precepts of the religion, are hypocrites.

Laws are laws, whether they are part of Canon Law, U.S. Constitutional Law, or Islamic Law (as practiced in several countries). You are either law-abiding, or you are not. If you don't want to follow the laws, nothing ties you to the religion, the nation, or the region.

I commend Pope Benedict XVI for his courage to maintain principles where others would say, "Gee, I wanna have sex on my terms, so please go along with the modern view of things."

He's not trying to pander to the public with a "Change" campaign, only to spin a different song afterwards.

Hey, maybe if there was more self-control, fewer folk would find themselves with HIV/AIDS? Oh, but that would require discipline and education, and how could we expect that......?

Man, you're just a little right of Attila the Hun, aren't you?