# 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:** 2
**Author:** ![Dead\_Badger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/848f3c/32.png) [@Dead\_Badger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dead_Badger)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2009, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/21 "2009-03-17T19:09:15Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > But the Church takes the position that it _cannot_. Right, fine. So their subjective interpretation of an ancient document is so inviolable that it trumps any concerns for contemporary welfare. That’s a position you can take - not a particularly appealing one, but at least it’s self-sustainable. But don’t try and pretend that the Church isn’t aware of the effects of its policy, or that it isn’t responsible for said effects. When you’ve got the Pope himself saying, in spite of all the evidence, that condoms exacerbate the problems of AIDS, you’ve vacated any morally defensible ground and are left with precisely the fallback you’ve taken - that God Says So. Be straight with people: the promulgation of your religious beliefs is more important to you than the wellbeing of the people you infect. Not so? ETA: that’s a generic “you” there - I’m aware that you personally, as so often, are simply arguing a side. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2009, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/22 "2009-03-17T19:10:19Z")
Well, let me ask an analogous question. Here in the USA, we have laws against rape. We constantly broadcast the message that rape is wrong, that ‘no’ means ‘no.’ Yet we continue to have rapes, every year. Perhaps we should change that approach to somehow acknowledge this? Maybe let people know that if you’re going to rape, try to be gentle, and don’t cause too much physical injury? And, dare I say it, wear a condom when you do? Obviously that’s ridiculous. It’s a vile, disgusting idea. Rape is wrong, and we need to make that point through our society’s teachings, even if making it doesn’t stop rapes from happening. Don’t we? ---
**Author:** ![Dead\_Badger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/848f3c/32.png) [@Dead\_Badger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dead_Badger)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2009, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/23 "2009-03-17T19:14:57Z")
Yeah, that’d be a brilliant analogy, and we’d be in a right conundrum, if only _people were capable of consenting to rape, and rape had a demonstrable benefit_. Other than that, top work. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2009, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/24 "2009-03-17T19:15:25Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Obviously that’s ridiculous. It’s a vile, disgusting idea. Rape is wrong, and we need to make that point through our society’s teachings, even if making it doesn’t stop rapes from happening. > > Don’t we? 1. Are you seriously arguing that rape and premarital sex are analogous? 2. Rapists are a small minority. People who engage in premarital sex are the opposite. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2009, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/25 "2009-03-17T19:23:10Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Actually, no, you don’t. > > But on this subject: here’s where you and the Church part ways, I suspect. The Church believes, and teaches, that it’s wrong to have sex outside of marriage, and that it’s wrong to impose an artificial barrier to the transmission of life during the sex act inside marriage. > > Now, your points seem to be: > > 1. The Church is wrong about one or both claims. > 2. People will more readily listen to the Church on one claim than the other. > 3. Therefore, the Church should change its teachings. > > Is that about right? > > But the Church takes the position that it _cannot_. Both the idea that sex should be confined to marriage, and the idea that artificial barriers to conception are wrong come, they feel, from God’s law. You contend that based on how poorly people follow their advice, they should change their advice. > > But that suggests that their advice is somehow based on what’s most popular as a teaching. I guarantee you that the Church could pick all sorts of changes to their doctrine if they were merely guided by how well people liked the teaching, or how readily they obeyed it. That’s not the touchstone for their lesson plan. I am claiming that the church is preaching an ignorant message that is actually making the situation worse. I don’t care that the actually believe that it’s true, white supremacists believe that their ideology is true. That doesn’t make it good, it makes them stupid and a hindrance. I think the church should either change its teaching or just stop lying that condoms are bad. Advice isn’t the same thing as education. I’ll repeat the exact same thing I said in the earlier post: If no one ever told you to wash your hands after wiping your ass you wouldn’t do it. Educating people about dangers they can’t see is vital. Educating ignorant people about an unseen danger isn’t the same as telling them to ignore their biological imperative. Get it? ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2009, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/26 "2009-03-17T19:28:50Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Well, let me ask an analogous question. Here in the USA, we have laws against rape. We constantly broadcast the message that rape is wrong, that ‘no’ means ‘no.’ > > Yet we continue to have rapes, every year. > > Perhaps we should change that approach to somehow acknowledge this? Maybe let people know that if you’re going to rape, try to be gentle, and don’t cause too much physical injury? And, dare I say it, wear a condom when you do? > > Obviously that’s ridiculous. It’s a vile, disgusting idea. Rape is wrong, and we need to make that point through our society’s teachings, even if making it doesn’t stop rapes from happening. > > Don’t we? Jesus. Merciful. Fuck. If you look out your back window you’ll see my days of taking you seriously receding into the distance. ---
**Author:** ![Troy\_McClure\_SF](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/troy_mcclure_sf/32/4150_2.png) [@Troy\_McClure\_SF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Troy_McClure_SF)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2009, 7:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/27 "2009-03-17T19:31:20Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Well, let me ask an analogous question. Sure, shoot. ---
**Author:** ![MovieMogul](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f08c70/32.png) [@MovieMogul](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MovieMogul)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2009, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/28 "2009-03-17T19:42:05Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > And what of the fact that it’s wrong (in their view) to use condoms? They should simply change that idea? Start thinking it’s right? How about [stop lying about it first](http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/03/17/world/AP-AF-Pope-Africa.html?_r=2&ref=world), eh? > [@](#): > > ‘‘You can’t resolve it with the distribution of condoms,’’ the pope told reporters aboard the Alitalia plane heading to Yaounde. ‘‘On the contrary, it increases the problem.’’ So you don’t want people to use condoms? Fine. :(:mad: But to intentionally spread false information to somehow justify your unpopular and potentially dangerous position? Detestable. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2009, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/29 "2009-03-17T19:47:05Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > 1. Are you seriously arguing that rape and premarital sex are analogous? In the particulars of this analogy, yes. I am assuming, here, that I’m not talking to a bunch of idiots who will immediately scream, “OMG!!!11! He said rape and sex are the same thing and he must DIE!” Obviously the analogy is targeted towards the issue of disapproval for an act, and whether or not it eliminates the act. If someone wishes to rebut my analogy on the basis of how vile rape is and how unvile consensual sex is, that person would be completely missing the point. > [@](#): > > 1. Rapists are a small minority. People who engage in premarital sex are the opposite. And how is that relevant to the analogy? If it is, let’s discuss speeding laws, routinely violated by large numbers of people. Should we then remove speed laws? Does that get rid of you “small minority” problem? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2009, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/30 "2009-03-17T19:48:37Z")
> [@Dead\_Badger](#): > > Yeah, that’d be a brilliant analogy, and we’d be in a right conundrum, if only _people were capable of consenting to rape, and rape had a demonstrable benefit_. > > Other than that, top work. _sigh_ Again, with the complete and maniacal focus on something about the analogy utterly irrelevant. OK. Same question, speeding laws instead of rape. People can consent to speed, and it has a demonstrable benefit: saving time on the road. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2009, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/31 "2009-03-17T19:53:23Z")
> [@ArchiveGuy](#): > > How about [stop lying about it first](http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/03/17/world/AP-AF-Pope-Africa.html?_r=2&ref=world), eh?So you don’t want people to use condoms? Fine. :(:mad: But to intentionally spread false information to somehow justify your unpopular and potentially dangerous position? Detestable. In what way is that a lie? Look, I agree that in the past, other Church officials have out-and-out lied about condoms, saying the AIDS virus passes through them. And I agree that there is no justification for that act. This statement, however, is not in that category, because it’s not remotely clear what “it” is that’s being made worse. I suspect the Pope is talking about the overall deterioration of social fabric and values – THAT is what condoms make worse, not the clinical data of AIDS transmission. Again (since many people here seem to have a real hard time reading actual words on this topic): I agree that spreading deliberate lies about condoms is detestable. An example of this would be: “Don’t use condoms, because they don’t stop AIDS.” An example that would NOT fit this category would be: “Don’t use condoms, because it’s wrong.” ---
**Author:** ![Dead\_Badger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/848f3c/32.png) [@Dead\_Badger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dead_Badger)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2009, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/32 "2009-03-17T19:54:49Z")
No, it’s _not_ irrelevant. We are talking about the Church’s opposition to condoms, not its opposition to extramarital sex. If you want an analogy, it’s like a road safety group being opposed to seatbelts because they believe they encourage speeding. Oh, and because they’re against God. Your analogy is fucked, face it. Oh, and you haven’t bothered addressing the Church’s blatant lying about condoms’ efficacy. Quelle surprise. ETA: Oh, okay, you’ve addressed it by flat out denying it. Fine. ---
**Author:** ![Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/qadgop_the_mercotan/32/83_2.png) [@Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qadgop_the_Mercotan)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2009, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/33 "2009-03-17T19:56:07Z")
> [@ArchiveGuy](#): > > But to intentionally spread false information to somehow justify your unpopular and potentially dangerous position? Detestable. This is where it all falls apart, to me. I’m not going to argue with their spiritual claims against condom use. They are entitled to their own religious philosophies. I will vehemently argue with their factual claims against condom use. They are not entitled to their own ‘facts’ which do not stand up to scientific scrutiny. ---
**Author:** ![Dead\_Badger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/848f3c/32.png) [@Dead\_Badger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dead_Badger)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2009, 7:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/34 "2009-03-17T19:59:09Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Again (since many people here seem to have a real hard time reading actual words on this topic): I agree that spreading deliberate lies about condoms is detestable. An example of this would be: “Don’t use condoms, because they don’t stop AIDS.” An example that would NOT fit this category would be: “Don’t use condoms, because it’s wrong.” Apparently you have a real problem reading actual words, because the Pope himself said: > [@](#): > > 'You can’t resolve [AIDS] with the distribution of condoms … On the contrary, it increases the problem. Please explain to me how this is commensurate with anything resembling a fact. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2009, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/35 "2009-03-17T20:04:02Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > This statement, however, is not in that category, because it’s not remotely clear what “it” is that’s being made worse. I suspect the Pope is talking about the overall deterioration of social fabric and values – THAT is what condoms make worse, not the clinical data of AIDS transmission. Not remotely clear? And social deterioration is more likely the antecedent for the word “it?” > [@](#): > > **Condoms are not the answer to Africa’s fight against HIV, Pope Benedict XVI said Tuesday as he began a weeklong trip to the continent**. It was the pope’s first explicit statement on an issue that has divided even clergy working with AIDS patients. > > Benedict arrived in Yaounde, Cameroon’s capital, on Tuesday afternoon, greeted by a crowd of flag-waving faithful and snapping cameras. The visit is his first pilgrimage as pontiff to Africa. > > In his four years as pope, Benedict had never directly addressed condom use, although his position is not new. His predecessor, Pope John Paul II, often said that sexual abstinence – not condoms – was the best way to prevent the spread of the disease. > > \*\*Benedict also said the Roman Catholic Church was at the forefront of the battle against AIDS. > > ‘‘You can’t resolve it with the distribution of condoms,’’ the pope told reporters aboard the Alitalia plane heading to Yaounde. ‘‘On the contrary, it increases the problem.’’\*\* > > The pope said a responsible and moral attitude toward sex would help fight the disease. Bolding mine. Where does he refer to social deterioration? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2009, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/36 "2009-03-17T20:13:15Z")
> [@Dead\_Badger](#): > > No, it’s _not_ irrelevant. We are talking about the Church’s opposition to condoms, not its opposition to extramarital sex. > > If you want an analogy, it’s like a road safety group being opposed to seatbelts because they believe they encourage speeding. Oh, and because they’re against God. > > Your analogy is fucked, face it. But it’s opposition to condoms is tied inextricably to its opposition to premarital and extramarital sex. The two are part of the same package. > [@](#): > > Oh, and you haven’t bothered addressing the Church’s blatant lying about condoms’ efficacy. Quelle surprise. > > ETA: Oh, okay, you’ve addressed it by flat out denying it. Fine. Where did I do that, please? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2009, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/37 "2009-03-17T20:14:19Z")
> [@Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](#): > > This is where it all falls apart, to me. > > I’m not going to argue with their spiritual claims against condom use. They are entitled to their own religious philosophies. > > I will vehemently argue with their factual claims against condom use. They are not entitled to their own ‘facts’ which do not stand up to scientific scrutiny. And I agree completely. When a Church official claims that condoms “let AIDS pass through” that’s detestable and utterly contemptible. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2009, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/38 "2009-03-17T20:16:17Z")
> [@Dead\_Badger](#): > > Apparently you have a real problem reading actual words, because the Pope himself said: > Please explain to me how this is commensurate with anything resembling a fact. Post #31 of mine. ---
**Author:** ![Duke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e8c25b/32.png) [@Duke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duke)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2009, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/39 "2009-03-17T20:16:43Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > And I agree completely. When a Church official claims that condoms “let AIDS pass through” that’s detestable and utterly contemptible. The problem is that this falsehood is being used to support the policy. At best that’s a logical flaw, at worst a deliberate lie to support an indefensible policy that cannot be defended through legitimate means. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2009, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774/40 "2009-03-17T20:20:21Z")
> [@Contrapuntal](#): > > Not remotely clear? And social deterioration is more likely the antecedent for the word “it?” Bolding mine. > > Where does he refer to social deterioration? It’s an obvious consequence. When the message is, “Have sex with whomever you like, just use a condom,” you weaken and destroy the barrier that should exist to confine sex to a martial relationship. Now, it’s true of course that using condoms would be far better than NOT using condoms, assuming it’s a given that people will be having premarital and extra-marital sex. But while the people apparently listen slavishly to the words of the pontiff on the issue of condoms, they don’t care what he says about actually having the sex. Apparently. :rolleyes: [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/this-is-why-i-cant-stomach-the-catholic-church-still-against-condoms-in-africa/489774.md?page=3)