church against reduction of vat on condoms !!

scuby

why is the catholic church so against the reduction of vat on condoms ???

it is so ridicules to come out with a statement saying it will lead to an increase in under age sex etc and promiscuity..

have they not thought, about people may not being able to afford them ?
the rise in std's from not using them ?
in third world countries, the rise in aids, due to unprotected sex etc etc etc...

the way they are going they will alienate the church goers that are left.. they need to get with it and live in the real world..

and then there is the whole legal wrangle against the release of legal papers and documents about the governments investigation in child abuse..one arch-bishop trying to keep another quiet !!

They really need to cop on... it's 2008 !!!!! thats my rant, a little drunk... i'm going to hell :mad:

philologos

I can see where the Catholic Church are coming from. They want to encourage abstinence instead of using condoms, because when people say "ah I can chuck on a condom", it allows them to become more promiscuous, which in itself is wrong. Also, they want to encourage the role of marriage.

I however see no problem with using condoms as a temporary step, ultimately leading towards the emphasis on abstinence just as a means of ultimately ridding the AIDs issue in Africa.

Akrasia

Jakkass wrote: »

I can see where the Catholic Church are coming from. They want to encourage abstinence instead of using condoms, because when people say "ah I can chuck on a condom", it allows them to become more promiscuous, which in itself is wrong. Also, they want to encourage the role of marriage.

I however see no problem with using condoms as a temporary step, ultimately leading towards the emphasis on abstinence just as a means of ultimately ridding the AIDs issue in Africa.

The catholic church love big families because it means there are more catholics in the next generation. That's the main reason. They are against family planning.

philologos

Akrasia wrote: »

The catholic church love big families because it means there are more catholics in the next generation. That's the main reason. They are against family planning.

I can't speak for the Catholic Church, but I can speak of my personal beliefs, which are as in previous post.

lostexpectation

safety first

PDN

scuby wrote: »

why is the catholic church so against the reduction of vat on condoms ???

it is so ridicules to come out with a statement saying it will lead to an increase in under age sex etc and promiscuity..

have they not thought, about people may not being able to afford them ?
the rise in std's from not using them ?
in third world countries, the rise in aids, due to unprotected sex etc etc etc...

While personally I am all for abolishing VAT on condoms, in fairness to the Roman Catholic Church I should point out that the rate of VAT on condoms in Ireland is hardly going to affect anyone in third world countries (unless, of course, the good citizens of Malawi are coming to Dublin on shopping trips to buy their prophylactics).

panda100

It always really frustrates me the way people seem to blame the Catholic church and there stance on contraception on the aids epidemic in Africa.
Only 13% of Africans are Catholic so the other 87% are hardly going to care about what the pope says.

The catholic church really need a new PR sytem. Instead of saying 'rawh rawh dont do this ,dont do that' they should be promoting their very valid answer to the increase in STD's,teen pregnancys etc and that is abstinence. I think If we ever do get a public national sex education camapign that instead of just promoting condoms etc abstinence should also be promoted. I know everyones expereince in relationships is differnet but I have definatly found that abstaining from sex has made my relationships a lot more fuffilling then relationships where Ive had a more physical relationship.

JC 2K3

panda100 wrote: »

It always really frustrates me the way people seem to blame the Catholic church and there stance on contraception on the aids epidemic in Africa.
Only 13% of Africans are Catholic so the other 87% are hardly going to care about what the pope says.

I'm not going to check if your stats are correct, but anyway, there are about 900 million people in Africa.

900 million*13% = 117 million people

It's not only 13% when you're talking about such large numbers of people.

panda100 wrote: »

The catholic church really need a new PR sytem. Instead of saying 'rawh rawh dont do this ,dont do that' they should be promoting their very valid answer to the increase in STD's,teen pregnancys etc and that is abstinence.

Ireland isn't going to go back to strict Catholicism. That is not a practical solution at all.

panda100 wrote: »

I think If we ever do get a public national sex education camapign that instead of just promoting condoms etc abstinence should also be promoted.

Of course, but alongside, and not at the expense of the promotion of safe sex, and with no mention of Christianity or any religion. I wouldn't expect too many people to opt for it tbh.

Hivemind187

Abstinence. That program is working wonders in the US isnt it?

And, be fair, the poor in many African and South American nations have no TV, no books, no radios, no food, sometimes no water and you want to take THAT away from them as well?

I'm with Geldof on this one, with every bottle of milk sent over send a condom.

coffee_cake

Hivemind187 wrote: »

Abstinence. That program is working wonders in the US isnt it?

I read an article awhile back that said teen pregnancy rates were higher in the areas that had abstinence programs in school =/

hairyheretic

Teen pregnancy rates and STDs both, as I recall. Abstinence is great in principle, but in the real world, it simply doesn't work. Then when the kids that haven't been taught anything else do start having sex, they end up with more diseases and more pregnancies.

philologos

JC 2K3 wrote: »

I'm not going to check if your stats are correct, but anyway, there are about 900 million people in Africa.

900 million*13% = 117 million people

It's not only 13% when you're talking about such large numbers of people.


Ireland isn't going to go back to strict Catholicism. That is not a practical solution at all.

Hang on here. Surely if these people are not using contraception purely because the Pope says so, they will also take the stance on pre-marital sex just as clearly? Why heed the Pope in one regard and not another? This just proves to me that they aren't all to concerned about what the Pope says anyway, and the Catholic Church is not responsible for the spread of AIDS. That's just logically looking through it. I don't think it's fair to criticise the Church as if these people were truly practicing abstinence up until marriage it certainly wouldn't cause an AIDS epidemic.

How do you know what Ireland will or will not do? I hope the people of Ireland come to Christianity in general regardless of denomination.

Hivemind187

Jakkass wrote: »

Hang on here. Surely if these people are not using contraception purely because the Pope says so, they will also take the stance on pre-marital sex just as clearly? Why heed the Pope in one regard and not another? This just proves to me that they aren't all to concerned about what the Pope says anyway, and the Catholic Church is not responsible for the spread of AIDS. That's just logically looking through it. I don't think it's fair to criticise the Church as if these people were truly practicing abstinence up until marriage it certainly wouldn't cause an AIDS epidemic.

Is it lonely up there on that pedestal?

Jakkass, even you have to admit that human beings have urges and those urges lead to sex. If you dont know (because maybe you are the no-sex-before-marriage type and are still a virgin). Sex feels good. It is physiologically beneficial to health both physical and mental, its fun, its relaxing and it is life affirming - all things that many African nations need badly.

Also, much of the trade that goes on in these places is subject to the whim of local tribal leaders. They make the decisions about what can and cannot be sold in villages or in many cases what can and cannot be used by the populace. If these individuals are in the pocket (do cassocks have pockets?) of the Catholic Church then they will prevent the distribution of jimmy-hats.

Its very easy to sit back and say its all their own fault for having sex, but not everyone is as high and mighty - many of the posters on this very forum, who are devout Christians may well find the abstinence protocol laughably naive as well.

With all due respect.
Hivemind.

MooseJam

abstinence didn't work too well for the Catholic clergy , a large number of them ended up abusing kids, though maybe it's wrong to blame abstinence and a large percentage of priests are pedophiles

philologos

Hivemind187 wrote: »

Is it lonely up there on that pedestal?

Jakkass, even you have to admit that human beings have urges and those urges lead to sex. If you dont know (because maybe you are the no-sex-before-marriage type and are still a virgin). Sex feels good. It is physiologically beneficial to health both physical and mental, its fun, its relaxing and it is life affirming - all things that many African nations need badly.

Also, much of the trade that goes on in these places is subject to the whim of local tribal leaders. They make the decisions about what can and cannot be sold in villages or in many cases what can and cannot be used by the populace. If these individuals are in the pocket (do cassocks have pockets?) of the Catholic Church then they will prevent the distribution of jimmy-hats.

Its very easy to sit back and say its all their own fault for having sex, but not everyone is as high and mighty - many of the posters on this very forum, who are devout Christians may well find the abstinence protocol laughably naive as well.

With all due respect.
Hivemind.

I couldn't care how lonely it is on that pedestal. I don't think the Pope deserves as much blame as the general public are giving him and the Catholic Church over the AIDS epidemic.

Yes humans have urges, urges that can be controlled and exercised in the correct situation. Not all things that feel good are necessarily good in the light of morality. I could feel good if I took a hit of heroin but that doesn't make it correct or right does it?

If the individuals were truly of the Church, they would be encouraging this also as it is truly beneficial. I believe that telling someone to put on a condom and just say that it is all okay isn't acceptable. Because you haven't tackled the root problem, which is the lust and the promiscuity about the whole thing.

Hivemind, I believe it's far far easier to blame Christianity for the problems in Africa. In a sense you are using the Catholic Church in particular as a scapegoat. (I don't usually defend the RC Church as much as this but in this point of view they are spot on)

daveyjoe

Well said Hivemind187

Jakkass wrote: »

... it allows them to become more promiscuous, which in itself is wrong.

Please append 'according to my belief system' to these statements in future.

Jakkass wrote: »

Because you haven't tackled the root problem, which is the lust and the promiscuity about the hole thing.

Sex happens! Attacking the 'root problem' is not a practical solution and it's the reason that the mess is there in the first place.

BrianCalgary

daveyjoe wrote: »

Well said Hivemind187


Please append 'according to my belief system' to these statements in future.
[=QUOTE]

Leave the modding to the mods.:D

JC 2K3

Jakkass wrote: »

How do you know what Ireland will or will not do? I hope the people of Ireland come to Christianity in general regardless of denomination.

Ah come on now. Religion being a delusion is at least debatable, but this is just ridiculous.

Jakkass wrote: »

I could feel good if I took a hit of heroin but that doesn't make it correct or right does it?

There's nothing morally wrong about heroin use, or the use of any other drug. In fact, the government's stance on drugs is very similar to the Catholic Church's stance on sex; rather than promoting a safer way to indulge in activities that humans will inevitibly participate in, they take a Draconian and impractical approach - and it doesn't work!

Black Swan

scuby wrote: »

why is the catholic church so against the reduction of vat on condoms ???

"Be fruitful and multiply?"

amen

"Be fruitful and multiply?"

but it promotes the cycle method

philologos

JC 2K3 wrote: »

Ah come on now. Religion being a delusion is at least debatable, but this is just ridiculous.

It's not ridiculous. There is healthy growth in Christianity in Ireland (this is perhaps debatable, however all denominations have seen a rise), and throughout the world. It's a reasonable assertion.

JC 2K3 wrote: »

There's nothing morally wrong about heroin use, or the use of any other drug. In fact, the government's stance on drugs is very similar to the Catholic Church's stance on sex; rather than promoting a safer way to indulge in activities that humans will inevitibly participate in, they take a Draconian and impractical approach - and it doesn't work!

Nothing wrong perhaps in your morality. It divides families, ruins lives and destroys perfectly healthy people, as do most illegal substances. The governments stance is harsh on drugs and rightly so, our streets need to be rid of them.

The Catholic Church's stance (bear in mind I'm not even an adherent of the Catholic Church) on sex is reasonable and compatible with all strains of Christianity, within the correct boundaries. In marriage there is a lesser likelihood of one committing adultery or being promiscuous than in a relationship without marriage. The objective is merely to keep people safe from of hurt or abuse that can come in the course of a relationship. So I think they are providing a safer way, in terms of both the physical (STDs etc), and the mental (in terms of being more attached due to a sexual relationship).

I think humans can hold out till the correct situation. I don't think that is so unreasonable at all.

Mrs OBumble

MooseJam wrote: »

abstinence didn't work too well for the Catholic clergy , a large number of them ended up abusing kids, though maybe it's wrong to blame abstinence and a large percentage of priests are pedophiles

Would you care to share your source for this information?

(btw, it's spelt paedophiles.)

daveyjoe

JustMary wrote: »

Would you care to share your source for this information?

(btw, it's spelt paedophiles.)

Are you serious?
Don't even have to go into archive for this one (fresh from today's papers): http://www.rte.ie/news/2008/0204/church.html

I don't know if it's fair to say that a 'large number' (what's a large number?) of priests are paedophiles but it is fair to say that the proportion of priests who have abused children is much higher than that of the total population.

Run_to_da_hills

MooseJam wrote: »

abstinence didn't work too well for the Catholic clergy , a large number of them ended up abusing kids, though maybe it's wrong to blame abstinence and a large percentage of priests are pedophiles

Abstinence is un Biblical. If the Catholic Church allowed marriage among their own clergy in the first place they wouldn't have the vast number of closet cases of child abuse coming out of the woodwork.

"A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous, One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity" 1 Timothy 3vs 2to4

JC 2K3

Jakkass wrote: »

It's not ridiculous. There is healthy growth in Christianity in Ireland (this is perhaps debatable, however all denominations have seen a rise), and throughout the world. It's a reasonable assertion.

The worlds' population is also on the rise....

Jakkass wrote: »

It divides families, ruins lives and destroys perfectly healthy people, as do most illegal substances.

That's quite the assertion you're making there. Besides cocaine, heroin and perhaps a few other less common ones, illegal drugs don't ruin people's lives, and even in the case of both of those drugs, there's a strong argument that it is the legal status of the drugs, and not their effects, which is a much bigger factor in them destroying lives.

But that's a whole other topic....

robindch

bluewolf wrote: »

I read an article awhile back that said teen pregnancy rates were higher in the areas that had abstinence programs in school =/

The evidence is pretty convincing. Here's an article by one of the guys who did the research:

http://www.pbs.org/pov/pov2005/shelbyknox/special_pledges_1.html

To summarize, taking abstinence pledges delayed first sex by around 18 months, but at the greater risk of not using contraception when they do get around to it. Overall, the delay in sex is offset by the later failure, producing a rate of STD's and teen pregnancy that's the same as unpledged populations.

Interestingly, preaching abstinence only causes this delay for a limited age-group, and most interestingly of all, it only works when the pledging group is a small percentage of the overall population -- it doesn't work if the pledger is on his/her own, or if the population contains more than about 30% pledgers.

Preaching pledging clearly does not work.

Spyral

it is so ridicules to come out with a statement saying it will lead to an increase in under age sex etc and promiscuity..

have they not thought, about people may not being able to afford them ?
the rise in std's from not using them ?
in third world countries, the rise in aids, due to unprotected sex etc etc etc..

erm... why don't you look at the UK... they have a very pro-contraception pro-abortion situation and yet teen pregnancy are at a high. A normal person learns from his mistakes, a wise man learns from the mistakes of others. So learn from the uk...

the way they are going they will alienate the church goers that are left.. they need to get with it and live in the real world.

.

So they will alienate their own followers by reinforcing their actual teaching. That's like saying if man utd win games their supporters wont follow them.. why don't you get with the program ?

They really need to cop on... it's 2008 !!!!! thats my rant, a little drunk... i'm going to hell

exactly and in≈2000 years the church is pretty much the same on its core beliefs..

The catholic church really need a new PR sytem. Instead of saying 'rawh rawh dont do this ,dont do that' they should be promoting their very valid answer to the increase in STD's,teen pregnancys etc and that is abstinence. I think If we ever do get a public national sex education camapign that instead of just promoting condoms etc abstinence should also be promoted. I know everyones expereince in relationships is differnet but I have definatly found that abstaining from sex has made my relationships a lot more fuffilling then relationships where Ive had a more physical relationship.

the church generally is nice and non rawr but then no one listens to them so they get rarw and then even less people listen to them..

Teen pregnancy rates and STDs both, as I recall. Abstinence is great in principle, but in the real world, it simply doesn't work. Then when the kids that haven't been taught anything else do start having sex, they end up with more diseases and more pregnancies.

so not having sex doenst work, so you still get stds and pregnant by not havign sex ? That is what we call i) a miracle or ii)bull

abstinence does work if you follow it..

abstinence didn't work too well for the Catholic clergy , a large number of them ended up abusing kids, though maybe it's wrong to blame abstinence and a large percentage of priests are pedophiles

I don't know if it's fair to say that a 'large number' (what's a large number?) of priests are paedophiles but it is fair to say that the proportion of priests who have abused children is much higher than that of the total population.

large number... you mean ... the same number %-age wise of teachers and other professions that abuse kids you mean ?
You are way off here plus its irrelavant to the argument about condoms..

. If the Catholic Church allowed marriage among their own clergy in the first place they wouldn't have the vast number of closet cases of child abuse coming out of the woodwork

because being married child abusers ?

Abstinence is un Biblical

havent you heard of the eunichs speech in the bible? Nothing the RCC teaches is unbiblical.

Run_to_da_hills

Spyral wrote: »

Nothing the RCC teaches is unbiblical.

“And call no man your father on earth for one is your Father, which is in heaven.” Matthew 23:9

Overheal

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

“And call no man your father on earth for one is your Father, which is in heaven.” Matthew 23:9

did catholocism just skip over this bit or am I reading it right. I'm guessing thats why churches like the Protestant use the term Reverend?

Run_to_da_hills

Overheal wrote: »

did catholocism just skip over this bit or am I reading it right. I'm guessing thats why churches like the Protestant use the term Reverend?

Precisely, dose it ever dawn on them that they are the only denomination among the thousands of other Christian denominations that use this blasphemous title.

hairyheretic

Jakkass wrote: »

Nothing wrong perhaps in your morality. It divides families, ruins lives and destroys perfectly healthy people, as do most illegal substances. The governments stance is harsh on drugs and rightly so, our streets need to be rid of them.

The same could be said of legal drugs, alcohol being the prime example. A cynical individual might point out the ammount of money that is made from that drug, both to the supplier and the government, in the form of taxes, as at least part of the reason it isn't banned.

If I remember my history correctly, the reason that marijuana was banned in the US was down to pressure (and probably bribary) from the tobacco industry.

Jakkass wrote: »

In marriage there is a lesser likelihood of one committing adultery or being promiscuous than in a relationship without marriage.

Is that the case though? I would have thought it was more down to the person involved. If they are willing to cheat while in a relationship, then they're probably as likely to cheat while married.