What's this got to do with the Pope?

[JAG]

Even when we do you claim we are to stupid to understand your points. The Pope is in no way shape manner of form responsible for the spread of aids in Africa.Trying to say so pnly makes you look either silly or hows you have an unrasonable hate for the Pope and Catholics in general. Once more if they listened to him aids would practically dissappear but because they dont its his fault.

Sigh...

[Adrian II]

Well, I remember some posts around JP's death saying he was responsible for the millons of Aids dead in Africa.

Never mind. Isn't it surprising that a thread about some of the worst obscurantism in Africa is turned into yet another debate pro and contra the Pope? I believe this thread demonstrates that some of the Church's critics aren't interested in Africa or Aids at all, only in criticising the Church.

[Paul Peru]

I'll be honest, you secular humanists are really driving forward, emboldened by your successes I suppose.

Are we successful?
oboyoboyoboy!
This is great!

Just do me a favor, before you decide that praying should be illegal, or belief in any form for that matter, give us all a heads up, would you? It can't be that far off, based on where you're at now...

I think the official policy in China is to frown upon some religions and persecute others by varying degrees. Now you know.

[Paul Peru]

Well, I remember some posts around JP's death saying he was responsible for the millons of Aids dead in Africa.

Never mind. Isn't it surprising that a thread about some of the worst obscurantism in Africa is turned into yet another debate pro and contra the Pope? I believe this thread demonstrates that some of the Church's critics aren't interested in Africa or Aids at all, only in criticising the Church.

Maybe there is something about the title of the thread?
Actually I haven't gotten around to leading the entire article yet

[JAG]

Well, I remember some posts around JP's death saying he was responsible for the millons of Aids dead in Africa.

Never mind. Isn't it surprising that a thread about some of the worst obscurantism in Africa is turned into yet another debate pro and contra the Pope? I believe this thread demonstrates that some of the Church's critics aren't interested in Africa or Aids at all, only in criticising the Church.

To be fair Adrian, you named the bloody thread the way you did, what do you expect people like me to reply with? You set the terms of the article in a 'pro and contra Pope' context, don't then be so disingenuous in stating how we don't care for Africa and those suffering of AIDS.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Look how many people in africa do you really belive didnt use condoms because of the Pope but still had sex outside of marriage regardless of what he says. If you going to listen only to those parts you choose how can you blame that on the Pope? I could blame you liberals more for encourging people that if you want sex with whoever its fine and dandy just use protection. Its the same thing If they dont listen to both parts of what you say they will be in trouble.

"But the liberals told me it was fine to have sex with anyone I pleased and now Ive got aids'

"But you didnt use protection"

"But still you told me I can have sex with anyone"

You have to obey the entire precept not half of it.

Once more if they are going to commit a big sin like having sex out of marriage do you really think they wont use a condom because its an almost negigible sin. Your not going to hell for using a condom. You will for screwing your neighbors wife.

[Goofball]

Whoa, whoa, whoa, people! I am grouping this post:

If they truly believe it's wrong, aren't you demanding that they be hypocrites because you don't think human beings can restrain their sexual impulses?

and this post:

Right, because the Pope is here to explain how to take the 'easier' route.



Why do you presume that on the Pope's agenda there should be medical hygiene? He's here to save souls, not the flesh. I'm not even Catholic, let alone Christian and I can see that.

You have placed an expectation on the Pope to be 'the greatest guy ever who will fix everything' and he isn't. He's just the head of a Church, here to advocate his faith.

and this post:

Again, PP, I'm going to pose the same challenge to you that I did to Goofball. Instead of assuming the Pope's just like to screw with people and ruin all their fun (they do this because of a grinch-like mentality), consider for a moment that they actually believe the reasoning they've offered.

together in my response, because they all make the same fundamental mistake. They all assume or accuse me of one of two things (or both things):

1) Thinking that it is the Pope's responsibility to make AIDS prevention part of his agenda;

and/or:

2) Thinking the Pope has hidden, dastardly motives for forbidding his flock from using condoms.

Neither of which is true.

As to point 1, I never said anywhere that I believe the Pope should make AIDS fighting his number one concern. As far as I'm concerned, the Pope is a spiritual leader, not a civic problem solver. His job is to minister to the souls of his flock. If he believes that peoples' souls are in danger if they use condoms, then he has the responsibility to tell them not to use them, even if it does cause danger to their earthly bodies. But the fact remains:

not using condoms = increased risk of AIDS.

As to point 2, I made no comment in my post as to what motivates the Pope to forbid the use of condoms, but you two seem to think I believe him to have less than pure motivation. Again, not true. As I said above, I am certain the Pope thought he was absolutely doing the best thing for the souls of his flock when he forbade the use of condoms, and it is his job to worry about souls, not bodies. But again:

not using condoms = increased risk of AIDS

So what I said in my initial post cannot be argued against:

there is no question that he was more of a hindrance than a help when it came to preventing the spread of AIDS in Africa

Now, on to Gawain's ridiculous statement:

Even when we do you claim we are to stupid to understand your points. The Pope is in no way shape manner of form responsible for the spread of aids in Africa.Trying to say so pnly makes you look either silly or hows you have an unrasonable hate for the Pope and Catholics in general. Once more if they listened to him aids would practically dissappear but because they dont its his fault.

Having sex is a natural human urge, and one that is often very hard to overcome. So, let me give you a scenario (and as weird as it may sound, coming from a long line of Catholics myself, not to mentioned being married to one, let me assure you that it is not that far-fetched):

Young David Mwenge and his girlfriend Lisa Mtibi have been dating for many months and are in love . Lisa is a devout Catholic and has so far been able to heed the advice of her priest, so she has not sinned by having sex with David. One night, however, she weakens and in the heat of the moment has sex with David. As they were about to start, David pulled out a condom. Lisa, already feeling advance guilt about committing one sin, tells him not to wear the condom, because that would be adding another sin to the pile. Because David has not been nearly so pure as Lisa has been up to this point in their lives, David gives Lisa AIDS.

At any rate, whether you believe that scenario could take place or not, the fact remains that preaching abstinence is not a solution to the prevention of AIDS. Since humankind came into existence, we have been driven by a powerful need to have sex. It is a fact that humans will continue to have sex with multiple partners before, during, and after marriage. At least if they use a condom they might not kill or be killed by that sex.

No, it is not the Pope's responsibility to teach people about safe sex, but because of his teachings, more people will die of AIDS than would have had he not been specifically preaching against one major method of preventing the spread of the disease.

Very simple.

[Goofball]

Once more if they are going to commit a big sin like having sex out of marriage do you really think they wont use a condom because its an almost negigible sin. Your not going to hell for using a condom. You will for screwing your neighbors wife.

Interesting that you bring that up, because I address it in the post I just wrote while you were writing that one.

I guess we disagree about the sillyness of the rationalizations people will use for their actions.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

not to mentioned being married to one, let me assure you that it is not that far-fetched):

Its not far fetched its sheer stupidity. She will commit a mortal sin and have sex but wont use a condom when its ony its a venial sin. If your souls going to hell what difference will using a condom make. Using a condom is like telling a lie. I dont know a single Catholic here who doesnt use condoms because they think its a sin. They dont use them because it spoils the experience. Im sure she was lying there all hot getting sex for the fiirst time and the man went to put on a condom and she thought of what the Pope said and told him no I dont want to sin anymore than I HAVE to.

Its like murdering someone but not robbing their watch because you dont want to get in anymore trouble than you already are.

[Goofball]

Its not far fetched its sheer stupidity. She will commit a mortal sin and have sex but wont use a condom when its ony its a venial sin.

Really? Far-fetched?

Hmmm...

I thought we were talking about a people who believe that women swell-up like blowfish and get cases of the screaming scoots and die if they don't have sex with their dead husbands' brothers.

But I guess you're right. My scenario was so far-fetched it could only take place in a really superstitious culture...

[Don Corleone]

Goof, that was a beautiful post. Well thought out, made some great points, and you certainly managed to remain true to your original statements.

But you never actually answered what I thought was a very basic question.

Hypothetically speaking, if the Pope truly believes it's wrong to use birth control, isn't it incumbent on him to teach that? Wouldn't it be hypocritical of him not to?

Now, as to your point that regardless of his intent, the result of his teachings means more AIDS.... I completely and utterly disagree. Gawain is completely right about this. If people were following his teachings, AIDS would exist in textbooks only right now.

Even with 100% condom usage, AIDS is not preventable if you engage in risky behavior, such as having multiple partners. What's more, even in places like San Francisco, where schools are legally required to make condoms available, and health department officials stream through every other day to talk about how important it is to use them, they still see their number of new cases rising, not falling. Why? Because the people engaging in this high risk sex don't want to use condoms. It cramps their style.

I imagine if you asked "ACT-UP", they'd say it's your fault and mine that AIDS is on the rise. If we would just give more tax money to the government, the NIH would have a cure by now and why should they have to cramp their style with condoms.

Condom use is NOT the panacea you all seem to think it is. In light of that, you still expect an organization with thousands of years of teaching on the subject to make a U-turn, because it MIGHT make a difference. Give me a freakin break. How much bending over do we have to do?

[Ser Clegane]

She will commit a mortal sin and have sex but wont use a condom when its ony its a venial sin. If your souls going to hell what difference will using a condom make.

Uhm ... what "mortal" sin for which her soul is "going to hell" did the fictional Lisa Mtibi commit?

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Uhm ... what "mortal" sin for which her soul is "going to hell" did the fictional Lisa Mtibi commit?

Im not quite sure if its a mortal sin but intercourse outside of marriage is one I believe. I do know its a far worse sin than using a condom though. Again I dont know a single Catholic who ever said they wouldnt use a condom because the Pope says so.

[Goofball]

Goof, that was a beautiful post. Well thought out, made some great points, and you certainly managed to remain true to your original statements.

Thanks Don.

But you never actually answered what I thought was a very basic question.

Hypothetically speaking, if the Pope truly believes it's wrong to use birth control, isn't it incumbent on him to teach that? Wouldn't it be hypocritical of him not to?

Actually, I did answer that question when I said:

His job is to minister to the souls of his flock. If he believes that peoples' souls are in danger if they use condoms, then he has the responsibility to tell them not to use them, even if it does cause danger to their earthly bodies.

Now, as to your point that regardless of his intent, the result of his teachings means more AIDS.... I completely and utterly disagree. Gawain is completely right about this. If people were following his teachings, AIDS would exist in textbooks only right now.

Well, I guess we have to disagree then, for the reasons I have already put forth.

But again, here is my point:

If the Pope's preaching against condom use has prevented even one HIV-infected man or woman from using condoms, then the Pope is inarguably (albeit indirectly) responsible for increasing the spread of the AIDS virus. Or, if you are uncomfortable with holding him responsible, how about this: The Pope has been a detriment to the fight against the spread of AIDS.

Isn't it surprising that a thread about some of the worst obscurantism in Africa is turned into yet another debate pro and contra the Pope? I believe this thread demonstrates that some of the Church's critics aren't interested in Africa or Aids at all, only in criticising the Church.

You're kidding, right?

You start a thread entitled "What's this got to do with the Pope?" that features an article discussing AIDS in Africa, then slam people for discussing the Pope and his impact on AIDS in Africa?

[Don Corleone]

Okay, Goof, you make a good point. Since the Pope preached abstinence, which you don't like but would have prevented AIDS, and against condom usage, which you do like and would have reduced the risk of AIDS, the Pope is responsible for an increase in the risk of AIDS. But you're responsible for it not being eliminated. Indirectly of course. Fair?

[Goofball]

Okay, Goof, you make a good point. Since the Pope preached abstinence, which you don't like but would have prevented AIDS, and against condom usage, which you do like and would have reduced the risk of AIDS, the Pope is responsible for an increase in the risk of AIDS. But you're responsible for it not being eliminated. Indirectly of course. Fair?

Not really. Actually, wrong on two levels:

Firstly, I am not advocating against abstinence as a form of AIDS prevention. I think it's a great way to prevent the spread of AIDS. I am just saying that abstinence should not be the only permitted/taught form of AIDS prevention.

Second, although I cut quite a dashing figure and command attention (especially from the ladies) in any social setting, I have nowhere near the social influence the Pope has. My publicly preaching for or against something (which, by the way, I do not do) really has no impact whatsoever on anything. On the other hand, when the Pope so much as farts, Catholics the world over sit up and wait for the rest of the anticipated benediction...

[Steppe Merc]

Hypothetically speaking, if the Pope truly believes it's wrong to use birth control, isn't it incumbent on him to teach that? Wouldn't it be hypocritical of him not to?

I think it would be hypocritical, and it would certaintly be going against his principles. It doesn't make it necassarily good that he teaches that, but I think that if he believes something, he should stick by it.

Would be good if you actually read my post.

I did, thank you. My point stands.

I'm wondering, what faith are these people in this articale? Cause if they're Christians, than you'd think that Priests would try and help the women by preaching their thing about sex, and how it's bad. And if they aren't Christians, this shows that as Don was saying, that most people don't use condoms not because they aren't available, but because they don't want to. In addition, their refrences to people refusing to use condoms would imply that condoms were readily available, just not used.

[Byzantine Prince]

The only way to end AIDS is to kill whoever is diagnosed with it.

Those people are doomed anyways and if they live enough to rape someone(which is more common in Africa then people here think) or to just have sex or have a child they will keep the virus alive. Condoms will never be enough. There's genetic AIDS transmition as well and sexual.

[Steppe Merc]

It's not genetic. It's from the mixture of bodily fluids with mother and child.

And I disagree strongly. These people can still live a while, and shouldn't be put down like some rabid dog. They are still humans, despite what disease they have.

[Papewaio]

The only way to end AIDS is to kill whoever is diagnosed with it.

Those people are doomed anyways and if they live enough to rape someone(which is more common in Africa then people here think) or to just have sex or have a child they will keep the virus alive. Condoms will never be enough. There's genetic AIDS transmition as well and sexual.

BP AIDS is not genetically transmitted. I think you are confusing it with mother to birth of child transmission which is not 100%.

Killing people because they have a disease? Are you part Swedish or been reading books on Eugenics?

PS for those who don't know alot of the starting works in eugenics where in Sweden including stopping 'undesirables' from having children prior to the rise of Nazi Germany.

Also PS I am taking a dig at my ethnic orgin... I have a Swedish surname from my grandfather.

[Proletariat]

Ah good, at least you're an honest Christian and state you have no problems with the all powerful Christ's representatives you worship being responsible for millions of deaths.

Now I'm Christian? I see.

This is the closest I've come to being actually offended on this board. Now I not only worship Jesus but I also worship a German geriatric in a robe. Nice example of your reading comprehension, I suppose.

And the Catholic church has in effect 'shot' people for attempting to use them, the articles I posted when the pope hismelf died, listed how Catholic bishops and priests in Africa were stating lies about condoms - how they did not stop AIDS and even actively helped spread it. For people, as the article shows, who trust dogma, tradition and spiritual leaders so much, that is pulling the trigger my friend.

What on Earth does this, true or not, have to do with the Pope?

Oh yeah, you're from the side of the spectrum that blames Bush for Abu Graib.

Originally Posted by Proletariat
Why do you presume that on the Pope's agenda there should be medical hygiene? He's here to save souls, not the flesh. I'm not even Catholic, let alone Christian and I can see that.

He did on occasion speak out against gratuitous flesh-destroying, though...

In what capacity do you mean? Against genocide? Murder? Other things (like promiscuity) which are against the faith he's here to advocate?

Originally Posted by Proletariat
You have placed an expectation on the Pope to be 'the greatest guy ever who will fix everything' and he isn't. He's just the head of a Church, here to advocate his faith.

As long as he's free to do that, it should be OK for others to be free to say that they disagree. And it's not unheard of for the catholic church to change their views to bring them closer to decency and common sense. We just won't see it with the current pope.

Sure, disagree all you'd like, but that doesn't make the complaints against him apples to apples.

It's like getting mad at an AIDS charity for not helping to cure cancer. The Pope is not a doctor, a social reformer, or a even a law maker. He's here to get people to accept Jesus in order to get to Heaven (I presume, not totally intimate with Catholicism.)

Where's the outcry towards the Muslim leadership on this issue? Aren't there a few of them in Africa as well?

Oh yeah, it's so sexy and humanist and modern and vogue to trash White Western Christianity.

[Don Corleone]

BP AIDS is not genetically transmitted. I think you are confusing it with mother to birth of child transmission which is not 100%.

Killing people because they have a disease? Are you part Swedish or been reading books on Eugenics?

PS for those who don't know alot of the starting works in eugenics where in Sweden including stopping 'undesirables' from having children prior to the rise of Nazi Germany.

Also PS I am taking a dig at my ethnic orgin... I have a Swedish surname from my grandfather.

We all played games like that at the turn of the last century. My state here, North Carolina, certainly wasn't leading anyone in medical research in 1900. But they just came clean and admitted they sterilized 20K people between 1910 and 1959. And that's just 1 of 50, not known for being 'medically advanced'.

BP, I really truly hope you say these things for shock value to get a rise out of us. Sadly, I'm beginning to get to a point where I'm starting to take you at your word.

[Byzantine Prince]

No I don't just say these thing to get a rise out of you. That would be trolling, something I am often wrongly accused of. I do actually beleave in what I say. You have my word on that.

The thing is, you don't understand what I'm saying is meant as the big picture. Consider how many people have yet to die of AIDS and think about how their lives would be saved if we stop this horrific desease. This desease is nature's way of making us bow down to it, and I think we can fight it by exerminating it completely.

[Don Corleone]

If you honestly believe that in your limited experiences, with your narrow little view of the world, you're qualified to make the decision that one person, let alone millions of people need to die in order to fit into your grand plan, you're sick. You have what's known as a sociopathological disorder. I know you won't, but I strongly advise you to seek professional help. If you let this progress, one day you will murder somebody, it's a question of when, not if. And I'm not saying that to get a rise.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

If the Pope's preaching against condom use has prevented even one HIV-infected man or woman from using condoms, then the Pope is inarguably (albeit indirectly) responsible for increasing the spread of the AIDS virus.

Then like I said before if you liberals telling everyone that sex is healthy and you should get as much as you can or want has caused even one man or woman to get aids then you are responsible as much if not more than the Pope for its spread.

If they listen to you some will still get aids . If they listen to the Pope no one will get aids. At least not through intercourse. Its the liberal attitude towards sex that is far more responisble for its spread than anything the Pope said.

[Byzantine Prince]

I don't decide the future of millions, so why am I sick? My point of view is not narrowminded at all. I used to think like you, and now I'm beyond that and therefore beyond this world's petty morality that everything has to preserved at the cost of millions of lives that could be saved.

[Don Corleone]

This is what I'm talking about man. You haven't evolved, you shut a basic part of your psyche off. This "well, as long it serves me it's good, if it doesn't it's not" attitude is only the first warning sign.

Call me a peon, I'm happy to be one of Neitzche's 'underclass'. I'm proud that I still do have a sense of right and wrong and that I know I have no right to decide anyone's life/death fate. You casually suggest slaughtering millions of people who's only crime is getting ill, and then wonder why we all look at you bug eyed. You're sick. You're not left, you're not right, you're all about BP (or whatever your real name is) and it's only going to get worse.

Think about it. Even during the Middle Ages, they didn't go around murdering people with the plague, and those rulers certainly had your man Neitchze's 'will to power'. I'm glad you think you have all the answers and that murdering enough people will fix all the problems in the world, but if you really believe that, and you're not just saying that cause it sounds cool, you need serious help. Don't take my word for it. Ask anybody else who comes around here. Hell, on this matter, I'd take Jag's word on it. None of us have the right to arbitrarily go around slaughtering innocents because they don't fit into our plan.

[Byzantine Prince]

That's hillarious coming from a guy who calls himself the Godfather.

I would never hurt inocent people, I want to protect those innocents from the sick shit that are seeking to defile our society. That means the slaughter of those that brake certain laws like rape or murder is to be executed and we are not to take light of it. I think you as a consevative should agree with this.

[Don Corleone]

"I would never hurt innocent people".

Yet, in the past few days, because you consider yourself a 'superman', you've advocated:

-Shooting anyone in your socialist system that doesn't work hard enough
-Killing anybody who gets AIDS
-Killing anyone who starts dissent in your perfect society.

I asked you if you were just talking crap and you answered that no, you really believe this. I believe you. I don't think you're just puffing your chest out.

[JAG]

Hell, on this matter, I'd take Jag's word on it. None of us have the right to arbitrarily go around slaughtering innocents because they don't fit into our plan.

You already know I totally agree with you on this point. But I do think you are being a tad harsh on BP. Even if he firmly believes what he is stating is right, it doesn't mean he has a mental illness. For all the heated debates I have had with people who have extreme opposing views to mine, I don't think I stated they had illness'. I mean Capo's position on crime is the same as BP's I guess he has a mental problem too?

The problem with both of them, in my opinion, is that they have not witnessed someone dieing, or someone being killed because it is 'for the greater good'. If you asked them to witness it, to participate in it, they would change their minds. We only learn through experience and only know our true beliefs when we actively choose them and do the thing we propose. Until then, they are simply as concrete and important in our lives as a fluttering butterfly.