Vatican is telling people not to use condoms
-
Indeed, humans are not saints. We err. Until the day that we can safely say that there's no causal sex, condoms have to stay to prevent more deaths.Originally posted by stupidissmart:Believing abstinence without the use of condom can solve all STD, aids problem is the same as believing abstinence (of peforming crime) can solve all the world crime problem without the use of police. They r assuming men r ideal. -
You'll then get prostitutes all over HDB areas. That's what Geylang is for, a concentric area for such activities so that other parts of Singapore remains clean.Originally posted by M©+square:Ya. Ban Prostitution in Geylang and we'll see what happens.
-
Humans are sinners, but nevertheless are called to be saints.Originally posted by kaister:Indeed, humans are not saints. We err. Until the day that we can safely say that there's no causal sex, condoms have to stay to prevent more deaths. -
hmm...so whats the conclusion?
-
If you can't abstain from sex, please use a condom!Originally posted by alexkusu:hmm...so whats the conclusion?
-
No, the Catholic Church is not assuming that men are ideal, otherwise there would be no need for her to preach repentence and faith in the salvation of God in Jesus Christ.Originally posted by stupidissmart:Believing abstinence without the use of condom can solve all STD, aids problem is the same as believing abstinence (of peforming crime) can solve all the world crime problem without the use of police. They r assuming men r ideal.
However, echoing the words of our Lord in Scripture to 'be perfect as your Father in Heaven is perfect', she is calling on men to live up to the challenge given to us by the Father to imitate Christ.
That men fail to live up to the ideal does not mean that the ideal is wrong, just as a student who fail to get 100% for a physics test would not prove that the laws of physics are invalid.
As Chesterton said so many years ago, it is not that the Christian ideal has been tried and found wanting, but that it has been found to be too difficult and not tried.
regards,
obiterdicta -
No, the Catholic Church is not assuming that men are ideal, otherwise there would be no need for her to preach repentence and faith in the salvation of God in Jesus Christ.
Again realistically speaking people fail to rise with the "challenge". People r having casual sex more than ever and without the use of condom the situation of STD worsens.
However, echoing the words of our Lord in Scripture to 'be perfect as your Father in Heaven is perfect', she is calling on men to live up to the challenge given to us by the Father to imitate Christ.
That men fail to live up to the ideal does not mean that the ideal is wrong, just as a student who fail to get 100% for a physics test would not prove that the laws of physics are invalid.
As Chesterton said so many years ago, it is not that the Christian ideal has been tried and found wanting, but that it has been found to be too difficult and not tried.
Even if u fail the "test" of abstinence of sex, it deosn't means u should throw away all safe guards and preventive measures -
i agree with SIS that to throw out all safeguards in hope that everyone will wake up from their idea is far lesser than ideal.
The Catholic Church knew that most people are not ideal but yet they are deploying an "ideal strategy" that is doomed to fail in reality.
ObiterDicta gave an example of not expect a student to get 100% in a physics test. Let me try to give another example. Say you take away re-tests in hope that students will work harder for the actual test. Indeed, some will. However, there will always be quite a handful who will not heed the advice and fail the first test anyway. So are you just going to fail them or give them another chance?
By the same analogy, condoms provide a safeguard for those who fail to abstain, for whatever reasons. -
I guess the main issue here is the wrong interpretation on whether condoms will encourage people to have sex. People will have sex whether condoms exists or not and its safe to say that the people who could abstain greatly outnumbers those who can't and won't. -
It is correct for the Vatican to make a statement of faith for its church members and publish religious instructions by which its adherents should obey. That is its right and duty as a religious institution.
It is for the secular government to decide what is best for all its citizens, regardless of religion affiliation.
I don't blame the Vatican for saying what they said. But I do blame a government if it follows what the Vatican said. -
To make a statement without considerations of the consequences can only be seen as an irresponsible behaviour. It's like saying that we've made our stand, and we don't care if you die cos' if you do, you clearly deserved it.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:It is correct for the Vatican to make a statement of faith for its church members and publish religious instructions by which its adherents should obey. That is its right and duty as a religious institution.
It is for the secular government to decide what is best for all its citizens, regardless of religion affiliation.
I don't blame the Vatican for saying what they said. But I do blame a government if it follows what the Vatican said.
A government has nothing to do with whether the people uses condoms or not. More importantly, it is the people who will ultimately make the decision of whether to use condoms or abstain from sex entirely.
Unfortunately history had told us time and again, assuming the best of men and only brings out the worst in them. -
The Vatican's statements are meant for its believers. If its members are all saints and either abstain or stick to only 1 partner, that is not a problem.Originally posted by kaister:To make a statement without considerations of the consequences can only be seen as an irresponsible behaviour. It's like saying that we've made our stand, and we don't care if you die cos' if you do, you clearly deserved it.
A government has nothing to do with whether the people uses condoms or not. More importantly, it is the people who will ultimately make the decision of whether to use condoms or abstain from sex entirely.
Unfortunately history had told us time and again, assuming the best of men and only brings out the worst in them.
The government's policy must be to educate and make available access to condoms to all its citizens. Whether they wish to use it or not depends on an individual's religious and moral convictions. -
It is correct for the Vatican to make a statement of faith for its church members and publish religious instructions by which its adherents should obey. That is its right and duty as a religious institution.
It seems as right as catholic staging a crusade since it is a statement of faith for its member, instructions which members should obey and it is their right and duty as a religious institute.
I think u need to be clear tat no one is asking people to abort the idea of abstinence. It is the best way to solve STD, aids problem. Wat we r not happy about is why drag in condom, which is a partner tat helps the STD/AIDs problem and condemn its use. Why is using condom an act tat is against god ? We r not talking about casual sex, we r talking about using condom for casual sex . -
Just my own personal opinion (treat this as a crazy ranting)
1) The Vatican's statement of faith in regards to condoms is only influencial to the members of the Roman Catholic Church, not to anyone else, if I am not wrong, this is just one of many instructions in regards to sex (which also includes abstinence, faithfulness to spouse ....etc)
2) Its true that the condoms do offer a certain level of protection, but its not 100% fool proof method. Though I am in a sense agreeable that 90% is better than 0% (that is if 10% failure rate can also interpret as 90% success rate?)
3) Ultimately its still up to individual responsibility when it comes to commutable deseases (HIV, STD, SARS ....etc), futhermore, sex is not the only way where HIV can be transmitted, tainted blood is another (one which that even abstinence cannot prevent).
ok... I am done ranting
have a nice weekend
*instruction sounds better than rulings
-
Every religion has its own teachings and rules. You want to know the basis of its doctrine? Go and study in its theological schools.Originally posted by stupidissmart:It seems as right as catholic staging a crusade since it is a statement of faith for its member, instructions which members should obey and it is their right and duty as a religious institute.
I think u need to be clear tat no one is asking people to abort the idea of abstinence. It is the best way to solve STD, aids problem. Wat we r not happy about is why drag in condom, which is a partner tat helps the STD/AIDs problem and condemn its use. Why is using condom an act tat is against god ? We r not talking about casual sex, we r talking about using condom for casual sex .
There is no need to use condom for casual sex if you are not having casual sex, which is condemned by the church. If you haven't got a dick, why worry about what the Vatican is saying about condoms? It has nothing to do with you.
If you are a Catholic, you implicitly agreed to follow the teachings of the Vatican. If you are not, what the heck do you care? -
This isn't about the Church's doctrine. It's about a public statement and behaviour that's unacceptable and dangerous.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Every religion has its own teachings and rules. You want to know the basis of its doctrine? Go and study in its theological schools.
There is no need to use condom for casual sex if you are not having casual sex, which is condemned by the church. If you haven't got a dick, why worry about what the Vatican is saying about condoms? It has nothing to do with you.
If you are a Catholic, you implicitly agreed to follow the teachings of the Vatican. If you are not, what the heck do you care?
You might not be having causal sex but your partner might be. So it's still important to care.
Condom use has to do with whether you have a dick or not. More so when you're a woman cos' you don't want to be at men's mercy when it comes to sex. Just because the contraception is used on men doesn't mean women has no choice in the decision making.
Unfortunately, progagada from the Church does not reach only its believers. They come in the form of media, missionaries, word-of-mouth and others.
Do you think people with little to no education can tell the difference? Do you think when Vatican preaches to the people, they selectively tune out its messages to non-believers? They also preach to people who know little to nothing about Catholism and attempt to convert them and adopt their doctrines.
When you give the wrong messages, that's where people start dying. -
There is no need to use condom for casual sex if you are not having casual sex, which is condemned by the church. If you haven't got a dick, why worry about what the Vatican is saying about condoms? It has nothing to do with you.
Why does "not having a dick" have anything to do with wat vatican have to say ? R u saying all aids people r males and non r females ?If you are a Catholic, you implicitly agreed to follow the teachings of the Vatican. If you are not, what the heck do you care?
I can repharse your statement into below
The topic is on Vatican. R u from Vatican ? If u r not, so wat the heck do u care ? -
Haha... nice reuse of logic!Originally posted by stupidissmart:I can repharse your statement into below
The topic is on Vatican. R u from Vatican ? If u r not, so wat the heck do u care ? -
I am not catholic, so I don't care about the religious rulings of the Vatican.Originally posted by stupidissmart:I can repharse your statement into below
The topic is on Vatican. R u from Vatican ? If u r not, so wat the heck do u care ?
But I am human, so when a stupid example of a human being starts ranting I have to shut him up
-
There is nothing dangerous about the church's teachings on condoms. It does not work because the only people likely to follow them religiously are the altar boys who can recite the sermons by heart anyway. But that does not make it dangerous nor unacceptable. It works for saints, but unfortunately many are not.Originally posted by kaister:This isn't about the Church's doctrine. It's about a public statement and behaviour that's unacceptable and dangerous.
You might not be having causal sex but your partner might be. So it's still important to care.
The secular authority can and should promote condom use for the sinners outside the church, but that is no excuse for trying to shut the church up. -
I suspect you've not read my initial post? What the church is doing is way beyond spreading their faith.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:There is nothing dangerous about the church's teachings on condoms. It does not work because the only people likely to follow them religiously are the altar boys who can recite the sermons by heart anyway. But that does not make it dangerous nor unacceptable. It works for saints, but unfortunately many are not.
The secular authority can and should promote condom use for the sinners outside the church, but that is no excuse for trying to shut the church up.
When they start interfering with the actions of secular governments/health organisations, that's why things start going wrong. Misleading the public is wrong no matter what angle you look at it.Originally posted by kaister:In Lwak, near Lake Victoria, the director of an Aids testing centre says he cannot distribute condoms because of church opposition. Gordon Wambi told the programme: "Some priests have even been saying that condoms are laced with HIV/Aids."
And again, how can you selectively make sure such messages don't get to the non-believers? You can't. As a result, people in poverty with little education will shun condoms or be very confused when there's 2 different organisations telling them different things.
Imagine you're a villager with no access to tv/media in a rural area and missionaries come along to tell you all the misinformation about condoms. It would be hard to imagine how a lowly educated villager will not heed to their advice even though he/she might be a non-believer.
That is why the church should always just encourage abstinence instead of discouraging condom use. Don't leave a trail of destruction all in the name of spread their faith or practices. -
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:I am not catholic, so I don't care about the religious rulings of the Vatican.
But I am human, so when a stupid example of a human being starts ranting I have to shut him up 
I'm personally quite surprised something like this came from a doctor's mouth. Where's the compassion and empathy?
Reminds me of a certain elitist by the name of Wee.... -
But I am human, so when a stupid example of a human being starts ranting I have to shut him up
Tat is wat happen when the vatican speaks isn't it Glad u understand why people r complaining about their stupidityThere is nothing dangerous about the church's teachings on condoms. It does not work because the only people likely to follow them religiously are the altar boys who can recite the sermons by heart anyway. But that does not make it dangerous nor unacceptable. It works for saints, but unfortunately many are not.
Wat r u trying to say ? R u saying tat church teaching is futile and no one except the "altar boys" listen to them anyway ?
Assuming normal people r saint, and teaching them things tat can only work in saints, but bring disasterous effect on normal men, is already dangerous and unacceptable.The secular authority can and should promote condom use for the sinners outside the church, but that is no excuse for trying to shut the church up.
When it make a stand against public interest, why can't the gov shut it up
U r really trying to shut the gov up here when the gov is doing it for public interest since abstinence with condom works better than just plain abstinence. Wat is your excuse for shutting the gov up ?
If some freakish religion say tat people should eat their own sh!t everyday, and go around telling people to do it, the health authority should condemn such practise and issue a public statement about it too right ? The church can speak but the gov cannot ? And your logic tat it is perfectly ok is simply because it is for believers even though it is really scientifically unhealthy. How strange
Let me guess the reply I expect from a person like u U simply going to ask me to eat sh!t right It is posts like these tat make catholic look bad Thanks for shaming catholic -
What is abstinence with condoms? Do you mean safe sex with condoms?Originally posted by stupidissmart:When it make a stand against public interest, why can't the gov shut it up U r really trying to shut the gov up here when the gov is doing it for public interest since abstinence with condom works better than just plain abstinence. Wat is your excuse for shutting the gov up ? -
What is abstinence with condoms? Do you mean safe sex with condoms?
everyone should practise abstinence if they wanna sto STD and AIDs. If u die die must have sex, then please wear protection because it is far worse than no protection.