AIDS Activists Blast Vatican's Stance on Condoms

Catholics for a Free Choice
A pro-abortion group who is not affiliated with the Catholic Church. If these people don't like where the Church stands, why are they still calling themselves Catholic.

According to BBC report, "cardinals, bishops, priests and nuns in four continents of the church have been quoted as saying HIV can pass through tiny holes in condoms but latest warnings were made in a Panorama programme called 'Sex and the Holy City' by one of the Vatican's most senior cardinals Alfonso Lopez Trujillo who allegedly suggests that the AIDS virus is roughly 450 times smaller than the spermatozoon and could pass through net formed by the condom.
Trujillo, President of the Vatican's Pontifical Council for the Family, called on governments to urge people not to use condoms.
His words "These margins of uncertainty, should represent an obligation on the part of the health ministries and all these campaigns to act in the same way as they do, with regard to cigarettes, which they state to be a danger."
In swift reaction to this claim, the World Health Organization (WHO) has condemned the comments and warned the Vatican to desist from putting lives at risk with such utterances.

A spokeswoman to WHO was quoted as saying that" Statements like this are quite dangerous"We are facing a global pandemic which has already killed more than 20 million people and currently affects around 42 million. "There is so much evidence to show that condoms don't let sexually transmitted infections like HIV through. "Anyone who says otherwise is just wrong."

I went through the first two links and got a pretty clear picture of what theyr'e about. The first is a left wing hit peice opinion column published in the S.F. Chronicle. The author - a left wing idiot - makes one accusation after another without substantiating even one of them.

The itacized text is from the second article. Please notice the words "allegedly suggested." That is hardly a pronouncement of Catholic doctrine. What the good Cardinal actually said is in quotes in the article. His words "These margins of uncertainty, should represent an obligation on the part of the health ministries and all these campaigns to act in the same way as they do, with regard to cigarettes, which they state to be a danger" may be cause for controversy, but it is bad public policy to permit people to believe that use of a condom insures protection from contracting diseases.

As for your analogy to seatbelts it is based on a false premise. Use of seat belts is only a redundancy to driving a car. So, a small percentage of road trips result in an accident. An even smaller percentage result in a life threatening accident and finally, seat belts reduce the risk of deat even further. If your chance of any given road trip resulting in a life threatening accident is much less that 2% and sealt belts only reduce this further.

If you had a 2% chance of dying, each time you got in an automobile - I can assure you driving would be prohibited. It would also be a pretty unpopular activity.

A better analogy would be the flying of bomber missions to Germany in WWII. On each mission there was a 3% (I beleive) mortality rate. After only 20 missions 60% of the original 60% of the original group was dead. For this reason, crews were limited to 25 missions. This gave them at least some chance of survival.

If these people don't like where the Church stands, why are they still calling themselves Catholic.

I hate this expression but ... "because they can". The word "catholic" means "universal". There are many 'catholic' churches that have nothing to do with the Roman Catholic church.

If you check out the Catholic League web site they ask people to call the DNC and tell them to take Catholics for Free Choice off their site as a Catholic organization.