Guilty of genocide?

Rhisiart · #1 March 29th, 2009, 05:32 AM

Not sleeping around makes good moral sense as well as being better for one's survival, particularly if you live in sub-Saharan Africa.

However, the Pope's recent advice that condoms should not be used at all strikes me as feckless in the extreme.

It is not my intention to offend Catholics (of which my wife is one). But at a time when AIDS/TB is rising faster than at any time in the last 30 years, surely the Pope is taking a non-Christian view of the problem.

ora · #2 March 29th, 2009, 07:51 AM

Catholicism has a bunch of bad baggage. I really think they need to get over this stuff in order to seem relevant to people in the modern world, that said most of the Catholic base in in the developing world these days. Having a bio background I am also fairly irate at anyone who I feel is essentially increasing the risk of people getting HIV/AIDS. It may not be genocide but it is morally wrong IMHO.

Same with that idiot Mbeki in South Africa who seems to believe that HIV and AIDS are unrelated. As it happens there are some valid scientific discussions on this topic but they way he dealt with it in the public sphere was in my opinion grossly irresponsible.

With both Ratzinger & Umbeki, they seem blind to the fact that people WILL have sex, whatever they say, and unprotected sex in an area with a high prevalence of HIV/AIDS is supremely dangerous. Marriage is not the solution either, in South Africa many of the women who have AIDS get it from their husband's infidelities. Again, infidelity will ALWAYS happen to some extent, humans are imperfect. Surely we need to do everything we can to stop this disease from wrecking Africa and elsewhere.

If you want to read a Not Safe for Work, aggressive satire on the pope issue read this but be warned, if you are easily offended probably best to skip it.

voice- · #3 March 30th, 2009, 03:16 PM

At least he's being consistent. The catholic church has always been opposed to condoms, even among their own members and even before we knew of AIDS. I don't believe for a second that the Pope hates africans or that he is trying to keep the disease alive, I think he's just against condoms because he honestly believes they promote casual sex among unmarried people.

If the alternative is abstinence he's quite right, condoms will increase the problem. Then again, if the alternative were abstinence, there would be no problem at all, so the alternative is clearly unprotected sex.

He's not evil, he's just stupid.

**Giaguara** · #4 March 30th, 2009, 03:50 PM

I guess the US school systems also shows how great results they can achieve with the abstinence only. If it doesn't protect teenagers from having sex, how would you explain the abstinence only to older people, or e.g. those who are married or in stable relationship? Abstinence for the sake of ... not affording a child? Sure, clear solution (the same as for preventing overpopulation?) = no sex for anyone even remotely possibly in a reproductional age. So no one over the age of 4 (as the youngest proven mother was 5), to no upper age limit (at least for men. Probably for women the age of 70 should work for upper limit?)

For the sake of continuity, I think they should take as strong an opinion against all assisted fertility options and treatments. So no IVF etc.

Rhisiart · #5 April 1st, 2009, 01:07 PM

Miniature Earth

reed · #6 June 2nd, 2009, 05:11 PM

A question. What do the Jewish and Muslim big wigs think? For example. Are they ever asked this in the press? Just curious.

Randy Singer · #7 June 2nd, 2009, 05:42 PM

There is no Jewish equivalent to the Pope. Judaism is non-centralized. Individual rabbi's (literally "scholars") interpret the Torah and Talmud for folks who ask. But rabbi's often confer with and/or disagree with each other. (There is an old saying "get two rabbi's together, and you will get three opinions.")

The Jewish religion tends to be very progressive on a lot of modern issues.

As far as the Jewish view on birth control, check out:
http://judaism.about.com/od/sexinjud...rthcontrol.htm

reed · #8 June 2nd, 2009, 07:10 PM

Thanks for the clarification Singer.
The Christian religion too can be very progressive by the way. Like all religions in fact. Even the Muslims. It all depends on who one talks to or wishes to believe I guess. The Pope does not control all his "flock." Thank goodness. I just wish it wasn't always the Pope (Roman Catholic view point) that is quoted in terms of these issues. That's all.