Pope says condoms sometimes permissible to stop AIDS

Forgiveness_Man wrote:

That is entirely and 100% just untrue and a complete outsider understanding of the Church. If you don't like the church, your choice. But it's hardly the way you describe at all.

OH REALLY? Sorry but HISTORY outside the church says otherwise!

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Roman%20Catholicism/rcc7-dogma.htm

captainbryce wrote:OH REALLY? Sorry but HISTORY outside the church says otherwise!

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20Religions/Roman%20Catholicism/rcc7-dogma.htm

Any website can make up facts and call it history. Anti catholicism, lol.

Forgiveness_Man wrote:


Any website can make up facts and call it history. Anti catholicism, lol.

So, let me get this straight, you are denying that these were in fact positions of the Catholic Church? Wow!

On the topic again, if you read what the pope actually said, it's amazing how foolish this news story looks. Seeing how people misrepresent something so small, it's no wonder they can't get church history right.

Forgiveness_Man wrote:On the topic again, if you read what the pope actually said, it's amazing how foolish this news story looks.

OK, here is what the Pope said, and later had to clarify:

Vatican: Condoms ‘lesser of two evils'

By Nicole Winfield and Victor L. Simpson
of The Associated Press

Wed. Nov. 24, 2010

VATICAN CITY — The Vatican said Tuesday that condoms are the lesser of two evils when used to curb the spread of AIDS, even if their use prevents a pregnancy.



The position was an acknowledgment that the Roman Catholic church’s long-held anti-birth control stance against condoms doesn’t justify putting lives at risk.



The new stance was staked out as the Vatican explained Pope Benedict XVI’s comments on condoms and HIV in a book that came out Tuesday based on his interview with a German journalist.



The Vatican still holds that condom use is immoral and that church doctrine forbidding artificial birth control remains unchanged. Still, the reassessment on condom use to help prevent disease carries profound significance, particularly in Africa where AIDS is rampant.



The change came on a day when U.N. AIDS officials announced that the number of new HIV cases has fallen significantly – thanks to condom use – and a U.S. medical journal published a study showing that a daily pill could help prevent spread of the virus among gay men.



Theologians have debated for years whether it could be morally acceptable for HIV-infected people to use condoms to avoid infecting their partners. The Vatican years ago was reportedly preparing a document on the subject, but it never came out.

 (In the meantime how many of the obedient faithful got infected?)

The groundbreaking shift, coming as it does from the deeply conservative pontiff, would appear likely to restrain any public criticism from Catholic conservatives, who insisted Tuesday the pope was merely reaffirming the church’s moral teaching.

Conservatives have feared that a comment like this would give support to Catholics who want to challenge the church’s ban on artificial contraception in an environment where they feel they are under siege from a secular, anti-Catholic culture.



Benedict’s comments come at a time when bishops in the United States are focused on upholding the strictest views of Catholic orthodoxy, emphasizing traditional marriage, natural family planning based on a woman’s menstrual cycle and making abortion the most important issue.



In the book, “Light of the World: The Pope, the Church and the Signs of the Times,” Benedict was quoted as saying that condom use by people such as male prostitutes was a lesser evil since it indicated they were moving toward a more moral and responsible sexuality by aiming to protect their partners from a deadly infection.



His comments implied that he was referring primarily to homosexual sex, when condoms aren’t being used for contraception.



But questions arose immediately about the pope’s intent because the Italian translation of the book used the feminine for prostitute, while the original German used the masculine.



The Vatican spokesman, the Rev. Federico Lombardi, said Tuesday that he asked the pope whether he intended his comments to apply only to men. Benedict replied that it really didn’t matter, the important thing was that the person took into consideration the life of another, Lombardi said.


The clarification is significant.



Forgiveness_Man wrote:Seeing how people misrepresent something so small, it's no wonder they can't get church history right.

Is this so small?

UNAIDS estimates that 22.4 million people in Africa are infected with HIV, and that 54 percent – or 12.1 million – are women. Heterosexual transmission of HIV and multiple, heterosexual partners are believed to be the major cause of the high infection rates.

Yes it is small. The Associated Press'(or any other media outlet who are seeing what they WANT to see in what he said) take on the pope's words don't really impress me. The pope said that they can be a first step towards moral responsibility. That doesn't mean the behavior involved isn't sinful or that condom usage is somehow condoned by the church. It'd be like saying a bank robber who robs banks with an unloaded gun may be a step above one who uses a loaded gun, but his actions are still sinful.(Not my comparison)

The media is totally blowing what he said out of proportion cause they are looking to play a "GOTCHA" game. They just can't accept the fact that the church teaches that certain things are wrong. On one hand, the church needs to change it's policies to get with the times, but on the other hand, they act like people are still morally bound to do what the church says until it changes it's tune. It's almost like they fear damnation if they're going against the church, so they want the church to change to ease their fears. Observation only of course. Just seems like they wanna have their cake and eat it too.

All in all, this IS a small matter. From the few lines I scanned in the article you posted, there are already GRAVE misunderstandings of the church to begin with. So yeah, it is a small matter that they are trying to twist into something bigger. Nothing has changed in regards to church teaching. And since most of the people making a deal about it don't give a fig what the pope says in the first place, I fail to see why it matters anyway.

Objective reporting? Most journalists don't bother. This entire story screams bias.

There you go again, personal shots. I am not a journalist and I don't pass myself off as one. I am also not the only one who comments on articles I don't read. (Although I don't have to read everything to know what to say. Most people who hate Glenn Beck aren't regular viewers of his show either. ) I can just read one line from them and already see that they've already gotten it 100% wrong.

Funny how you call ME ignorant when that article is the one that in the end truly proves ignorant by twisting something a Pope said in a book into a news story. Well it's your opinion that I'm ignorant, which you're entitled to. You could find more who agree, and I could find several more who don't. I'd like to see you debate without taking shots at me. If you wanna just sling mud all day, go ahead. It's about all you seem able to do.

I never said AIDS in Africa was no big deal, I said that the TOPIC of this thread, comments made by the pope, were no big deal. Because they aren't. The pope didn't say anything new whatsoever; that is why it isn't a big deal. You don't like it, so you ain't Catholic. End of story.

Oh and excuse me, the NEWS media! There, happy? And wait you saw that I say I was a writer? Awwww!