# This is why I can't stomach the Catholic Church - still against condoms in Africa **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 17, 2009, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774 "2009-03-17T17:57:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![Lynn\_Bodoni](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e47c2d/32.png) [@Lynn\_Bodoni](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lynn_Bodoni)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2009, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/181 "2009-03-22T16:00:50Z")
> [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](#): > > Sure, but they didn’t fuck anywhere near as much in uncommited relationships. I call bullshit. I’m pretty sure that they screwed around just as much, it just wasn’t talked about as much. Of course, if you consider having a steady mistress a “commited relationship” I guess that you can lower the stats a bit. I know it was quite common for men to have a wife AND a mistress (or several mistresses) if he could afford them. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tao_s_Revenge)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2009, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/182 "2009-03-22T17:22:50Z")
> [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](#): > > I remember the days back in the sixties and seventies and eighties often driving home **safely** on weekends after consuming a dozen drinks or so with no problem whatsover. What are you claiming? That Drunk driving can be done without risk? If so that claim is amazingly false. Why would you even make it? If you really are according to the [US Department of Transportation](http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/research/AlcoholHighway/2__overview.htm): > [@](#): > > The relative probability of a crash was found to begin to increase “precipitously” as the driver’s BAC approached .08. At a BAC of .10, the probability of a fatal or serious-injury crash was estimated to be 6 to 12 times that of a driver with no alcohol. The relative probability of a fatal crash was said to be much higher at higher BACs, over 20 at a BAC of .15. Yea clearly the same thing as responsible condom use. > [@kanicbird](#): > > Condoms don’t work on a societal level, more condom use = more problems, we reap what we sow. God’s first order to humans is be fruitful and multiply, this was set forth the next verse after God created man and woman (Gen 1:27,28). Messing with this first (and only one in the unfallen world IMHO) rule God set forth caused all the problems we now live with in the ‘fallen world’ (IMHO). There’s 6+ billion people. The earth is full enough. God must be a real asshole if he expects us to multiply beyond sustainability and starve. > [@even\_sven](#): > > It won’t happen that directly. But you will only use condoms if you have them. Which means they need to be widely and openly available in your community. Many NGOs work towards making sure that every village has a place that sells condoms. The pope could hinder that by making shops reluctant to sell condoms and people afraid to buy them. > > And you are more likely to have them if you know how and why to use them. Many groups- including many Catholic groups- do presentations explaining why you should use condoms and demonstrating how to use them. The goal is to make it something that people are not scared, confused, or ashamed of. Believe it or not, there are still millions of people (women especially) who have never seen a condom, don’t know what they do, and don’t know how to use them. And every year there is a new generation of young people who need to know this stuff. I don’t know how true this story is but I’ve heard the the government of China put out videos about how to use condoms. Births skyrocketed. Seems in the video they showed some guy sliding the condom over his finger as a metaphor for his thinger. So people where putting condoms on their finger and having sex. Seems kind of silly but I’d believe it after some stuff I’ve seen around here including my friend who was convinced you had to have sex for ayear to get pregnant, and wouldn’t believe me at all when I tried to explain reason to her. She has a kid now. ---
**Author:** ![buttonjockey308](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bcef8e/32.png) [@buttonjockey308](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/buttonjockey308)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2009, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/183 "2009-03-22T20:14:24Z")
> [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](#): > > Where I can possibly see a problem with the point of view I’ve expressed so far is the case of a monagamous Catholic wife who desires not to use condoms (because of her faith) with her philandering husband. > > The fact is that her philandering husband is the one who doesn’t want to use condoms because it diminishes his manhood, his pleasure, and he’s resisting the global conspiracy to limit the black population. > > How effective is the RCC in limiting condom use ? Are Catholic girls in Africa or the US experiencing a higher pregnancy or HIV incidence in the respective environments ? I doubt it, so show me. First, that seems like a counter scenario to the one I posed earlier about the married couple with one getting HIV from a blood transfusion and not knowing it and passing it on unknowingly, whether or not the HIV came to the husband because he had a transfusion or was a cheater, it could be prevented if the wife were “allowed” to use rubbers. Simple. Second, that’s one of the nuttier statements I’ve ever heard. Third, you came up with the question, come up with the cite. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [March 22, 2009, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/184 "2009-03-22T20:49:12Z")
I’m waiting for an answer to my question, a few posts above. Since when did the Church start encouraging married sex, or ANY kind of sex at all? Don’t make me call bullshit. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2009, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/185 "2009-03-23T01:00:41Z")
> [@Lynn\_Bodoni](#): > > I call bullshit. I’m pretty sure that they screwed around just as much, it just wasn’t talked about as much. Of course, if you consider having a steady mistress a “commited relationship” I guess that you can lower the stats a bit. I know it was quite common for men to have a wife AND a mistress (or several mistresses) if he could afford them. Why call bullshit ? A man supporting several regular sexual partners is not sexually networking and spreading HIV. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2009, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/186 "2009-03-23T01:10:31Z")
> [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](#): > > Why call bullshit ? A man supporting several regular sexual partners is not sexually networking and spreading HIV. It’s bullshit because it’s not true. The sole difference now is what we _know_ about people’s sexual behavior. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2009, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/187 "2009-03-23T01:42:57Z")
> [@buttonjockey308](#): > > First, that seems like a counter scenario to the one I posed earlier about the married couple with one getting HIV from a blood transfusion and not knowing it and passing it on unknowingly, whether or not the HIV came to the husband because he had a transfusion or was a cheater, it could be prevented if the wife were “allowed” to use rubbers. Simple. Sure, but if you think the wife will be allowed to use rubbers if the Pope says so, then you are sadly mistaken. I also want to add one more point regarding the misplaced confidence in assuming condom use will prevent a wife from contracting HIV from her philandering husband whether she’s aware or not. What’s she gonna do when she wants a child? That is a far stronger biological urge for many women than sex. > [@](#): > > Third, you came up with the question, come up with the cite. I thought I already did to some extent reporting on the comparison of HIV incidence between Latin America and other global regions. But digging some more, and in the interest of full disclosure, I learned that the main Catholic countries, [Spain, Italy and Portugal](http://www.avert.org/eurosum.htm) have an HIV incidence over 100% higher than Germany. The Netherlands or Norway. I must admit that the RCC bears serious responsibility. ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2009, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/188 "2009-03-23T03:11:32Z")
> [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](#): > > (1)Now say that guy has a catholic wife, she knows, but she can’t tell him to wear a condom because it’s a “sin”. Is that right? > > (2)What about if the couple can’t afford anymore kids. What are they supposed to do to control their fertility then? > > (3) Really? I was under the impression it was “blocking the will of god” or something which was a separate thing. (apparently this all powerful deity can be thwarted with a cheap sheet of latex.) > > (4)Sex can be reasonably safe, and a natural part of human relations. Drunk driving never is safe. (numbers mine) 1. “Defensive” use of condoms or other birth-control methods may be acceptable if the intercourse is unwanted and concerns have been expressed. If you don’t respect your wife then it’s no longer lawful sex but forced sex and limiting the unwanted results of unwanted sexual relations is acceptable. 2. Sympto-Thermal method of Natural Family Planning. Rythm is long, long gone; it’s not even reccomended. 3. You were under the wrong impression. Once you commit mortal sin it doesn’t get any “more mortal”. Shooting 4 people is not “more mortal” than shooting 3. “Thwarting the will…” doesn’t mean what you imply. God desires something and He informs us. You don’t “beat” God by wearing a condom, you do something He told you not to. 4. But it is safer if you buckle up. > [@even\_sven](#): > > It won’t happen that directly. But you will only use condoms if you have them. Which means they need to be widely and openly available in your community. Many NGOs work towards making sure that every village has a place that sells condoms. The pope could hinder that by making shops reluctant to sell condoms and people afraid to buy them. > > And you are more likely to have them if you know how and why to use them. Many groups- including many Catholic groups- do presentations explaining why you should use condoms and demonstrating how to use them. The goal is to make it something that people are not scared, confused, or ashamed of. Believe it or not, there are still millions of people (women especially) who have never seen a condom, don’t know what they do, and don’t know how to use them. And every year there is a new generation of young people who need to know this stuff. Mostly agreed. Every person has the right to make his/her own decisions and bear the consequences. If you want to bowl at my place, you gotta wear the shoes. Don’t wear them if you don’t want to, but you can’t play. > [@SteveG1](#): > > I’m waiting for an answer to my question, a few posts above. > > Since when did the Church start encouraging married sex, or ANY kind of sex at all? > > Don’t make me call bullshit. Since the very first pages of the Bible. St. Paul says it’s better to be married than burn (with desire). [This 1936 document](http://www.ewtn.com/library/MARRIAGE/MORMAR.txt) might enlighten you. * * * Only 1 in 6 Africans is Catholic. Just saying. ---
**Author:** ![Lynn\_Bodoni](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e47c2d/32.png) [@Lynn\_Bodoni](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lynn_Bodoni)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2009, 5:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/189 "2009-03-23T05:11:30Z")
> [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](#): > > Why call bullshit ? A man supporting several regular sexual partners is not sexually networking and spreading HIV. I wasn’t speaking of BOTH instances in one case. That is, I say that there were casual sex encounters AND long term sexual relationships in the past that were not confined to marriage. The guys would have sex with the local gals, and they’d have sex when they travelled, and they’d spread the STDs to both casual and long sex partners. Similarly, the gals would enjoy themselves with the travelling salesmen, or whatever other male happened to cross their paths, if they thought they could get away with it. I’m not saying that EVERYONE did it, mind you. I am saying that it was not uncommon, though. People are people, and a lot of them are going to have a wandering eye. Some of them will act on what they see, no matter what time period you’re talking about. We know that just making laws won’t stop some people from breaking them. That goes for religious laws as well as laws of the land. ---
**Author:** ![Icerigger](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/icerigger/32/432_2.png) [@Icerigger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Icerigger)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2009, 9:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/190 "2009-03-23T09:54:39Z")
> [@](#): > > Since the very first pages of the Bible. St. Paul says it’s better to be married than burn (with desire). > This 1936 document might enlighten you. WOW, what a romantic document. The CC has absolutely no concept of what sex is like, no true notions of love, romance and loving desire. It them it is all a philosophical abstraction. ---
**Author:** ![monavis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@monavis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monavis)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2009, 11:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/191 "2009-03-23T11:53:52Z")
It is my understanding that the RCC church does not approve of Condoms or any form of birth control except only when a woman cannot concieve or the time of month. They call any other methode unnatural, every intercourse a couple have must be open to conception as they should not block God’s desire for a child to be concieved. They use,I believe his name was Anan in the old testement as spilling his seed to be evil. If a couple is supposed to have sex just at certian times, I believe that is unnatural and I know of many couples in my generation who had many fights because of this rule. Some lived unhappily together for 40 or 50 years and thought of sex as something dirty. I can understand their sex outside of marriage rule, but to expect a married couple to bear children they cannot afford that leads to extreme poverty in many, many cases is unfair and immoral. Heart transplants etc. are not natural or keeping one alive on tubes against their will can also be immoral. Most RCC’s that I know of now do not pay any attention to the church’s teachings. ---
**Author:** ![ShadowFacts](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shadowfacts/32/2934_2.png) [@ShadowFacts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShadowFacts)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2009, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/192 "2009-03-23T15:47:55Z")
I’m coming to this thread late, but I could not let the following comment pass without accolade: [QUOTE=Miller] A stupid idea does not become less stupid with age. [/QUOTE] Excellently put, and an apt criticism of lots of traditional beliefs. Well said, sir. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2009, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/193 "2009-03-23T15:55:53Z")
I see that my question about how the Church “encourages” sex within marriage was never answered. I assume then that it is being ignored. So, as someone who was born and raised Catholic, I have to call BULLSHIT on what the person claiming it said. ---
**Author:** ![42fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/4/b487fb/32.png) [@42fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/42fish)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2009, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/194 "2009-03-23T15:59:43Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Raping little girls as “having sex with a virgin cures AIDs”\* is \*a new thing. However, the notion that sex with a virgin would cure other STDs isn’t a new thing: "The myth of the Virgin Cure has a rich and culturally diverse history stretching back to 16th century Europe, and more prominently to be found in 19th century Victorian England, where, in spite of the emphasis on morality, rectitude and family values, there existed a widespread belief, that sexual intercourse with a virgin was a cure for syphilis, gonnorhea, [and other STD’s]. " (from: [http://www.scienceinafrica.co.za/2002/april/virgin.htm](http://www.scienceinafrica.co.za/2002/april/virgin.htm)) ---
**Author:** ![Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aji_de_gallina/32/260_2.png) [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aji_de_Gallina)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2009, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/195 "2009-03-23T16:43:03Z")
> [@Icerigger](#): > > WOW, what a romantic document. The CC has absolutely no concept of what sex is like, no true notions of love, romance and loving desire. It them it is all a philosophical abstraction. It’s a theological document, not a Daniel Steele book. Still plenty of giving, loving and pleasure in it. > [@monavis](#): > > It is my understanding that the RCC church does not approve of Condoms or any form of birth control except only when a woman cannot concieve or the time of month. They call any other methode unnatural, every intercourse a couple have must be open to conception as they should not block God’s desire for a child to be concieved. They use,I believe his name was Anan in the old testement as spilling his seed to be evil. > > If a couple is supposed to have sex just at certian times, I believe that is unnatural and I know of many couples in my generation who had many fights because of this rule. Some lived unhappily together for 40 or 50 years and thought of sex as something dirty. > > I can understand their sex outside of marriage rule, but to expect a married couple to bear children they cannot afford that leads to extreme poverty in many, many cases is unfair and immoral. > > Heart transplants etc. are not natural or keeping one alive on tubes against their will can also be immoral. > > Most RCC’s that I know of now do not pay any attention to the church’s teachings. Your understanding is wrong. Couple are not expected “to bear children they cannot affors and lead to poverty”. Read a bit, will ya? > [@SteveG1](#): > > I see that my question about how the Church “encourages” sex within marriage was never answered. I assume then that it is being ignored. So, as someone who was born and raised Catholic, I have to call BULLSHIT on what the person claiming it said. What would qualify as “encourage”? The Pope saying "yo, married guys, GO SCREW YOUR BRAINS OUT??? Definitely sex is an important part of marrige in the RCC but one that flows out of love, giving and respect; then pleasure is not only expected but welcomed and embraced. Didn’t know that big fonts and red made an answer better. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2009, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/196 "2009-03-23T17:12:25Z")
> [@Aji\_de\_Gallina](#): > > Your understanding is wrong. Couple are not expected “to bear children they cannot affors and lead to poverty”. Read a bit, will ya? Couples are expected to bear any children that God deigns to send them and not to use any contraceptives (though why God can’t power through a condom is a puzzler) no matter how destitute they may be. They are allowed NFP, which is really silly when you consider that doing something to avoid having children sure isn’t welcoming children with open arms. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2009, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/197 "2009-03-23T18:28:16Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > Couples are expected to bear any children that God deigns to send them and not to use any contraceptives (though why God can’t power through a condom is a puzzler) no matter how destitute they may be. > > They are allowed NFP, which is really silly when you consider that doing something to avoid having children sure isn’t welcoming children with open arms. Agree. > [@](#): > > ## “It is well for a man not to touch a woman…. It is well … to remain single as I do. But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to be aflame with passion.” (I Corinthians 7:1, 8-9) > > According to Professor Bainton: “Marriage, said Augustine, is good. Sex as such is not evil. But the purpose of sex is propagation, and anything in excess of that intent is evil. It is an evil, however, from which no married couple is ever free . . . That which outside of marriage is a mortal sin, within marriage is but a venial sin, provided no artificial device is used to prevent offspring.”\* > > ## [http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,779910,00.html](http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,779910,00.html) > > St Augustine: > From “On Marriage and Concupiscence” > > That chastity in the married state is God’s gift, is shown by the most blessed Paul, when, speaking on this very subject, he says: “But I would that all men were even as I myself: but every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.” Observe, he tells us that this gift is from God; and although he classes it below that continence in which he would have all men to be like himself, he still describes it as a gift of God. … > > The union, then, of male and female for the purpose of procreation is the natural good of marriage. But he makes a bad use of this good who uses it bestially, so that his intention is on the gratification of lust, intend of the desire of offspring. … > > With respect, however, to what I ascribed to the nature of marriage, that the male and the female are united together as associates for procreation, and consequently do not defraud each other (forasmuch as every associated state has a natural abhorrence of a fraudulent companion), although even men without faith possess this palpable blessing of nature, yet, since they use it not in faith, they only turn it to evil and sin. > > THIS DISEASE OF CONCUPISCENCE IN MARRIAGE … > > A man turns to use the evil of concupiscence, and is not overcome by it, when he bridles and restrains its rage, as it works in inordinate and indecorous motions; and never relaxes his hold upon it except when intent on offspring, and then controls and applies it to the carnal generation of children to be spiritually regenerated, not to the subjection of the spirit to the flesh in a sordid servitude. That the holy fathers of olden times after Abraham, and before him, to whom God gave His testimony that “they pleased Him,” thus used their wives, no one who is a Christian ought to doubt, since it was permitted to certain individuals amongst them to have a plurality of wives, where the reason was for the multiplication of their offspring, not the desire of varying gratification. Now then. The above “passages” have been part of “church teaching” for a long long time. Sex is bad. It is “almost OK”, so long as the only purpose is to produce more children, bit over all, it is still bad. Just “less bad”. As Paul might put it, married sex is the lesser of two evils. According to Augustine, who is still considered a “great mind” by the church, sex is not much different from disease. The church still holds these two “famous dead people” up as great teachers, to be admired and followed. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2009, 8:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/198 "2009-03-23T20:51:11Z")
What. Did I kill the thread? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2009, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/199 "2009-03-23T21:16:04Z")
> **[Web Page Under Construction](http://www.epigee.org/guide/catholicism.html)** > > Network Solutions - Original domain name registration and reservation services with variety of internet-related business offerings. Quick, dependable and reliable. "Sex Within Marriage For Catholics, _sex within marriage is a wonderful thing_. It not only helps to unite the couple, but also presents the possibility of creating a new life. In the eyes of the Roman Catholic Church, a marriage is the ideal, stable environment in which to raise children. Couples that abide by the Catholic Church belief system are encouraged to have as many children as their circumstances allow. However, the Church also recognizes the need to space children out ’ they certainly don’t expect a woman to constantly be pregnant! For this reason, certain forms of birth control are considered to be acceptable. " [http://wiretap.area.com/Gopher/Library/Religion/Catholic/Pius\_XI/Casti\_connubii](http://wiretap.area.com/Gopher/Library/Religion/Catholic/Pius_XI/Casti_connubii) “Nor are those considered as acting against nature who in the married state use their right in the proper manner although on account of natural reasons either of time or of certain defects, new life cannot be brought forth. For in matrimony as well as in the use of the matrimonial rights there are also secondary ends, such as mutual aid, the cultivating of mutual love, and the quieting of concupiscence which husband and wife are not forbidden to consider so long as they are subordinated to the primary end and so long as the intrinsic nature of the act is preserved” Note that was back in \*\*1930. \*\* [http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc\_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm](http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm) "2360 Sexuality is ordered to the conjugal love of man and woman. In marriage the physical intimacy of the spouses becomes a sign and pledge of spiritual communion. Marriage bonds between baptized persons are sanctified by the sacrament. 2361 "Sexuality, by means of which man and woman give themselves to one another through the acts which are proper and exclusive to spouses, is not something simply biological, but concerns the innermost being of the human person as such. It is realized in a truly human way only if it is an integral part of the love by which a man and woman commit themselves totally to one another until death."143 2362 "The acts in marriage by which the intimate and chaste union of the spouses takes place are noble and honorable; the truly human performance of these acts fosters the self-giving they signify and enriches the spouses in joy and gratitude."145 _Sexuality is a source of joy and pleasure: "_ )italics mine) ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [March 23, 2009, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/200 "2009-03-23T21:26:03Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > [http://www.epigee.org/guide/catholicism.html](http://www.epigee.org/guide/catholicism.html) > "Sex Within Marriage > For Catholics, _sex within marriage is a wonderful thing_. It not only helps to unite the couple, but also presents the possibility of creating a new life. In the eyes of the Roman Catholic Church, a marriage is the ideal, stable environment in which to raise children. Couples that abide by the Catholic Church belief system are encouraged to have as many children as their circumstances allow. However, the Church also recognizes the need to space children out ’ they certainly don’t expect a woman to constantly be pregnant! For this reason, certain forms of birth control are considered to be acceptable. " > > [http://wiretap.area.com/Gopher/Library/Religion/Catholic/Pius\_XI/Casti\_connubii](http://wiretap.area.com/Gopher/Library/Religion/Catholic/Pius_XI/Casti_connubii) > “Nor are those considered as acting against nature who in the married state use their right in the proper manner although on account of natural reasons either of time or of certain defects, new life cannot be brought forth. For in matrimony as well as in the use of the matrimonial rights there are also secondary ends, such as mutual aid, the cultivating of mutual love, and the quieting of concupiscence which husband and wife are not forbidden to consider so long as they are subordinated to the primary end and so long as the intrinsic nature of the act is preserved” > > Note that was back in \*\*1930. \*\* > > [http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc\_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm](http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm) > "2360 Sexuality is ordered to the conjugal love of man and woman. In marriage the physical intimacy of the spouses becomes a sign and pledge of spiritual communion. Marriage bonds between baptized persons are sanctified by the sacrament. > > 2361 "Sexuality, by means of which man and woman give themselves to one another through the acts which are proper and exclusive to spouses, is not something simply biological, but concerns the innermost being of the human person as such. It is realized in a truly human way only if it is an integral part of the love by which a man and woman commit themselves totally to one another until death."143 > 2362 "The acts in marriage by which the intimate and chaste union of the spouses takes place are noble and honorable; the truly human performance of these acts fosters the self-giving they signify and enriches the spouses in joy and gratitude."145 _Sexuality is a source of joy and pleasure: "_ > > )italics mine) In that case, “Houston we have a problem”. I say that because your cites are not what I was taught in Catholic grade school or in Catholic high school. It also does not “mesh” with what many friends of mine (who were getting married and had to go through “marriage counseling” in order to get a church wedding) were told. My experience and theirs far more closely matched the nonsense that I cited. “Sex is bad”. It is only for making babies. Back in the Sixties “the pill” was bad because it interferes with the making of babies. Etc etc etc. Your cites say “Sex is OK within guidelines”. So, let’s take your cites and my cites as they are. They contradict each other. I would propose that we consider them to “cancel each other out”. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774.md?page=9) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774.md?page=11)