Pope rejects condom use in Africa

Nodin

Pope Benedict XVI has said that handing out condoms is not the answer in the fight against HIV/Aids, as he makes his first visit to Africa as pontiff. Speaking en route to Cameroon, he said distribution of condoms "increases the problem". The Vatican urges abstinence.

(My bold)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7947460.stm
He's actually becoming dangerous, with that kind of talk.

Mena

Nodin wrote: »

(My bold)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7947460.stm
He's actually becoming dangerous, with that kind of talk.

This has always been his/their line. There's nothing "becoming" about it, the man and the institution are a menace and will cause the deaths of thousands simply because people listen to them.

If he/they ever think abstinence will work, especially in Africa, they are deluded beyond imagination.

smileykey

Man!!!! How astupid is he??? Would he prefer for thousand to die or live in sickness rather than have safe sex. I know its what the church believes in but its one of those beliefs best kept quite, especially in regards to a continent plagued by HIV/AIDS. I thought they had learned to shut up about this?

Nodin

You can go here and see the reasoned logic of the modern Church in its full glory.
http://www.channel4.com/news/watchlisten/

Tuesday 17th March - Part 3, the piece starts at roughly 4.50 seconds in. The studio discussion starts at 7.00 min and is worth watching for its tragi-comic performance.

Player takes a few seconds to load, so give it time.

Gurgle

On the plus side, the more <edit>biological waste product</edit> this man and his cronies come out with the more they erode what little credibility the RCC has left.

vinchick

This is not a new stance. It has always been the same. If you ever come across the "Alive" newspaper (which is always good for a read) you can find many articles on condoms and STIs. I read a very amusing one on India.

The Chruch claims that fidelity in marriage is the best weapon to combat AIDS and that condoms only increase promiscuity and cheating which is bad.

Its a very simplistic way of looking of things and very dangerous. But that never seems to matter.

Phototoxin

Well studies in South Asia have shown that total abstinence works. Its sensible really no sex = little chance of STIs. Condoms have only about an 85% efficiency in practice and don't protect against all STI's anyway. So it makes sense although the hole 'condoms iz eevil' thing is a bit mental.
I'm all for having tonnes of kids but I'm also for spacing them out as wimmenz are not baby ovens.

Mickeroo

IT's no more than i expected really, at least pope john paul had the excuse of being senile, this guy is just dangerous.

vinchick

Phototoxin wrote: »

Well studies in South Asia have shown that total abstinence works. Its sensible really no sex = little chance of STIs. Condoms have only about an 85% efficiency in practice and don't protect against all STI's anyway. So it makes sense although the hole 'condoms iz eevil' thing is a bit mental.
I'm all for having tonnes of kids but I'm also for spacing them out as wimmenz are not baby ovens.

Makes sense that it does but if only life was so simple! Sex is a fact of it, something that the Pope should realise. That and if you are in a relationship someone with AIDS doesnt matter if you are faithful or not, you need the condom.

L31mr0d

i'm with the pope on this one, although I think he should start up a playstation 3 for condoms program.. seriously, it will single handedly stop the spread of aids

robindch

The bit I liked from that story was where the Beeb pointed out that:

Beeb wrote:

Baptised Catholics made up 17% of the African population in 2006, compared with 12% in 1978, the Vatican says.

So, the guy who leads an organization which believes that it's successful if it gains new members (and membership is most securely conferred by being born to existing members) says that members shouldn't use contraception.

Makes an appalling kind of sense.

PDN

Interesting thread title - but who exactly was asking the Pope to use a condom while he was in Africa?

population

Picking up on the Alive! magazine stuff. They give quite low statistics for Condoms prevebting AIDS and STI's. Cant remember off hand but I think it was like 60% or something.

It actually fretted me a bit because I started to think about my own (and I believe thousands of others) situation. I have had approximately 10 one night stands in my life. Every single time I used a condom and was not drunk or inebriated in any way so I am 100% confident the condom stayed on throughout. Sex was conventional and all. But then you read a stat like that and you think in your darker moments 'Crikey what if they are right and I am wrong? What if I caught something???'

I mean even at the previous posters 85% stat, that does still leave a nagging doubt y'know........

Zillah

population wrote: »

Picking up on the Alive! magazine stuff. They give quite low statistics for Condoms prevebting AIDS and STI's. Cant remember off hand but I think it was like 60% or something.

It actually fretted me a bit because I started to think about my own (and I believe thousands of others) situation. I have had approximately 10 one night stands in my life. Every single time I used a condom and was not drunk or inebriated in any way so I am 100% confident the condom stayed on throughout. Sex was conventional and all. But then you read a stat like that and you think in your darker moments 'Crikey what if they are right and I am wrong? What if I caught something???'

I mean even at the previous posters 85% stat, that does still leave a nagging doubt y'know........

Y'see, that's the problem with reading a rag like Alive. Condoms are, for all intents and purposes, total protection against HIV. HIV has a very low transmission rate anyway, add in that extra level of protection and you'll be fine. Other STDs can be different, for example, warts can form...er, outside the protective area of a condom and all that is necessary is physical contact for transmission. Of course a lot of stats for condoms refer to pregnancy, and they are of course not 100%, that's why most wise people double up, such as both the pill and a condom.

Don't read Alive. Trust the World Health Organisation instead:

WHO wrote:

The most convincing data on the effectiveness of condoms in preventing HIV infection has been generated by prospective studies undertaken on serodiscordant couples, when one partner is infected with HIV and the other is not. These studies show that, with consistent condom use, the HIV infection rate among uninfected partners was less than 1 percent per year. Also, in situations where one partner is definitely infected, inconsistent condom use can be as risky as not using condoms at all.

So basically, after a year of having sex with someone with HIV, less than 1% of those using condoms became infected. The chances of you getting HIV from a one night stand in Ireland has to be in the order of 1 in billions.

Dades

In theory Il Papa is right, in that sexual abstinence as the best way to prevent the spread of the disease. Though it takes someone who has never actually had sex to suggest this was the only 'weapon' against a pandemic.

@ population - TMI, dude. :pac:

Rev Hellfire

There's certainly no denying that the use of condoms can help in combating the spread of STDs.
Though they're not a solution in their own right, lets face it having crates of them in Africa isn't going to do a lot unless African males can be persuaded to actually use them and change their sexual practises.

uncleoswald

Phototoxin wrote: »

Well studies in South Asia have shown that total abstinence works.

It kind of goes without saying that total abstinence works. The question is do abstinence only programs work? My understanding was that these programs have proved less effective then pro-condom sex education. And the U.S. Government has cut its funding to Abstinence only programs in places like Vietnam because of pressure from AIDS prevention advocates. Do you have a link to these studies you mention?

And they have found that in the US abstinence only programs have led to an increase in the popularity of oral sex, which..., eh..., um..., hang on, what side was I on again...?

5uspect

Mena wrote: »

the man and the institution are a menace and will cause the deaths of thousands simply because people listen to them.
...
If he/they ever think abstinence will work, especially in Africa, they are deluded beyond imagination.

They're not really listening to them if they still have unprotected sex. It makes a somewhat dubious excuse however for people to not use condoms.

Mena

Living in Africa for over 25 years, and then moving to a "first world" country has taught me a lot of things, one of which is that attitudes to sex between the two are vastly different.

I don't see the abstinence message ever working in Africa, in general, and this being the case the promotion of safe sex makes the most sense.

Actively dissuading the use of condoms is tantamount to genocide in this case, in my view.

Rev Hellfire

Mena wrote: »

Actively dissuading the use of condoms is tantamount to genocide in this case, in my view.

I would think genocide is a bit strong, careless perhaps.
It's not like he's forcing them to have unprotected sex now is he.

Nodin

Unfortunately, the Church often has a more widespread infrastructure than the state in certain parts of the world. Should they use this to pass on dubious information regarding the benefits of condom use and the like, it will almost inevitably stick, particularily in the rural areas.

Galvasean

Rev Hellfire wrote: »

It's not like he's forcing them to have unprotected sex now is he.

He is telling them not to have protected sex.
He is also being naive thinking that they will favour 'no sex' over 'any sex'.

Dades

Galvasean wrote: »

He is telling them not to have protected sex.

Not sure that's accurate. He's telling them not to have sex at all.

Galvasean wrote: »

He is also being naive thinking that they will favour 'no sex' over 'any sex'.

Now that I agree with.

Rev Hellfire

Galvasean wrote: »

He is telling them not to have protected sex.

As Dades stated he's telling them abstinence is best.

Galvasean wrote: »

He is also being naive thinking that they will favour 'no sex' over 'any sex'.

True, but that's their decision to make and their responsibility when it all goes títs up.

PDN

Dades wrote: »

Not sure that's accurate. He's telling them not to have sex at all.

Not sure that's accurate either. He is promoting abstinence and fidelity. He's telling them not to have sex outside of marriage at all.

Zillah

Which has been shown to be incredibly ineffective because people really really like having sex and will do it no matter how many conservatives tell them they shouldn't.

Flamed Diving

Zillah wrote: »

Which has been shown to be incredibly ineffective because people really really like having sex and will do it no matter how many conservatives tell them they shouldn't.

Yeah. It's a shame that God made sex feel so good, but then tells us not to partake in it. But as they say, God has a twisted sense of humour works in mysterious ways.

Phototoxin

I can understand him making moral judgements on the use of condoms, but saying it would make the problem worse is just plain silly.

Makes sense that it does but if only life was so simple! Sex is a fact of it, something that the Pope should realise. That and if you are in a relationship someone with AIDS doesnt matter if you are faithful or not, you need the condom.

You can choose not to have sex though. The same way I can choose not to take my insulin. (but then I die a slow and painful death :pac: )

Picking up on the Alive! magazine stuff. They give quite low statistics for Condoms prevebting AIDS and STI's. Cant remember off hand but I think it was like 60% or something.

Its propaganda and LIES. When I was devout catholic I still hated it as it was often inaccurate.

Unfortunately, the Church often has a more widespread infrastructure than the state in certain parts of the world. Should they use this to pass on dubious information regarding the benefits of condom use and the like, it will almost inevitably stick, particularily in the rural areas.

Not just the RCC ... when polio was being vaccinated the muslims were up in arms against it as an infidel plot or some shyte.

Not sure that's accurate either. He is promoting abstinence and fidelity. He's telling them not to have sex outside of marriage at all.

+1 And it makes sense. However some people's lives will be ruined from rape, being born wiht it and so on. The african concept of abstinance for a man (because you have HIV/AIDS) is a laughable suggestion. They had difficulty with the priesthood thing for a while as they couldnt get over how you couldnt have children.

Stercus Accidit

People are starting to ignore these lunatics right?

I mean, am I as deluded as a believer, to erm, believe that the church's influence is dwindling outside of the first world also, or are they stronger in third world countries?

Regardless, these people are unbelieveably naive.

Goduznt Xzst

Zillah wrote: »

Which has been shown to be incredibly ineffective because people really really like having sex and will do it no matter how many conservatives tell them they shouldn't.

Have you noticed though that the rampant spreading of Aids and premarital sex in Africa is nearly inversely proportional to the number of Bears in Africa. Coincidence?

midlandsmissus

I see his point.

Condoms will not stop the spread of aids in africa, as how exactly are you going to get men to WEAR a condom in a culture where they believe sex is their right, and they believe sleeping with a virgin is the cure for aids?

Education is the only way

Flamed Diving

midlandsmissus wrote: »

I see his point.

Condoms will not stop the spread of aids in africa, as how exactly are you going to get men to WEAR a condom in a culture where they believe sex is their right, and they believe sleeping with a virgin is the cure for aids?

Education is the only way

Sane people call for education, abstinence, condoms, etc. You know, those who don't view the world in black & white and realise that taking a multi-faceted approach is the best.

No, wait. Having everything in neat and tidy bundles makes it easier to fathom.


NO TO CONDOMS!

Splainc

Phototoxin wrote: »

Well studies in South Asia have shown that total abstinence works. Its sensible really no sex = little chance of STIs. Condoms have only about an 85% efficiency in practice and don't protect against all STI's anyway. So it makes sense although the hole 'condoms iz eevil' thing is a bit mental.
I'm all for having tonnes of kids but I'm also for spacing them out as wimmenz are not baby ovens.

that is scary isnt it??? do not have sex at all and still there is a slight chance that you might catch a sexually transmitted disease!!!!

that stat is ridiculous though in my opinion. sure its the same as : do not fly on planes = little chance of dying in a plane crash

resolves nothing

midlandsmissus

Splainc wrote: »

that is scary isnt it??? do not have sex at all and still there is a slight chance that you might catch a sexually transmitted disease!!!!

that stat is ridiculous though in my opinion. sure its the same as : do not fly on planes = little chance of dying in a plane crash

resolves nothing

ER solves alot of things. I know a guy who just came back form thailand, sleeping his way round every city, gave me frightful details of his s.t.i's. Whereas I, who have never have unprotected sex and have slept with one person has never had an STI.

I get really angry with people who have unprotected sex and know better. It is the stupidest, stupidest thing you could do. And if you're in a relationship and having it, then get checked all the time, it's a no brainer, some people are unbeleivably stupid about their health.

Splainc

midlandsmissus wrote: »

ER solves alot of things. I know a guy who just came back form thailand, sleeping his way round every city, gave me frightful details of his s.t.i's. Whereas I, who have never have unprotected sex and have slept with one person has never had an STI.

I get really angry with people who have unprotected sex and know better. It is the stupidest, stupidest thing you could do. And if you're in a relationship and having it, then get checked all the time, it's a no brainer, some people are unbeleivably stupid about their health.

i agree with you but i think you are missing my point. if you abstain from sex i.e. have no sex then you have no chance of getting an STI as in order to get a Sexually Transmitted Infection you would need to first have sex.....

Flamed Diving

Better to not have sex then.

That'll show that AIDS virus...

Dades

midlandsmissus wrote: »

I see his point.

Condoms will not stop the spread of aids in africa, as how exactly are you going to get men to WEAR a condom in a culture where they believe sex is their right, and they believe sleeping with a virgin is the cure for aids?

Education is the only way

Of course condoms will not stop the spread of AIDs.

But they sure as hell will slow the increase more than just telling people not to have sex with anyone other than your wife.

Splainc

Dades wrote: »

Of course condoms will not stop the spread of AIDs.

But they sure as hell will slow the increase more than just telling people not to have sex with anyone other than your wife.

telling humans not to do anything has never really worked has it??!!!

dont press that button!
dont stick that up there!
dont do that!!
dont! dont! dont!!!!!

Mark Hamill

I think some people are forgetting that there are a lot of young people in africa with HIV/AIDS who got it from their parents. Its entirely possible that these people, when they grow up, will want to get married and have sexual relations exclusively with their spouse (just like any christian is supposed to do). Are these people supposed to have unprotected marital sex and possibly give their spouse the disease because they're not supposed to use condoms? Or, in the eyes of the pope, are these people unclean and not supposed to procreate at all?

Phototoxin

Are these people supposed to have unprotected marital sex and possibly give their spouse the disease because they're not supposed to use condoms? Or, in the eyes of the pope, are these people unclean and not supposed to procreate at all? __________________

No you're not supposed to have sex as that would be murdering your spouse essentially. Also as children are one of the main reasons to have kids the cold nazi lawyer personality in me (often akin to the RCC I find :pac: ) tells me to say no to them getting married

Galvasean

Goduznt Xzst wrote: »

Have you noticed though that the rampant spreading of Aids and premarital sex in Africa is nearly inversely proportional to the number of Bears in Africa. Coincidence?

Pfft, bears are not native to Africa.

*searces fossil record*

Mark Hamill wrote: »

I think some people are forgetting that there are a lot of young people in africa with HIV/AIDS who got it from their parents. Its entirely possible that these people, when they grow up, will want to get married and have sexual relations exclusively with their spouse (just like any christian is supposed to do). Are these people supposed to have unprotected marital sex and possibly give their spouse the disease because they're not supposed to use condoms? Or, in the eyes of the pope, are these people unclean and not supposed to procreate at all?

That is an interesting can of worms; which is more important, the right of these (blameless) people to have children or their responsibility not to create new sick people?

Flamed Diving

Galvasean wrote: »

Pfft, bears are not native to Africa.

*searces fossil record*

Inversely related

MrPudding

Splainc wrote: »

telling humans not to do anything has never really worked has it??!!!

dont press that button!
dont stick that up there!
dont do that!!
dont! dont! dont!!!!!

And let's not forget the one that is responsible for HIV/AIDS and growing old etc... Don't eat from that tree.

MrP

5uspect

Just to drag up an old thread with a related story.

Ben Goldacre's lost Bad Science chapter:
http://www.badscience.net/2009/04/matthias-rath-steal-this-chapter/

pH

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaZBSZ0xbfk

Please someone reassure me it's satire.

5uspect

Someone should tell him that isn't not a condom...

ChocolateSauce

pH wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaZBSZ0xbfk

Please someone reassure me it's satire.

I lost interest at "all you sceptics". He isn't funny enough to be satire, he's just a retard. Also, I stopped because I fear his experiment is gonna be a posh ****.

5uspect

He has another video "Why it is okay for sex to hurt the vagina".
I'm not going to sign up to youtube to watch it.

Tard ftw.

joe freethinker

the pope in theory is right, absanance is 100% reliable while a comdom isn't. but the reason aids is spreading is because people are not committing to one sexual partner for life, if they did aids wouldn't spread.
So when people are not listening to the church when it says "No sex before marrage" and "Thou shallt not commit aduldery" Why are they listening when it says "Don't wear a comdom"

Galvasean

pH wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaZBSZ0xbfk

Please someone reassure me it's satire.

'do you want a vagina full of aids?'

O'Coonassa

joe freethinker wrote: »

the pope in theory is right, absanance is 100% reliable while a comdom isn't. but the reason aids is spreading is because people are not committing to one sexual partner for life, if they did aids wouldn't spread.

Did they ever? Certainly not in Africa. The Pope is either evil or retarded.