The Vatican says.....

[Vaio]

Don't use Rubber Johnies

Nutters, the whole bloody lot of them

~Vaio~

[Lakhim]

Old.

[Tactitus]

Stay in school kids, and don't do religion!

[Vaio]

Originally Posted by Lakhim

Old.

Old how ?

~Vaio~

[Lakhim]

Originally Posted by Vaio

Old how ?

~Vaio~

The vatican has been saying that we shouldn't use condoms for quite a long time now.

[Evergreen]

Yes and if you read the article and stick things in context rather than out of.

They are arguing against condoms being an effective barrier from HIV and have claimed there is scientific studies that given the HIV virus is 450 times smaller than sperm that it can transmit through latex condoms.

Their argument is would you encourage someone to jump on a plane if you knew it had a 15-20% chance of crashing etc (analogy to them using a condom and contracting aids).

They are asking for better education and family planning to attack the aids menace.

Of course churning out lots of non enviromentally friendly condoms is the cheap way of attacking this problem in africa apparrently.

It's all messed up and it's all world affairs gone awry.

At least this time their reasoning behind not using them isn't as ignorant which should be noted here and not some quaffing at old stereotypical behaviour.

[Vaio]

You havent read it have you Lakhim ?

~Vaio~

[Lakhim]

Originally Posted by Vaio

You havent read it have you Lakhim ?

~Vaio~

Yes, I did.

[Vaio]

ok, you just didnt understand it

~Vaio~

[Lakhim]

Originally Posted by Vaio

ok, you just didnt understand it

~Vaio~

Isn't that a common fallacy in logical reasoning (dismissing the argument without providing support for your dismissal)?

Aw screw it, its 2 AM, I'm going to bed.

[Ebany]

That picture near the top just gives me a mental image of some african woman collecting up the villages condoms and giving them all a wash and is now hanging them out to dry before they re-use them all....

[Evergreen]

I looked and remembered mark's victory board of all the women he's banged.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Evergreen

I looked and remembered mark's victory board of all the women he's banged.

It doesn't look anything like my victor... I've said too much.

[Dante Hicks]

I'm not sure why we should listen anything the Vatican has to say since they're explicitly anti-rationality and anti-science. All they can contribute to any debate is obfuscation.

[Stew]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

I'm not sure why we should listen anything the Vatican has to say since they're explicitly anti-rationality and anti-science. All they can contribute to any debate is obfuscation.

Any mainly, they're anti-contraception?!???

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Stew

Any mainly, they're anti-contraception?!???

Well, yes and no. It's possible to have an opinion and still be reasonable when dealing with the evidence. The Catholic Church have been fundamentally dishonest when dealing with all sorts of scientific issues.

Certain companies can be trusted more than others when looking at scientific research. I'd trust GlaxoSmithkline (or whatever they're called now) on their scientific reports more than say, the Cigarette companies.

[IncubusGod]

Well they took their evidence from a report initated by the US Government who shared the same concerns about whether condoms could stop viruses.
The report found that in some cases, viruses passed through the condom. The amount was tiny and the viruses they were using were 40-400 times smaller than HIV. The conclusion of the report was that the risk is minimal and that its better to advise people to use condoms than to take any risks.
Its not like the Vatican has made stuff up, they have interprated scientific research in a way that suits their age old policies. Its not dishonest,its just a way of looking at the same results. It is possible that that HIV virus can pass through the condom. The risk is tiny however.
If you dont agree with them then you dont have to take their advice, what I dont like is that this option really doesnt exist for many other cultures where catholicism is the all pervasive rules of life and that some people will be exposed to this virus more than they would have to be because of their stance.
Though the argument that everyone should just use condoms is short-sighted. Education is necessary, however this isn't being implemented as it should be...queue another argument about WHO policy etc.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by IncubusGod

Though the argument that everyone should just use condoms is short-sighted.

I'm not sure many people actually say that though.

And their overall attitude is dishonest, although I quite agree they could be right on this individual issue.

[Radical Edward]

Originally Posted by Evergreen

They are arguing against condoms being an effective barrier from HIV and have claimed there is scientific studies that given the HIV virus is 450 times smaller than sperm that it can transmit through latex condoms.

and completely ignores the fact that water, which is even smaller than HIV and the transport solvent, cannot get through the condom. cool dat.

[queball]

Originally Posted by IncubusGod

Its not like the Vatican has made stuff up, they have interprated scientific research in a way that suits their age old policies. Its not dishonest,its just a way of looking at the same results. It is possible that that HIV virus can pass through the condom. The risk is tiny however.

What can be more dishonest than misinterpreting evidence?

[IncubusGod]

Originally Posted by Radical Edward

and completely ignores the fact that water, which is even smaller than HIV and the transport solvent, cannot get through the condom. cool dat.

Erm,it can, there are anything between 4-15% of condoms that leak water. Depending on the tests and production methods of the manufacturer.

Originally Posted by queball

What can be more dishonest than misinterpreting evidence?

What? Their point (and alot of other peoples) is that they are not misinterpreting the evidence,they are looking at what the report says and stating that in the defence of their stance. Its not dishonest. They are not lying. The report does say that virus' can pass through condoms and that water leakers exist in large numbers.

[StaticX]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programme...ma/3845011.stm

The conclusions of the Panorama show which dealt with this issue along with quotes from some of thoe who actually performed the research.

[Sandsnake]

My biggest problem has always been the fact that you're told condoms are great, they're wonderful, and then they neglect to tell you the inherent dangers (many STDs are not preventable by condoms, leakage, and yes, HIV can POSSIBLY pass through a condom).

Here's the one they never ask in school: Given a condom, would you have sex with a known HIV-positive person? Why or why not?

[JC]

Originally Posted by Sandsnake

many STDs are not preventable by condoms

Since when?

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Sandsnake

Here's the one they never ask in school: Given a condom, would you have sex with a known HIV-positive person? Why or why not?

If they were fit, probably. I'm not going to live for ever either way. Bleh.

[Perfection]

Originally Posted by JC

Since when?

Since STDs are virus' and virus' can, in very rare cases, pass through a condom - STDs can be transmitted through a condom.

[JC]

He said it as though its common place, which according to anyone other than the vatican it isnt.

[LHC]

Maybe we should bath in HIV blood, since we're all going to get AIDS anyway.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by IncubusGod

What? Their point (and alot of other peoples) is that they are not misinterpreting the evidence,they are looking at what the report says and stating that in the defence of their stance. Its not dishonest. They are not lying. The report does say that virus' can pass through condoms and that water leakers exist in large numbers.

I'd still class it as a misrepresentation.

I mean, let's imagine I have a personal dislike of smoke alarms. I then find evidence (let's assume it's true) that not all smoke alarms are 100% effective. Sometimes, they fail to go off, fail to wake the occupants of their house, etc. This all seems fairly reasonable.

I could then go on a weird rant that people shouldn't be taught "just to use a smoke alarm" and they should be careful with flammable materials. Which is of course true. Indeed, perhaps having a smoke alarm in some cases puts people in more danger as they are more negligent with general fire safety.

But it'd be unfair to present the argument as "Why you shouldn't use a smoke alarm because it's really dangerous!" Which is what they seem to be trying to do. People are going to have sex. Some of this sex, despite what the Roman Catholics would hope is going to be outside of marriage. Therefore, the safe thing to do is to use barrier protection as well as better sex education generally. The best thing to do is NOT to create some anti-comdom hysteria which they inevitably will try and whip up with this.

As mentioned elsewhere, Panorama carried this story on Sunday. The headline they carried on the show in big bold text was "DO CONDOMS KILL?". Now, if that's not a dishonest way to head a story I don't know what is.

[Proteus]

Originally Posted by JC

Since when?

Pubic lice.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Proteus

Pubic lice.

That's not a disease!

[Proteus]

Originally Posted by MrL_JaKiri

That's not a disease!

Wikipedia says it is and Wikipedia is always right.

[queball]

A whore on Panorama described how she checks clients for anything crawling around.

[acropolis]

Originally Posted by Sandsnake

Here's the one they never ask in school: Given a condom, would you have sex with a known HIV-positive person? Why or why not?

no.

cuz i'm not gay.

anyway, there's a big difference between a condom failing a leak test 10-15% of the time actually getting AIDS through one.

Especially if you are a guy and not a faggot. Even without a condom girls almost never give guys AIDS, unless they go for some really violent back door action without lube.

Crazy wart things however move decidedly quickly in the condom free world.

[Sandsnake]

Originally Posted by Perfection

Since STDs are virus' and virus' can, in very rare cases, pass through a condom - STDs can be transmitted through a condom.

the virus is carried in body fluids, skin contact is all that's required in many cases. Maybe you're sexually inept, that's your business, but I can't think of any cases in my own life where female bodily fluid only got on the condom.

Look up condoms and genital herpes sometime..it's a real eye opener. Sure, condoms are an effective way to prevent catching it, but you can catch it from rolling over in the wet spot....yay you and your condom. ANYTHING can be spread this way....contact with bodily fluid is all most diseases need to create risk factor.

The problem is we're taught condoms will prevent all this stuff and not much time is spent on what it won't prevent. Not to say using a condom isn't a damn good idea, but they're not near the holy grail of safety that people seem to think.

[Evergreen]

It's how there is a massive focus on teaching people that drink driving is wrong, when doing literally anything when too drunk is just as deadly, most apartment fires that raze down tenement blocks are the result of a drunk man trying to cook some chips usually for example.

Condom should be part of safety but the emphasis should be on prevention of coming into contact with ALL bodily fluids that could transmit STD's (it's no irony that STD transmission rates are still rising even though Condoms seem more acceptable and common in sexual habits of the average joe these years), just like how the emphasis on drinking should be on making sure they don't do anything that can result in death rather than just enthusing they don't drive a car.

[JonnyBGood]

I'd seriously suggest you provide some proof that most apartment fires are caused by the attempts of drunk men to cook chips.

[Evergreen]

Heh, proof meh can't be arsed to get the figures, experience, I'm sure Kura will gladly confirm most ****ing fires in the west of scotland are pissed men trying to make some chips.

I know of 3 out of 4 fires that started that way (the other one was someone drunk dropping their fag still lit on the couch while they slept).

[JonnyBGood]

I know four dogs, all of which live in my area. One of those dogs has only one eye. Ergo a quarter of all dogs everywhere have only one eye. Quad erat dumbonstrandum lol.

[Dante Hicks]

Using the same logic I am happy to report the amount of Chinese people in the world has been greatly exaggerated.

[Boogster]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

Using the same logic I am happy to report the amount of Chinese people in the world has been greatly exaggerated.

Happy?

[Evergreen]

Your pedantism is witty. No honestly it is.

****wits.

[JonnyBGood]

I think anyone who attempts to present an argument shortly followed by the phrase "Heh, proof meh can't be arsed to get the figures, experience" when asked to back up his claims deserves to be both ridiculed and trolled.

[IncubusGod]

Evergreen is too busy selling rocks that keep tigers away, however when people ask him to prove it he does something similar so his exuses ring hollow, damn adopted canadian.

[Marilyn Manson]

I don't care what The Vatican says,
When The Vatican says it's raining,
You'll never hear me complaining,
I'm certain the sun will shine.

[Evergreen]

You were postively missed MM ( in the sense we needed a shittier gimmick version of mark).

[Marilyn Manson]

I don't see anyone else complaining about my behaviour. Until then I excercise my right to ignore your witless prattlings.

[pyirt]

The Vatican have had many strange beliefs in the past (not to mention people walking on water and floating off on a clouds etc) that fish did n`t sexually reproduce; they just grow out of the water; and Onanism (the solitary male vice) was murder; the shedding of tiny human beings.