Oh no all over again. :(
|
And Ambrosia Slaad pointed out and gave several references which supported that condom use is very effective in preventing the spread of AIDS.
Abstinence is 100% effective against sexually transmitted HIV. Just sayin.
This is a BS topic serving only to troll the 'religious nut jobs'. We all know you have an agenda. OTOH, I see the flagging system seems to be working again.
More than 25 million people have died of AIDS since 1981. I don't think the topic of millions of people dying painful and avoidable deaths is a topic that -should- be avoided, do you?
If this were breast cancer would it be something you'd happily sweep under the rug?
I vote with my feet and give the Pope as much attention as I believe he deserves, and similarly do not contribute towards religious charitiable institutions as they link the offer of aid to accepotabnce of their dogma.
Aside from pointing out to them (when the opportunity arises) that I believe their views are harmful and outdated, I simply have to leave it at that. Grandstanding the point won't change much that I can see.
The good thing is that here in Australia we have a separation of church and state and can choose not to participate.
|
|
Let me rephrase, it is not worth the time it takes to debate this because you have your view and most of the rest of the world has it's own. Learn to pick your fights and drop it so we can all get on with life. I feel, that it seems you are unwilling or perhaps unable to drop a topic.More than 25 million people have died of AIDS since 1981. I don't think the topic of millions of people dying painful and avoidable deaths is a topic that -should- be avoided, do you?
If this were breast cancer would it be something you'd happily sweep under the rug?
Again, abstinence is 100% fool proof vs STDs.
Again, abstinence is 100% fool proof vs STDs.
As is death. 100% guaranteed to avoid STD's.
About as usefull as recommending abstinance as an avoidance technique too.
|
|
Again, abstinence is 100% fool proof vs STDs.As is death. 100% guaranteed to avoid STD's.
About as usefull as recommending abstinance as an avoidance technique too.
So, the Catholic church is bad because their traditional view on condoms would prevent them from being used to prevent the spread of AIDS. At the same time the churches prefered method that guarantees prevention of the vast majority of cases is unacceptable to you, yet somehow you have the moral high ground.
So, the Catholic church is bad because their traditional view on condoms would prevent them from being used to prevent the spread of AIDS. At the same time the churches prefered method that guarantees prevention of the vast majority of cases is unacceptable to you, yet somehow you have the moral high ground.
Well the Ku Klux Klan would recommend that Apartheid and racial separation would be 100% effective in curbing the incidence of racially motivated hate crimes; yet would you be ready to accept that as a legitimate and morally steadfast position?
No?
Really?
But it would SOLVE THE PROBLEM 100%.
How could you say no to that kinda solid logic?
(The only difference I see is that the KKK isn't in a significant position of trust and power)
Edit: Just so we don't get confused later, I'm not anti-religion by any stretch, its simply that condoms aren't mentioned in the bible, and thus, as no precedent was set, later rulings have been decided upon by the clergy. Thats not the same thing as the Biblical RAW.
|
|
Let me rephrase, it is not worth the time it takes to debate this because you have your view and most of the rest of the world has it's own. Learn to pick your fights and drop it so we can all get on with life. I feel, that it seems you are unwilling or perhaps unable to drop a topic.More than 25 million people have died of AIDS since 1981. I don't think the topic of millions of people dying painful and avoidable deaths is a topic that -should- be avoided, do you?
If this were breast cancer would it be something you'd happily sweep under the rug?
Sweep under the rug, no. Blame a group that did nothing to cause it, no.
And Ambrosia Slaad pointed out and gave several references which supported that condom use is very effective in preventing the spread of AIDS.Abstinence is 100% effective against sexually transmitted HIV. Just sayin.
Abstinence is a good idea, and will stop the majority of cases.
Unfortunately, the science does not completely support you on the 100% idea. HIV can be transmitted through other methods then Sex.
Kidding aside, your comparison make absolutely no sense whatsoever.
Really?
You simply posit that your (church based) solution is 100% ok, and people should just accept it on the chin, regardless of the human death toll that comes from such reckless indifferece.
I find that pretty morally bankrupt; it goes beyond mere indifference and enters the territory of malice.
Besides please point to the Anti-Condom clause in the 10 Commandments RAW? Its just Papal fiat and you know it.
Abstinence is not reality, it is exceedingly naive to believe that it can be enforced. People have been preaching abstinence since religion was invented and it has been ignored by almost everybody since some killjoy thought the idea up.
So while abstinence will stop sexually transmitted disease spreading - abstinence is not a social reality.... I also wonder how many people preaching abstinence actually practice what they preach.
When I was younger and at uni during my first Orientation Week I was cornered by a person with deep religious convictions who tried to lecture me about abstinence. I didn't stop laughing for ages.... "I said Mate I am at university, its my duty to get drunk, do stupid s$#$ and try and hook up with anybody that would have me.."
So while it is noble to suggest abstinence it is practical and responsible to practice safe sex.
|
Ambrosia Slaad, thanks for the link in previous thread. I had never seen that before. :) And who could not agree with "lawyers" (sorry Sebastian) Of course politicians should have had a place there too. :)
Again, abstinence is 100% fool proof vs STDs.Let me rephrase, it is not worth the time it takes to debate this because you have your view and most of the rest of the world has it's own. Learn to pick your fights and drop it so we can all get on with life. I feel, that it seems you are unwilling or perhaps unable to drop a topic.More than 25 million people have died of AIDS since 1981. I don't think the topic of millions of people dying painful and avoidable deaths is a topic that -should- be avoided, do you?
If this were breast cancer would it be something you'd happily sweep under the rug?
If people actually where abstinent, you might have a point. But the evidence is that abstinence only policies do not work. To sum up the point, i will hand over to John Santelli, M.D., M.P.H.a, Mary A. Ott, M.D.b, Maureen Lyon, Ph.D.c, Jennifer Rogers, M.P.H.d, Daniel Summers, M.D.e, Rebecca Schleifer, J.D., M.P.H.f, and the abstract to their paper Abstinence and abstinence-only education: A review of U.S. policies and programs
Abstinence from sexual intercourse is an important behavioral strategy for preventing human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), other sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and pregnancy among adolescents. Many adolescents, including most younger adolescents, have not initiated sexual intercourse and many sexually experienced adolescents and young adults are abstinent for varying periods of time. There is broad support for abstinence as a necessary and appropriate part of sexuality education. Controversy arises when abstinence is provided to adolescents as a sole choice and where health information on other choices is restricted or misrepresented. Although abstinence is theoretically fully effective, in actual practice abstinence often fails to protect against pregnancy and STIs. Few Americans remain abstinent until marriage; many do not or cannot marry, and most initiate sexual intercourse and other sexual behaviors as adolescents. Although abstinence is a healthy behavioral option for teens, abstinence as a sole option for adolescents is scientifically and ethically problematic. A recent emphasis on abstinence-only programs and policies appears to be undermining more comprehensive sexuality education and other government-sponsored programs. We believe that abstinence-only education programs, as defined by federal funding requirements, are morally problematic, by withholding information and promoting questionable and inaccurate opinions. Abstinence-only programs threaten fundamental human rights to health, information, and life.
This is entirely typical of work in the field, and also of the work carried out on adults. The evidence is that abstinance is not, and cannot be the whole answer.
Especially as to stop all sexual transmission of HIV, we would have to stop every person on earth having sex, until HIV was eradicated. Why? Because other sources of infection are possible, and married people can become infected by means other than sexual intercourse and pass on the virus, to their spouse. Are you suggesting the married couples shouldn't be having sex?
Sweep under the rug, no. Blame a group that did nothing to cause it, no.Let me rephrase, it is not worth the time it takes to debate this because you have your view and most of the rest of the world has it's own. Learn to pick your fights and drop it so we can all get on with life. I feel, that it seems you are unwilling or perhaps unable to drop a topic.More than 25 million people have died of AIDS since 1981. I don't think the topic of millions of people dying painful and avoidable deaths is a topic that -should- be avoided, do you?
If this were breast cancer would it be something you'd happily sweep under the rug?
Yet educational and social policies which they know do not work, did play a major part in the causation of this pandemic.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
So the question about secondary infection vectors and marital relations can be answered, could you provide statistics about the prevalence of these transmissions?
Thanks.
Sigil,
Given that LT was caught red handed making up numbers in the last thread I'd take any 'stats' he gives with a grain (or more) of salt.
I'm staying out of this to a) remain civil and b) not feed the lying troll.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I'm staying out of this to a) remain civil and b) not feed the lying troll.Um...
Yeah yeah, I know. But commenting that 'facts' coming from LT is like weight loss tips coming from me isn't 'participating' it's more of a caveat. (hint: Pointing out where someone made up numbers isn't a personal attack).
I have political blogs I read (and have linked to) for 'topics' like this. I don't need the grief on gaming boards.
|
|
So the question about secondary infection vectors and marital relations can be answered, could you provide statistics about the prevalence of these transmissions?
Thanks.
Does it matter?
Let's say, for the sake of the argument, that the incidence is "1". If that's not enough, let's say it's "2". When does it become "enough"? When do the number of painful and needless deaths become significant enough to address?
It absolutely matters. If it can be demonstrated in a person, then it is no longer a theory. If it can be demonstrated in a group of people it can be demonstrated to be more than a statistical anomaly and worth discussing at all. If it can be demonstrated in a population then it becomes something more serious and certainly something worth diverting the thread to talk about.
At this point, (with no malice intended) it seems these secondary transmissions fall more into the category of anecdotal evidence at best and urban myth at worst. If you or anyone else has more information I am willing listen.
My question is... If when the Pope says to be abstinent, it can be demonstrated that people do not listen (though I am not sure we have established that it is Catholics that have been studied in info so far presented, apologizes if I am wrong on that), then do we have any evidence that Catholics are more inclined to listen when he says to not use condoms?
"Kevin Smith says Ben Affleck still kills hookers."
NOT TRUE!
Bixby Snyder says "I'd buy that for a dollar!"
Brodie says his cousin Walter is a "weird guy".
Lord Whorfin says I'll see him in hell.
I say the next feller that says "shenanigans" gets pistol-whipped.
Julia Child says to let the wine breath.
The East India Trading Company says we have a right to drill.
The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy says that Vogon poetry is one of the worst in the universe.
Ramirez says there can be only one.
Dunkelzahn said "run fast, die young".
Sauron said the ring wasn't that pretty.