Posted on 03/18/2009 8:11:16 PM PDT by JoeProBono
When he says "don't use condoms - even to prevent the spread of Aids" it has a significant impact among tens, even hundreds of millions of people. Getting on for a fifth of Africans are Roman Catholic. The Church has been growing more quickly in Africa than anywhere else, and this is the Pope's first visit there in the four years he has been the spiritual leader of the world's approximately one billion Catholics. With Africans - 22 million of whom are infected with HIV - hanging on his every word, that made his statement aboard the plane heading to Cameroon this week all the more significant.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.bbc.co.uk ...
The pope shouldn’t be in the business of giving a damn about what a man put on his...
Of course, I’m no Catholic, so the pope doesn’t apply to me anyway. I already have enough people in Washington DC that would meddle in my personal life. I don’t need another.
He gives a damn about what catholic men do and don’t do. There is an easy way to fix that problem, don’t be catholic, as you have done.
He speaks on matters of morality. It's in the job description.
Poor man is being flanked by RuPaul.
What’s up with that chicks hair.It makes her taller than everyone there.Bad hair day:)
> He speaks on matters of morality. It’s in the job description.
As a non-Catholic (studying to be one) I have always wondered why contraception was a matter of morality, as opposed to being a matter of commonsense?
(Yes, I have read about Onan, and am of the view that he was struck dead not because he played with himself, and not because he used a rudimentary form of contraception, but because of his motives for doing so — which were to avoid keeping his brother’s family line alive, after his brother’s death: in other words, he tried to wiggle out of carrying out a direct command from God by making compliance impossible.)
Why the Pope ses condoms
The only approved catholic birth control pill: St. Joseph aspirin held betwen the knees.
I’m not convinced that’s a chick.
Because it won't work? I recall years ago Ann Landers ran a letter from a woman who wrote that there were ways to hold an aspirin firmly between the knees and still have sexual intercourse.
The HIV microbe is smaller than a cell on a latex condom. That is to say, you can still get AIDS if you use a condom.
Also, the condoms break. Particularly during “dry” or anal sex. Sorry, them’s the facts. Ugly but true.
Most people are under the impression that condom use eliminates the possibility of pregnancy and STDS. No, it reduces the possibility of pregnancy and STDS.
And if you have sex when you otherwise wouldn’t, because you are under the false impression that nothing bad can happen to you, you increase the chance that you get pregnant or get a disease.
“She described Pope Benedict’s remarks as “alienating”, “ignorant” and “pernicious”.
So I wonder what the AIDS rate is in South Africa, as opposed to at the Vatican?
Someone’s teaching is ignorant, but it would appear to be hers. . .
It's a two way street: you don't apply to the pope, either.
Hah I have been waiting for someone to start posting pics of the Cameroon Version of Mae West.
Gawd awful fashion taste that woman has.
It is Live on EWTN right now.
Nearly all matters of morality ought to be matters of common sense, but, according to Catholic teaching, because of one of the effects of original sin (the effect termed ‘darkening of the intellect’) man sometimes has difficulty using common sense, either because of flawed premises or because of faulty reasoning, and so God has gone ahead and revealed much that man could, and often does, reason to.
If one does a rudimentary biological study, most people will conclude that the reproductive organs are for reproduction. Thus, over the course of history, most cultures and religions have officially condemned contraception. Under the influence of Freud, Malthus, and ZPGers, the Anglicans broke ranks with this tradition in 1930 in a limited way, and over the next 38 years nearly the entire rest of Western civilization followed suit, so that in 1968 Paul VI seemed very isolated from contemporary western thought when he re-affirmed the traditional teaching in his encyclical Humanae Vitae. Most of the west had become stuck on the idea that the reproductive organs are actually a cheap home entertainment system, and the last 40 years have done little to change the western outlook (which is beginning to creep into Islam).
While there are a handful of Biblical texts that, with a little ingenuity, can be used with people intent on deriving all truth directly from the Bible while discussing this subject, for those willing to admit the use of reason, the most useful starting point is probably the point “Thou shall not lust,” specifically as put forward by Christ in the Sermon on the Mount (cf. Mt. 5:28). Lust is the seeking of sexual gratification without regard for the whole person. Contraception seeks to allow sexual gratification while eliminating two aspects of the person: the reproductive aspect, and the aspect of temporal commitment [the language of the sexual act naturally includes a commitment to remain with the person for the sake of rearing any offspring that might result from the union). As the ability to procreate is the greatest natural gift given to man (a way in which man surpasses even the angels) this is no minor thing—those who contracept are rejecting one of the fundamental aspects of both their partners and themselves. John Paul II wrote much on this subject, most notably in his book Love and Responsibility (which is not an easy read).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.