OrthodoxChristianity.net
September 14, 2014, 10:24:04 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 4 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Pope: Condoms 'Increase' AIDS Epidemic in Africa  (Read 10548 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,772



« on: March 17, 2009, 10:46:48 AM »

Pope Benedict XVI said Tuesday that the distribution of condoms is not the answer in the fight against AIDS in Africa.

Benedict has never before spoken explicitly on condom use although he has stressed that the Roman Catholic Church is in the forefront of the battle against AIDS. The Vatican encourages sexual abstinence to fight the spread of the disease.

"You can't resolve it with the distribution of condoms," the pope told reporters aboard the Alitalia plane headed to Yaounde, Cameroon. "On the contrary, it increases the problem."...

To read the rest of the story go to: Pope: Condoms 'Increase' AIDS Epidemic in Africa
« Last Edit: March 17, 2009, 10:47:10 AM by Asteriktos » Logged
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #1 on: March 17, 2009, 11:17:49 AM »

Pope Benedict XVI said Tuesday that the distribution of condoms is not the answer in the fight against AIDS in Africa.

Benedict has never before spoken explicitly on condom use although he has stressed that the Roman Catholic Church is in the forefront of the battle against AIDS. The Vatican encourages sexual abstinence to fight the spread of the disease.

"You can't resolve it with the distribution of condoms," the pope told reporters aboard the Alitalia plane headed to Yaounde, Cameroon. "On the contrary, it increases the problem."...

To read the rest of the story go to: Pope: Condoms 'Increase' AIDS Epidemic in Africa

Wow... and seat belts have been known to increase car crash fatalities?
Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,070


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #2 on: March 17, 2009, 11:35:29 AM »

Pope Benedict XVI said Tuesday that the distribution of condoms is not the answer in the fight against AIDS in Africa.

Benedict has never before spoken explicitly on condom use although he has stressed that the Roman Catholic Church is in the forefront of the battle against AIDS. The Vatican encourages sexual abstinence to fight the spread of the disease.

"You can't resolve it with the distribution of condoms," the pope told reporters aboard the Alitalia plane headed to Yaounde, Cameroon. "On the contrary, it increases the problem."...

To read the rest of the story go to: Pope: Condoms 'Increase' AIDS Epidemic in Africa

Wow... and seat belts have been known to increase car crash fatalities? 

The only way to combat claims is with facts; if you've got numbers that show that condom use decreases AIDS more than it encourages unsafe sex, then you'll win.  You can't just go to "common sense," because then you'll never win the other person over to your position (and if you believe strongly enough that condoms should be distributed in Africa to stem the tide of AIDS deaths, then you should indeed be committed to making that point to your detractors, for the sake of those at risk).  If he's got hard evidence that shows that condom use increases sexual promiscuity so much that the AIDS rate does actually increase, then he'll have made his point.

If he has numbers that show that seatbelt use increases unsafe driving and, in turn, fatalities, then he'll win.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #3 on: March 17, 2009, 11:43:57 AM »

Condoms, when used properly, are over 99% effective in preventing AIDS. There is no grand argument here- if a condom is used correctly, (i.e. if the Africans are properly educated in their use as well as the risks of HIV), then AIDS will decrease. There are two immediate responses to the condom question: 1.) provide them, along with better education on their proper use, or 2.) don't, and continue teaching abstinence in the hopes that not having sex will catch on.  I'm putting my money on option number one being the most likely path for decreasing AIDS in the long run.

edit: And since the article cited provides zero evidence other than the pope's personal opinion, should I assume his ideas are backed up by facts?
« Last Edit: March 17, 2009, 11:52:04 AM by Bogoliubtsy » Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,571



« Reply #4 on: March 17, 2009, 12:33:44 PM »

Pope Benedict XVI said Tuesday that the distribution of condoms is not the answer in the fight against AIDS in Africa.

Benedict has never before spoken explicitly on condom use although he has stressed that the Roman Catholic Church is in the forefront of the battle against AIDS. The Vatican encourages sexual abstinence to fight the spread of the disease.

"You can't resolve it with the distribution of condoms," the pope told reporters aboard the Alitalia plane headed to Yaounde, Cameroon. "On the contrary, it increases the problem."...

To read the rest of the story go to: Pope: Condoms 'Increase' AIDS Epidemic in Africa

Wow... and seat belts have been known to increase car crash fatalities?
Actually, yes.

Studies have found that people do not place them properly, causing internal bleeding.

An analogy: there was the whole argument about infants having to have their own seats on planes a few years back, the argument that not having them fastened caused fatalities in plane crashes.  Problem is is that plane crashes are far, far less than auto accidents.  Since most parents couldn't/wouldn't pay for the seat on the plane, and ended up driving, infant risk went up.

Condoms, when
IF
Quote
edit: And since the article cited provides zero evidence other than the pope's personal opinion, should I assume his ideas are backed up by facts?
There's your fact.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2009, 12:35:27 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,070


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #5 on: March 17, 2009, 12:49:21 PM »

Condoms, when used properly, are over 99% effective in preventing AIDS. There is no grand argument here- if a condom is used correctly, (i.e. if the Africans are properly educated in their use as well as the risks of HIV), then AIDS will decrease. There are two immediate responses to the condom question: 1.) provide them, along with better education on their proper use, or 2.) don't, and continue teaching abstinence in the hopes that not having sex will catch on.  I'm putting my money on option number one being the most likely path for decreasing AIDS in the long run.

Yes, this is the argument that we've heard over and over again; when you're debating someone who doubts the efficacy of using condoms in the fight against AIDS, you've got to come with more than that.

edit: And since the article cited provides zero evidence other than the pope's personal opinion, should I assume his ideas are backed up by facts?

Don't assume it - in fact, assume the opposite, that they are specifically not backed up by research.  That's why your only approach must be one founded upon studied observation, upon research.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,571



« Reply #6 on: March 17, 2009, 01:17:31 PM »

Condoms, when used properly, are over 99% effective in preventing AIDS. There is no grand argument here- if a condom is used correctly, (i.e. if the Africans are properly educated in their use as well as the risks of HIV), then AIDS will decrease. There are two immediate responses to the condom question: 1.) provide them, along with better education on their proper use, or 2.) don't, and continue teaching abstinence in the hopes that not having sex will catch on.  I'm putting my money on option number one being the most likely path for decreasing AIDS in the long run.

Yes, this is the argument that we've heard over and over again; when you're debating someone who doubts the efficacy of using condoms in the fight against AIDS, you've got to come with more than that.

edit: And since the article cited provides zero evidence other than the pope's personal opinion, should I assume his ideas are backed up by facts?

Don't assume it - in fact, assume the opposite, that they are specifically not backed up by research.  That's why your only approach must be one founded upon studied observation

Studied observation, eh?  Sure there's enough volunteers to watch. Shocked
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #7 on: March 17, 2009, 06:04:18 PM »

edit: And since the article cited provides zero evidence other than the pope's personal opinion, should I assume his ideas are backed up by facts?

The Pope is infallible, so obviously you are wrong. 
Logged
Theophilos78
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #8 on: March 17, 2009, 06:28:20 PM »


I guess the Pope's statement is being misinterpreted. He is trying to say that "some people" are introducing condom use as an alternative to the method used by the Roman Church (abstinence from promiscuous affairs) in the prevention of sexual diseases. He actually says that this method (condom use) cannot be the only or alternative solution because it causes more (theological) problems. This debate eventually gets similar to the one about abortion. Practical solutions are considered no solutions by the Pope if they are theologically and/or ethically defective.
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #9 on: March 17, 2009, 06:35:14 PM »

Condoms, when used properly, are over 99% effective in preventing AIDS. There is no grand argument here- if a condom is used correctly, (i.e. if the Africans are properly educated in their use as well as the risks of HIV), then AIDS will decrease. There are two immediate responses to the condom question: 1.) provide them, along with better education on their proper use, or 2.) don't, and continue teaching abstinence in the hopes that not having sex will catch on.  I'm putting my money on option number one being the most likely path for decreasing AIDS in the long run.

edit: And since the article cited provides zero evidence other than the pope's personal opinion, should I assume his ideas are backed up by facts?

The last I checked they were 70 something %. If you don't wash yourself immdetaitely afterwards, you can still get an STD. so that 99% claim is false.

The same is true when you put on plastic gloves to take care of someone that may have something. If you don't wash your hands afterwards then you can still be contaminated. Nurses are tought how to take plastic gloves off safely, but they still have to wash their hands.......the same is true with Condom use.......you have to wash up afterwards.

But if you don't have a place to wash up (right after using the condom) then your chances of getting something are higher.



JNORM888
« Last Edit: March 17, 2009, 06:37:07 PM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #10 on: March 17, 2009, 06:43:00 PM »


I guess the Pope's statement is being misinterpreted. He is trying to say that "some people" are introducing condom use as an alternative to the method used by the Roman Church (abstinence from promiscuous affairs) in the prevention of sexual diseases. He actually says that this method (condom use) cannot be the only or alternative solution because it causes more (theological) problems. This debate eventually gets similar to the one about abortion. Practical solutions are considered no solutions by the Pope if they are theologically and/or ethically defective.

Alot of people that are for condom use feel that sex is natural(because they feel that we are nothing more than mere animals) therefore we shouldn't care if people have sex because they are going to do it anyway. To them, if you have an internal desire/impulse then they feel that you are being fake if you try to resist it.

They feel that our true selves are our impulses/desires. If we give in to them, then we are being what godless/senseless/purposelessness evolution made us to be. If we resist them, then we are being fake, and not true to ourselves.......thus we are in the way of "progress", and we are the cause of all the worlds problems.







JNORM888
« Last Edit: March 17, 2009, 06:45:32 PM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #11 on: March 17, 2009, 06:48:12 PM »

I'm really struggling to see what the "debate" is all about here. Whether condoms are 99% or 70% or 57% effective, I'm fairly certain they work better at preventing HIV than using no protection at all.

Of course, abstinence is 100% effective, but until the Africans are properly infused with the spirit of the Holy Roman Catholic Church and the teachings of the infallible vicar of Christ on Earth, I'd say CONDOMS will do a better job at preventing AIDS then telling people to stop having sex. I'd also say that the odds of teaching Africans how to properly use condoms are much better than converting them all to Christianity and having them adopt the Church's moral code. So, until they're all made chaste Christians,  let's opt for educating them and helping to save them from disease and death, even if it rubs the pope the wrong way.
« Last Edit: March 17, 2009, 06:50:39 PM by Bogoliubtsy » Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #12 on: March 17, 2009, 07:36:20 PM »

I'm really struggling to see what the "debate" is all about here. Whether condoms are 99% or 70% or 57% effective, I'm fairly certain they work better at preventing HIV than using no protection at all.

Of course, abstinence is 100% effective, but until the Africans are properly infused with the spirit of the Holy Roman Catholic Church and the teachings of the infallible vicar of Christ on Earth, I'd say CONDOMS will do a better job at preventing AIDS then telling people to stop having sex. I'd also say that the odds of teaching Africans how to properly use condoms are much better than converting them all to Christianity and having them adopt the Church's moral code. So, until they're all made chaste Christians,  let's opt for educating them and helping to save them from disease and death, even if it rubs the pope the wrong way.


If you don't wash up quickly after using the condom, then giving them condoms can make it worse. If you want to do something then it should be both.....both.








JNORM888
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,901


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #13 on: March 17, 2009, 10:28:24 PM »

I'm really struggling to see what the "debate" is all about here. Whether condoms are 99% or 70% or 57% effective, I'm fairly certain they work better at preventing HIV than using no protection at all.

Of course, abstinence is 100% effective, but until the Africans are properly infused with the spirit of the Holy Roman Catholic Church and the teachings of the infallible vicar of Christ on Earth, I'd say CONDOMS will do a better job at preventing AIDS then telling people to stop having sex. I'd also say that the odds of teaching Africans how to properly use condoms are much better than converting them all to Christianity and having them adopt the Church's moral code. So, until they're all made chaste Christians,  let's opt for educating them and helping to save them from disease and death, even if it rubs the pope the wrong way.

Actually no.  Abstinence programs have actually been more effective in redcuing the rate of HIV in Africa.  Of course the media ignores this and AIDS activists are committed to condoms because how dare anyone actually tell anybody not to have sex. 

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=12226
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_2_19/ai_96238192
http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/global_health/aids/News/abcfactsheet.html
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,571



« Reply #14 on: March 17, 2009, 10:49:03 PM »

I'm really struggling to see what the "debate" is all about here.
No you're not.  You have an agenda which you pursue through all your posts and threads.
Quote
Whether condoms are 99% or 70% or 57% effective, I'm fairly certain they work better at preventing HIV than using no protection at all.

Then post the link to your findings.

Quote
Of course, abstinence is 100% effective, but until the Africans are properly infused with the spirit of the Holy Roman Catholic Church and the teachings of the infallible vicar of Christ on Earth, I'd say CONDOMS will do a better job at preventing AIDS then telling people to stop having sex.

Female circumcision helps too.  Why don't we promote that too?

Quote
I'd also say that the odds of teaching Africans how to properly use condoms are much better than converting them all to Christianity and having them adopt the Church's moral code.
Really?   Why don't we provide sterile female circumcision too, since we shouldn't convert them all to Christianity and impose our morality on them.  Since they are going to do it anyway, why not make it safe?

Quote
So, until they're all made chaste Christians,  let's opt for educating them and helping to save them from disease and death, even if it rubs the pope the wrong way.

I'll stick with the facts, even if it rubs the media the wrong way.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #15 on: March 17, 2009, 10:52:58 PM »

I'm really struggling to see what the "debate" is all about here. Whether condoms are 99% or 70% or 57% effective, I'm fairly certain they work better at preventing HIV than using no protection at all.

Of course, abstinence is 100% effective, but until the Africans are properly infused with the spirit of the Holy Roman Catholic Church and the teachings of the infallible vicar of Christ on Earth, I'd say CONDOMS will do a better job at preventing AIDS then telling people to stop having sex. I'd also say that the odds of teaching Africans how to properly use condoms are much better than converting them all to Christianity and having them adopt the Church's moral code. So, until they're all made chaste Christians,  let's opt for educating them and helping to save them from disease and death, even if it rubs the pope the wrong way.

Actually no.  Abstinence programs have actually been more effective in redcuing the rate of HIV in Africa.  Of course the media ignores this and AIDS activists are committed to condoms because how dare anyone actually tell anybody not to have sex. 

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=12226
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_2_19/ai_96238192
http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/global_health/aids/News/abcfactsheet.html

Your sources deal primarily with Uganda. They also call for a combination of fidelity to one partner, abstinence AND the use of condoms in preventing HIV. The Pope, on the other hand, wants to rule out condoms entirely- something that would reduce those three legs of prevention to two.

According to this (more reliable) study it seems circumcision and fidelity to one partner (married or not makes no difference) trump both abstinence and condoms. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/42242.php
Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,571



« Reply #16 on: March 17, 2009, 11:20:20 PM »

I'm really struggling to see what the "debate" is all about here. Whether condoms are 99% or 70% or 57% effective, I'm fairly certain they work better at preventing HIV than using no protection at all.

Of course, abstinence is 100% effective, but until the Africans are properly infused with the spirit of the Holy Roman Catholic Church and the teachings of the infallible vicar of Christ on Earth, I'd say CONDOMS will do a better job at preventing AIDS then telling people to stop having sex. I'd also say that the odds of teaching Africans how to properly use condoms are much better than converting them all to Christianity and having them adopt the Church's moral code. So, until they're all made chaste Christians,  let's opt for educating them and helping to save them from disease and death, even if it rubs the pope the wrong way.

Actually no.  Abstinence programs have actually been more effective in redcuing the rate of HIV in Africa.  Of course the media ignores this and AIDS activists are committed to condoms because how dare anyone actually tell anybody not to have sex. 

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=12226
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_2_19/ai_96238192
http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/global_health/aids/News/abcfactsheet.html

Your sources deal primarily with Uganda. They also call for a combination of fidelity to one partner, abstinence AND the use of condoms in preventing HIV. The Pope, on the other hand, wants to rule out condoms entirely- something that would reduce those three legs of prevention to two.

According to this (more reliable) study it seems circumcision and fidelity to one partner (married or not makes no difference) trump both abstinence and condoms. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/42242.php
Your agenda, and not your source, provided that.

Your source also has something interesting:

Quote
"[C]ontrary to popular wisdom, as income levels go up in both men and women, we see higher rates of HIV
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #17 on: March 18, 2009, 03:01:24 PM »

I'm really struggling to see what the "debate" is all about here. Whether condoms are 99% or 70% or 57% effective, I'm fairly certain they work better at preventing HIV than using no protection at all.

Of course, abstinence is 100% effective, but until the Africans are properly infused with the spirit of the Holy Roman Catholic Church and the teachings of the infallible vicar of Christ on Earth, I'd say CONDOMS will do a better job at preventing AIDS then telling people to stop having sex. I'd also say that the odds of teaching Africans how to properly use condoms are much better than converting them all to Christianity and having them adopt the Church's moral code. So, until they're all made chaste Christians,  let's opt for educating them and helping to save them from disease and death, even if it rubs the pope the wrong way.

Actually no.  Abstinence programs have actually been more effective in redcuing the rate of HIV in Africa.  Of course the media ignores this and AIDS activists are committed to condoms because how dare anyone actually tell anybody not to have sex. 

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=12226
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_2_19/ai_96238192
http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/global_health/aids/News/abcfactsheet.html

Your sources deal primarily with Uganda. They also call for a combination of fidelity to one partner, abstinence AND the use of condoms in preventing HIV. The Pope, on the other hand, wants to rule out condoms entirely- something that would reduce those three legs of prevention to two.

According to this (more reliable) study it seems circumcision and fidelity to one partner (married or not makes no difference) trump both abstinence and condoms. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/42242.php

If you are going to give them condoms then you will also have to give them:

1.) Clean water

2.) regular soap, anti-bacterial soap, & anti-fungal soap

3.) Bio-hazard materials to get rid of the used condoms.


If not then you are only gonna make the problem worse.






JNORM888
« Last Edit: March 18, 2009, 03:02:05 PM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #18 on: March 18, 2009, 06:27:20 PM »

I think the statement is plain stupid and is not worth discussing. (Sorry, Your Holiness...)
Logged

Love never fails.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #19 on: March 18, 2009, 06:29:50 PM »

I think the statement is plain stupid and is not worth discussing. (Sorry, Your Holiness...)
But he's an infallible expert in epidemiology.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,901


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #20 on: March 18, 2009, 06:52:36 PM »

One need look no further than the US were condoms are readily available, free often times, and yet rates of STDs have steadily risen.  You want to be safe don't have sex.  Sex, even with condoms, is a risk.

Fr. Deacon Lance
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #21 on: March 18, 2009, 06:53:58 PM »

One need look no further than the US were condoms are readily available, free often times, and yet rates of STDs have steadily risen.  You want to be safe don't have sex.  Sex, even with condoms, is a risk.

Fr. Deacon Lance
How does the rate of HIV infection in the US compare with Africa?
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Jetavan
Argumentum ad australopithecum
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,542


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #22 on: March 18, 2009, 06:59:08 PM »

One need look no further than the US were condoms are readily available, free often times, and yet rates of STDs have steadily risen.  You want to be safe don't have sex.  Sex, even with condoms, is a risk.

Fr. Deacon Lance
How does the rate of HIV infection in the US compare with Africa?


News flash.
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #23 on: March 18, 2009, 07:07:09 PM »

One need look no further than the US were condoms are readily available, free often times, and yet rates of STDs have steadily risen.  You want to be safe don't have sex.  Sex, even with condoms, is a risk.

Fr. Deacon Lance
How does the rate of HIV infection in the US compare with Africa?


News flash.

Thanks Jetevan! That article has some great advice. It says:

Quote
What To Do?

Plain and simple:  get tested and use condoms.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,901


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #24 on: March 18, 2009, 07:31:38 PM »

Plainer and simpler and more effective: Don't have sex.  And you'll avoid sinning too.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #25 on: March 18, 2009, 07:33:27 PM »

Plainer and simpler and more effective: Don't have sex. 
Excellent advice which I hope that all Roman Catholics follow, and if they do happen to fall into fornication, I hope they do not use condoms.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #26 on: March 18, 2009, 07:59:22 PM »

George, I think you are forgetting that AIDS is a gift from God to the true believers and a scourge upon homosexuals.  Therefore using condoms is going against the will of GOD.  It's in the Bible.  Clearly it's why Metr. Jonah has been enthroned.   
« Last Edit: March 18, 2009, 08:05:09 PM by Νεκτάριος » Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #27 on: March 18, 2009, 08:08:06 PM »

George, I think you are forgetting that AIDS is a gift from God to the true believers and a scourge upon homosexuals.  Therefore using condoms is going against the will of GOD.  It's in the Bible.
You're right, which is why I advocate that all true believing Roman Catholics should remain celibate, and if they do fall into fornication, they absolutely must NOT use condoms. All Catholic Parents must advise their children at once to abstain from sex for the rest of their lives, but knowing human weakness, they must compassionately also advise them NEVER to use condoms if they happen to fall into the temptation of fornication. Only by NOT wearing condoms can they be assured of safety.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #28 on: March 18, 2009, 08:30:37 PM »

George, I think you are forgetting that AIDS is a gift from God to the true believers and a scourge upon homosexuals.  Therefore using condoms is going against the will of GOD.  It's in the Bible.
You're right, which is why I advocate that all true believing Roman Catholics should remain celibate, and if they do fall into fornication, they absolutely must NOT use condoms. All Catholic Parents must advise their children at once to abstain from sex for the rest of their lives, but knowing human weakness, they must compassionately also advise them NEVER to use condoms if they happen to fall into the temptation of fornication. Only by NOT wearing condoms can they be assured of safety.

How blessed we are to have a prophet in our midst in these end times of delusion!
Logged
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,901


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #29 on: March 18, 2009, 10:06:55 PM »

You guys are confusing issues.  It is one thing to hope that if someone falls into sin they take precaution.  It is another to have an AIDS epidemic and act as if condoms are the solution when statistics show they are not.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #30 on: March 18, 2009, 10:12:47 PM »

You guys are confusing issues.  It is one thing to hope that if someone falls into sin they take precaution.  It is another to have an AIDS epidemic and act as if condoms are the solution when statistics show they are not.
Evidence?
I believe in unicorns too.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,901


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #31 on: March 18, 2009, 10:19:07 PM »

Oh I don't know, perhaps the fact that after over a decade of throwing condoms at Africans the only place with a reduction in AIDS is the place where abstinence was taken seriously.
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #32 on: March 18, 2009, 10:20:37 PM »

over a decade of throwing condoms at Africans
They don't work if you just throw them at people. They actually have to put them on.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #33 on: March 18, 2009, 10:36:43 PM »

I'm really struggling to see what the "debate" is all about here.
No you're not.  You have an agenda which you pursue through all your posts and threads.
Quote
Whether condoms are 99% or 70% or 57% effective, I'm fairly certain they work better at preventing HIV than using no protection at all.

Then post the link to your findings.

 


I'll just respond to this piece since the rest of your post is rubbish.  I want to be clear before I reply though. Are you actually asking me to provide evidence that using condoms is more effective in preventing HIV than NOT using condoms during sex?
Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,571



« Reply #34 on: March 19, 2009, 12:00:28 AM »

I'm really struggling to see what the "debate" is all about here.
No you're not.  You have an agenda which you pursue through all your posts and threads.
Quote
Whether condoms are 99% or 70% or 57% effective, I'm fairly certain they work better at preventing HIV than using no protection at all.

Then post the link to your findings.

 



I'll just respond to this piece since the rest of your post is rubbish.
I'll have to defer to your expertise on that.
Quote
  I want to be clear before I reply though. Are you actually asking me to provide evidence that using condoms is more effective in preventing HIV than NOT using condoms during sex?

That's been posted several times. And the hyposteses why that is so too.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,571



« Reply #35 on: March 19, 2009, 12:02:46 AM »

over a decade of throwing condoms at Africans
They don't work if you just throw them at people. They actually have to put them on.

LOL. I remember talking to someone who did this type of work in Africa (this was before the big AIDS scare: back then it was just family planning).  They demonstrated by putting them on their thumb.  They couldn't figure out why the birth rate hadn't changed, in fact went up.  They then found out that the men were wearing them on their thumbs during sex.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #36 on: March 19, 2009, 12:11:56 AM »

I'm really struggling to see what the "debate" is all about here.
No you're not.  You have an agenda which you pursue through all your posts and threads.
Quote
Whether condoms are 99% or 70% or 57% effective, I'm fairly certain they work better at preventing HIV than using no protection at all.

Then post the link to your findings.

 



I'll just respond to this piece since the rest of your post is rubbish.
I'll have to defer to your expertise on that.
Quote
  I want to be clear before I reply though. Are you actually asking me to provide evidence that using condoms is more effective in preventing HIV than NOT using condoms during sex?

That's been posted several times. And the hyposteses why that is so too.

http://www.cdc.gov/HIV/resources/qa/condom.htm
"Latex condoms, when used consistently and correctly, are highly effective in preventing heterosexual sexual transmission of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. Research on the effectiveness of latex condoms in preventing heterosexual transmission is both comprehensive and conclusive."

Next I'll be asked to provide "proof" that eating food helps keep you alive.
Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,571



« Reply #37 on: March 19, 2009, 01:26:05 AM »

I'm really struggling to see what the "debate" is all about here.
No you're not.  You have an agenda which you pursue through all your posts and threads.
Quote
Whether condoms are 99% or 70% or 57% effective, I'm fairly certain they work better at preventing HIV than using no protection at all.

Then post the link to your findings.

 



I'll just respond to this piece since the rest of your post is rubbish.
I'll have to defer to your expertise on that.
Quote
  I want to be clear before I reply though. Are you actually asking me to provide evidence that using condoms is more effective in preventing HIV than NOT using condoms during sex?

That's been posted several times. And the hyposteses why that is so too.

http://www.cdc.gov/HIV/resources/qa/condom.htm
"Latex condoms, when used consistently and correctly, are highly effective in preventing heterosexual sexual transmission of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. Research on the effectiveness of latex condoms in preventing heterosexual transmission is both comprehensive and conclusive."

You are the one who posted the link to this:
Quote
However, condom use in South Africa and Botswana has had little effect in reducing those countries' HIV epidemics -- which have reached the general population -- because regular sex partners rarely use condoms consistently.
http://www.orthodoxchristianity.net/forum/index.php/topic,20243.msg301955.html#msg301955
According to this (more reliable) study

Quote
Next I'll be asked to provide "proof" that eating food helps keep you alive.

google "obesity"
« Last Edit: March 19, 2009, 01:34:46 AM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Elisha
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,420


« Reply #38 on: March 19, 2009, 01:55:33 AM »

I thought this was interesting:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/29/books/review/Donnelly-t.html?_r=1
Logged
ma2000
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: ORTHODOX
Jurisdiction: ROMANIAN
Posts: 287


Saint Anthony The Great


« Reply #39 on: March 19, 2009, 04:06:07 AM »

Wow... and seat belts have been known to increase car crash fatalities?

Actually, during an Economy class, the teacher told us that after the introduction of safety belts, the fatalities among the pedestrians have increased. Her explanation was the the drivers became more confident and drove at higher speeds, reducing the chance of braking in time before they hit pedestrians.
Logged

Asemănându-te obiceiurilor râvnitorului Ilie şi urmând Botezătorului pe drepte cărări, Părinte Antonie, te-ai făcut locuitor pustiului şi ai întărit lumea cu rugăciunile tale. Pentru aceasta, roagă-te lui Hristos Dumnezeu, să mântuiască sufletele noastre.
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #40 on: March 19, 2009, 04:27:04 AM »

Just to clarify, does anyone here intentionally never wear their seatbelts? 
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,571



« Reply #41 on: March 19, 2009, 07:03:40 AM »


Yes.
Quote
After five years in Washington covering the politics of AIDS and three years in Africa writing about the lives of those infected and affected, in truth, I have little patience for books on AIDS in Africa. With few exceptions, they tend to be too self-important, too polemical, too grim or too at odds with my experiences in the field. Epstein, in contrast, teaches me things I didn’t know. Her rigorous reporting unearths new findings among old, worn-out issues. And the evidence she puts forward could provide a roadmap for comprehensive prevention programs that incorporate teaching abstinence, using condoms and, most critically, emphasizing fidelity. Indeed, Epstein’s animated consideration of debates on fidelity leaves me to wonder, and not for the first time, about the virtual silence on this issue by most African leaders. (Then again, a ruler like King Mswati III of Swaziland, who has something like 13 wives and whose country has an adult H.I.V. rate of greater than 30 percent, is not about to speak up.)

This isn’t a blanket criticism, as Epstein would not count herself among those blind to the real problems of a varied continent; nor would she say that about several of her foreign researcher heroes quoted in the book. But in Uganda, she found a powerful example of Africans taking the lead in the fight. When scientists first reported the decline in Uganda’s H.I.V. prevalence in 1995, Epstein says, she and others assumed it was because so many Ugandans had died from AIDS, not because they were sleeping around less. What had actually taken place, she writes, was a “very African” prevention approach.

It was led by President Yoweri Museveni’s call for “zero grazing” — meaning couples should stay faithful to each another. This call inspired Ugandans to talk about AIDS more openly, which in turn erased the stigma of the disease to some degree, empowered women to divorce unfaithful husbands and cast shame on those who continued to have affairs. Hence Epstein’s title and theme — “the invisible cure.” Beatrice Were, a brave H.I.V.-positive activist in Uganda, articulates it best: “I am often asked whether there will ever be a cure for H.I.V./AIDS, and my answer is that there is already a cure,” she says. “It lies in the strength of women, families and communities who support and empower each other to break the silence around AIDS and take control of their sexual lives.”


Take control of their sexual lives.  Who would have thought? Roll Eyes I mean, they are going to do it anyways.

Quote
To track down Maxine Ankrah, the woman who studied Ugandan sexual habits, Epstein traveled to a hilltop in Mukono, Uganda, a small town 30 miles outside Kampala. The two had dinner together. One can imagine the power of the conversation, as Epstein told Ankrah about the fate of her long-lost work. Ankrah had believed her research would be forever forgotten, especially when the United Nations researcher failed to cite her study even in his footnotes. “It was as though I had been written out of history,” Ankrah said. To her credit, Epstein has written her back in. It’s time the world takes note of Ankrah’s research and Epstein’s apt reporting, and shifts the prevention message to spare millions from H.I.V. infection and an early death.

Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,070


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #42 on: March 19, 2009, 08:25:05 AM »

Just to clarify, does anyone here intentionally never wear their seatbelts?  

The people that I know don't wear them, and do so intentionally, are either in their 70's and resentful that the "government is telling me what to do," or are in their teens/20's and just don't like 'em.  Either way, I find their arguments ridiculous ("the government tells you to not eat poison; want some arsenic to fight "the man?"").
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,190


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #43 on: March 19, 2009, 12:40:55 PM »

So the ends justify the means? We should be encouraging people to engage in that which is intrinsically evil (contraception) in order to avoid another evil (HIV)?
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #44 on: March 19, 2009, 01:21:21 PM »

So the ends justify the means? We should be encouraging people to engage in that which is intrinsically evil (contraception) in order to avoid another evil (HIV)?
Logical fallacy: circular reasoning.
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #45 on: March 19, 2009, 01:25:40 PM »

So the ends justify the means? We should be encouraging people to engage in that which is intrinsically evil (contraception) in order to avoid another evil (HIV)?

Your Pope says condoms are evil.
Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #46 on: March 19, 2009, 02:08:19 PM »

Take control of their sexual lives.  Who would have thought? Roll Eyes I mean, they are going to do it anyways.

I read that article as promoting a both / and approach: fidelity education and condom usage. 
Logged
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #47 on: March 19, 2009, 02:19:59 PM »

Take control of their sexual lives.  Who would have thought? Roll Eyes I mean, they are going to do it anyways.

I read that article as promoting a both / and approach: fidelity education and condom usage. 

I read it the same way. We must both be crazy.
Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,070


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #48 on: March 19, 2009, 02:22:58 PM »

Take control of their sexual lives.  Who would have thought? Roll Eyes I mean, they are going to do it anyways.

I read that article as promoting a both / and approach: fidelity education and condom usage.  

I read it the same way. We must both be crazy.

No, I'm the crazy one for somehow agreeing with you on something... Cheesy
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #49 on: March 19, 2009, 02:25:34 PM »

Take control of their sexual lives.  Who would have thought? Roll Eyes I mean, they are going to do it anyways.

I read that article as promoting a both / and approach: fidelity education and condom usage.  

I read it the same way. We must both be crazy.

No, I'm the crazy one for somehow agreeing with you on something... Cheesy

Come over to the dark side.  Smiley
Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,571



« Reply #50 on: March 19, 2009, 03:01:42 PM »

Take control of their sexual lives.  Who would have thought? Roll Eyes I mean, they are going to do it anyways.

I read that article as promoting a both / and approach: fidelity education and condom usage. 

I read it the same way. We must both be crazy.
Roll Eyes
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
rwprof
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA now, Antiochian originally
Posts: 294



« Reply #51 on: March 19, 2009, 04:33:10 PM »

Just a gentle suggestion, but perhaps instead of reading what the media reported, we might read what Benedict actually said.

Quote
"It is my belief that the most effective presence on the front in the battle against HIV/AIDS is precisely the Catholic Church and her institutions. I think of the Community of Sant’ Egidio, which does so much, visibly and invisibly to fight AIDS, of the Camillians, of all the nuns that are at the service of the sick.

“I would say that this problem of AIDS cannot be overcome with advertising slogans. If the soul is lacking, if Africans do not help one another, the scourge cannot be resolved by distributing condoms; quite the contrary, we risk worsening the problem. The solution can only come through a twofold commitment: firstly, the humanization of sexuality, in other words a spiritual and human renewal bringing a new way of behaving towards one another; and secondly, true friendship, above all with those who are suffering, a readiness - even through personal sacrifice - to be present with those who suffer. And these are the factors that help and bring visible progress.

“Therefore, I would say that our double effort is to renew the human person internally, to give spiritual and human strength to a way of behaving that is just towards our own body and the other person’s body; and this capacity of suffering with those who suffer, to remain present in trying situations.

“I believe that this is the first response [to AIDS] and that this is what the Church does, and thus, she offers a great and important contribution. And we are grateful to those that do this.”

Full text: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=15403
Logged

Mark (rwprof) passed into eternal life on Jan 7, 2010.  May his memory be eternal!
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,190


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #52 on: March 19, 2009, 05:49:46 PM »

So the ends justify the means? We should be encouraging people to engage in that which is intrinsically evil (contraception) in order to avoid another evil (HIV)?

Your Pope says condoms are evil.
So do the Church fathers, as did Eastern Orthodoxy at one time.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #53 on: March 19, 2009, 05:51:39 PM »

So the ends justify the means? We should be encouraging people to engage in that which is intrinsically evil (contraception) in order to avoid another evil (HIV)?

Your Pope says condoms are evil.
So do the Church fathers, as did Eastern Orthodoxy at one time.

ROFL!
You can't be serious! Which Church Fathers forbade condoms?
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,407


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #54 on: March 19, 2009, 06:04:22 PM »

So the ends justify the means? We should be encouraging people to engage in that which is intrinsically evil (contraception) in order to avoid another evil (HIV)?

If one must prevent HIV, then abstinence makes sense.  Nevertheless, if one must have sex, why can't we promote the use of condoms to prevent HIV?  Do we really want to act like fundamentalists who wish disease upon the abominable fornicators and homosexuals?  This is the Pope who is against the death penalty, right?
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,407


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #55 on: March 19, 2009, 06:09:11 PM »

So the ends justify the means? We should be encouraging people to engage in that which is intrinsically evil (contraception) in order to avoid another evil (HIV)?

If one must prevent HIV, then abstinence makes sense.  Nevertheless, if one must have sex, why can't we promote the use of condoms to prevent HIV?  Don't you think it's waaaaaaaaaaaaay much better than having sex unprotected?  Do we really want to act like fundamentalists who wish disease upon the abominable fornicators and homosexuals?  Not only do you prevent disease, but unwanted abortion under Papal definition.

This is the Pope who is against the death penalty, right?  Just as one may take a position of love towards murderers so that they may not be killed under law, why not offer the same love to promiscuous people, in hopes that they may repent in good health some day?
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,571



« Reply #56 on: March 19, 2009, 06:23:30 PM »

Just a gentle suggestion, but perhaps instead of reading what the media reported, we might read what Benedict actually said.

Don't confuse people with the facts.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,571



« Reply #57 on: March 19, 2009, 06:31:01 PM »

So the ends justify the means? We should be encouraging people to engage in that which is intrinsically evil (contraception) in order to avoid another evil (HIV)?

If one must prevent HIV, then abstinence makes sense.  Nevertheless, if one must have sex, why can't we promote the use of condoms to prevent HIV?  Don't you think it's waaaaaaaaaaaaay much better than having sex unprotected?  Do we really want to act like fundamentalists who wish disease upon the abominable fornicators and homosexuals?  Not only do you prevent disease, but unwanted abortion under Papal definition.

Contrast:

“I am often asked whether there will ever be a cure for H.I.V./AIDS, and my answer is that there is already a cure,” she says. “It lies in the strength of women, families and communities who support and empower each other to break the silence around AIDS and take control of their sexual lives.”

How about giving out condemns to adulterers?  After all, in those circumstances a disease or pregnancy would be a whole host of problems.

Quote
This is the Pope who is against the death penalty, right?  Just as one may take a position of love towards murderers so that they may not be killed under law, why not offer the same love to promiscuous people, in hopes that they may repent in good health some day?
Your analogy is off: if the pope, gave the murder more human ways of doing his craft (say, poison instead of a knife) your analogy would be more in line.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2009, 06:34:55 PM by ialmisry » Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,772



« Reply #58 on: March 19, 2009, 07:15:19 PM »

Quote
You can't be serious! Which Church Fathers forbade condoms?

Latex condoms in fancy packaging? They didn't. The ancient equivalent of condoms though, they did, and they unfortunately condemned all other forms of birth control as well.
Logged
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #59 on: March 19, 2009, 09:20:32 PM »

You guys are confusing issues.  It is one thing to hope that if someone falls into sin they take precaution.  It is another to have an AIDS epidemic and act as if condoms are the solution when statistics show they are not.

Bingo!!!





JNORM888
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #60 on: March 19, 2009, 09:25:58 PM »

Just to clarify, does anyone here intentionally never wear their seatbelts? 

Many people did before it become federal law......or something like that.

I didn't always put one on. It took the police to make me change my mind. Now I put one on all the time.

it's the law.  police





JNORM888
« Last Edit: March 19, 2009, 09:26:56 PM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #61 on: March 19, 2009, 09:29:19 PM »



Thank You!!!




JNORM888
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Jetavan
Argumentum ad australopithecum
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,542


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #62 on: March 19, 2009, 09:31:35 PM »

Just a gentle suggestion, but perhaps instead of reading what the media reported, we might read what Benedict actually said.

Quote
"It is my belief that the most effective presence on the front in the battle against HIV/AIDS is precisely the Catholic Church and her institutions. I think of the Community of Sant’ Egidio, which does so much, visibly and invisibly to fight AIDS, of the Camillians, of all the nuns that are at the service of the sick.

“I would say that this problem of AIDS cannot be overcome with advertising slogans. If the soul is lacking, if Africans do not help one another, the scourge cannot be resolved by distributing condoms; quite the contrary, we risk worsening the problem. The solution can only come through a twofold commitment: firstly, the humanization of sexuality, in other words a spiritual and human renewal bringing a new way of behaving towards one another; and secondly, true friendship, above all with those who are suffering, a readiness - even through personal sacrifice - to be present with those who suffer. And these are the factors that help and bring visible progress.

“Therefore, I would say that our double effort is to renew the human person internally, to give spiritual and human strength to a way of behaving that is just towards our own body and the other person’s body; and this capacity of suffering with those who suffer, to remain present in trying situations.

“I believe that this is the first response [to AIDS] and that this is what the Church does, and thus, she offers a great and important contribution. And we are grateful to those that do this.”

Full text: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=15403

So, in other words, at least in this quote here, the Pope is not condemning condoms themselves, but he's condemning the idea that condoms alone will solve the problem.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2009, 09:33:04 PM by Jetavan » Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #63 on: March 19, 2009, 09:33:01 PM »

over a decade of throwing condoms at Africans
They don't work if you just throw them at people. They actually have to put them on.



You still have to worry about body fluid. A condom won't protect your waste, thighs, and other places in that same area.


1.) Clean water

2.) Regular Soap, Anti-Bacterial Soap, & Anti-fungal Soap

3.) Bio-Hazard materials to discard used condoms in the area
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #64 on: March 19, 2009, 09:33:41 PM »

Just a gentle suggestion, but perhaps instead of reading what the media reported, we might read what Benedict actually said.

Quote
"It is my belief that the most effective presence on the front in the battle against HIV/AIDS is precisely the Catholic Church and her institutions. I think of the Community of Sant’ Egidio, which does so much, visibly and invisibly to fight AIDS, of the Camillians, of all the nuns that are at the service of the sick.

“I would say that this problem of AIDS cannot be overcome with advertising slogans. If the soul is lacking, if Africans do not help one another, the scourge cannot be resolved by distributing condoms; quite the contrary, we risk worsening the problem. The solution can only come through a twofold commitment: firstly, the humanization of sexuality, in other words a spiritual and human renewal bringing a new way of behaving towards one another; and secondly, true friendship, above all with those who are suffering, a readiness - even through personal sacrifice - to be present with those who suffer. And these are the factors that help and bring visible progress.

“Therefore, I would say that our double effort is to renew the human person internally, to give spiritual and human strength to a way of behaving that is just towards our own body and the other person’s body; and this capacity of suffering with those who suffer, to remain present in trying situations.

“I believe that this is the first response [to AIDS] and that this is what the Church does, and thus, she offers a great and important contribution. And we are grateful to those that do this.”

Full text: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=15403

So, in other words, at least in this quote here, the Pope is not condemning condoms themselves, but he's condemning the idea that condoms alone will solve the problem.


Bingo!!!





JNORM888
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Jetavan
Argumentum ad australopithecum
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,542


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #65 on: March 20, 2009, 12:26:44 PM »


Quote
March 19, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Edward C. Green, director of the AIDS Prevention Research Project at the Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies, has said that the evidence confirms that the Pope is correct in his assessment that condom distribution exacerbates the problem of AIDS.

"The pope is correct," Green told National Review Online Wednesday, "or put it a better way, the best evidence we have supports the pope's comments."

"There is," Green added, "a consistent association shown by our best studies, including the U.S.-funded 'Demographic Health Surveys,' between greater availability and use of condoms and higher (not lower) HIV-infection rates. This may be due in part to a phenomenon known as risk compensation, meaning that when one uses a risk-reduction 'technology' such as condoms, one often loses the benefit (reduction in risk) by 'compensating' or taking greater chances than one would take without the risk-reduction technology." ( see the full interview with Green here)

It should be noted that Green seems to be referring to studies in Africa, rather than in America. I don't know if studies among Americans have shown an increase in HIV-infection rates associated with greater availability and use of condoms.

And in the full interview:

Quote
Green added: “I also noticed that the pope said ‘monogamy’ was the best single answer to African AIDS, rather than ‘abstinence.’ The best and latest empirical evidence indeed shows that reduction in multiple and concurrent sexual partners is the most important single behavior change associated with reduction in HIV-infection rates (the other major factor is male circumcision).”

What about monogamous polygyny, one husband with two or more wives, with each wife being monogamous with the one husband, the the husband being polygynous only with his wives? That would seem to reduce infection rates, too.


Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,407


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #66 on: March 20, 2009, 01:51:57 PM »

So the ends justify the means? We should be encouraging people to engage in that which is intrinsically evil (contraception) in order to avoid another evil (HIV)?

If one must prevent HIV, then abstinence makes sense.  Nevertheless, if one must have sex, why can't we promote the use of condoms to prevent HIV?  Don't you think it's waaaaaaaaaaaaay much better than having sex unprotected?  Do we really want to act like fundamentalists who wish disease upon the abominable fornicators and homosexuals?  Not only do you prevent disease, but unwanted abortion under Papal definition.

Contrast:

“I am often asked whether there will ever be a cure for H.I.V./AIDS, and my answer is that there is already a cure,” she says. “It lies in the strength of women, families and communities who support and empower each other to break the silence around AIDS and take control of their sexual lives.”

How about giving out condemns to adulterers?  After all, in those circumstances a disease or pregnancy would be a whole host of problems.

Quote
This is the Pope who is against the death penalty, right?  Just as one may take a position of love towards murderers so that they may not be killed under law, why not offer the same love to promiscuous people, in hopes that they may repent in good health some day?
Your analogy is off: if the pope, gave the murder more human ways of doing his craft (say, poison instead of a knife) your analogy would be more in line.

Isa, if I was a health care professional, I can't just give spiritual advise to anyone I see.  The patient will tell me, "Yes, doctor, I want to have sex."  In which I case, I will answer, "PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE use a condom.  You have a better chance protecting yourself from unwanted pregnancies and STDs than without protection."

I think this is a very sensible approach.  If I know they have a greater risk without protection, why should I not ask otherwise.

If on the other hand Isa, I was talking to you as a friend, as a brother in Orthodoxy (or anyone who is interested in my spiritual advise), then yes, I would plead to you with spiritual advise, i.e. abstinence.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2009, 01:52:58 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #67 on: March 20, 2009, 02:40:40 PM »

Since the silence establishes that most everyone here does actually wear a seatbelt, it is time for my next question.  Suppose your kid said to you that they had decided they were going to be sexually active.  No matter how much you exhort him or her on how foolish that is for a variety of reasons, they are convinced in their position.  Do you wish for him / her to use a condom or not? 
Logged
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,516


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #68 on: March 20, 2009, 02:56:02 PM »

I actually know a man that lived in S. Africa and has founded a AIDS relief organization. ( http://www.agathosfoundation.org/ )  One of the problems with condoms and the AIDS crisis is the climate actually. Condoms are most effective when kept in their ideal environment. They need to stay relatively cool to maintain their effectiveness (hence why keeping one in your pocket all the time is stupid). The heat and various other conditions over there often render condoms ineffective long before they would be ineffective anywhere else. If latex becomes too warm the "pores" so to speak open up allowing nearly anything to get thru. Most people that have HIV or AIDS over there don't have a nice cool place to put their condoms. Additionally most of them would have to travel a long ways to "restock" since they don't have those nice vending machines that we in the US have in bar bathrooms Roll Eyes It is quite possible that the condoms don't really even work by the time people receive them. The expiration date on condoms in Africa is in effect worthless for knowing if they are indeed effective anymore. Condoms are the finger in the dike. The CULTURE over there is what is causing this mass AIDS crisis. There is a horrible thought that if you have sex with/rape a child/infant girl that one will be "cured" of HIV or AIDS.

http://www.scienceinafrica.co.za/2002/april/virgin.htm
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/444213
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/southafrica/1362134/South-African-men-rape-babies-as-cure-for-Aids.html
« Last Edit: March 20, 2009, 03:22:07 PM by Quinault » Logged
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,516


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #69 on: March 20, 2009, 03:00:20 PM »

Voila-
The history of the condom
http://www.avert.org/condoms.htm
Logged
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,516


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #70 on: March 20, 2009, 03:25:02 PM »

over a decade of throwing condoms at Africans
They don't work if you just throw them at people. They actually have to put them on.



You still have to worry about body fluid. A condom won't protect your waste, thighs, and other places in that same area.


1.) Clean water

2.) Regular Soap, Anti-Bacterial Soap, & Anti-fungal Soap

3.) Bio-Hazard materials to discard used condoms in the area


And you can't forget that the most essential part in making a condom useful is HOW you take it off after sex. That is a technique that can't exactly be practiced on produce or plastic phalluses. So even with all of the above precautions it is still ineffective if you don't take it off correctly. All the studies on the effectiveness of condoms for preventing AIDS are based on CORRECT usage. But the reality is much different. For example with PERFECT use a couple using condoms will only become pregnant 2% of the time. But "typical use" actually results in pregnancy 15% of the time, now imagine how effective it is against something MUCH smaller than sperm- a virus.

http://www.guttmacher.org/in-the-know/prevention.html
« Last Edit: March 20, 2009, 03:35:10 PM by Quinault » Logged
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #71 on: March 20, 2009, 03:47:11 PM »

So the ends justify the means? We should be encouraging people to engage in that which is intrinsically evil (contraception) in order to avoid another evil (HIV)?

Who says that contraception is intrinsically evil? And why, for what reason?
Logged

Love never fails.
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #72 on: March 20, 2009, 04:35:24 PM »

Since the silence establishes that most everyone here does actually wear a seatbelt, it is time for my next question.  Suppose your kid said to you that they had decided they were going to be sexually active.  No matter how much you exhort him or her on how foolish that is for a variety of reasons, they are convinced in their position.  Do you wish for him / her to use a condom or not? 

Of course not. What I have learned from this thread is that condoms raise HIV rates, so why would I?  Roll Eyes
Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,190


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #73 on: March 20, 2009, 07:28:37 PM »

So the ends justify the means? We should be encouraging people to engage in that which is intrinsically evil (contraception) in order to avoid another evil (HIV)?
Logical fallacy: circular reasoning.
Logical fallacy: claiming that something is circular reasoning when it is not.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,190


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #74 on: March 20, 2009, 07:29:24 PM »

So the ends justify the means? We should be encouraging people to engage in that which is intrinsically evil (contraception) in order to avoid another evil (HIV)?

Who says that contraception is intrinsically evil? And why, for what reason?
Well the Church fathers for one... Also, the Eastern Orthodox Church did until recently.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,190


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #75 on: March 20, 2009, 07:30:49 PM »

So the ends justify the means? We should be encouraging people to engage in that which is intrinsically evil (contraception) in order to avoid another evil (HIV)?

Your Pope says condoms are evil.
So do the Church fathers, as did Eastern Orthodoxy at one time.

ROFL!
You can't be serious! Which Church Fathers forbade condoms?
They condemned birth control in general.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #76 on: March 20, 2009, 07:33:02 PM »

So the ends justify the means? We should be encouraging people to engage in that which is intrinsically evil (contraception) in order to avoid another evil (HIV)?

Your Pope says condoms are evil.
So do the Church fathers, as did Eastern Orthodoxy at one time.

ROFL!
You can't be serious! Which Church Fathers forbade condoms?
They condemned birth control in general.
Did they? Could you give us a quote or two?
What if the intention is not birth control but disease control? What if a married woman contracts HIV via a blood transfusion- should the couple never have sex again because condoms are intrinsicly evil?
BTW, Chastity is a form of birth control.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2009, 07:37:26 PM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #77 on: March 20, 2009, 07:39:18 PM »

Is coitus interruptus considered a sinful form of birth control? Or, what if your wife is unable to bring a child to term but can still conceive, but that conception endangers your wife's health.  If you are a practicing Roman Catholic, is it permissible to use birth control in that situation?
Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,407


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #78 on: March 20, 2009, 07:40:46 PM »

I believe a Catholic would answer no to that one George.  If I'm not mistaken, Catholics have taken a stand that sex should be nothing but procreative.

Thus, the woman with HIV cannot and should not have sex anymore, even if married.  Am I right?

This is probably the underlying reason why HH Pope Benedict said what he said.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #79 on: March 20, 2009, 07:45:20 PM »

I believe a Catholic would answer no to that one George.  If I'm not mistaken, Catholics have taken a stand that sex should be nothing but procreative.

Thus, the woman with HIV cannot and should not have sex anymore, even if married.  Am I right?

This is probably the underlying reason why HH Pope Benedict said what he said.

Could somebody (preferably a knowledgeable member of the Roman Catholic Church) please tell me that this isn't true.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,516


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #80 on: March 20, 2009, 07:47:33 PM »

If you can't be "open to life" you are supposed to be celibate in marriage as a Catholic.
Logged
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #81 on: March 20, 2009, 07:53:01 PM »

Is coitus interruptus considered a sinful form of birth control? Or, what if your wife is unable to bring a child to term but can still conceive, but that conception endangers your wife's health.  If you are a practicing Roman Catholic, is it permissible to use birth control in that situation?

Allow me respond to myself Smiley

I just read that withdrawal is considered sinful, but the "rhythm method" is perfectly acceptable.  And where did people get this crazy notion that the Catholic Church is legalistic?  Tongue

But really, the primary purpose of sex is procreation? I didn't realize the RCC considered humans to be so much like animals.
Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #82 on: March 20, 2009, 07:53:16 PM »

If you can't be "open to life" you are supposed to be celibate in marriage as a Catholic.
Does this include the case where the primary aim is to prevent infection of the woman's partner (and baby)? Are you seriously telling me that the Catholic Church says that HIV infected married persons must remain celibate?
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,516


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #83 on: March 20, 2009, 07:55:12 PM »

If it isn't open to life it isn't OK.
Logged
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #84 on: March 20, 2009, 07:59:29 PM »

If it isn't open to life it isn't OK.
If that's true, then I guess there is no point discussing the issue with them.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,516


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #85 on: March 20, 2009, 08:03:04 PM »

If it isn't open to life it isn't OK.
If that's true, then I guess there is no point discussing the issue with them.


That is one thing (amongst quite a few others) that made us decide against Catholocism. In general Orthodoxy is not for birth control. But there seems to be allowances for the fact that for many it can be a need to limit/avoid children..
Logged
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,190


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #86 on: March 20, 2009, 08:18:04 PM »

If you can't be "open to life" you are supposed to be celibate in marriage as a Catholic.
Does this include the case where the primary aim is to prevent infection of the woman's partner (and baby)? Are you seriously telling me that the Catholic Church says that HIV infected married persons must remain celibate?
Yup. Its not like sex is a be all end all in life.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #87 on: March 20, 2009, 08:22:01 PM »

Its not like sex is a be all end all in life.

Compassion is.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
Papist
Patriarch of Pontification
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Byzantine
Posts: 12,190


Praying for the Christians in Iraq


« Reply #88 on: March 20, 2009, 08:23:25 PM »

So the ends justify the means? We should be encouraging people to engage in that which is intrinsically evil (contraception) in order to avoid another evil (HIV)?

Your Pope says condoms are evil.
So do the Church fathers, as did Eastern Orthodoxy at one time.

ROFL!
You can't be serious! Which Church Fathers forbade condoms?
They condemned birth control in general.
Did they? Could you give us a quote or two?
"The use of contraceptives and other devices for birth control is on the whole strongly discouraged in the Orthodox Church. Some bishops and theologians altogether condemn the employment of such methods. Others, however, have recently begun to adopt a less strict position, and urge that the question is best left to the discretion of each individual couple, in consultation with the spiritual father." - Met. Ware, The Orthodox Church.
Logged

Note Papist's influence from the tyrannical monarchism of traditional papism .
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,516


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #89 on: March 20, 2009, 08:46:03 PM »

Quote
"The use of contraceptives and other devices for birth control is on the whole strongly discouraged in the Orthodox Church. Some bishops and theologians altogether condemn the employment of such methods. Others, however, have recently begun to adopt a less strict position,  and urge that the question is best left to the discretion of each individual couple, in consultation with the spiritual father." - Met. Ware, The Orthodox Church.

The Catholic church seems to ONLY care about the procreative aspect of sex and forget completely about the unitive nature. They see it as both/and rather than seeing them as the separate issues altogether which they are. Sex or lack thereof is an issue that can and often does make or break a marriage. And we are not to withold from each other unless we are in agreement. This will often lead to many catholic men becoming porn and masturbation issues because they can't have sex with their wife due to health issues.

The worst case of this thought process I saw was when a woman that wanted to wed a man with a vasectomy was told she can't because it would never be a marriage "open to life." And I saw a case where a man was told he couldn't wed a woman that had a tubal ligation as well. They would have been second marriages but these people had the procedures before they converted. To declare that a marriage is invalid simply because there is no chance of "creating life" is horrendous to my mind.
« Last Edit: March 20, 2009, 08:51:01 PM by Quinault » Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Online Online

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,571



« Reply #90 on: March 21, 2009, 12:20:14 AM »

So the ends justify the means? We should be encouraging people to engage in that which is intrinsically evil (contraception) in order to avoid another evil (HIV)?

Your Pope says condoms are evil.
So do the Church fathers, as did Eastern Orthodoxy at one time.

ROFL!
You can't be serious! Which Church Fathers forbade condoms?
They condemned birth control in general.

Yes, the reason why Humanae Vitae, correct as it is, is devoid of patristics: those Fathers who condemned birth control would also condemn the rhythm method.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #91 on: March 21, 2009, 07:10:31 AM »

Yes, the reason why Humanae Vitae, correct as it is,
You're right. We ignorant, backwater Christians who call themselves the Orthodox should look more to the Vatican for answers and guidance.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2009, 07:10:50 AM by ozgeorge » Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
rwprof
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA now, Antiochian originally
Posts: 294



« Reply #92 on: March 21, 2009, 07:29:23 AM »

Note that the Patriarch of Moscow supports Benedict's position:

http://www.interfax-religion.com/?act=news&div=5818


Logged

Mark (rwprof) passed into eternal life on Jan 7, 2010.  May his memory be eternal!
Jetavan
Argumentum ad australopithecum
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,542


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #93 on: March 21, 2009, 08:20:15 AM »

Note that the Patriarch of Moscow supports Benedict's position:

http://www.interfax-religion.com/?act=news&div=5818


From the story:

Quote
"It is incorrect to consider condoms as a panacea for AIDS," the deputy chairman of the Moscow Patriarchate Department for External Church Relations Archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin told a round table in Moscow on Friday, commenting on the international row concerned with the pope's statement in Africa.

AIDS can be prevented not by contraceptives but by education and a righteous life, the priest said.

"If a person lives a sinful, aimless and senseless life, uses drugs and is lewd, some disease will kill him one day, neither a condom nor medicine will save him," Fr. Vsevolod added.

Insofar as the Pope is stating that condoms in themselves will not solve the AIDS crisis, that's pretty non-controversial.


Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #94 on: March 21, 2009, 10:35:51 AM »

Thank God that His Holiness the Patriarch of Moscow is following the lead of The Pope on this issue.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #95 on: March 21, 2009, 12:56:42 PM »

So the ends justify the means? We should be encouraging people to engage in that which is intrinsically evil (contraception) in order to avoid another evil (HIV)?

If one must prevent HIV, then abstinence makes sense.  Nevertheless, if one must have sex, why can't we promote the use of condoms to prevent HIV?  Don't you think it's waaaaaaaaaaaaay much better than having sex unprotected?  Do we really want to act like fundamentalists who wish disease upon the abominable fornicators and homosexuals?  Not only do you prevent disease, but unwanted abortion under Papal definition.

Contrast:

“I am often asked whether there will ever be a cure for H.I.V./AIDS, and my answer is that there is already a cure,” she says. “It lies in the strength of women, families and communities who support and empower each other to break the silence around AIDS and take control of their sexual lives.”

How about giving out condemns to adulterers?  After all, in those circumstances a disease or pregnancy would be a whole host of problems.

Quote
This is the Pope who is against the death penalty, right?  Just as one may take a position of love towards murderers so that they may not be killed under law, why not offer the same love to promiscuous people, in hopes that they may repent in good health some day?
Your analogy is off: if the pope, gave the murder more human ways of doing his craft (say, poison instead of a knife) your analogy would be more in line.

Isa, if I was a health care professional, I can't just give spiritual advise to anyone I see.  The patient will tell me, "Yes, doctor, I want to have sex."  In which I case, I will answer, "PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE use a condom.  You have a better chance protecting yourself from unwanted pregnancies and STDs than without protection."

I think this is a very sensible approach.  If I know they have a greater risk without protection, why should I not ask otherwise.

If on the other hand Isa, I was talking to you as a friend, as a brother in Orthodoxy (or anyone who is interested in my spiritual advise), then yes, I would plead to you with spiritual advise, i.e. abstinence.

If you are going to tell them to use a condom then you should also tell them to wash up afterwards and to safely dispose of the used condom.

If you are not gonna tell them the rest then you shouldn't even tell them about the condom part.


If you are going to tell them (as a doctor) then tell them everything.





JORM888
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #96 on: March 21, 2009, 12:58:59 PM »

I actually know a man that lived in S. Africa and has founded a AIDS relief organization. ( http://www.agathosfoundation.org/ )  One of the problems with condoms and the AIDS crisis is the climate actually. Condoms are most effective when kept in their ideal environment. They need to stay relatively cool to maintain their effectiveness (hence why keeping one in your pocket all the time is stupid). The heat and various other conditions over there often render condoms ineffective long before they would be ineffective anywhere else. If latex becomes too warm the "pores" so to speak open up allowing nearly anything to get thru. Most people that have HIV or AIDS over there don't have a nice cool place to put their condoms. Additionally most of them would have to travel a long ways to "restock" since they don't have those nice vending machines that we in the US have in bar bathrooms Roll Eyes It is quite possible that the condoms don't really even work by the time people receive them. The expiration date on condoms in Africa is in effect worthless for knowing if they are indeed effective anymore. Condoms are the finger in the dike. The CULTURE over there is what is causing this mass AIDS crisis. There is a horrible thought that if you have sex with/rape a child/infant girl that one will be "cured" of HIV or AIDS.

http://www.scienceinafrica.co.za/2002/april/virgin.htm
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/444213
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/southafrica/1362134/South-African-men-rape-babies-as-cure-for-Aids.html



Bingo!



If we are gonna tell people to use condoms, then we need to tell the whole story......and not just part of it. Condoms alone is not the answer.


Plus, what will they do with all the used condoms? If someone or an animal picks it up and if the person doesn't wash their hands(and if that person has cuts on their hands) then the problem will only spread.





JNORM888
« Last Edit: March 21, 2009, 01:08:47 PM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #97 on: March 21, 2009, 01:04:04 PM »

Since the silence establishes that most everyone here does actually wear a seatbelt, it is time for my next question.  Suppose your kid said to you that they had decided they were going to be sexually active.  No matter how much you exhort him or her on how foolish that is for a variety of reasons, they are convinced in their position.  Do you wish for him / her to use a condom or not? 

You need to tell your child about everything. If the person or persons they are sleeping with have body fluids dripping......then that condom won't be of much help for the other areas of the body......especially if you have an open wound or cut anywhere.....but even if the person doesn't have HIV, they might have another STD.....in which the other parts of the body are at risk.

You need to tell your kid more than just "here, take this condom". Condoms alone is not the answer.





JNORM888
« Last Edit: March 21, 2009, 01:11:08 PM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #98 on: March 21, 2009, 01:13:06 PM »

So the ends justify the means? We should be encouraging people to engage in that which is intrinsically evil (contraception) in order to avoid another evil (HIV)?
Logical fallacy: circular reasoning.
Logical fallacy: claiming that something is circular reasoning when it is not.

In order for something to make sense and be coherent, there will always be a level of circular reasoning somewhere.

So people should be happy about circular reasoning.........it's everywhere.




JNORM888
« Last Edit: March 21, 2009, 01:13:51 PM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
ozgeorge
I'll take you for who you are if you take me for everything.
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Oecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the New Rome, the Great Church of Christ.
Posts: 16,382


My plans for retirement.


WWW
« Reply #99 on: March 21, 2009, 01:15:58 PM »

Condoms alone is not the answer.

No one is saying that condoms alone are the answer. What is being objected to is the false claim that 1) Condoms increase the risk of HIV transmission and 2) The dangerous and irrational idea that condoms should NOT be used if one falls into fornication.
Logged

If you're living a happy life as a Christian, you're doing something wrong.
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #100 on: March 21, 2009, 01:17:23 PM »

over a decade of throwing condoms at Africans
They don't work if you just throw them at people. They actually have to put them on.



You still have to worry about body fluid. A condom won't protect your waste, thighs, and other places in that same area.


1.) Clean water

2.) Regular Soap, Anti-Bacterial Soap, & Anti-fungal Soap

3.) Bio-Hazard materials to discard used condoms in the area


And you can't forget that the most essential part in making a condom useful is HOW you take it off after sex. That is a technique that can't exactly be practiced on produce or plastic phalluses. So even with all of the above precautions it is still ineffective if you don't take it off correctly. All the studies on the effectiveness of condoms for preventing AIDS are based on CORRECT usage. But the reality is much different. For example with PERFECT use a couple using condoms will only become pregnant 2% of the time. But "typical use" actually results in pregnancy 15% of the time, now imagine how effective it is against something MUCH smaller than sperm- a virus.

http://www.guttmacher.org/in-the-know/prevention.html



My point exactly!!!!



Thankyou for posting this. I know the same to be true with plastic gloves. If you don't take them off correctly then you will contaminate yourself.

When you take off a plastic glove, you are not suppose to touch any other skin part. And you throw the glove away in a Bio-Hazard garbage bag/can.

You are also suppose to wash your hands for 30 seconds with liquid soap after.....after.....you take the gloves off.

But alot of people that use condoms, don't know how to take them off correctly, and if the other person has body fluids, then you can't take them off correctly.

And not only that, but alot of people that use condoms, either don't wash up immediately afterwards or just don't have access to where they can wash up safely. Not to mention not knowing what to do with a used condom........a used condom is a bio-hazard.









JNORM888
« Last Edit: March 21, 2009, 01:26:08 PM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #101 on: March 21, 2009, 01:29:45 PM »

Condoms alone is not the answer.

No one is saying that condoms alone are the answer. What is being objected to is the false claim that 1) Condoms increase the risk of HIV transmission and 2) The dangerous and irrational idea that condoms should NOT be used if one falls into fornication.


I thought the Pope rejected the idea that "condoms alone" was not the answer.

1.) I think it can in a 3rd World country.

2.) I agree that # 2 is a dangerous and irrational idea.





JNORM888
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #102 on: March 21, 2009, 01:35:15 PM »

So the ends justify the means? We should be encouraging people to engage in that which is intrinsically evil (contraception) in order to avoid another evil (HIV)?

Who says that contraception is intrinsically evil? And why, for what reason?


All sins are sins, but when you have to choose between two different sins, then you go with the lesser of two evils.


As far as contraception being evil......well, I know that a good number of church fathers and nonfathers were against it back in the day.......my memory isn't too good at the moment....as to why. Maybe someone else can answer that part.





JNORM888
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #103 on: March 21, 2009, 01:40:41 PM »

If you can't be "open to life" you are supposed to be celibate in marriage as a Catholic.
Does this include the case where the primary aim is to prevent infection of the woman's partner (and baby)? Are you seriously telling me that the Catholic Church says that HIV infected married persons must remain celibate?
Yup. Its not like sex is a be all end all in life.

True





JNORM888
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #104 on: March 21, 2009, 01:45:10 PM »

Quote
"The use of contraceptives and other devices for birth control is on the whole strongly discouraged in the Orthodox Church. Some bishops and theologians altogether condemn the employment of such methods. Others, however, have recently begun to adopt a less strict position,  and urge that the question is best left to the discretion of each individual couple, in consultation with the spiritual father." - Met. Ware, The Orthodox Church.

The Catholic church seems to ONLY care about the procreative aspect of sex and forget completely about the unitive nature. They see it as both/and rather than seeing them as the separate issues altogether which they are. Sex or lack thereof is an issue that can and often does make or break a marriage. And we are not to withold from each other unless we are in agreement. This will often lead to many catholic men becoming porn and masturbation issues because they can't have sex with their wife due to health issues.

The worst case of this thought process I saw was when a woman that wanted to wed a man with a vasectomy was told she can't because it would never be a marriage "open to life." And I saw a case where a man was told he couldn't wed a woman that had a tubal ligation as well. They would have been second marriages but these people had the procedures before they converted. To declare that a marriage is invalid simply because there is no chance of "creating life" is horrendous to my mind.

The Primary function of sex is procreation. Anything else is just a bonus/reward for helping bring new life into the World.

The primary function is the primary function and it shouldn't be overlooked nor ignored for the sake of personal pleasure. That personal pleasure is there for a reason.

To ignore it's primary function is to make sex nothing more than a natural drug........where people get their personal fixes.

And it makes the addiction of the personal fix.....the primary reason.....when it isn't......it is secondary.





JNORM888
« Last Edit: March 21, 2009, 01:49:18 PM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,516


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #105 on: March 21, 2009, 01:49:19 PM »

Can't agree with you jnorm. Being in my current situation I can and will say that the primary function of sex is NOT procreative.

1) I am pregnant. So to have sex right now would NOT be procreative, that is just redundant.
2) My husband is gone/will be gone for a loooonnngggg time.

Does this mean that neither my husband or I have a need for sex? No, we both do and if we were together we would have it. Sex fulfills both emotional and physical needs/desires.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2009, 01:51:47 PM by Quinault » Logged
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #106 on: March 21, 2009, 01:54:22 PM »

Can't agree with you jnorm. Being in my current situation I can and will say that the primary function of sex is NOT procreative.

1) I am pregnant. So to have sex right now would NOT be procreative, that is just redundant.
2) My husband is gone/will be gone for a loooonnngggg time.

Does this mean that neither my husband or I have a need for sex? No, we both do and if we were together we would have it.

The primary reason for sex is procreation......anything else is secondary. Now I'm not saying you can't have sex.....I'm just saying that it's secondary.

If procreation wasn't the primary means for this function then we would have other natural ways to have babies.

Anything else is a secondary reason or subordinate reason to have sex. Now I'm not saying your wrong in wanting to have sex, instead, I'm just saying that such a thing is a secondary reason(of why we have these sex organs).......or else there would be no need to invent contraceptives to stop the baby from being formed.

This alone should tell us what the primary function is.





JNORM888
« Last Edit: March 21, 2009, 01:59:24 PM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,516


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #107 on: March 21, 2009, 02:01:05 PM »

I would equate the sex drive outside marriage to a fix, a drug. You are driven by hormonal desire and desire a fix. But within marriage it is more than outside marriage.

If we aren't supposed to withhold sex from each other except if we both agree like Scripture says, then that means sex is more than procreation. Not to mention if you go the primary procreative route then sex when people are older and past childbearing years is wrong since it can't be procreative. What about women that have had to have a hysterectomy? Then there is no chance of conception! Do you doom these women to remaining single for the rest of their lives? Women can be born without uterus's or ovaries, should they be banned from marriage too? This type of logic looks good on the surface but when you scratch a bit deeper it is merely turning women into baby factories. And if you can't make babies you are worthless. Then it measures the worth of men and women by their fertility. My brother in law has fertility issues and can't conceive a child with his wife. But this inability to impregnate his wife makes him no less of a husband or man. But if you use the logic that sex is primarily for procreation then he shouldn't wed if he knows he can't produce a child.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2009, 02:10:07 PM by Quinault » Logged
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #108 on: March 21, 2009, 02:11:48 PM »

I would equate the sex drive outside marriage to a fix, a drug. You are driven by hormonal desire and desire a fix. But within marriage it is more than outside marriage.

If we aren't supposed to withhold sex from each other except if we both agree like Scripture says, then that means sex is more than procreation. Not to mention if you go the primary procreative route then sex when people are older and past childbearing years is wrong since it can't be procreative. What about women that have had to have a hysterectomy? Then there is no chance of conception! Do you doom these women to remaining single for the rest of their lives? Women can be born without uterus's or ovaries, should they be banned from marriage too? This type of logic looks good on the surface but when you scratch a bit deeper it is merely turning women into baby factories. And if you can't make babies you are worthless. Then it measures the worth of men and women to their fertility. My brother in law has fertility issues and can't conceive a child with his wife. But this inability to impregnate his wife makes him no less of a husband or man. But if you use the logic that sex is primarily for procreation then he shouldn't wed if he knows he can't produce a child.



So you're saying that the Primary reason for sex within marriage is twofold.

1.) Procreation & marital sex



Interesting, you may have a point. I will have to ponder this.

Thanks for posting.


You know that this will bring up a whole other can of warms.........it is easier and safer (for civil reasons) to just let those who are able to procreate get married.   But I will think about what you said.....for you do raise alot of good points.










JNORM888
« Last Edit: March 21, 2009, 02:16:43 PM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #109 on: March 21, 2009, 02:13:11 PM »

I would equate the sex drive outside marriage to a fix, a drug. You are driven by hormonal desire and desire a fix. But within marriage it is more than outside marriage.

If we aren't supposed to withhold sex from each other except if we both agree like Scripture says, then that means sex is more than procreation. Not to mention if you go the primary procreative route then sex when people are older and past childbearing years is wrong since it can't be procreative. What about women that have had to have a hysterectomy? Then there is no chance of conception! Do you doom these women to remaining single for the rest of their lives? Women can be born without uterus's or ovaries, should they be banned from marriage too? This type of logic looks good on the surface but when you scratch a bit deeper it is merely turning women into baby factories. And if you can't make babies you are worthless. Then it measures the worth of men and women by their fertility. My brother in law has fertility issues and can't conceive a child with his wife. But this inability to impregnate his wife makes him no less of a husband or man. But if you use the logic that sex is primarily for procreation then he shouldn't wed if he knows he can't produce a child.

Agreed.
Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #110 on: March 21, 2009, 02:14:45 PM »

I would equate the sex drive outside marriage to a fix, a drug. You are driven by hormonal desire and desire a fix. But within marriage it is more than outside marriage.

If we aren't supposed to withhold sex from each other except if we both agree like Scripture says, then that means sex is more than procreation. Not to mention if you go the primary procreative route then sex when people are older and past childbearing years is wrong since it can't be procreative. What about women that have had to have a hysterectomy? Then there is no chance of conception! Do you doom these women to remaining single for the rest of their lives? Women can be born without uterus's or ovaries, should they be banned from marriage too? This type of logic looks good on the surface but when you scratch a bit deeper it is merely turning women into baby factories. And if you can't make babies you are worthless. Then it measures the worth of men and women to their fertility. My brother in law has fertility issues and can't conceive a child with his wife. But this inability to impregnate his wife makes him no less of a husband or man. But if you use the logic that sex is primarily for procreation then he shouldn't wed if he knows he can't produce a child.



So you're saying that the Primary reason for sex within marriage is twofold.

1.) Procreation & marital sex



Interesting, you may have a point. I will have to ponder this.

Thanks for posting.










JNORM888

If I'm remembering correctly, this is the view espoused by Fr. Meyendorff in his book on Orthodox marriage. Both parts- procreation and physical union, hold the same weight of importance.
Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #111 on: March 21, 2009, 02:16:17 PM »

"The goal of sex in marriage is spiritual union. Through the joining of two physical bodies in marital love comes a unique oneness of soul. Saint John Chrysostom instructs us: 'Their intercourse accomplishes the joining of their bodies, and they are made one, just as when perfume is mixed with ointment" (12th Homily on Colossians)

From: http://orthodoxwiki.org/Sex
Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #112 on: March 21, 2009, 02:17:51 PM »

So the ends justify the means? We should be encouraging people to engage in that which is intrinsically evil (contraception) in order to avoid another evil (HIV)?

Who says that contraception is intrinsically evil? And why, for what reason?


All sins are sins, but when you have to choose between two different sins, then you go with the lesser of two evils.


As far as contraception being evil......well, I know that a good number of church fathers and nonfathers were against it back in the day.......my memory isn't too good at the moment....as to why. Maybe someone else can answer that part.





JNORM888

Yes, some of them definitely were against anything beyond procreation in marriage. Moreover, some of them, like St. John Chrysostom, wrote that Adam and Eve had no sex whatsoever untill they fell into sin, because it's just unconceivable that such a horrible, dirty, filthy thing as copulation could be a part of life of sinless humans. When God told them to be fruitful and multiply, He most definitely meant something else, not this horrible, atrocious, abominable "stuff."

I consider such writings a pure undiluted idiocy. Sorry Fathers. With all due respect for other things that you wrote...
« Last Edit: March 21, 2009, 02:18:22 PM by Heorhij » Logged

Love never fails.
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #113 on: March 21, 2009, 02:18:33 PM »

I would equate the sex drive outside marriage to a fix, a drug. You are driven by hormonal desire and desire a fix. But within marriage it is more than outside marriage.

If we aren't supposed to withhold sex from each other except if we both agree like Scripture says, then that means sex is more than procreation. Not to mention if you go the primary procreative route then sex when people are older and past childbearing years is wrong since it can't be procreative. What about women that have had to have a hysterectomy? Then there is no chance of conception! Do you doom these women to remaining single for the rest of their lives? Women can be born without uterus's or ovaries, should they be banned from marriage too? This type of logic looks good on the surface but when you scratch a bit deeper it is merely turning women into baby factories. And if you can't make babies you are worthless. Then it measures the worth of men and women to their fertility. My brother in law has fertility issues and can't conceive a child with his wife. But this inability to impregnate his wife makes him no less of a husband or man. But if you use the logic that sex is primarily for procreation then he shouldn't wed if he knows he can't produce a child.



So you're saying that the Primary reason for sex within marriage is twofold.

1.) Procreation & marital sex



Interesting, you may have a point. I will have to ponder this.

Thanks for posting.










JNORM888

If I'm remembering correctly, this is the view espoused by Fr. Meyendorff in his book on Orthodox marriage. Both parts- procreation and physical union, hold the same weight of importance.

Interesting, I will put it on my books to get list.



thanks for sharing



JNORM888
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,516


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #114 on: March 21, 2009, 02:21:37 PM »

I have heard plenty of Catholics get around the idea of older sex past childbearing years being "open to life" by saying-"Well it is still open to life because you aren't doing anything to prevent pregnancy and would take a child if you were given one."

But we aren't in biblical times. And I guarantee that my grandma at 80 or my mom at 63 would be shocked, appalled and terrified if they became pregnant again  laugh Being "open to life" is the farthest thing from their minds at that age.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2009, 02:30:01 PM by Quinault » Logged
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #115 on: March 21, 2009, 02:22:46 PM »

So the ends justify the means? We should be encouraging people to engage in that which is intrinsically evil (contraception) in order to avoid another evil (HIV)?

Who says that contraception is intrinsically evil? And why, for what reason?


All sins are sins, but when you have to choose between two different sins, then you go with the lesser of two evils.


As far as contraception being evil......well, I know that a good number of church fathers and nonfathers were against it back in the day.......my memory isn't too good at the moment....as to why. Maybe someone else can answer that part.





JNORM888

Yes, some of them definitely were against anything beyond procreation in marriage. Moreover, some of them, like St. John Chrysostom, wrote that Adam and Eve had no sex whatsoever untill they fell into sin, because it's just unconceivable that such a horrible, dirty, filthy thing as copulation could be a part of life of sinless humans. When God told them to be fruitful and multiply, He most definitely meant something else, not this horrible, atrocious, abominable "stuff."

I consider such writings a pure undiluted idiocy. Sorry Fathers. With all due respect for other things that you wrote...

I thought Saint John Chrysostom made a good observation. But to each his own.

I thought it had more to do with the idea that if you had sex before the fall then you would also have kids before the fall. I don't think you can put Saint John Chrysostom in the same boat with Saint Augustine. I could be wrong, but I think the Eastern Fathers had a different view about sex than Augustine.


But to each his own.




JNORM888
Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,516


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #116 on: March 21, 2009, 02:25:09 PM »

God opens and closes the womb as he chooses. There is certainly plenty of evidence for that in scripture. I don't think we can assume that there was no sex before the fall. I think many people think of the fall and their nakedness being exposed and correlate nakedness with the fall and then the sex occurred later because they were naked. But the issue is more complex than that and you have to delve deeper.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2009, 02:26:17 PM by Quinault » Logged
jnorm888
Jnorm
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 2,516


Icon and Cross (international space station)


WWW
« Reply #117 on: March 21, 2009, 02:25:30 PM »

"The goal of sex in marriage is spiritual union. Through the joining of two physical bodies in marital love comes a unique oneness of soul. Saint John Chrysostom instructs us: 'Their intercourse accomplishes the joining of their bodies, and they are made one, just as when perfume is mixed with ointment" (12th Homily on Colossians)

From: http://orthodoxwiki.org/Sex


Interesting. It looks like I have to change my mind about this. But don't expect it to change overnight.






JNORM888
« Last Edit: March 21, 2009, 02:25:51 PM by jnorm888 » Logged

"loving one's enemies does not mean loving wickedness, ungodliness, adultery, or theft. Rather, it means loving the theif, the ungodly, and the adulterer." Clement of Alexandria 195 A.D.

http://ancientchristiandefender.blogspot.com/
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,516


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #118 on: March 21, 2009, 02:28:28 PM »

There is also the fact that there is specific mention of pain in childbirth being increased for women. Who knows how we would have reproduced and given birth before the fall? Pushing a baby out certainly isn't painless! Cheesy
« Last Edit: March 21, 2009, 02:28:52 PM by Quinault » Logged
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,516


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #119 on: March 21, 2009, 02:43:47 PM »


You know that this will bring up a whole other can of warms.........it is easier and safer (for civil reasons) to just let those who are able to procreate get married.   But I will think about what you said.....for you do raise alot of good points.

JNORM888

Why would it be "easier and safer" to only allow those that can procreate to wed? This would only increase fornication, the sex drive is not driven by fertility alone.  (Especially for men, women will often have an increase is sexual desire in relation to ovulation, but that isn't the only time women desire sex. And sex for women is more than just a physical desire so the desire of sex is more of an emotional one for women than men.)
« Last Edit: March 21, 2009, 02:47:18 PM by Quinault » Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,132


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #120 on: March 21, 2009, 03:02:44 PM »

So the ends justify the means? We should be encouraging people to engage in that which is intrinsically evil (contraception) in order to avoid another evil (HIV)?
And the same Roman church that calls artificial birth control intrinsically evil also calls fornication and adultery intrinsically evil.  Why focus your polemic on just one side of the problem?  Ideally, according to your church's reasoning, a man and a woman should have sex with each other only if they are married to each other, and they would do so without using contraceptives.  If unmarried men, women, boys, and girls heeded your church's call to abstain from sex before or outside of the marriage bed, then you wouldn't also need to tell them to not use contraceptives, since it would just be a non-issue.  However, we're fallen and weak.  As such, a good number of our unmarried folk are going to engage in sexual activity--as much as we preach against it, they're going to do it anyway, for they just don't have the strength apart from the grace of God to resist one of the strongest of natural urges.  Why not at least support some modicum of protection, even if it is sinful, as a pastoral concession to the fact that they are sinning anyway, so that they can at least live long enough to repent?
« Last Edit: March 21, 2009, 03:03:50 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
rwprof
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA now, Antiochian originally
Posts: 294



« Reply #121 on: March 21, 2009, 03:24:59 PM »

Insofar as the Pope is stating that condoms in themselves will not solve the AIDS crisis, that's pretty non-controversial.

As non-controversial as what Benedict actually said, but when you rely on the Christian-hating media for your information, well, this thread is what happens.


Logged

Mark (rwprof) passed into eternal life on Jan 7, 2010.  May his memory be eternal!
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #122 on: March 21, 2009, 04:25:47 PM »


You know that this will bring up a whole other can of warms.........it is easier and safer (for civil reasons) to just let those who are able to procreate get married.   But I will think about what you said.....for you do raise alot of good points.

JNORM888

Why would it be "easier and safer" to only allow those that can procreate to wed? This would only increase fornication, the sex drive is not driven by fertility alone.  (Especially for men, women will often have an increase is sexual desire in relation to ovulation, but that isn't the only time women desire sex. And sex for women is more than just a physical desire so the desire of sex is more of an emotional one for women than men.)

The Church does, in fact, admit that sex is a legitimate part of marriage, even if fertility is out of question. If I am not mistaken, Ialmisry (or was it Sol?) even found Canons stating that while infertility is not a legitimate grounds for divorce, impotence is. Yet, there is this constant theme pretty much everywhere in the patristic heritage that to not have sex is better than to have it; that's why during fasts, married people should abstain from sex (makes you closer to God, etc.), monks are the only people eligible for episcopate, etc. etc. etc. So, sex is a "concession" - yes, if you are married, you should have it with your spouse, rather than lust for a prostitute; but usually there are all kinds of negative things associated with it, almost never anything positive, let alone calling it a sacred thing. I am afraid that it is nothing else but  this age-old fear of sex for pleasure (or, as I call it, sorry, idiocy) that resulted in Catholic ideas about "the absolute necessity of openness for conception" as detailed in the "Humanae Vitae."
Logged

Love never fails.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,407


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #123 on: March 21, 2009, 04:36:54 PM »

If you are going to tell them to use a condom then you should also tell them to wash up afterwards and to safely dispose of the used condom.

Ya, oh God...wo is me!!! Thank you for reminding me... Roll Eyes

THE POINT IS: so you agree with me that if someone is going to have sex, they should use a condom?
« Last Edit: March 21, 2009, 04:38:02 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Deacon Lance
Archon
********
Online Online

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archeparchy of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,901


Liturgy at Mt. St. Macrina Pilgrimage


« Reply #124 on: March 22, 2009, 01:52:18 PM »

‘We have found no consistent associations between condom use and lower HIV-infection rates, which, 25 years into the pandemic, we should be seeing if this intervention was working.”

So notes Edward C. Green, director of the AIDS Prevention Research Project at the Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies, in response to papal press comments en route to Africa this week.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MTNlNDc1MmMwNDM0OTEzMjQ4NDc0ZGUyOWYxNmEzN2E%3D
Logged

My cromulent posts embiggen this forum.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,407


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #125 on: March 22, 2009, 03:49:40 PM »

‘We have found no consistent associations between condom use and lower HIV-infection rates, which, 25 years into the pandemic, we should be seeing if this intervention was working.”

So notes Edward C. Green, director of the AIDS Prevention Research Project at the Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies, in response to papal press comments en route to Africa this week.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MTNlNDc1MmMwNDM0OTEzMjQ4NDc0ZGUyOWYxNmEzN2E%3D

Searching for Edward Green's research, I found it to be quite enlightening:

http://www.harvardaidsprp.org/research/green-manhattan-institute-lecture-010908.pdf

In it he makes an interesting statement that Ms. Lopez here seems to ignore, i.e. what may be working in NY and Bangkok does not necessarily mean it will work in Africa.  In addition, we know that when educating teens in schools on sex education, they are taught the ABC's of sex (abstinence, be faithful, circumcision/condom).  Green's "A" is a bit different:  he includes being faithful in A, while B is reducing risk through restricting relationships (perhaps polygamous).  Apparently, the funding of AID's prevention in Africa has been only "C's."  That is unfortunate and very suspiciously malicious.  The culture in Africa is also different, where one tends to have two life-long sexual relationships, whereas in the US, serial monogamy is popular.  Thus, "A" is already a cardinal rule in the US, but not so in Africa (not to be confused with Bush's "A" program of abstinence only).

This doesn't mean condoms aren't effective.  It's the last resort.  But behavior is just as important.  He does not discourage use of condoms as the Pope is.  He's simply stating Africa should have a different approach as successfully has been in Uganda.  There are ads for polygamists as well to be faithful.  There are ads that teach people to stay only with their wives.  In the past, ads were only for encouraging sex and condom use, which is where Green becomes frustrated.

In conclusion, the Pope agrees with Green's main point in discouraging the use of multiple partners, which is apparently very popular in Africa.  However, he does not take off condoms from the list like the Pope.  In fact, here is what he thinks is an example of progress:

Quote
• Reduce the number of multiple and concurrent multiple and concurrent partnerships.
• Prepare for the possible roll out of male circumcision.
• Address male involvement and responsibility for sexual and reproductive health, & HIV prevention and support.
Increase consistent and correct condom use.
• Continue programming around delayed sexual debut.

In addition to the main issue, which was multiple parternships, there was still inadequate/incorrect condom use due to no education and unavailability in rural areas, which is considered to add to the problem.  So, yes, I think we can all agree condom use should not be the main solution, but when you have stubbornness, condoms are actually encouraged by Green.

So who is Kathryn Jean Lopez?  A Catholic, Bush supporting Conservative (not that there's anything wrong with that).  I'm suspicious she just picked and chose things to write without giving us the full story due to her own agenda.  I won't be surprised if Green will come back to clarify his views from Lopez's one-sided article.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2009, 03:57:55 PM by minasoliman » Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #126 on: March 22, 2009, 04:05:09 PM »

Condoms are like Russian roulette. They don't work 100% of the time. And it only takes one time for the infection to take place.

----------

Sex DOES have a holy unitive aspect to it when shared in the marriage bed---but the primary aspect is PROCREATIVE and should not be actively and artificially impeded. That's God's territory.
Logged
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #127 on: March 23, 2009, 12:57:03 PM »

Sex DOES have a holy unitive aspect to it when shared in the marriage bed---but the primary aspect is PROCREATIVE and should not be actively and artificially impeded. That's God's territory.
I'm sorry, but we are just not going to agree with you, or the Pope, on this issue. There are many aspects to sex, and procreation is merely one of them. Then again, the Catholic church did always have a tough time with the idea of "first among equals." Wink
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #128 on: March 23, 2009, 02:48:25 PM »

Sex DOES have a holy unitive aspect to it when shared in the marriage bed---but the primary aspect is PROCREATIVE and should not be actively and artificially impeded. That's God's territory.

Yes, I hear this from Catholics all the time. But to me, it sounds weird and cruel. It is NOT God's territory, it is the territory of God AND the particular married couple. It is up to THEM, to conceive or not. I just don't see how it can be otherwise.
Logged

Love never fails.
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #129 on: March 23, 2009, 05:53:43 PM »

Condoms are like Russian roulette. They don't work 100% of the time. And it only takes one time for the infection to take place.

----------

Sex DOES have a holy unitive aspect to it when shared in the marriage bed---but the primary aspect is PROCREATIVE and should not be actively and artificially impeded. That's God's territory.

What is the Vatican's stance on whether priests ought to wear condoms while raping altar boys?  Would that take away from the procreative aspect of sex? 
 You could have made your point quite well without being so insulting to our Catholic guests as to bring up this scandal, which is still a sore point for many Catholics, in such a crass way.

-PeterTheAleut (modified after discussion with ozgeorge)
« Last Edit: March 24, 2009, 12:06:41 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,407


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #130 on: March 23, 2009, 07:19:43 PM »

Condoms are like Russian roulette. They don't work 100% of the time. And it only takes one time for the infection to take place.

----------

Sex DOES have a holy unitive aspect to it when shared in the marriage bed---but the primary aspect is PROCREATIVE and should not be actively and artificially impeded. That's God's territory.

What is the Vatican's stance on whether priests ought to wear condoms while raping altar boys?  Would that take away from the procreative aspect of sex? 

Come on man, that was uncalled for.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #131 on: March 23, 2009, 07:24:36 PM »

Condoms are like Russian roulette. They don't work 100% of the time. And it only takes one time for the infection to take place.

----------

Sex DOES have a holy unitive aspect to it when shared in the marriage bed---but the primary aspect is PROCREATIVE and should not be actively and artificially impeded. That's God's territory.

What is the Vatican's stance on whether priests ought to wear condoms while raping altar boys?  Would that take away from the procreative aspect of sex? 

Come on man, that was uncalled for.

Not at all.  If Catholics are saying that condoms ought not to be used because imposing Catholic morality on a large swathe of the population (many of whom aren't Catholics) is more effective at preventing STIs, then it should be logical that the Roman Catholic clergy would be pillars of this morality.  If, one the other hand, the shocking reality is that people can and do make mistakes, and that in such cases, it would be better to at least use a condom than have absolutely no protection at all. 
Logged
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #132 on: March 23, 2009, 08:40:31 PM »

Sex DOES have a holy unitive aspect to it when shared in the marriage bed---but the primary aspect is PROCREATIVE and should not be actively and artificially impeded. That's God's territory.
I'm sorry, but we are just not going to agree with you, or the Pope, on this issue. There are many aspects to sex, and procreation is merely one of them. Then again, the Catholic church did always have a tough time with the idea of "first among equals." Wink

Don't blame us, blame the Fathers.

This capitulation among almost every Christian communion beginning in the middle of the 20th century is striking, to say the least.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 32,132


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #133 on: March 23, 2009, 08:42:27 PM »

Sex DOES have a holy unitive aspect to it when shared in the marriage bed---but the primary aspect is PROCREATIVE and should not be actively and artificially impeded. That's God's territory.
I'm sorry, but we are just not going to agree with you, or the Pope, on this issue. There are many aspects to sex, and procreation is merely one of them. Then again, the Catholic church did always have a tough time with the idea of "first among equals." Wink

Don't blame us, blame the Fathers.

This capitulation among almost every Christian communion beginning in the middle of the 20th century is striking, to say the least.
Should it be so striking that we at least recognize the need for pastoral sensitivity to real life situations and don't just believe in enforcing the strict letter of the law as this has been laid down from the ivory tower of the Vatican?
Logged
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #134 on: March 24, 2009, 12:06:02 PM »

Sex DOES have a holy unitive aspect to it when shared in the marriage bed---but the primary aspect is PROCREATIVE and should not be actively and artificially impeded. That's God's territory.
I'm sorry, but we are just not going to agree with you, or the Pope, on this issue. There are many aspects to sex, and procreation is merely one of them. Then again, the Catholic church did always have a tough time with the idea of "first among equals." Wink

Don't blame us, blame the Fathers.

This capitulation among almost every Christian communion beginning in the middle of the 20th century is striking, to say the least.
Should it be so striking that we at least recognize the need for pastoral sensitivity to real life situations and don't just believe in enforcing the strict letter of the law as this has been laid down from the ivory tower of the Vatican?
Precisely. It is not capitulation to have mercy on certain individuals, depending on their particular needs and situations. On the contrary, it is Christian. Remember the woman who committed adultery? The law demanded that she be put to death. Christ refused to follow the letter of the law, but instead showed her mercy and allowed her to repent and turn from her ways. Did Christ in so doing claim that adultery is not immoral? By no means! Yet he also showed that strictly enforcing the letter of the law is not always the best way to govern the Church.
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #135 on: March 24, 2009, 01:36:15 PM »

Sex DOES have a holy unitive aspect to it when shared in the marriage bed---but the primary aspect is PROCREATIVE and should not be actively and artificially impeded. That's God's territory.
I'm sorry, but we are just not going to agree with you, or the Pope, on this issue. There are many aspects to sex, and procreation is merely one of them. Then again, the Catholic church did always have a tough time with the idea of "first among equals." Wink

Don't blame us, blame the Fathers.

This capitulation among almost every Christian communion beginning in the middle of the 20th century is striking, to say the least.
Should it be so striking that we at least recognize the need for pastoral sensitivity to real life situations and don't just believe in enforcing the strict letter of the law as this has been laid down from the ivory tower of the Vatican?
Precisely. It is not capitulation to have mercy on certain individuals, depending on their particular needs and situations. On the contrary, it is Christian. Remember the woman who committed adultery? The law demanded that she be put to death. Christ refused to follow the letter of the law, but instead showed her mercy and allowed her to repent and turn from her ways. Did Christ in so doing claim that adultery is not immoral? By no means! Yet he also showed that strictly enforcing the letter of the law is not always the best way to govern the Church.

But why at all compare contraception with adultery? Are there any doctrinal decisions of the WHOLE Church (not just papal encyclicas like Humanae Vitae) that unequivocally declare that having marital relations while being protected or closed against conception is in any way sinful?
Logged

Love never fails.
minasoliman
Mr., Sir, Dude, Guy, Male, tr. Minas in Greek, Menes in white people Egyptologists :-P
Section Moderator
Toumarches
*****
Online Online

Faith: Oriental Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic Orthodox Archdiocese of North America
Posts: 11,407


Strengthen O Lord the work of Your hands(Is 19:25)


WWW
« Reply #136 on: March 24, 2009, 02:36:32 PM »

Whenever I read 1Cor. 7, I feel St. Paul is not implying that the main point of marriage is to give birth to children, but rather a mutual union of man and woman, especially in sexual matters.

In the Old Testament, it seemed that marriage was a union for giving birth, but as we learn from the NT, you don't have to be a biological father to be a father.  This changes the framework of marriage, for although we might imitate Christ's relationship with the Church, we are also considered "sons" by adoption.

In the Old, it was be fruitful and multiply in a literal sense.  Now, we should be fruitful and multiply in an evangelical sense.  The Old cared about descendants of Jacob.  The New cares about adoptions into the Church.  This definitely should change the framework of marriage.

I have a feeling the Holy Fathers thought such about contraception not because of marriage relationships, but because they felt the seed was a human being, a full human person.  Ejaculation to them was abortion.

God bless.
Logged

Vain existence can never exist, for \\\"unless the LORD builds the house, the builders labor in vain.\\\" (Psalm 127)

If the faith is unchanged and rock solid, then the gates of Hades never prevailed in the end.
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #137 on: March 24, 2009, 06:29:54 PM »


Precisely. It is not capitulation to have mercy on certain individuals, depending on their particular needs and situations. On the contrary, it is Christian. Remember the woman who committed adultery? The law demanded that she be put to death. Christ refused to follow the letter of the law, but instead showed her mercy and allowed her to repent and turn from her ways. Did Christ in so doing claim that adultery is not immoral? By no means! Yet he also showed that strictly enforcing the letter of the law is not always the best way to govern the Church.

Last time I checked, Jesus didn't say, "Go and sin more."

You're basically saying, if people fail to live up to a standard, why have a standard at all?
Logged
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #138 on: March 25, 2009, 11:56:07 AM »

Sex DOES have a holy unitive aspect to it when shared in the marriage bed---but the primary aspect is PROCREATIVE and should not be actively and artificially impeded. That's God's territory.
I'm sorry, but we are just not going to agree with you, or the Pope, on this issue. There are many aspects to sex, and procreation is merely one of them. Then again, the Catholic church did always have a tough time with the idea of "first among equals." Wink

Don't blame us, blame the Fathers.

This capitulation among almost every Christian communion beginning in the middle of the 20th century is striking, to say the least.
Should it be so striking that we at least recognize the need for pastoral sensitivity to real life situations and don't just believe in enforcing the strict letter of the law as this has been laid down from the ivory tower of the Vatican?
Precisely. It is not capitulation to have mercy on certain individuals, depending on their particular needs and situations. On the contrary, it is Christian. Remember the woman who committed adultery? The law demanded that she be put to death. Christ refused to follow the letter of the law, but instead showed her mercy and allowed her to repent and turn from her ways. Did Christ in so doing claim that adultery is not immoral? By no means! Yet he also showed that strictly enforcing the letter of the law is not always the best way to govern the Church.

But why at all compare contraception with adultery? Are there any doctrinal decisions of the WHOLE Church (not just papal encyclicas like Humanae Vitae) that unequivocally declare that having marital relations while being protected or closed against conception is in any way sinful?
No, but since the Pope has said this, I thought the comparison warranted. It's not so much a comparison of contraception with adultery as it is Catholicism with Pharasaism.
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #139 on: March 25, 2009, 11:56:41 AM »


Precisely. It is not capitulation to have mercy on certain individuals, depending on their particular needs and situations. On the contrary, it is Christian. Remember the woman who committed adultery? The law demanded that she be put to death. Christ refused to follow the letter of the law, but instead showed her mercy and allowed her to repent and turn from her ways. Did Christ in so doing claim that adultery is not immoral? By no means! Yet he also showed that strictly enforcing the letter of the law is not always the best way to govern the Church.

Last time I checked, Jesus didn't say, "Go and sin more."

You're basically saying, if people fail to live up to a standard, why have a standard at all?

No. Not at all.
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
Heorhij
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA, for now, but my heart belongs to the Ukrainian Orthodox Church
Posts: 8,576



WWW
« Reply #140 on: March 25, 2009, 12:12:26 PM »


But why at all compare contraception with adultery? Are there any doctrinal decisions of the WHOLE Church (not just papal encyclicas like Humanae Vitae) that unequivocally declare that having marital relations while being protected or closed against conception is in any way sinful?

No, but since the Pope has said this, I thought the comparison warranted. It's not so much a comparison of contraception with adultery as it is Catholicism with Pharasaism.

Thank you for clarification. Unfortunately, however, every now and then I hear from the Orthodox people (even on this site!) that "contraception is sinful." And I never heard any compelling arguments that it is so.
« Last Edit: March 25, 2009, 12:12:45 PM by Heorhij » Logged

Love never fails.
Bogoliubtsy
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,268



« Reply #141 on: March 25, 2009, 12:30:49 PM »


Precisely. It is not capitulation to have mercy on certain individuals, depending on their particular needs and situations. On the contrary, it is Christian. Remember the woman who committed adultery? The law demanded that she be put to death. Christ refused to follow the letter of the law, but instead showed her mercy and allowed her to repent and turn from her ways. Did Christ in so doing claim that adultery is not immoral? By no means! Yet he also showed that strictly enforcing the letter of the law is not always the best way to govern the Church.

Last time I checked, Jesus didn't say, "Go and sin more."

You're basically saying, if people fail to live up to a standard, why have a standard at all?


Here's my post-modern ecumenical quip that most here on both sides of the issue will probably shoot down:

Who says that the Africans want your Christian (RC) morality? Perhaps they consider their sexual morality to be just fine and have no interest in accepting yet another Western, almost paternalistic program for their "betterment".

You're basically saying, if you can't live up to the Roman Church's understanding of morality, then you're a sinner. Condoms only reinforce your sinful behavior. Therefore, you shouldn't receive condoms because it only encourages our understanding of living an unholy life. If you can't live up to our standards or holiness then just go on your way and get HIV.  When enforcing your morality is potentially at the expense of the lives of people who are contracting HIV left and right, what kind of morality is it really?
« Last Edit: March 25, 2009, 12:32:24 PM by Bogoliubtsy » Logged

"When you give food to the poor, they call you a saint. When you ask why the poor have no food, they call you a communist". - Archbishop Hélder Pessoa Câmara
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #142 on: March 25, 2009, 04:51:37 PM »


But why at all compare contraception with adultery? Are there any doctrinal decisions of the WHOLE Church (not just papal encyclicas like Humanae Vitae) that unequivocally declare that having marital relations while being protected or closed against conception is in any way sinful?

No, but since the Pope has said this, I thought the comparison warranted. It's not so much a comparison of contraception with adultery as it is Catholicism with Pharasaism.

Thank you for clarification. Unfortunately, however, every now and then I hear from the Orthodox people (even on this site!) that "contraception is sinful." And I never heard any compelling arguments that it is so.
Sadly, I hear this too. And neither have I heard any good arguments that it is sinful. We choose to avoid "the pill" because of medical complications--my mother has been a nurse for thirty years and is quite familiar with the science of it. But for us, it's not a decision with any more religious significance than any other.
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
Quinault
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 4,516


What about frogs? I like frogs!


« Reply #143 on: March 25, 2009, 05:04:34 PM »

I would say that utilizing contraception without thinking and praying about it is unwise. Children are a blessing to be sure (otherwise I would have eaten them by now being a single parent! Wink ) But we all have to approach "family planning" with a realistic view of both what your family can handle, and to have faith that God will provide. So limiting your children to 2 simply because that is "a nice even number" or other arbitrary reasons isn't a good idea. But then just having baby after baby in spite of the fact that your health is deteriorating and your finances are in collapse isn't a good idea either. It could be that two children are all that you should have. But the decision needs to be a bit deeper than an arbitrary number that has been fulfilled.
Logged
lubeltri
Latin Catholic layman
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Archdiocese of Boston
Posts: 3,795



« Reply #144 on: March 25, 2009, 10:32:29 PM »

No matter how many times you say condom distribution will reduce HIV, it doesn't make it true.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MTNlNDc1MmMwNDM0OTEzMjQ4NDc0ZGUyOWYxNmEzN2E=


When enforcing your morality is potentially at the expense of the lives of people who are contracting HIV left and right, what kind of morality is it really?

You should turn this on yourself and all the others who satisfy themselves that Africans by their nature are irreformably promiscuous and thus should be flooded with condoms. Over 20 million dead---how many more have to die before the condom merchants give up?

I wonder how many of these people would have so-called "safe" sex with someone they knew was HIV positive. But I guess it is okay for Africans to be encouraged to play the Russian roulette of condoms.
Logged
Tags: AIDS Africa birth control contraception marriage 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.444 seconds with 172 queries.