For instance, he distorts science in order to back up his moral position on condom use.
I don't mind if as a layman, you decide that you decide not to have sex, unprotected or otherwise, but advocating that condom usage increases the chances of HIV, because you do not like the fact it stops babies being made... isn't that what he really means?
Should the pope say instead, the church is against condom usage, but it does prevent HIV transmission?
He actually said the virus passes through the condom. The pope promotes the creation of children who's parents can't even feed his existing ciblings.
But At Least the'll add to the Christian Stats
Did anyone tell the pope where that thing goes on the human body? When the Nazis were slaughtering millions of people, the pope did nothing. In a previous time, popes have called for religious wars. Post-protestantism, lot of the denominational wars were initiated, if not supported, by the pope.
I hasten to add however that the pope is not exclusive in doing these things -- leaders of other religions have done similar things.
My point is that leaders of religions have often displayed less moral obligation than the rank and file of that religion. The former are held in high regard by the latter and they use this to propagate their agenda. This is nothing new. The pope is not listed in the bible. However, pastors, elders, etc. have a moral obligation with greater importance because they cannot lead their sheep astray. The have a bigger responsibility than their congregants. And we, who evangelize, also have a moral obligation to follow the bible word-for-word. We also are responsible to what we say. Well I may not have an answer for you on the condom thing, but yes, a person of great power like the Pope definitely has a greater obligation. Anytime you claim authority or leadership over others, and have substantial influence over them, you are held to a higher standard. I am sure the Pope, or the President, or others would admit that if you asked them. This shows that you are confused about what even constitutes evidence. And that you limit the Pope to only saying 'religious' things, whatever that means.
The scientific evidence and historical evidence for his position are irrefutable. I've been waiting for years for him to say something, esp since the success of Uganda in the early 2000's against HIV.
http://www.hli.org/condom_expose_complet...
COMPLETE TEXT
And here is the position which you are mis-stating as 'religious'.
The Case Against Condoms: The Scientific and Moral Basis for the Teaching of the Catholic Church on Preventing the Spread of Disease (Paperback)
by Alfonso Cardinal Lopez Trujillo
YOU ARE WRONG TWICE. YOU MUST BEAR SOME RESPONSIBILITY FOR THAT !! Some people try to justify their beliefs anyway they can.
Edit: Bring back the last pope, at least he accepted evolution. "Harvard Aids expert says Pope 'correct' on condoms and spread of HIV"
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment...
"The best evidence we have supports his comments" -- Edward C. Green, director of the Harvard AIDS Prevention Research Project
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2009...
About Green:
http://www.harvardaidsprp.org/faculty-st...
"Green is a world renowned expert on AIDS in Africa, and a member of the President's Advisory Council for HIV/AIDS, as well as the Research Advisory Council, Office of AIDS, National Institute of AIDS. He is a medical anthropologist, and Senior Research Scientist in the School of Public Health, Center for Population and Development Studies, Harvard University. His work in developing countries has spanned Africa, Latin America, the Caribbean, and Asia. He is also the author several books as well as more than 300 journal articles, book chapters, presented papers, and commissioned reports. Dr. Green is currently lead researcher on the role of behavioral change in HIV/AIDS epidemics in Africa and southeast Asia, under a US government-funded research project. He has recently testified in both houses of congress on AIDS issues."
http://www.aids.org/aboutUs/profile.html I am a Christian but I do not believe with the whole pope idea...
Sorry Catholics, no mean to offend. maybe...but he gets into alot of personal stuff....we have brains
Methodist Yes, the Pope has a greater moral obligation. This does not mean that he should support immorality.
These experts agree with the Pope:
Last year, Edward C. Green, director of the AIDS Prevention Research Project at the Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies, wrote: "In every African country in which HIV infections declined, this decline has been associated with a decrease in the proportion of men and women reporting more than one sex partner over the course of a year鈥攚hich is exactly what fidelity programs promote."
And: "Many countries that have not seen declines in HIV have seen increases in condom use, but in every country worldwide in which HIV has declined there have been increases in levels of faithfulness and usually abstinence as well." http://www.harvardaidsprp.org/index.html
Sam L. Ruteikara, co-chair of Uganda's National AIDS-Prevention Committee wrote: The proportion of Ugandans infected with HIV plunged from 21 percent in 1991 to 6 percent in 2002. Telling men and women to keep sex sacred -- to save sex for marriage and then remain faithful -- is telling them to love one another deeply with their whole hearts. Most HIV infections in Africa are spread by sex outside of marriage: casual sex and infidelity. The solution is faithful love. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...
The Catholic Church has never asked unmarried people to have unprotected sex. Neither has she asked married couples with diseases to have unprotected sex.
Judeo-Christian tradition has taught for thousands of years:
1. Single people should be celibate.
2. Married people should be faithful to each other (adultery is wrong).
3. Married couples should welcome God's gift of children and, therefore, artificial birth control is against the will of God.
If the world is going to ignore teachings about chastity (1 & 2), then why is the world so upset about teaching artificial birth control (3)?
People who are already ignoring the more important teachings about chastity (1 and 2) should have no problem ignoring the less important teaching of artificial birth control (3).
Even if a person infected with AIDS was to use a condom to help protect his or her spouse, condoms are not 100% effective (read the box) and the spouse may be infected and die anyway. A person who truly loves their spouse would not endanger them in this way.
In regards to sex outside of marriage, the Church makes it a practice not to tell people how to sin. With or without a condom:
鈥?Fornication is still fornication
鈥?Adultery is still adultery
鈥?Rape is still rape
With love in Christ. Anytime you deliberately (or out of ignorance, because you have not done the appropriate due diligence) you misinform people in such a manner that might cause them to act in hazardous ways, you've done something unethical. The pope is certainly guilty on that count.
Ratzinger is guilty of the further offense of abusing his position of authority. Although given the history of the papacy and Catholic church, it should have long since been disregarded and ignored as either a moral authority or a source of information on the true state of the world.
So, really, anybody who supports the Catholic church is at least partially culpable whenever a pope goes and says something like this, because it's completely predictable. If people did not support the church monetarily or by giving undue respect, someone like the pope would have no greater credibility or public esteem than anybody else who's prone to making dangerous crackpot assertions.
EDIT:
I must revise my remarks. It turns out, I was misinformed. The pope did not (as this question states, and other sources I've read also suggest) explicitly claim that condoms are ineffective against AIDS -- though that is a claim that has been made by others within the church.
Instead, he claims that condom distribution will not ultimately end the AIDS problem, and that it may, in fact, exacerbate it. Technically speaking, that's not wrong (or at least, whether or not it's wrong is a matter of legitimate debate).
That said, the pope's remarks are somewhat ambiguous, especially in the context of other opinions issued by the Vatican. If the message that the African missionaries get (and spread) to their flock is "condoms are no good for preventing HIV" then it's still an act of deception, and harm is still being done, even if a strict reading of the pope's words are actually defensible. |
