The doctor operating on a patient slips and unknowningly mixes blood with his patient from a small wound. The doctor is unaware of this, but a natural virus sense alerts the doctor that he has been infected. The doctor sighs, but knows that rationally he cannot have sex with his wife ever again, and should quit so that he will not have another accident and infect another patient.
Because we all know that once a person becomes infected, they KNOW they are infected. :rolleyes:
What diseases would be ‘true’ STDs then? I mean, what diseases can you NOT get through IV drug use or blood transfusions that you CAN get through sexual contact?
They go to an Episcopal church now and they say it’s a much more comfortable atmosphere for them.
Wow. I was going to expand upon my earlier post, maybe discussing a little queer theory along the way, but upon reviewing this train wreck I think I’m going to retire from the field.
Not taking a position on this issue, you understand, but Genital Warts sprang to mind. Chlymidia, maybe?
The point remains, why should the Catholic Church make moralistic comments upon medical issues, because, like God made the plague so his followers could believe ?
This is a medical issue, not a moral one, this is not a matter for religious groups to be gathering around, it is an issue for educators and medical professionals.
Add to that Hepatitis C which is far more easily spread, can be every bit as devastating as AIDS, can be spread in the same ways and in several others, medical professionals will tell you that taking blood borne illness precautions against Hep C will protect against AIDS and this includes sexual transmission too.
So why would the Catholic witch burners not show the same concern for Hep C sufferers as it does with AIDS? Hep C is far more readily transmissable.
I wonder if it could be that the rotten edifice that is the Catholic Church has decided that the big issue here is gay sex, that AIDS is Gods gay plague.
Perhaps if the Catholic heirarchy gave out their message that we should all take fairly modest precautions against a range of disease, then we might all be healthier then it would come across less of a power trip, but of course they will not, because such things are medical issues, and not moral ones, and certainly not as charismatic as a gay plague, which is how the Catholics seem to see it, despite much evidence to the contrary.
The issue is not what the Catholics are saying, it is why the fuck are they making their ignorant, ill-informed, innaccurate, biased and downright dangerous opinions out in public when they do not have the expertise to make any such statements.
Because HIV/AIDS is a sexually transmitted disease, according to the Centers for Disease Control.
casdave, they say it because they feel it impinges somehow into their bailiwick (people enjoying consequence-free carnality may find spirituality boring, or something in that direction), and generally because anyone can say anything about any topic (just like G.W. Bush can talk about literacy policy) and it’s up to the audience to decide if they got a point or are full of it (after all, that Church does preach Free Will!).
What does the Catholic Church say about women who are on the pill, not for birth control, but for unbearable menstrual cramps?
I am sure this must mean something, but I can’t tell what. Unfortunately, I am sure you can’t either.
If you mean that I am claiming that only bad people get sick, feel free to go sodomize a rabid wolverine (or vice versa). I mentioned specifically that children get AIDS from their parents.
But apparently not everybody know how to spell.
What is this, you Tarzan, me fuckwit?
STD stands for Sexually Transmitted Disease. So what you posted was that it is a misnomer to call a sexually transmitted disease a sexually transmitted disease.
Uh huh.
Regards,
Shodan
As I understand it, taking the pill as treatment for a specific medical condition is allowed. The reasoning is that you are NOT taking it for the purpose of availing yourself of consequences-free sex.
All in the same year we have hundreds of priests caught raping little boys, an official denouncement of homosexuality, and now this, condoms don’t protect against AIDS.
In case anyone noticed, the Vatican doesn’t know what the hell its talking about.
The pope may not want me dead but I can’t say the same likewise.
Actually, there are plenty of disease spread models which demonstrate disease spreads faster and wider in cases when there is NEAR monogamy than in cases where everyone is sleeping with lots of people. In Africa, for instance, there are places where most wives are totally monogamous, but men cheat. The problem is: who do they cheat with? The answer: the same few women, who quickly become infected, infect all the men, who then infect all the wives. If the wives, however, cheated more often, the disease wouldn’t spread as fast. So in this case, more cheating by the RIGHT people would actually decrease the spread of the disease, not increase it.
And it’s quite true that in many cases, disease spreads could be slowed down if those who are monogamous start sleeping with more people. It seems counter-intuitive, but essentially is works because, with certain pretty reasonable percentages, the increase of uninfected partners out there in the dating pool decreases everyone’s chance of encountering an infected partner.
Ironically, this means that abstinence programs, if they have any traction at all, might well INCREASE the spread of disease, because they almost assuredly have differentially more effect on exactly the people who should sleep around more (the sexual conservatives with safer sexual histories), while having no effect at all on those who should sleep around less (those with long and dangerous sexual histories).
Bit of a hijack, but as an example of some major non-sexual transmissions, there was a case in China recently about how the local officials basically forced poor people to donate blood, then they basically just mixed similar types in a huge vat to extract the plasma, infecting the entire blood plasma supply. In short order, almost entire villiages became infected.
And, the charming and characteristically Chinese ending, is that the doctor that tried to warn people about this and bring it to light was thrown in prison for “leaking state secrets.” It goes without saying that one of the people responsible for infecting potentially hundreds of thousands of people with AIDS is now a very high placed member of the Party.
Is ‘nearly monogamous’ akin to ‘almost a virgin’?
Nonetheless, because there are other usually-effective medications which do not prevent implantation, it is encouraged to use these when possible, rather than the BCP.
I listen to Catholic radio periodically, and they will often have short anti-abortion spots between programming. Frequently they’ll cite research showing health benefits from not having abortion. Pretty lame, in my opinion: if basis for your position is Natural Law, that’s a pretty strong foundation, though not everyone will accept it. OTOH, if you oppose abortion simply because it’s healthier for the mother, you’re one scientific study away from supporting it.
If the one-sided propaganda weren’t enough, this week I heard them air a spot that amounts to an outright lie. I wish I could remember their claim.
Sadly, many of these people allow their passion for a single issue to blind them to any facts that could muddy the water. I suppose it’s always so with fervent campaigners on any issue.