BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Arthur_itus
Date: 23 Nov 10 - 11:38 AM

"It means that every who who is Catholic can now say "I could be at risk of HIV from my husband, because I don't know what he does in his spare time away from me. So we must use a condom in future"
"

should have read

It means that every woman who is Catholic can now say "I could be at risk of HIV from my husband, because I don't know what he does in his spare time away from me. So we must use a condom in future"

Sorry about that.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Stringsinger
Date: 23 Nov 10 - 12:13 PM

Notice it was "male" prostitutes. How about little boys?

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: gnu
Date: 23 Nov 10 - 02:12 PM

HIV risk reducing pill.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Nov 10 - 03:27 PM

Dont you think it would be better in every way, if they just stopped having sex with multiple partners?

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Brian May
Date: 23 Nov 10 - 04:13 PM

Akenaton

It was me that was a Guest at work earlier.

Get my facts right? Do you think the truth is ever likely to come out?

Sex with mulitiple partners, there are many innocents who don't know the 'pedigree' of their partners - widows, widowers, partners marrying a divorcee etc etc

Your implication is that all multiple partner relationships is due to being promiscuous - pray tell me which of my examples above it that?

Judging by the Pope's office 'amplification', we (apart from Akenaton) aren't the only people who find the comment outrageous.

So the abuse of teenage boys (vulnerable kids to whom the priest was THE authority figure) is OK? It's not paedophilia then - so when is it, 12, 13, 14?

It was a 'shame on the Catholic church' - you my friend have a gift for understatement (actually I don't think we'd ever be friends, I'm quite fussy).

Arthur - yep, spot on, everyone is at risk, since there's all this promiscuity about.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Nov 10 - 04:32 PM

Well Brian I'm sorry you feel the need to be so personal, but most people seem to think that hiv is caused/passed on by promiscuity.
Why is there such a deviation between homo and hetero infection rates....are homosexuals really so much more promiscuous.

To the best of my knowledge, paedophilia is definined as the act of an adult being sexually aroused, or having sexual intercourse with a pre-pubescent child.

What was happening with the RC priests was simple homosexual assault.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Joe Offer
Date: 23 Nov 10 - 06:54 PM

Patsy says:

Is the Pope really that niave to think that male prostitutes are the only ones who can carry HIV? He must be terribly sheltered or something. What about if a female prostitute is visited by a bi-sexual man? Who's to say that they are going to wear a condom? Surely he should have said all prostitutes. So in around about way he is saying that the risk of AIDS comes from homosexuality mainly or did I hear that wrong?

and later....

Why can't people just be brave enough to say that it is Pope Benedict that has to go. Can a Pope be sacked? I am not a Catholic so I don't know if there is a procedure they follow if a Pope doesn't come up to scratch.

Please remember that the statement about condoms is an excerpt from a book-length interview, not a complete doctrinal statement. No, of course the Pope isn't so naive as "to think to think that male prostitutes are the only ones who can carry HIV," and it's really quite foolhardy to attempt to make that sort of implication. The guy was a distinguished university professor, for heaven's sake. The male prostitute was proposed as an example where a condom could be used to prevent spread of disease, not a declaration that this would be the only situation where using a condom could be morally correct. The general idea is that the Pope conceded that condoms could be useful in preventing the spread of disease. The implication is that prevention of disease is a moral good, and that use of a condom to prevent disease could be morally right - apart from consideration of the morality of contraception or extramarital sex. As far as I can tell, further details have not been published. Still, it is an encouragement to hear that this pope will at least allow for the fact that condoms are effective in reducing the spread of disease.

I think that Pope Paul VI made a mistake by continuing the prohibition of "artificial contraceptives" when he promulgated the Humanae Vitae encyclical in 1968. That was a time when change was possible and necessary, and it appeared at the time that he was going to make that change. It didn't happen, and conservative Catholics still applaud his decision because they claim that widespread contraception has resulted in widespread promiscuity. The decision also found approval among Catholics in cultures that have taboos against contraception. Progressive Catholics have learned to follow their own consciences, especially in the bedroom. This was the first time in recent history that there was widespread dissent against papal teaching, and it helped a whole generation of Catholics to learn to think for themselves.

Church doctrines are very difficult to change. To be credible, changes in doctrine have to reflect the beliefs of the vast majority of believers. The time was right for a change in doctrine at the time of Paul VI, and then he made his declaration in a way that was very hard to contradict later on.

Now that the mood of lay Catholics has become distressingly conservative, I'm beginning to be happy that doctrine is so difficult to change. The 25-year reign of John Paul II could have been a lot harder on us progressives if he could have changed doctrine more easily.

The statement of Benedict about condoms is a very small step, but it is a significant advance in a church that moves with prodigious slowness. I was pleased and surprised that he made even this small concession, and I see it as confirmation of my impression that he is a reasonable and compassionate person. He has not changed the teaching on birth control, but neither has he gone out of his way to condemn anyone who practices birth control.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Joe Offer
Date: 23 Nov 10 - 07:30 PM

To simplify things, I think that Benedict is saying, "Be good; and if you can't be good, be careful."


I don't think he's quite ready to subscribe to the third part of that statement, "If you can't be careful, name it after me." I don't think the Pope wants to see an upsurge of little HIV-infected Benedicts and Benedictas.


-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 23 Nov 10 - 07:53 PM

HIV is not passed on by promiscuity. It is passed on by someone who has it to someone who hasn't. Moralising at people who have "multiple sexual partners" or who are "promiscuous" is neither helpful nor accurate. The behaviours you criticise have been going on for millennia, and not just in third-world countries either, yet AIDS has been with us for just thirty years or so. Using AIDS to condemn behaviour you apparently disapprove of is just wrong.

What was happening with the RC priests was simple homosexual assault.

You are nit-picking. The majoriy of children who were sexually assaulted by priests were just that - children, minors, under-age, call them what you will. 12, 13, 14 years old and assaulted by people in powerful positions of trust. How you can possibly refer to that as "simple homosexual assault", as if it had happened between pissed blokes outside a gay bar on a Saturday night, is utterly beyond me.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Smokey.
Date: 23 Nov 10 - 07:55 PM

as if it had happened between pissed blokes outside a gay bar on a Saturday night

That's taking 'going outside for a fag' a little too far, I think..

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Ed T
Date: 23 Nov 10 - 08:15 PM

A good, logical and compassionate response Steve.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Smokey.
Date: 23 Nov 10 - 08:28 PM

It was indeed. Pardon my sense of humour, Steve.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Joe Offer
Date: 23 Nov 10 - 09:28 PM

Well, I have to take Steve's "logic" to task. He says:

HIV is not passed on by promiscuity. It is passed on by someone who has it to someone who hasn't.

Trouble is, Steve, the more sex partners you have, the better chance you have of coming across one who has HIV.
If you and your mate have a lifelong relationship and you don't have other sex partners, your chance of getting a sexually transmitted disease is slim to none. Sexual fidelity does help control the spread of disease. So do condoms. To deny the efficacy of either, is equally silly.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Charley Noble
Date: 23 Nov 10 - 10:25 PM

That is certainly a bold step for a Pope, almost brings him and the Church into the 20th century.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Joe Offer
Date: 23 Nov 10 - 10:42 PM

You're about right there, Charley. Still, it's a hell of a lot better than the last Pope did.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Smokey.
Date: 23 Nov 10 - 11:10 PM

HIV is not passed on by promiscuity. It is passed on by someone who has it to someone who hasn't.

I took that literally - it doesn't deny the obvious; that promiscuity will spread the disease faster.

It's a step forward - and they certainly need the credibility points at the moment. The turnout for Benny's recent gig at Cofton Park in Birmingham was about 60,000 but they were expecting 80,000.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 06:00 AM

Steve...If a man picked up a 14 or 15 year old girl and had sex with her, he would not be charged with "paedophilia", he would be charged with rape or sexual assault.......why is it different for men who rape youths?......do you need me to tell you?

The crimes were called paedophilia, not to protect the perpetrators, not to protect the victims, not to protect the RC church but to protect the "liberal" view of homosexual practice.

and the media will make sure the "liberal" view is the view of the general public pretty soon.

There is right and there is wrong, the Popes job is to give guidance to humanity, not turn himself into a media star.....Sometimes stating what is right can make one very unpopular but Benedict will stick to his guns.

Joe is wrong to compare him unfavourably with more "liberal" Popes, times have changed hiv is an epidemic amongst MSM and if they are unwilling or unable to ammend their sexual behaviour it will destroy them.....and many more besides.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Ed T
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 06:28 AM

... "the more sex partners you have, the better chance you have of coming across one who has HIV".

Not necessarily true.

You can only have one sex partner, ever, and still get AIDS, if that person has it. It is rare to find a person who has only had one sex partner, even in the RC church and marriage (stats seem to indicate that all over). And, it only takes that one encounter, if you have unprotected sex.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Ed T
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 06:45 AM

Paedophilia is, the large or exclusive sexual attraction of an adult to children, male or female. Sexual contact does not have to occur, but it is often when we see it first. In some cases priests were found to have pornographic pictures of children, but no evidence of sexual activity was proven. These people could reasonably be classified as paedophiles.

In most countries, people who have sexual contact with children are not charged with paedophilia, there are normally charged with other legal offenses, such as rape, sexual interference, etc.

So, when priests, who are in a position of power, mostly (or exclusively) seek out or have sexual activity with male or female minors (children), it is fair to call them paedophiles. That does not mean they are not also rapists.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 06:54 AM

Well, I have to take Steve's "logic" to task. He says:
HIV is not passed on by promiscuity. It is passed on by someone who has it to someone who hasn't.

Trouble is, Steve, the more sex partners you have, the better chance you have of coming across one who has HIV.
If you and your mate have a lifelong relationship and you don't have other sex partners, your chance of getting a sexually transmitted disease is slim to none. Sexual fidelity does help control the spread of disease. So do condoms. To deny the efficacy of either, is equally silly.

Actually, Joe, it was someone else who claimed the logic for me. I stated an incontrovertible fact, that's all. Right,so in a world in which people went around blithely and blindly having unprotected sex with all and sundry, your argument applies. But underlying what I said is that it does not have to be that way. You can have sex with lots of different people and always insist on condoms. You can have sex with lots of different people and avoid the riskiest sexual practices. You can have sex with lots of different people after you've known them for a while and checked them out. You could be having sex in an area where there is no HIV (like we all were half a century ago). Your correlation under any of these circumstances founders at least somewhat if not almost completely. What my four scenarios have in common is education. I've said it many times in other contexts (such as how we can cut the numbers of unwanted pregnancies and therefore abortions): the answer, or at least a very big part of it, is education. Good education for sex, relationships and self-respect. And the removal of faux-moral barriers to using condoms, of course. What we pejoratively and moralisingly refer to as promiscuous behaviour (and I note that you snook that moral buzzword "fidelity" in there) may be the norm in many countries and in certain communities in other countries. You will not change that behaviour (and who's to say it's wrong anyway? Western values??) by moralising at people and hectoring them about how they're promoting HIV. That just has that horrid, evangelical, opportunistic Christian stench about it. The Catholic Church has serially demonstrated that you don't change behaviour by moralising at people. What did the Church ever do to cut abortion rates! What we need is education, education, education.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Ed T
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 07:04 AM

A good read on paedophiles and what makes some with this condition tick (though there are many sources on the internet).

Note that some paedophiles prefer males, some females, and others whicherver is mostly available, with easy access. Stress,isolation and opportunity can bring out the latent paedophilia desires.

http://www.radcliffe-oxford.com/books/samplechapter/7742/Powell_02-1002ae60rdz.pdf

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: GUEST,Patsy
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 07:06 AM

There was a case here in the UK where a woman knowing full well that she was HIV positive deliberately omitted to tell a man / it could have been more but anyway she was bitter and angry and thought she would reek a bit of revenge on the unsuspecting men. All I am saying is that you cannot know the state of mind or situation of every individual. I think she got a jail sentence. Perhaps it was as much the fault of the men not wearing a condom. Talking to other women it is surprising the number of men who will still avoid or agree to not wearing one, even men who are pretty savvy and intelligent when push comes to shove.

The Pope has got to start somewhere I agree and I suppose even if it is a little it's better than not at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Ed T
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 07:08 AM

"The Catholic Church has serially demonstrated that you don't change behaviour by moralising at people". I recall Joe saying that most RCs do what they feel is right for them relating to sex, not what the church (Rome) tells them.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 07:49 AM

What we need is education, education, education. STEVE SHAW

In England … education produces no effect whatsoever.
Oscar Wilde (1856-1900) Irish poet and dramatist.<<<<<<
==========
Regret to say, I think Oscar had it right, insofar as the sort of anti-AIDS propaganda [& anti-smoking & alcoholism & gambling & other such abuses] is concerned. How many campaigns have we seen about them? & how many have had any significant success ~ honest, now? Only exception I can think of is a matter of force-majeure rather than propaganda [or 'education' if you prefer]: the way that the quite recent legislation against smoking in places of public access has been successful & accepted. But you can hardly legislate against sexual-intercourse occurring in such places!

I make these observations with no sort of satisfaction; they merely seem to me to describe and postulate an observable phenomenon.

~Michael~

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 07:52 AM

From Encyclopedia Brittanica

Encyclopedia
paedophilia

psychosexual disorder in which an adult's arousal and sexual gratification occur primarily through sexual contact with prepubescent children. The typical pedophile is unable to find satisfaction in an adult sexual relationship and may have low self-esteem, seeing sexual activity with a child as less threatening than that with an adult. Most pedophiles are men; the condition is extremely rare in women.


Learn more about paedophilia with a free trial on Britannica.com.

NB PREPUBESCENT CHILDREN.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 08:09 AM

Exactly so MtGM, there is much more information and less stigma than there was say 10 years ago, but the homosexual hiv figures keep rising while all other demographics are falling.

I repeat the question, is it simply that homosexuals are vastly and dangerously more promiscuous than heteros?....is it part of male/male sex to never be content with up to half a dozen lifetime sexual partners(that appears to be the norm for heteros), or is there some other reason for the high incidence of aids amongst homosexuals?

Should we be promoting the lifestyle, when this state of affairs exists?

Does our political agenda mean more to us than the deaths of hundreds of thousands of young men?

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 08:10 AM

But underlying what I said is that it does not have to be that way. You can have sex with lots of different people and always insist on condoms...etc(Steve Shaw24 Nov 10 - 06:54 AM) Using condoms while you are doing all that reduces the risk, but it doesn't in fact eliminate it, and that reduced risk increases with numbers.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Ed T
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 09:26 AM

"puberty The stage in the development of humans and other primates marked by the development of secondary sex characteristics, including menarche in females. In humans, puberty occurs at the onset of adolescence, between the ages of about 11 and 14 in girls and 13 and 16 in boys".The term has a range of definitions as found in psychiatry, psychology, the vernacular, and law enforcement.


"The International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems defines pedophilia as "a sexual preference for children, boys or girls or both, usually of prepubertal or early pubertal age."[5] Under this system's criteria, a person 16 years of age or older meets the definition if they have a persistent or predominant sexual preference for prepubescent children at least five years younger than them"



http://www.thefreedictionary.com/puberty

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Ed T
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 09:29 AM

Sorry, the last sentence in the first paragraph in my first post should have been under pedophilia, not puberty, as below>

"puberty The stage in the development of humans and other primates marked by the development of secondary sex characteristics, including menarche in females. In humans, puberty occurs at the onset of adolescence, between the ages of about 11 and 14 in girls and 13 and 16 in boys".

"The International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems defines pedophilia as "a sexual preference for children, boys or girls or both, usually of prepubertal or early pubertal age."[5] Under this system's criteria, a person 16 years of age or older meets the definition if they have a persistent or predominant sexual preference for prepubescent children at least five years younger than them"

"The term (pedophilia) has a range of definitions as found in psychiatry, psychology, the vernacular, and law enforcement".

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 10:15 AM

Dont pick out rare examples Ed.

Puberty is occuring earlier all the time, at present the norm is between 10 and 12
The majority of those assaulted were between 11 and 17.
These examples came from the Boston priest abuse study.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 10:23 AM

McGrath, I didn't say anything about eliminating the risk. However, reducing the risk would reduce the number of infected people in the long term, which would in turn reduce the incidence of transmission further.

MtheGM, the education has to be good education. Education for sex and relationships can go right across the school curriculum. The approach must be holistic. It isn't about diagrams, anonymous questions about oral sex posted in shoe-boxes, the school nurse coming in to do a "special" or demonstrations of condoms being rolled on test-tubes. Context is everything. The context of sex and relationships is the context of our whole lives, no compartments. Education, at least in the UK, has never got anywhere near to addressing this properly. We get nuts and bolts spiced with religious moralising. It isn't only not good enough, it's the wrong approach.

As for "promoting this lifestyle," I'm not aware that that is what's done. In any case, good education would give people the confidence and nous to make good choices. It isn't a question of promoting one thing over another. It's a question of dropping the moralising and getting practical.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 10:36 AM

Would you please answer the pertinent questions?

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 10:48 AM

It's a question of dropping the moralising and getting practical

Getting practical to me would include finding the partner that is right for you and sticking with him/her..

(or in my case with my problems dropping the desires altogether)

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Ed T
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 11:20 AM

"Dont pick out rare examples"

Maybe, that is what you have tried to do by citing one source, when the definition differs broadly?

There are many definitions.

What is it exactly you are trying to prove?
Is it something anti homosexual?

Or is it an attempt to belittle the pain and suffering children were put through by the aqctions of these priests?

Please be clear, rather than beating around the edges?

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 11:23 AM

We will better prevent the deaths of "hundreds of thousands of young men" by education than by any other means. People who want to have sex are going to have sex. If you can find a way of cutting down on that save by issuing all men with padlocked barbed-wire underpants you're a better man than I am.

As for moralising about gay men's "lifestyles", I'm not about to do that. It simply isn't my business. It would be good if they were all fully aware of the potential consequences of their activities, same as for everybody else. Hence the bit about education.

I note, by the way, that, apparently, gay men have "lifestyles," whilst the rest of us just have sex-lives. Hmm.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 11:42 AM

Well, the first thing which should be done is for some brave qualified person to explain the link between homosexual practice and AIDs.
Then some compulsion, like regular testing of "at risk" groups contact tracing etc.

This was done in Cuba in the eighties and they now have one of the lowest infection rates in the world......in a country which according to all perceived wisdom ought to have one of the highest.

What are you Hmming about? Homosexuality is an unusual sexual lifestyle......Heterosexuality is the norm; and please dont play games.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 11:47 AM

Education is provided in cartloads, it seems to have been taken on board by every demographic except the one with by far the highest rates of infection.
Homosexual infection rates continue to rise annually despite the huge amounts of money being spent on education.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 12:03 PM

hmm, I.m tolerant but peronal belief would make homosexuality a sin for me but some of this is reading to me (or maybe I'm missreading) dangerously like it is being blamed for AIDS.

I'd feel fairly sure all those suffering kids in Africa were not born out of homosexual relationships.!

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 12:24 PM

What are you Hmming about? Homosexuality is an unusual sexual lifestyle......Heterosexuality is the norm; and please dont play games

Good grief. I thought attitudes like this were long-outmoded. Awful stuff.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: frogprince
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 12:33 PM

"Homosexuality is an unusual sexual lifestyle......Heterosexuality is the norm"

That much, as worded, is a plain as the nose on anyone's face; the majority are hetero, a minority are homosexual.

"The norm" Is a point, or area, on a distribution chart; any characteristic, of anything, is either within or outside any defined range. Whether to stigmatize and denigrate a given thing that is atypical, is an entirely different matter.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 01:20 PM

"What is it exactly you are trying to prove?
Is it something anti homosexual?".....ED

NO! you stupid fuckers, it's anti death and disease!
YOU are the ones who seem content to let things go on as they are.

As far as I am concerned homosexuals could shag one another till they were blue in the face....IF there was no chance of catching of spreading a deadly disease. Unfortunately the figures speak for themselves...44 times more likely to contract the disease, life expectancy well below heterosexuals, almost 1 in 5 homosexuals carrying the virus.(all CDC figures)

And you say do nothing!

"What are you Hmming about? Homosexuality is an unusual sexual lifestyle......Heterosexuality is the norm; and please dont play games" AK

"Good grief. I thought attitudes like this were long-outmoded. Awful stuff." SS

Playing games again Steven...If you cant dispute what I say, just put down the tar brush!

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 01:26 PM

I apologise for using the term "stupid fuckers".
I dont think any of you are stupid......Its something much worse than that.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Ed T
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 01:27 PM

"What is it exactly you are trying to prove?
Is it something anti homosexual?".....ED

"NO! you stupid fuckers, it's anti death and disease!
YOU are the ones who seem content to let things go on as they are".

So, what does that have to do with what you raise regarding RC priests, puberty and the sexual abuse of children and RC pedophilia in Boston, or elsewhere?

BTW, I suspect sex with a priest *regardless of its nature) may be much safer than with random sex on the street? :)

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: GUEST,999
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 01:31 PM

This decision is between the Pope and the people who listen to or observe his dictates or pontifications. It would be a good thing to identify yourself as either Catholic or non-Catholic. Folks who are anti-religious ain`t never gonna have anything good to say about so-called organized religion or most anything to do with it.

IMO and FWIW

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 01:48 PM

Well, phew, the level of debate goes stratospheric. Blast away and you lose, unfortunately. I never said do nothing. The very opposite in fact. You want gay people compulsorily tested. Wow, what a great idea. I look forward to seeing how you propose this should be done. Don't forget to lock up all the human rights organisations before you start. Anything else? Compulsory daily bromine doses? Yep, beats education every time!

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 01:51 PM

"So, what does that have to do with what you raise regarding RC priests, puberty and the sexual abuse of children and RC pedophilia in Boston, or elsewhere?"

I was simply trying to make clear the definition of paedophilia.
Someone had described the criminals as "paedophiles".

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 01:56 PM

But you failed to distinguish between what you called simple homosexual assault and the homosexual assault of vulnerable children by people in positions of trust and power. I suggest that there is something there that aggravates the "simple homosexual assault" by quite a large margin.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: akenaton
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 02:04 PM

For education to work, people must pay attention, that does not seem to be happening in the homosexual community.

However If homosexuals do not self regulate their behaviour and the infection rates continue to rise, society will have no option but take action......this was hinted at in the CDC fact sheet.

If this was happening in any other demographic(even IDU's) it would be considered a disaster and measures brought in to combat it.

As "gay rights" are a "liberal" cause celebre even the medical establishment is afraid to tackle the issue head on.

Your tar brush gets into every corner, doesn't it.

I fear the thread is drifting, so I will say no more, unless forced to.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Brian May
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 02:32 PM

Well . . . as long as the priests use condoms when visiting male prostitutes, or raping the kids in their care, everything is fine.

A bit OTT ? . . yes, so are their crimes and so is their boss's naivety.

BUT . . . as Arthur said, it gives good RCs (and there ARE millions of them) the option to control both their health and population concurrently.

As has been observed above, it brings the RC church into the 20th Century (sad fact is, we are all in the 21st). But it IS undeniably progress.

Subject: RE: BS: Pope 'condones condom use in some cases
From: Arthur_itus
Date: 24 Nov 10 - 02:34 PM

100