ChatterBank0 min ago
Breathtaking ignorance through religion
30 Answers
A Catholic Bishop in Mozambique has claimed that some European condoms are deliberately infected with HIV.
He has claimed the same about some retro-viral drugs.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/701433 5.stm
In a country with 16.2% HIV infection, this beggers belief.
He also goes on to say that abstinance in the unmarried, and faithfulness for the married are the best way to fight AIDS/ HIV. Whilst these two facts are of themselves obviously true, they equally clearly ignores reality.
The reality is that the bishop is promoting this line on condoms because the Catholic church wants high birth rates, because it knows very well that it is the best way to shore up its own power. When it is clear (and for anyone that doubts this, stop the debate - you are wrong) that allowing people to limit their families is one of the very best ways of reducing poverty as well as stopping AIDS, this has to be considered an act of unconscionable evil.
He has claimed the same about some retro-viral drugs.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/701433 5.stm
In a country with 16.2% HIV infection, this beggers belief.
He also goes on to say that abstinance in the unmarried, and faithfulness for the married are the best way to fight AIDS/ HIV. Whilst these two facts are of themselves obviously true, they equally clearly ignores reality.
The reality is that the bishop is promoting this line on condoms because the Catholic church wants high birth rates, because it knows very well that it is the best way to shore up its own power. When it is clear (and for anyone that doubts this, stop the debate - you are wrong) that allowing people to limit their families is one of the very best ways of reducing poverty as well as stopping AIDS, this has to be considered an act of unconscionable evil.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by WaldoMcFroog. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
WaldoMcFrogg
Are a series of yes answers the only ones permissible?
I do recall watching a programme about health programmes in Africa, where one of the difficulties of the programmes re contraception and the non transmission of disease is that it is perceived to be promoted by white western people who have an agenda of controlling the birth of black people. Not because such a health method is enlightened and in the interests of the recipients but because the white people want a smaller population which is therefore easier to control.
Also I was always brought up to believe that predominately agricultural societies generally wanted largish families to offset the the mortality of children and to have a reasonable labour force that would be enough to keep the whole family going. This may not be accurate just one of those explanation one grows up with
Are a series of yes answers the only ones permissible?
I do recall watching a programme about health programmes in Africa, where one of the difficulties of the programmes re contraception and the non transmission of disease is that it is perceived to be promoted by white western people who have an agenda of controlling the birth of black people. Not because such a health method is enlightened and in the interests of the recipients but because the white people want a smaller population which is therefore easier to control.
Also I was always brought up to believe that predominately agricultural societies generally wanted largish families to offset the the mortality of children and to have a reasonable labour force that would be enough to keep the whole family going. This may not be accurate just one of those explanation one grows up with
It's hard to do sometimes but I do try very hard to see the other point of view.
If you truely believe in the sort of religion that the Bishop does. You can easily see that it's better for some people to die long drawn out deaths that have widespread promiscuity causing the damnation of millions.
From a predominantly non-religous western European viewpoint it really seems despicable though.
I know that it's fashionable to believe in religious tolerance and that religious and secular philosophies can co-exist happily but when the chips are down this sort of thing shows that they can't.
I do think you're wrong about one thing though I don't believe there's any ignorance here. I think he knows what he's saying is untrue and he is deliberately trying to instill a climate of fear - after all fear has been the stock in trade of many many churches over the years why not trot it out now!
If you truely believe in the sort of religion that the Bishop does. You can easily see that it's better for some people to die long drawn out deaths that have widespread promiscuity causing the damnation of millions.
From a predominantly non-religous western European viewpoint it really seems despicable though.
I know that it's fashionable to believe in religious tolerance and that religious and secular philosophies can co-exist happily but when the chips are down this sort of thing shows that they can't.
I do think you're wrong about one thing though I don't believe there's any ignorance here. I think he knows what he's saying is untrue and he is deliberately trying to instill a climate of fear - after all fear has been the stock in trade of many many churches over the years why not trot it out now!
Surely just another conspiracy theory to be treated the same as many others?
If you really believe that the people of Mozambique will believe this (of course there are always a few) then that doesn�t say much for your faith in humankind. The link you provided shows examples of their own exasperation.
Using the �West against Africans� is not too dissimilar to the claims of Islamic nations. As Jake has said above, he is playing on the fears of the people, and I doubt he is as ignorant as you are assuming.
If you really believe that the people of Mozambique will believe this (of course there are always a few) then that doesn�t say much for your faith in humankind. The link you provided shows examples of their own exasperation.
Using the �West against Africans� is not too dissimilar to the claims of Islamic nations. As Jake has said above, he is playing on the fears of the people, and I doubt he is as ignorant as you are assuming.
I agree it's a conspiracy theory, and I do also agree with those saying the Bishop undoubtedly knows better - ignorance was probably the wrong word, although that is certainly what he is promoting.
However, saying that people won't fall for this, is wrong, I think. Certainly the educated citizens, such as those involved in HIV/AIDS-related work won't be fooled, but they're not the target of the message.
People can and do follow the edicts of relgious figures, and those in positions like the Bishop are well aware of the influence they wield.
------------
Ruby, you're right about what you say about large families etc - indeed, fecundity rises as poverty increases - and I can well believe that there are some who would believe it was a plan to subjugate black people. However, the facts are quite clear that reducing family size is one of the best ways of reducing poverty. It also means that women are not reduced to baby machines, which is only a good thing, not least because it has been found time and time again that if you want to put in place good practices that will reduce poverty, women, not men, are the best vectors.
However, saying that people won't fall for this, is wrong, I think. Certainly the educated citizens, such as those involved in HIV/AIDS-related work won't be fooled, but they're not the target of the message.
People can and do follow the edicts of relgious figures, and those in positions like the Bishop are well aware of the influence they wield.
------------
Ruby, you're right about what you say about large families etc - indeed, fecundity rises as poverty increases - and I can well believe that there are some who would believe it was a plan to subjugate black people. However, the facts are quite clear that reducing family size is one of the best ways of reducing poverty. It also means that women are not reduced to baby machines, which is only a good thing, not least because it has been found time and time again that if you want to put in place good practices that will reduce poverty, women, not men, are the best vectors.
Well you were the one suggesting that people follow the edicts, Shirley, not me.
The edict here is that they abstain "....advising fidelity within marriage or sexual abstinence..." particularly as the European condoms are (allegedly) contaminated. Yes, an attempt to blight the use of contraception and promiscuity, but as we said above, more about controlling the fears and anxieties of the nation.
The edict here is that they abstain "....advising fidelity within marriage or sexual abstinence..." particularly as the European condoms are (allegedly) contaminated. Yes, an attempt to blight the use of contraception and promiscuity, but as we said above, more about controlling the fears and anxieties of the nation.
And my point is that abstinance does not work.
Where I grew up, the Catholics took the bit about condoms and didn't use them, but not the bit about abstinance and so got pregnant (or rather a higher proportion of the Catholics; I'm not suggesting they all got pregnant).
They will take the bit about the condoms to heart, but not the bit about keeping your bits to yourself.
Where I grew up, the Catholics took the bit about condoms and didn't use them, but not the bit about abstinance and so got pregnant (or rather a higher proportion of the Catholics; I'm not suggesting they all got pregnant).
They will take the bit about the condoms to heart, but not the bit about keeping your bits to yourself.
Again, a collision of religion and custom.
Custom dictates that male children = good and many male children will ensure that some survive to help support and provide for the family.
We are only one generation away from the practise of polygamy and the old traditions pull can be strong.......
Custom also dictates that a man has his appetites and eyebrows remain firmly in place if he plays away from home.......
Women are often still mere chattels and in places where there is no Governmental aid to young unmarried women, there are, sadly, forced to resort to the oldest profession...
Religion dictates that a couple remain monogamous within marriage and condoms should not intervene when God may 'want' you to have a baby........
I would agree that monogamy would certainly be one way to slow down the threat of HIV/AIDS; but here on planet earth, that is one wish on the list Father Christmas is likely to be unable to supply...........
Custom dictates that male children = good and many male children will ensure that some survive to help support and provide for the family.
We are only one generation away from the practise of polygamy and the old traditions pull can be strong.......
Custom also dictates that a man has his appetites and eyebrows remain firmly in place if he plays away from home.......
Women are often still mere chattels and in places where there is no Governmental aid to young unmarried women, there are, sadly, forced to resort to the oldest profession...
Religion dictates that a couple remain monogamous within marriage and condoms should not intervene when God may 'want' you to have a baby........
I would agree that monogamy would certainly be one way to slow down the threat of HIV/AIDS; but here on planet earth, that is one wish on the list Father Christmas is likely to be unable to supply...........
It's about time that the Catholic church stood up and said use condoms. Its ridiculous.
I have always marveled that Catholics wont use condoms but will have sex outside of marriage. I don't think the church is to blame for the AIDS epidemic because again its people picking and choosing what part of religion they follow s Waldo pointed out. However, if they spoke out maybe they could hat it somewhat. It has me in pieces any time I read an article about the AIDS orphans or 10 year old girls raising their brothers and sisters.
I have always marveled that Catholics wont use condoms but will have sex outside of marriage. I don't think the church is to blame for the AIDS epidemic because again its people picking and choosing what part of religion they follow s Waldo pointed out. However, if they spoke out maybe they could hat it somewhat. It has me in pieces any time I read an article about the AIDS orphans or 10 year old girls raising their brothers and sisters.
Waldo, you were saying that Catholics will follow the latest edict from this Bishop, but then you are saying that they don�t follow the edicts because they get pregnant and practice infidelity and possibly spread HIV. Isn�t that exercising the Freedom of Choice ethos that you claim prevents many Christians from behaving or indeed misbehaving themselves?
The argument of AIDs is about personal responsibility and respect for fellow himans, and I believe that people should be given the freedom to do that.
As regards Catholics and condoms, its more likely that a man convinces a woman that it 'feels better' without, which has nothing much to do with religious belief now does it.
The argument of AIDs is about personal responsibility and respect for fellow himans, and I believe that people should be given the freedom to do that.
As regards Catholics and condoms, its more likely that a man convinces a woman that it 'feels better' without, which has nothing much to do with religious belief now does it.
I'm not sure how many times I can make the same point.
We know that Catholics take the bit about not using condoms but ignore the bit about not putting it about. I honestly don't think it's to do with blokes insisting 'it's better without', though there are undoubtably some. I'd imagine your own experience would tell you much the same thing - and that's in the UK. The people most at risk from the AIDS epidemic are uneducated and superstitious.
The two parts of the argument do not carry equal weight. That is entirely aside from whether they *should* - they do not, or whether they should listen to it at all.
We know that Catholics take the bit about not using condoms but ignore the bit about not putting it about. I honestly don't think it's to do with blokes insisting 'it's better without', though there are undoubtably some. I'd imagine your own experience would tell you much the same thing - and that's in the UK. The people most at risk from the AIDS epidemic are uneducated and superstitious.
The two parts of the argument do not carry equal weight. That is entirely aside from whether they *should* - they do not, or whether they should listen to it at all.
Ok, call me thicko � although I�d rather you didn�t � but what you are saying is that Catholics will not use condoms (because the Church said so), but will put it about (regardless)?
So why would this latest espousing make any difference at all? And if the Church said go ahead, use condoms, would that solve all these problems in Africa? It doesn�t seem to have worked elsewhere, where AIDs exists.
Do you think it�s solely a religious thing then? Or is that society/human nature in general?
So why would this latest espousing make any difference at all? And if the Church said go ahead, use condoms, would that solve all these problems in Africa? It doesn�t seem to have worked elsewhere, where AIDs exists.
Do you think it�s solely a religious thing then? Or is that society/human nature in general?
Hang on - I'm not suggesting that the AIDS crisis is attributable to religion! I'm not even suggesting that all Catholics in Mozambique would heed his words.
What I am saying is that people like this Bishop make a bad situation worse, and his motivation for saying what he said is directly linked to his religious views.
Do I think that if the Catholic Church reversed its stance on Condoms it would make a difference? Absolutely.
What I am saying is that people like this Bishop make a bad situation worse, and his motivation for saying what he said is directly linked to his religious views.
Do I think that if the Catholic Church reversed its stance on Condoms it would make a difference? Absolutely.
Ah yes as you put it 'make a difference' of course it will. I won't deny that.
But it would appear that people in Mozambique are already using condoms, hence the Bishop felt it necessary to claim that they are contaminated.
I am a Catholic and I have used condoms. They make wonderful balloon animals.
But it would appear that people in Mozambique are already using condoms, hence the Bishop felt it necessary to claim that they are contaminated.
I am a Catholic and I have used condoms. They make wonderful balloon animals.
It�s the �religionists� belief in Jam Tomorrow that I believe causes many of the problems here on earth����..they believe that we have a duty to abide by the rules and regulations as set down by them in order to ensure the purity of our souls. And then in the afterlife, we are assured of Gods love and attention for all eternity.
So what is a mere 10/20/30���70/80 years of life here in the mortal world (regardless of the circumstances and the trials and tribulations) compared to an eternity of grace and favour���..? Therefore any accommodation to an easier life, is discouraged if it is contrary to man-made scripture, as it may result in a blemish on our souls. The �religionistas� cannot conceive of the utter and abject misery of lives led by some, and if they can it is all part of God�s great plan and that which passeth all understanding���
This particular Bishops comments are a complete abrogation of his duty to his fellow man, let alone to his flock.
There may be cultural problems to be overcome in the condom/HIV debate but surely if the use of condoms prevents any transmission of HIV/AIDS that can only be a good thing ?
The Catholic Church acts as a third wheel in critical debates such as this when if it put its mind to it there could be so much more good it could do.........
So what is a mere 10/20/30���70/80 years of life here in the mortal world (regardless of the circumstances and the trials and tribulations) compared to an eternity of grace and favour���..? Therefore any accommodation to an easier life, is discouraged if it is contrary to man-made scripture, as it may result in a blemish on our souls. The �religionistas� cannot conceive of the utter and abject misery of lives led by some, and if they can it is all part of God�s great plan and that which passeth all understanding���
This particular Bishops comments are a complete abrogation of his duty to his fellow man, let alone to his flock.
There may be cultural problems to be overcome in the condom/HIV debate but surely if the use of condoms prevents any transmission of HIV/AIDS that can only be a good thing ?
The Catholic Church acts as a third wheel in critical debates such as this when if it put its mind to it there could be so much more good it could do.........
Latest Posts
Motoring2 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
Crosswords3 mins ago
The Perils Of Privatisation - Part X
News4 mins ago
Body & Soul26 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.