PDA

View Full Version : Pope, Condoms & AC, and he's mad



antichrist
21-11-2010, 06:17 PM
16 years ago I was in Philippines that co-incided with World Youth Day being held there. The mayor of Pasay, a metro city between airport and CBD, had signs erected for folk to use condoms against AIDS, there were girlie bars in the area.

Well, under duress, he was forced to cover them for when the Pope went passed.

The then Pope over there spoke against condoms as the current pope also spoke against them recently.

Well I seen red over this, coz I had seen some overseas AIDS patients in resorts being cared for as cheaper to do so over there. Also I was upset as also witnessed the overpopulation, degradation and squalor that uncontrolled births produce.

A bit later in 1994 we both headed for Australia and Keating welcomed the Pope and said that we agree with his family policies - causing me to see RED, so I started yelling out protesting, breaking the Pope's speech, and subsequently got bashed up by his fans and his %!!@@** Swiss guards, calling me a Satanist.

Well now lo and behold just today the Pope announces that it is okay to use condoms to prevent AIDS - what a f...ing hero.

antichrist
22-11-2010, 01:02 PM
The Pope's acquisence is only for homosexual males who may spread AIDS but who cannot impregnate in such action - that is why allowable. It is not for sex workers or anyone else, He did not mention lesbians so who knows.

Desmond
22-11-2010, 01:43 PM
A step in the right direction IMO.

Hobbes
22-11-2010, 01:59 PM
16 years ago I was in Philippines that co-incided with World Youth Day being held there.

You were a toolie?

Kevin Bonham
22-11-2010, 05:48 PM
A step in the right direction IMO.

Indeed. Just a very small one with a very long way to go when it comes to the Vatican's pronouncements on sexual morality.

Rincewind
22-11-2010, 08:03 PM
Indeed. Just a very small one with a very long way to go when it comes to the Vatican's pronouncements on sexual morality.

Too right. They have a lot to answer for. Just think if AC's parents weren't catholic...

antichrist
22-11-2010, 09:53 PM
Too right. They have a lot to answer for. Just think if AC's parents weren't catholic...

How poorer the world would have been.

But I used to read Q magazine (queer) in the mid nineties, and every issue would have about 6 or 8 pages of obituararis, talk about Gay Plague, as well world wide millions have died in the 30 years it has taken the Vatican to only partly approve condoms. What a disgrace. In the meantime the priests had a free run of the chookyard - what total hypocrisy.

Igor_Goldenberg
23-11-2010, 07:53 AM
Indeed. Just a very small one with a very long way to go when it comes to the Vatican's pronouncements on sexual morality.
Can't say I agree with Vatican's view on sex, but why everyone is getting their knickers in the knot?
Is there a single country that prohibits sale of condoms because of Vatican?
Do catholic priest hold a candle in every bedroom?

Rincewind
23-11-2010, 08:40 AM
Is there a single country that prohibits sale of condoms because of Vatican?
Do catholic priest hold a candle in every bedroom?

The catholic church is a major if not the major christian religion in the world. If the head of that religion says condoms are against god's laws then do uyou not think some people will choose to believe him and not use them?

Apart from being a good way to slow down the spread of infectious diseases like HIV and many others. It also provides a a means to control birth rates which is a major issue in many resource and technology poor (catholic) regions.

Igor_Goldenberg
23-11-2010, 09:03 AM
The catholic church is a major if not the major christian religion in the world. If the head of that religion says condoms are against god's laws then do uyou not think some people will choose to believe him and not use them?
If people choose to believe him on this issue, why do they choose not to believe him on other issues?


Apart from being a good way to slow down the spread of infectious diseases like HIV and many others. It also provides a a means to control birth rates which is a major issue in many resource and technology poor (catholic) regions.
The discussion is not about pro and cons of condoms. BTW, the level of technology has a very small correlation with level of Catholicism in any regions. And I am not even sure it's negative. But that's not the issue.

Is the availability of condoms correlated with predominance of Catholicism? (with the possible exception of Vatican)

Rincewind
23-11-2010, 10:20 AM
If people choose to believe him on this issue, why do they choose not to believe him on other issues?

Question the reason why believers choose to listen to their religious leaders seems to be a irrelevant and moot point. Obviously a lot of poeple do otherwise the Vatican would cease to exist and Catholics would all become self-governing autonomous congregations.


The discussion is not about pro and cons of condoms. BTW, the level of technology has a very small correlation with level of Catholicism in any regions. And I am not even sure it's negative. But that's not the issue.

No but the issue of what catholics are told by their leader is only an issue in the low technology/resourced area with a significant catholic proportion. For example, I wouldn't count the poorer regions of china as the numbers are too low. However I would count certain part of latin america and poor regions of PI.


Is the availability of condoms correlated with predominance of Catholicism? (with the possible exception of Vatican)

I imagine the number of condoms sold in poor catholic countries are pretty low. But I don't have the figures.

The point is regardless of the practice the church's position on the use of contraception does not address the issues of birth rate and disease prevention. They claim it is supported by scripture, but I don't see other churches thinking it is a big deal.

Igor_Goldenberg
23-11-2010, 10:41 AM
Question the reason why believers choose to listen to their religious leaders seems to be a irrelevant and moot point.
It is relevant because condoms is only a part of Vatican stand on sexual matters. Catholics that don't follow Vatican doctrine on sex and marriage are not likely to follow their doctrine on condoms either.
That's why all those groups demanding Vatican to endorse usage of condoms are barking up the wrong tree.


The point is regardless of the practice the church's position on the use of contraception does not address the issues of birth rate and disease prevention.
Is Vatican concerned with birth rate?
As far as disease prevention is concerned condoms are very good for those that do not follow Vatican doctrine on sex, but largely irrelevant for those that strictly follow Catholic rules.

Rincewind
23-11-2010, 03:21 PM
It is relevant because condoms is only a part of Vatican stand on sexual matters. Catholics that don't follow Vatican doctrine on sex and marriage are not likely to follow their doctrine on condoms either.
That's why all those groups demanding Vatican to endorse usage of condoms are barking up the wrong tree.

You seem to have a very simplistic, black or white, view of the world.

Whether people "follow the rules" or not depends largely on individual benefit versus cost. It is perfectly feasible, in fact it is expected, that people will be tempted to break the rules on some part of the code and not others. If you will allow the analogy of a driver who might speed occasionally but generally will not drive through red-lights.


Is Vatican concerned with birth rate?

Generally I get the impression they want them to be as high as possible among catholics.


As far as disease prevention is concerned condoms are very good for those that do not follow Vatican doctrine on sex, but largely irrelevant for those that strictly follow Catholic rules.

As stated above only in cases where both partners follow the entire code (and not only part of it) and there is no infection from a secondary source like blood transfusion, previous marriages or congenital infection.

antichrist
23-11-2010, 04:22 PM
Some kinky Catholics who live in a conservative society will pretend all is hunky dorey (like some priests do - we seen them up the Cross) but could even be active homosexuals on the side ( or over the top who knows), if condoms were allowed in marriage it could protect the spouse from disease. I know a couple this happened to and she never slept with him, that was 20 years ago, she still locks him out of bed room. He gave her an std, and it wasn't me by the way.

Oepty
23-11-2010, 11:24 PM
The Pope's acquisence is only for homosexual males who may spread AIDS but who cannot impregnate in such action - that is why allowable. It is not for sex workers or anyone else, He did not mention lesbians so who knows.

Just heard on radio news that the Popes comments apply to both women and men and the example of male prostitutes is just one of the situations it applies to. Not sure how far his comments are supposed to go.
Scott

antichrist
24-11-2010, 06:15 AM
Just heard on radio news that the Popes comments apply to both women and men and the example of male prostitutes is just one of the situations it applies to. Not sure how far his comments are supposed to go.
Scott

I think he allowed male homosexuals to use condoms to protect the priests (a minority of course) from any disease whilst they molest little children. Certain acts of homosexuals can easily attract hepititis - not trying to vilify homosexuals.

Desmond
24-11-2010, 12:24 PM
Just heard on radio news that the Popes comments apply to both women and men and the example of male prostitutes is just one of the situations it applies to. Not sure how far his comments are supposed to go.
Scott
From the report I read in SMH (http://www.smh.com.au/world/condoms-acceptable-in-certain-cases-pope-20101121-182d1.html), he used the male prostitute example. I don't think it is justified to assume that his comments should be taken more broadly.

Oepty
24-11-2010, 04:55 PM
From the report I read in SMH (http://www.smh.com.au/world/condoms-acceptable-in-certain-cases-pope-20101121-182d1.html), he used the male prostitute example. I don't think it is justified to assume that his comments should be taken more broadly.

I was not assuming anything, just repeating what I heard reported on the radio, I was listening to BBC worldservice via ABC news radio. Here is a link to a story on the BBC website, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11821422
Scott

antichrist
25-11-2010, 06:38 AM
Put this into perspective, with one flash of his eyelashes God could cure all diseases - then why doesn't the mean bastard do it?

Kids born with deformities requiring maybe 20 operations, mothers dying coz of cancers, gangrene, leprosy, you name it.

The joke is the Pope and religious people who believe in such stupid concepts of a god.

antichrist
25-11-2010, 07:42 PM
Apparently different versions came out in English and Italian press, in Italian press guys if have disease can use condoms in marriage.

Capablanca-Fan
04-12-2010, 05:52 AM
Here is a Jewish non-Christian commentator, Jonah Goldberg (http://patriotpost.us/opinion/jonah-goldberg/2010/11/24/this-pope-plays-it-right/):


Now, I'm not on the same page as the Vatican on all matters of sexuality, never mind theology. But I respect it. And, given the core assumptions of Catholic moral thought, I think Benedict's reasoning is perfectly sound.

But, more relevant, I appreciate the role the church plays in savoring the right notes.

It's a common trope among church critics to glibly suggest that the Vatican has the blood of millions on its hands because it doesn't back condom distribution, particularly in Africa. That is as absurd as it is unprovable. The church's opposition to corruption, ethnic violence and murder are just as pronounced and resolute, and yet such maladies persist in Africa as well. Are we to believe that African male prostitutes no doubt devout Catholics all were simply following church doctrine when they declined to use condoms?

Meanwhile, the church does perhaps more than any other institution to aid the sick and feed the hungry in Africa, something you certainly can't say about many of the critics in the Fourth Estate peanut gallery.

As for the church's preferred approach abstinence until marriage it may be impractical in most parts of the world, as the critics claim. But it would undeniably save more lives than condom use if put into practice. What seems to offend many isn't the efficacy of the solution but the suggestion that such values have any place in the modern world.

antichrist
04-12-2010, 06:37 AM
Here is a Jewish non-Christian commentator, Jonah Goldberg (http://patriotpost.us/opinion/jonah-goldberg/2010/11/24/this-pope-plays-it-right/):


Now, I'm not on the same page as the Vatican on all matters of sexuality, never mind theology. But I respect it. And, given the core assumptions of Catholic moral thought, I think Benedict's reasoning is perfectly sound.

But, more relevant, I appreciate the role the church plays in savoring the right notes.

It's a common trope among church critics to glibly suggest that the Vatican has the blood of millions on its hands because it doesn't back condom distribution, particularly in Africa. That is as absurd as it is unprovable. The church's opposition to corruption, ethnic violence and murder are just as pronounced and resolute, and yet such maladies persist in Africa as well. Are we to believe that African male prostitutes no doubt devout Catholics all were simply following church doctrine when they declined to use condoms?

Meanwhile, the church does perhaps more than any other institution to aid the sick and feed the hungry in Africa, something you certainly can't say about many of the critics in the Fourth Estate peanut gallery.

As for the church's preferred approach abstinence until marriage it may be impractical in most parts of the world, as the critics claim. But it would undeniably save more lives than condom use if put into practice. What seems to offend many isn't the efficacy of the solution but the suggestion that such values have any place in the modern world.

Well according to your story Jono your God created us humans with very strong sexual urges, so abstinence is very unlikely except for priests, that is the Godly elite, and look what they do, many of them bugger boys. They are worse than anyone.

I agree the reasoning can be sound, but man is not a all-reasoning creature, the flesh is stronger than the mind - just ask those abovementioned priests. Neither is God an all-reasoning creature - he authorises genocide of Canaanites so they can be robbed by his Chosen People.

Bullshit the Church is against ethnic violence - they were blessing Nazi troops off on their way to Holocaust. And against corruption, we all know that Vatican bankers are up to their knees in it. Oh and against murder are they, how many hundreds of thousands did they have put to death during the Inquisition. They had homosexuals vertically sawn in half commencing at the sexual organs where the supposed sin was supposed to have originated from. They are the universial church of stupidity and cruelity. When it is not so is the small gaps inbetween when some individuals attempt to humanise and de-God the place.

Wasn't it the Hebrew God that deemed that the dark people would be slaves - I don't think the supposed Saviour spoke out against slavery, and it is ordained in the Old Testament.

About the Church helping feed the poor etc - the Church's philosophy edicts ensure that the poor will always be multiplying. In the Philippines the official Church backed the corrupt land-grabbing landowners against the starving poor. The priests would, and still do, conduct private masses in the chapels of the corrupt and murdering ruling class.

And what did supposed Jesus say about the poor when questioned by Judas re wasting precious oils to wash his grubby feet "they will always be with us". Even Judas showed him up. Jesus was like Marie Antoniette (was it) who said let the poor eat cake.

We only have one life and if condoms helps prevent too many children for our overcrowded planet, and helps prevents sexual diseases, then a historical killing-machine church should not get in the way.

They are experts in spreading ignorant and dangerous piffle - and you have sucked in.

And btw Merry Xmas if I am barred in the meantime

antichrist
28-03-2013, 12:13 PM
dont think the current pope would need condoms but do know that he was aggainst use of condoms to control aids early on