Vatican repeats opposition to condoms, says chastity only surefire way to prevent AIDS spread

Two years ago, a Vatican official hinted at a possible softening in the Church's position, writing in the Vatican newspaper L'Osservatore Romano that condoms were one of the ways to "contain" the spread of HIV.

The author, Monsignor Jacques Suadeau of the Pontifical Council for the Family, stressed that chastity was the only way to prevent the spread of the virus, but that in the case of Thai sex workers, for example, condom use was a "lesser evil."

This is an outright lie, one I helped expose at the time two years ago with this article:

AMERICA Magazine's Disinformation About Church's position on AIDS and Condom Use

Here is the original L'Osservatore Romano article referred to in this article above:

Stopping the Spread of HIV/AIDS: Prophylactics or Family Values?

Ping (as usual, if you would like to be added to or removed from my ping list, just send me a FReepmail.)

Corrected link (From PetersNet):

AMERICA Magazine's Disinformation About Church's position on AIDS and Condom Use

Good old fashioned Christian chastity IS the answer to the AIDs crisis. It will just take time for the world to realize this (and the world is resisting the truth of that mightily!). But in some countries, like Uganda, where abstinence until marriage has been pushed, AIDs is significantly less of a problem than elsewhere. Uganda's program has been highly successful - but AIDs activists are working overtime to not follow its example.

Not that it has anything to do with this article, but I was wondering if this means that Terry McAuliffe will have to remove the condom he wears over hois head????

Remember that people were told that filters made cigarettes safer. You don't hear liberals pushing filtered cigarettes.

But he said there was only one way to prevent AIDS and the HIV virus (news - web sites) from spreading. "We say that prevention ... is called chastity."

Ummm, isn't this a no-brainer?

And that goes for syphillis, gonorhea, herpes and HVP, too.

I agree that chastity is the best way to prevent the spread of disease and not to mention unplanned pregnancy.

The second best (in my opinion)is to be in a monogamous relationship long-term.

I agree that chastity is the best way to prevent the spread of disease and not to mention unplanned pregnancy. The second best (in my opinion)is to be in a monogamous relationship long-term.

Sure.

Not that it has anything to do with this article, but I was wondering if this means that Terry McAuliffe will have to remove the condom he wears over hois head????

Nothing I can think of could keep McAuliffe from being verbally promiscuous. But hey - he just helped elect a Republican Senate! He could be Republicans' best friend!

Well, sure abstinence is the only sure fire way to prevent the transmission of STDs. This is however, painfully unrealistic. Abstinence should be taught BY PARENTS, and I have absolutely no clue what the public and private schools are involved in this for - I thought the primary focus was teaching academic material. Nowadays that seems to be little more than an occasional afterthought.

Like it or not, people are going to continue to have unprotected sex, no matter what laws we pass or whatever the Vatican edicts. Self-destructive behavior is certainly nothing new under the sun. Ideally, these people who engage in such activities should ultimately be held accountable for their actions (unfortunately, leftists think that everyone else is responsible for the stupidity of others, and should therefore foot the bill). Yes, and unlike the left, I don't believe that the spread of AIDS is because of lack of federal funding.

A related phenomenon is that of prohibition. It didn't work in the 1930's and it certainly isn't working now. I would dare say that prohibition causes more problems than it solves. Given the estimated 117,000% profit margin (Cato Institute) in the drug trade, the character of people involved, and the insatiable demand for product, this is a no brainer. "Just Say No" was about as bright a response to the problem of drug use (which really was not so much a problem as it is today since prohibition and the emergence of the lucrative black market) as is the same ostrich approach to sexual abstinence. It is simply not rational and will create more problems than it ever attempted to solve.

The best method to addressing the issue is to remain rational. People are going to have sex, whether you or I like it or not (I personally don't care what they do, just as long as I don't get the bill for it). I am not particularly pleased at the idea of my teenage neice possibly being sexually active, but I am even more frightened of her contracting a deadly disease. Therefore, acknowledging that what is in theory logical but seldom practical, this 'abstinence only' may offer us some self-sense of 'moral riteousness' but given the nature of human behavior will end up as a failure entirely.

This is not to say that abstinence should not be taught as the primary defense against STDs, as it is the only sure-fire method to keep from contracting such. But reality is different. "Just Say No" has done little if anything to curb the appetite for illegal drugs, as I suspect it has done for the wave of STD's we now face. I really don't see educating our children about ways to protect themselves sexually is any "green light" to becomming sexually active, if explained that abstinence is the best method. However, should you screw up (no pun intended), at least take some degree of action to protect yourself from making the situation a life threatening disaster. It's not a comfortable position to be in, but at least it is somewhat practical.

I wished we lived in a perfect world, but sadly we do not. I do not see Utopia around the bend anytime soon, so perhaps it is better just to deal with reality as it presents itself as best we can. "Safety Nazis" as I refer to them, exist on both the right and the left. The safest place for anyone to be in the world is solitary confinement in a maximum security prison. That certainly would keep us all safe from ourselves and each other with a rather high degree of certainty - but is this a manner in which you would choose to "live"?

There is nothing incorrect about what you have to say, but the church still teaches that CHASTITY (not abstinence) is the way to curb to AIDS epidemic - no matter what humans want to believe about "safe sex". Outside the bounds of a chaste, monogamous relationship, there is no such thing.

Abstinence is a form of chastity. Okay?

I'm glad to see this!

Vatican repeats opposition to seatbelts, says staying home only surefire way to avoid dying in a road accident.

All those advanced degrees from prestigious colleges, the world is caving in over their sex and power scandal, and all they can do is come up with a lame statement repeating the obvious. You're right - its a good analogy - and reason number one as to why most of their members stopped listening to them.

SEX HAS A PRICE TAG

Sexually active people face odds four times higher for contracting a sexually transmitted disease (STD) than for getting pregnant.

Three million teenagers contract STDs annually.
25 million Americans are infected with the herpes virus.
More than 40 percent of sexually active singles are infected with human papillomavirus, commonly called genital warts.
One in every 250 Americans has the AIDS virus.
An estimated one in five Americans is infected with a viral STD, a figure that doesn't include bacterial diseases like chlamydia, syphilis and gonorrhea.

In the 1950s there were only five sexually transmitted diseases that were known and treated. Today there are more than fifty types of STDs. Chlamydia is the number one STD among teens today. There are about 4,000 teenagers every day who contract chlamydia. This is a bacteria, not a virus.

Unlike some venereal diseases, it can be cured. But more than 80 percent of the students who contract this disease do not realize they have it. If you contract chlamydia once in your life, you have a 25 percent chance of being sterile the rest of you life. If you get this disease more than once, the chances are much greater that you will never be able to have children.

ABSTINENCE WORKS!

Most of their members? Your sources please?

Excellent news! Bumpus ad summum!

Ummm, isn't this a no-brainer?

Yes, it is. Unfortunately, having a brain isn't a requirement before voting in most Western nations.