Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rob Instigator
I think the hunders of millions of poor Roman Catholics (the Roman Catholic church grows and grows in poor africa and south american and asia, where people can be more easily controlled, indoctrinated, and "converted by missionaries") all listen to what the Pope says very carefully.
|
that is why what he says is dangerous in its context, specifically in Africa where there was a Mass with one million attendants..
BUT, none-the-less, what he says is true. Though he is wrong to say that condoms should not be used, and he is also wrong to say that condoms exasperate the problem [though truthfully there might also be a grain of truth in this as well, for if people believe condoms are fail safe they might continue to engage in sexual activities which might endanger their safety in a world of 1-15% HIV infections rates its easy in the western world with a 0.001% infection rate to talk about the glory of condoms, when if we were as infected as other places, we might be promoting folks zip up as well, for their lives, I mean come on, I can be abstinent for fun, for faith, let alone for my life if it depended on it
]
the pope is absolutely correct, no sex is the safest bet, because no sex = no transmission..
essentially the solution lies in the middle between preferable abstinence and condom use with sex and sex education. They are not diametrically opposed, they are complimentary.
THE POPE IS WRONG FOR SAY ABSOLUTELY NO CONDOMS
THE SCIENTISTS ARE WRONG FOR DISCREDITING THE OBVIOUS EFFECTIVENESS OF ABSTINENCE AT PREVENTING STDS.
there I said what I said, now lets get to bustin heads..