Cardinal Pell defends Pope's HIV, condom comments - SMH (1 Viewer)

[moll.]

On St Patrick's Day, Pope Benedict spoke about the Catholic Church's teachings and the spread of AIDS in Africa. His comments provoked a storm of indignation, much of it genuine if uninformed, but a deal of it ferocious and disingenuous. It helps to be clear about what he said. The Pope rejected the notion that the Catholic attitude was unrealistic and ineffective, adding: "If there is no human dimension, if Africans do not help [by responsible behaviour], the problem cannot be overcome by the distribution of condoms; on the contrary, they increase it."
During an Easter television interview, I supported Pope Benedict's comments. I said: "I agree with him totally [about condoms] because they're encouraging promiscuity, because they're encouraging irresponsibility." I also said: "The idea that you can solve a great spiritual and health crisis like AIDS with a few mechanical contraptions like condoms is ridiculous."
My comments, too, prompted a reaction, including one from the Herald's David Marr, who galloped into the fray to defend the sexual revolution against what the Pope and I had said. He even mentioned Africa a couple of times. "How many good Catholics will die in Africa and the Philippines," he asks, before they learn?
At the heart of Marr's position is a fundamental misconception, which he states as follows: "And we know in our hearts - and every reputable study confirms - that the church's call for abstinence is useless."
In fact, the studies confirm that behaviour modification is possible and is occurring. In Cameroon the percentage of young people having sex before the age of 15 has gone down from 35 per cent to 14 per cent, United Nations AIDS said last year. Uganda has had a 70 per cent decline in HIV prevalence since the early 1990s, linked to a 60 per cent reduction in casual sex, says a 2004 report in Science. Similar evidence exists in Africa, from Ethiopia to Malawi.
Other studies support my claim that condoms encourage promiscuity and irresponsibility. UN AIDS has found that even when people use condoms consistently, something goes wrong about 10 per cent of the time. Condoms give users an exaggerated sense of safety, so that they sometimes engage in "risk compensation". In one Ugandan study, gains in condom use seem to have been offset by increases in the number of sex partners.
Pope Benedict was right to point out that the human dimension in sexual activity is crucial. We are not automatons, slaves to animal instinct. Education campaigns focusing on fewer partners, less casual sex and less use of sex workers have been key to reducing infection rates.
Earlier this year, the British Medical Journal reported: "In numerous large studies, concerted efforts to promote use of condoms has consistently failed to control rates of sexually transmitted infection", even in Canada, Sweden and Switzerland.
The response of critics to the Pope's comments have been classic examples of diversionary tactics; blame someone else in case people begin to understand that your solution is a significant cause of the problem.
To blame Catholics and Pope Benedict for the spread of HIV/AIDS requires proof that while people are ignoring the first, essential Christian requirement to be chaste before and within marriage, they are slavishly obedient to a second requirement not to use condoms. I doubt anyone thinks that is realistically the case.
Catholic teaching is opposed to adultery, fornication and homosexual intercourse, even with condoms, not because it denies condoms offer health protection, but because traditional Christian moral teaching believes all extra-marital intercourse contradicts the proper meaning of love and sexuality.
Christ called Christians to a different way of living, to a purity of heart where even looking on a woman with aggressive and disordered desire (lust) is wrong.
At least 25 per cent of the services and care for people with HIV/AIDS in Africa is provided by the Catholic Church. While the role of a church is different from government, which has to legislate and organise for people of all religions as well as those without, both are required to respect the evidence and good moral values in the programs they deliver.
Catholics are not obliged to protest publicly against every harm minimisation program, even when the church urges her members not to participate. In the same way, governments and non-Catholic aid agencies can and will continue to hand out condoms in HIV/AIDS programs, although the evidence suggests they may on balance be exacerbating the problem.
But all of us who want to help prevent and reduce the spread of HIV/AIDS need to respect the evidence about what helps and what doesn't. And the evidence is that it's not condoms which make the crucial difference, but the choices people make about how they use the gift of sexuality.

George Pell | AIDS | condoms

I have to admit, he does have a point that slavish devotion to condoms as a be-all and end-all solution to HIV/AIDS is blatantly wrong. However, it is negligent and naive of him to suggest that complete abstinence is the only way out and is simple to obtain.
Also, citing the study about a delay in virginity loss by Cameroonian children and then relating it to a drop in HIV cases is ignorant at best, and deliberately misguiding at worst. Just because the children are avoiding having sex doesn't mean they're having less off it when they start. Delayed sexuality is not in anyway related to complete extra-marital abstinence.
But Pell got it wrong in his last line: "And the evidence is that it's not condoms which make the crucial difference, but the choices people make about how they use the gift of sexuality." Sorry buddy, but it's neither. The key is education.
Only when the Africans are educated about the proper use of contraceptives, as well as alternatives to rampant sexuality will the problem be solved.

Also, on a side note, I like how he states that "Catholic teaching is opposed to... homosexual intercourse... because traditional Christian moral teaching believes all extra-marital intercourse contradicts the proper meaning of love and sexuality." So the Catholic Church is calling the actions of gays immoral because they believe that you can't love outside of marriage, and yet it is the Church who is the most vocal opponent to gays marrying one another, thereby creating the very conditions needed for the immorality?
Sounds fair to me.
​

 

[Iron]

I feel baited

 

[moll.]

You were.

 

[Iron]

snap

 

[Iron]

I'd only be repeating myself if I dive into this, fren. I defended the Pope's comments at the time and naturally support Cardinal Pell's further clarification.

Your criticisms arent very sharp. Your faith in education for instance is misplaced, as the 10% failure of contaceptives is human error, not using a frog-skin on your big toe or something.

You also just state that abstinence until a genuine marriage is unrealistic - I mean, whatever.

Also your last point on gays is just annoying and deliberately so. Homosexuality is intrinsically immoral - marriage doesnt even enter into it.

 

[SylviaB]

You also just state that abstinence until a genuine marriage is unrealistic - I mean, whatever.

It's the truthhh.

Also your last point on gays is just annoying and deliberately so. Homosexuality is intrinsically immoral - marriage doesnt even enter into it.

That's a load of rubbish.
Homosexuality doesn't affect you or anybody else. what people do with their own, consenting bodies is no one's busniness but their own.

 

[moll.]

I was quite happy to let sleeping dogs lie and kill this thread, but ok Sylvester. Have your argument.

 

[SylviaB]

No no, I'm not really fussed.

But I can hardly see how "..homosexuality is intinsically immoral" constitutes a 'sleeping dog'.

 

[moll.]

The dog's sleeping cos he's exhausted from all his activity in the God thread.

 

[boris]

refuse to read anything pell says

he is a fucking cunt ball sack licker and i would piss in his mouth if given the chance

 

[fleckar]

Why do either of these old fucks opinions matter? Oh, they don't?

HAHA.

 

[tessbd]

That's a load of rubbish.
Homosexuality doesn't affect you or anybody else. what people do with there own, consenting bodies is no one's busniness but their own.

Amen.

Oh look, I must be christian.

 

[Tully B.]

refuse to read anything pell says

he is a fucking cunt ball sack licker and i would piss in his mouth if given the chance

I wouldn't, but neither I wouldn't protest at your doing it.

I know this thread isn't about the immorality of homosexuality, but still... I disagree with Iron and agree with Sylvester. I'm not going to swear or anything, but yeah... that's my opinion.

Also, I'd like to say that the way that Protestant express themselves in this regard is much more respectful than the way in which Catholics do it. It's the Protestant who say "hate the sin, not the sinner" and it's the Catholics who walk out on the streets with signs saying "God hates fags". Do you hate homosexual people Iron? You neg repped me at one point last year calling me a "dirty little cocksucker" if I recall, purely because I disagreed with your view, so that might be your answer.

 

[moll.]

I wouldn't, but neither I wouldn't protest at your doing it.

I know this thread isn't about the immorality of homosexuality, but still... I disagree with Iron and agree with Sylvester. I'm not going to swear or anything, but yeah... that's my opinion.

Also, I'd like to say that the way that Protestant express themselves in this regard is much more respectful than the way in which Catholics do it. It's the Protestant who say "hate the sin, not the sinner" and it's the Catholics who walk out on the streets with signs saying "God hates fags". Do you hate homosexual people Iron? You neg repped me at one point last year calling me a "dirty little cocksucker" if I recall, purely because I disagreed with your view, so that might be your answer.

Westboro Baptist Church and the Reverend Fred Phelps are both Protestant.

 

[kingbigboyjames]

The deep south are filled with wacko protestants holding "god hates fag" posters.

 

[Tully B.]

The deep south are filled with wacko protestants holding "god hates fag" posters.

I guessed I said that from a biased perspective; I have many Protestant-Christian friends.

On a different note, did you know that the "Godhatesfags" website has a link to a website which believes that Barack Obama is the devil. Not just evil, but Lucifer himself.

EDIT: An add reading "The Story of Satan" just appeared below my post? What the fuck?