Total Posts:77|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Sex, Condoms, and The Holy Order

Freeman
Posts: 1,239
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2010 10:37:12 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Well, they've finally caved to the forces of modernity.

"VATICAN CITY — Pope Benedict XVI clearly acknowledged on Tuesday that the need to prevent diseases like AIDS could outweigh the church's long opposition to the use of condoms.

It was a significant and stunning personal pronouncement from the conservative pope after more than two decades of heated debate inside the Roman Catholic Church and condemnation by health workers who said the church's ban on prophylactics was morally indefensible during the AIDS crisis."

Seriously, I don't mean to be facetious, but can anyone possibly think of anything more ridiculous than this. How can such a basic accommodation to sanity, reason and human decency get passed off as significant moral progress? Two decades of heated debate?! What in Gods name were these people talking about in that time period? Their policies were causing people to die prematurely, suffer and get terminal diseases and they had to rack their brains for two decades to make even modest progress. *sigh* I don't mean to rant, but this is not encouraging.

They should just invite me to Rome. I could give them 1000 years of moral progress in the course of 1 hour. They wouldn't even have to pay me.

http://www.nytimes.com...
Chancellor of Propaganda and Foreign Relations in the Franklin administration.

"I intend to live forever. So far, so good." -- Steven Wright
SuperRobotWars
Posts: 3,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/23/2010 10:39:39 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Did the same thing with the possibility of aliens existence and any conflicts with the bible as well as heliocentric theory, the earth being round, and woman's rights . . .
Minister Of Trolling
: At 12/6/2011 2:21:41 PM, badger wrote:
: ugly people should beat beautiful people ugly. simple! you'd be killing two birds with the one stone... women like violent men and you're making yourself more attractive, relatively. i met a blonde dude who was prettier than me not so long ago. he's not so pretty now! ha!
:
: ...and well, he wasn't really prettier than me. he just had nice hair.
InquireTruth
Posts: 723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 1:06:08 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
"Their policies were causing people to die prematurely, suffer and get terminal diseases and they had to rack their brains for two decades to make even modest progress. "

The Catholic policy has always been abstinence until marriage - what part of this policy is causing people to die prematurely? Unfettered sex and string-less sensuality is the progress of a secularization nation - this helps the AID pandemic, right?
Atheism
Posts: 2,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 1:38:21 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/24/2010 1:06:08 AM, InquireTruth wrote:
"Their policies were causing people to die prematurely, suffer and get terminal diseases and they had to rack their brains for two decades to make even modest progress. "

The Catholic policy has always been abstinence until marriage - what part of this policy is causing people to die prematurely? Unfettered sex and string-less sensuality is the progress of a secularization nation - this helps the AID pandemic, right?
The Catholic Churches established throughout Africa were withholding condoms from the Africans who desperately needed it.

Part of a secular nation is allowing people to have the choice of what they want to do, and condoms were part of that list.
I miss the old members.
lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 10:48:59 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/24/2010 1:38:21 AM, Atheism wrote:
At 11/24/2010 1:06:08 AM, InquireTruth wrote:
"Their policies were causing people to die prematurely, suffer and get terminal diseases and they had to rack their brains for two decades to make even modest progress. "

The Catholic policy has always been abstinence until marriage - what part of this policy is causing people to die prematurely? Unfettered sex and string-less sensuality is the progress of a secularization nation - this helps the AID pandemic, right?
The Catholic Churches established throughout Africa were withholding condoms from the Africans who desperately needed it.

Part of a secular nation is allowing people to have the choice of what they want to do, and condoms were part of that list.

Exactly, plus they have no right to dictate how anyone lives their life, only say what the church itself is against.
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave
InquireTruth
Posts: 723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 10:49:21 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/24/2010 1:38:21 AM, Atheism wrote:
At 11/24/2010 1:06:08 AM, InquireTruth wrote:
"Their policies were causing people to die prematurely, suffer and get terminal diseases and they had to rack their brains for two decades to make even modest progress. "

The Catholic policy has always been abstinence until marriage - what part of this policy is causing people to die prematurely? Unfettered sex and string-less sensuality is the progress of a secularization nation - this helps the AID pandemic, right?
The Catholic Churches established throughout Africa were withholding condoms from the Africans who desperately needed it.

Part of a secular nation is allowing people to have the choice of what they want to do, and condoms were part of that list.

The catholic church was stockpiling condoms and disallowing access to them? I don't think so. Their policy has always been sex is for marriage. If THAT policy was followed, AIDS would not be as it is today.
lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 10:51:59 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/24/2010 10:49:21 AM, InquireTruth wrote:
At 11/24/2010 1:38:21 AM, Atheism wrote:
At 11/24/2010 1:06:08 AM, InquireTruth wrote:
"Their policies were causing people to die prematurely, suffer and get terminal diseases and they had to rack their brains for two decades to make even modest progress. "

The Catholic policy has always been abstinence until marriage - what part of this policy is causing people to die prematurely? Unfettered sex and string-less sensuality is the progress of a secularization nation - this helps the AID pandemic, right?
The Catholic Churches established throughout Africa were withholding condoms from the Africans who desperately needed it.

Part of a secular nation is allowing people to have the choice of what they want to do, and condoms were part of that list.

The catholic church was stockpiling condoms and disallowing access to them? I don't think so. Their policy has always been sex is for marriage. If THAT policy was followed, AIDS would not be as it is today.

Why should THEIR policy be the ONLY one thats followed?
What gives THEM the right to DICTATE how others live their lives?
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave
InquireTruth
Posts: 723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 10:58:21 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/24/2010 10:51:59 AM, lovelife wrote:
At 11/24/2010 10:49:21 AM, InquireTruth wrote:
At 11/24/2010 1:38:21 AM, Atheism wrote:
At 11/24/2010 1:06:08 AM, InquireTruth wrote:
"Their policies were causing people to die prematurely, suffer and get terminal diseases and they had to rack their brains for two decades to make even modest progress. "

The Catholic policy has always been abstinence until marriage - what part of this policy is causing people to die prematurely? Unfettered sex and string-less sensuality is the progress of a secularization nation - this helps the AID pandemic, right?
The Catholic Churches established throughout Africa were withholding condoms from the Africans who desperately needed it.

Part of a secular nation is allowing people to have the choice of what they want to do, and condoms were part of that list.

The catholic church was stockpiling condoms and disallowing access to them? I don't think so. Their policy has always been sex is for marriage. If THAT policy was followed, AIDS would not be as it is today.

Why should THEIR policy be the ONLY one thats followed?
What gives THEM the right to DICTATE how others live their lives?

It's not haha, which is why the blaming of the catholic church is so ironic. Unfettered sex is fine for those who want to participate, but it should not be thereafter blamed on the Catholic church when one contracts a left threating disease.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 10:59:57 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/24/2010 10:51:59 AM, lovelife wrote:
At 11/24/2010 10:49:21 AM, InquireTruth wrote:
At 11/24/2010 1:38:21 AM, Atheism wrote:
At 11/24/2010 1:06:08 AM, InquireTruth wrote:
"Their policies were causing people to die prematurely, suffer and get terminal diseases and they had to rack their brains for two decades to make even modest progress. "

The Catholic policy has always been abstinence until marriage - what part of this policy is causing people to die prematurely? Unfettered sex and string-less sensuality is the progress of a secularization nation - this helps the AID pandemic, right?
The Catholic Churches established throughout Africa were withholding condoms from the Africans who desperately needed it.

Part of a secular nation is allowing people to have the choice of what they want to do, and condoms were part of that list.

The catholic church was stockpiling condoms and disallowing access to them? I don't think so. Their policy has always been sex is for marriage. If THAT policy was followed, AIDS would not be as it is today.

Why should THEIR policy be the ONLY one thats followed?
What gives THEM the right to DICTATE how others live their lives?
Having a moral system is different to dictating what others should do.
lovelife
Posts: 14,629
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 11:00:10 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/24/2010 10:58:21 AM, InquireTruth wrote:
At 11/24/2010 10:51:59 AM, lovelife wrote:
At 11/24/2010 10:49:21 AM, InquireTruth wrote:
At 11/24/2010 1:38:21 AM, Atheism wrote:
At 11/24/2010 1:06:08 AM, InquireTruth wrote:
"Their policies were causing people to die prematurely, suffer and get terminal diseases and they had to rack their brains for two decades to make even modest progress. "

The Catholic policy has always been abstinence until marriage - what part of this policy is causing people to die prematurely? Unfettered sex and string-less sensuality is the progress of a secularization nation - this helps the AID pandemic, right?
The Catholic Churches established throughout Africa were withholding condoms from the Africans who desperately needed it.

Part of a secular nation is allowing people to have the choice of what they want to do, and condoms were part of that list.

The catholic church was stockpiling condoms and disallowing access to them? I don't think so. Their policy has always been sex is for marriage. If THAT policy was followed, AIDS would not be as it is today.

Why should THEIR policy be the ONLY one thats followed?
What gives THEM the right to DICTATE how others live their lives?

It's not haha, which is why the blaming of the catholic church is so ironic. Unfettered sex is fine for those who want to participate, but it should not be thereafter blamed on the Catholic church when one contracts a left threating disease.

They weren't allowing something SIMPLE that would save lives because of their holier than thou only one way is right stuck up attitude.
Without Royal there is a hole inside of me, I have no choice but to leave
Freeman
Posts: 1,239
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 11:01:14 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/24/2010 1:06:08 AM, InquireTruth wrote:
"Their policies were causing people to die prematurely, suffer and get terminal diseases and they had to rack their brains for two decades to make even modest progress. "

The Catholic policy has always been abstinence until marriage - what part of this policy is causing people to die prematurely?

Yes, we all know that people will remain abstinent until they get married if they are told to do this.

If you tell people that condom use is sinful, they will be less likely to use condoms and practice safe sex when they do have sex. On top of this, the Catholic church condemns people in the impoverished third world to huge bloated families that they can't support with their teachings on contraception and condoms. This guarantees that many of them will never get out of poverty and suffer all the ailments aligned with this condition. And it also guarantees that the Catholic church will have an endless supply of ignorant and poor people to fill their pew seats. Friedrich Nietzsche put it best:

"With this I come to a conclusion and pronounce my judgment. I condemn Christianity; I bring against the Christian church the most terrible of all the accusations that an accuser has ever had in his mouth. It is, to me, the greatest of all imaginable corruptions; it seeks to work the ultimate corruption, the worst possible corruption. The Christian church has left nothing untouched by its depravity; it has turned every value into worthlessness, and every truth into a lie, and every integrity into baseness of soul. Let any one dare to speak to me of its "humanitarian" blessings! Its deepest necessities range it against any effort to abolish distress; it lives by distress; it creates distress to make itself immortal. . . . For example, the worm of sin: it was the church that first enriched mankind with this misery!--The "equality of souls before God"--this fraud, this pretext for the rancunes of all the base-minded--this explosive concept, ending in revolution, the modern idea, and the notion of overthrowing the whole social order--this is Christian dynamite. . . . The "humanitarian" blessings of Christianity forsooth! To breed out of humanitas a self-contradiction, an art of self-pollution, a will to lie at any price, an aversion and contempt for all good and honest instincts! All this, to me, is the "humanitarianism" of Christianity!--Parasitism as the only practice of the church; with its anaemic and "holy" ideals, sucking all the blood, all the love, all the hope out of life; the beyond as the will to deny all reality; the cross as the distinguishing mark of the most subterranean conspiracy ever heard of,--against health, beauty, well-being, intellect, kindness of soul--against life itself..."

Unfettered sex and string-less sensuality is the progress of a secularization nation - this helps the AID pandemic, right?

Highly secular nations like Sweden, Denmark, The Netherlands etc. have lower rates of STDS than the United States. Religious views on sex have also been correlated with higher teen pregnancy and abortion. *High Five* Christians views on sex are producing the exact opposite of what they want.

Journal of Religion and Society
Cross-National Correlations of Quantifiable Societal Health with Popular Religiosity and Secularism in the Prosperous Democracies http://moses.creighton.edu...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com...
Chancellor of Propaganda and Foreign Relations in the Franklin administration.

"I intend to live forever. So far, so good." -- Steven Wright
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,926
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 11:53:45 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Interesting. A moral nihilist "condemning" Christanity. Boy, do I love me some Nietzsche.
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
annhasle
Posts: 6,657
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 11:56:55 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/24/2010 11:53:45 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
Interesting. A moral nihilist "condemning" Christanity. Boy, do I love me some Nietzsche.

Freeman is a moral nihilist?
I'm not back. This idiot just upset me which made me stop lurking.
InquireTruth
Posts: 723
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 12:00:54 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
On top of this, the Catholic church condemns people in the impoverished third world to huge bloated families that they can't support with their teachings on contraception and condoms. This guarantees that many of them will never get out of poverty and suffer all the ailments aligned with this condition.

That is a legitimate argument. But blaming them for the spread of AIDS is intellectually dishonest. As those who follow only 1 part of the policy and not the other are to blame, not the teaching itself. As the policy, if ACTUALLY followed, would work 100% better than condoms at preventing the spread of HIV (and of course other sexually transmitted conditions that are not prevented by use of contraception).

Highly secular nations like Sweden, Denmark, The Netherlands etc. have lower rates of STDS than the United States. Religious views on sex have also been correlated with higher teen pregnancy and abortion. *High Five* Christians views on sex are producing the exact opposite of what they want.

Appealing to historically Christian nations (and still largely Christian in name) is not particularly convincing. What we DO know is that abstinence-pledged teens are 35% less likely to contract a STD than their non-pledged counterparts. We also know that while male homosexuals tend to enjoy the most unfettered sexual lifestyle, they also enjoy the shortest life-expectancy.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 12:03:56 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
And yet....circumcision is said to reduce the spread of AIDS, and i never ever hear a call from the left to make circumcision more available in Africa, or elsewhere for that matter. Why is that? In fact few ever even hear about the reduction in AIDS cases that may be the result of widespread circumcision, why? http://www.nytimes.com...
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 12:09:26 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/24/2010 11:00:10 AM, lovelife wrote:
At 11/24/2010 10:58:21 AM, InquireTruth wrote:
At 11/24/2010 10:51:59 AM, lovelife wrote:
At 11/24/2010 10:49:21 AM, InquireTruth wrote:
At 11/24/2010 1:38:21 AM, Atheism wrote:
At 11/24/2010 1:06:08 AM, InquireTruth wrote:
"Their policies were causing people to die prematurely, suffer and get terminal diseases and they had to rack their brains for two decades to make even modest progress. "

The Catholic policy has always been abstinence until marriage - what part of this policy is causing people to die prematurely? Unfettered sex and string-less sensuality is the progress of a secularization nation - this helps the AID pandemic, right?
The Catholic Churches established throughout Africa were withholding condoms from the Africans who desperately needed it.

Part of a secular nation is allowing people to have the choice of what they want to do, and condoms were part of that list.

The catholic church was stockpiling condoms and disallowing access to them? I don't think so. Their policy has always been sex is for marriage. If THAT policy was followed, AIDS would not be as it is today.

Why should THEIR policy be the ONLY one thats followed?
What gives THEM the right to DICTATE how others live their lives?

It's not haha, which is why the blaming of the catholic church is so ironic. Unfettered sex is fine for those who want to participate, but it should not be thereafter blamed on the Catholic church when one contracts a left threating disease.

They weren't allowing something SIMPLE that would save lives because of their holier than thou only one way is right stuck up attitude.
What do you mean not allowing? They don't govern africa.

They don't recommend, because they recommend abstinence. Stupid? Yes. But not fatal, AIDS only results from following part of their advice. And frankly anyone stupid enough to go halfway deserves AIDS. Either ignore the church or follow the whole damn thing, I of course heartily recommend the first.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 12:16:42 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/24/2010 12:03:56 PM, innomen wrote:
And yet....circumcision is said to reduce the spread of AIDS, and i never ever hear a call from the left to make circumcision more available in Africa, or elsewhere for that matter. Why is that? In fact few ever even hear about the reduction in AIDS cases that may be the result of widespread circumcision, why? http://www.nytimes.com...

Because circumcision is not fully accepted as medically beneficial...?
President of DDO
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 12:19:24 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/24/2010 12:16:42 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 11/24/2010 12:03:56 PM, innomen wrote:
And yet....circumcision is said to reduce the spread of AIDS, and i never ever hear a call from the left to make circumcision more available in Africa, or elsewhere for that matter. Why is that? In fact few ever even hear about the reduction in AIDS cases that may be the result of widespread circumcision, why? http://www.nytimes.com...

Because circumcision is not fully accepted as medically beneficial...?

Countless (well not countless), but very reliable studies have shown that circumcision is a definite reduction in AIDS as a preventative, so speculate why this is not more publicized? Why would most media sources not make this front page news, or at least not buried in the back of the paper as a one time deal news?
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 12:34:31 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/24/2010 12:29:57 PM, innomen wrote:
You don't find this a tad hypocritical?

http://www.aolnews.com...

I hear crickets.

What's your point? That you expect people to advocate circumcision in Africa because they advocate condoms?
President of DDO
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 12:39:11 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/24/2010 12:34:31 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 11/24/2010 12:29:57 PM, innomen wrote:
You don't find this a tad hypocritical?

http://www.aolnews.com...

I hear crickets.

What's your point? That you expect people to advocate circumcision in Africa because they advocate condoms?

I do expect them to advocate circumcision as a preventative, just as condoms are a preventative, instead of banning it. It's blatantly hypocritical. The same people that are looking to ban it are also condemning the church.
Freeman
Posts: 1,239
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 12:59:36 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/24/2010 12:00:54 PM, InquireTruth wrote:
On top of this, the Catholic church condemns people in the impoverished third world to huge bloated families that they can't support with their teachings on contraception and condoms. This guarantees that many of them will never get out of poverty and suffer all the ailments aligned with this condition.

That is a legitimate argument.

Thank you.

But blaming them for the spread of AIDS is intellectually dishonest.

No, it isn't. They can't stop human nature. People will have sex regardless of their teachings. They make people more likely to have unsafe sex that helps spread AIDS.


Highly secular nations like Sweden, Denmark, The Netherlands etc. have lower rates of STDS than the United States. Religious views on sex have also been correlated with higher teen pregnancy and abortion. *High Five* Christians views on sex are producing the exact opposite of what they want.

Appealing to historically Christian nations (and still largely Christian in name) is not particularly convincing.

Whatever they once were, they're that no longer. And that's the point.

What we DO know is that abstinence-pledged teens are 35% less likely to contract a STD than their non-pledged counterparts.

Where is your evidence for this claim? All of the studies that I know of show the exact opposite. http://www.medicinenet.com...

"Teenagers Who Take Virginity Pledges No Less Sexually Active, More Likely to Forgo Birth Control, Condoms"

"Dec. 29, 2008 -- Teenagers who take virginity pledges are no less sexually active than other teens, according to a new study.

Researchers say the findings suggest that virginity pledges may not significantly affect teenagers' sexual behavior. Instead, they may decrease the likelihood of teenagers taking precautions, such as using a condom or using birth control, when they do have sex.

Virginity Pledge May Lead to Risky Sex

Researchers say the federal government spends about $200 million annually on abstinence promotion programs, which include virginity pledges. Two previous studies have suggested that virginity pledges can delay sex, but researchers say those studies did not account for pre-existing differences between pledgers and non-pledgers.

In this study, researchers compared the sexual behavior of 289 teenagers who reported taking a virginity pledge in a 1996 national survey to 645 non-pledgers who were matched on more than 100 factors, such as religious beliefs and attitudes toward sex and birth control.

The results showed that five years after taking the virginity pledge:

82% of pledgers denied ever having taken the pledge.
Pledgers and matched non-pledgers did not differ in rates of premarital sex, sexually transmitted disease, and oral and anal sex behaviors.
Pledgers had 0.1 fewer sexual partners in the past year but did not differ from non-pledgers in the number of lifetime sexual partners and the age of first sex.
The biggest difference between the two groups came in the area of condom and birth control use. The study showed that fewer pledgers used birth control or condoms in the past year or any form of birth control the last time they had sex.

Researcher Janet Elise Rosenbaum, PHD, of Harvard University, says the findings suggest that health care providers should provide birth control information to all teenagers, especially virginity pledgers."

I think you're pulling your material straight from thin air.

We also know that while male homosexuals tend to enjoy the most unfettered sexual lifestyle, they also enjoy the shortest life-expectancy.

Ugh.. Ok. I'm not sure if that's true (and since you're claiming it without evidence, I'm inclined to doubt). However, I'm not arguing for unfettered sex.
Chancellor of Propaganda and Foreign Relations in the Franklin administration.

"I intend to live forever. So far, so good." -- Steven Wright
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 1:02:03 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/24/2010 12:39:11 PM, innomen wrote:
At 11/24/2010 12:34:31 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 11/24/2010 12:29:57 PM, innomen wrote:
You don't find this a tad hypocritical?

http://www.aolnews.com...

I hear crickets.

What's your point? That you expect people to advocate circumcision in Africa because they advocate condoms?

I do expect them to advocate circumcision as a preventative, just as condoms are a preventative, instead of banning it. It's blatantly hypocritical. The same people that are looking to ban it are also condemning the church.

Circumcision is a painful procedure with iffy benefits still highly debated among doctors -- not to mention it's a surgical procedure that affects one's body (and could be dangerous) that most infants do not get to choose for themselves. I don't think that's exactly the same as wearing a condom which serves just to protect against unwanted pregnancy and the spread of harmful STDs. Nevertheless I don't think anyone here agrees with the people in California regardless, though in my eyes it's far more acceptable and practical to advocate against circumcision as opposed to advocating against condoms.
President of DDO
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 1:04:13 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/24/2010 12:59:36 PM, Freeman wrote:
"Teenagers Who Take Virginity Pledges No Less Sexually Active, More Likely to Forgo Birth Control, Condoms"

I'm glad you posted this. I was thinking about this, but felt too lazy and apathetic to look up the stats lol. I was going to say something (especially after reading the BS about gay men and their shorter life expectancies) but then had a premonition of another off topic battle with Mirza (and/or IT) in defense of my gay brethren so I just ignored it :P
President of DDO
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 1:19:17 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/24/2010 1:02:03 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 11/24/2010 12:39:11 PM, innomen wrote:
At 11/24/2010 12:34:31 PM, theLwerd wrote:
At 11/24/2010 12:29:57 PM, innomen wrote:
You don't find this a tad hypocritical?

http://www.aolnews.com...

I hear crickets.

What's your point? That you expect people to advocate circumcision in Africa because they advocate condoms?

I do expect them to advocate circumcision as a preventative, just as condoms are a preventative, instead of banning it. It's blatantly hypocritical. The same people that are looking to ban it are also condemning the church.

Circumcision is a painful procedure with iffy benefits still highly debated among doctors -- not to mention it's a surgical procedure that affects one's body (and could be dangerous) that most infants do not get to choose for themselves. I don't think that's exactly the same as wearing a condom which serves just to protect against unwanted pregnancy and the spread of harmful STDs. Nevertheless I don't think anyone here agrees with the people in California regardless, though in my eyes it's far more acceptable and practical to advocate against circumcision as opposed to advocating against condoms.

That makes no sense. The pain of circumcision is negligible, i served at a briss and the baby cried, yeah, but it really was no big deal, and was performed in a living room! It's not dangerous, and it is not painful. I've never heard of any serious case resulting from a circumcision, and if this tiny little procedure can greatly reduce AIDS, then i fully advocate it. Think about it, the significant reduction of AIDS is less important that advocating a practice that is widely used throughout the world, and throughout the age because we are preserving what? We're talking about a little fold of useless skin, not a lobotomy (well for most men).
Ferg
Posts: 6
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 3:22:06 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Abstinence, when actually practiced as it is intended, is marginally more effective than condoms for preventing certain diseases. Of course, condoms are much easier and more realistic in terms of public health, and sex isn't the only way to get HIV. The Vatican will always be playing catch-up with common sense and ethics. From its support of Fascism, its treatment of the Jews, etc. it will always be a little behind. We are dealing with an organization that still debates whether MARRIED COUPLES can use condoms when one of the partners has HIV and the other does not.

There is a small body of evidence that circumcision might have a barely-measurable effect on HIV transmission as well. So far the evidence has not been enough for any pediatric association to recommend the practice, and no on is seriously arguing that it is anywhere near as effective as condoms for HIV prevention.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 3:37:19 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/24/2010 3:22:06 PM, Ferg wrote:
Abstinence, when actually practiced as it is intended, is marginally more effective than condoms for preventing certain diseases. Of course, condoms are much easier and more realistic in terms of public health, and sex isn't the only way to get HIV. The Vatican will always be playing catch-up with common sense and ethics. From its support of Fascism, its treatment of the Jews, etc. it will always be a little behind. We are dealing with an organization that still debates whether MARRIED COUPLES can use condoms when one of the partners has HIV and the other does not.

There is a small body of evidence that circumcision might have a barely-measurable effect on HIV transmission as well. So far the evidence has not been enough for any pediatric association to recommend the practice, and no on is seriously arguing that it is anywhere near as effective as condoms for HIV prevention.

You serious? Look a little bit closer - http://www.northeastern.edu...
http://globalhealth.kff.org...
http://www.scientificamerican.com...

There are more, but i'm tired.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/24/2010 3:51:24 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Circumcision is not comparable to providing someone with a condom, though the church shouldn't have to do that. Circumcision is closer to sewing a condom on someone permanently, although less awkward of course, and such a procedure would not function for its intended purpose.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.