Thread Derails... Aids, Popes And Condoms

[philbo]

[quote name='havok579257' date='11 January 2010 - 10:36 PM' timestamp='1263245776' post='2035017']
why is it so hard for people to wait until marriage to have sex?
[/quote]
Because sex was around for aeons before anyone dreamt up marriage. It's part of the instinct of every reproducing animal.

[quote name='havok579257' date='11 January 2010 - 10:36 PM' timestamp='1263245776' post='2035017']
condoning something that is intrisically evil, is never right. condoms are intrisically evil.
[/quote]
"Intrinsically evil"??? Oh, please. That's got to be one of the silliest things I've read on this site. What is intrinsically evil about a bit of latex?

[quote name='havok579257' date='11 January 2010 - 10:36 PM' timestamp='1263245776' post='2035017']
according to your theory, since there will always be heroin users the catholic church and governments should pass out free needles to help promote better heroin use. or since murder will never stop, the catholic church and governments should push for less restrictions and make murder more acceptable?[/quote]
Leave out the strawmen, too. If this is the level of your debate, please go back to school and learn a bit more. Then try again.

[quote name='havok579257' date='11 January 2010 - 10:36 PM' timestamp='1263245776' post='2035017']
condoms promote people to have more premarital sex. most of hiv/aids victims get the disease outside or before marriage. so if everyone waited until marriage to have sex and only have sex with their spouse, the disease would eventually die out.
[/quote]
If everyone waited, and only had sex with their spouse, all STDs would eventually die out. But I live in the real world, not some fantasy one. If you can't get your priests to stay celibate, what chance is there for a people whose culture for the last x thousand years has been to have sex early and often? Just because you belong to a bunch of people who call that sort of behaviour "sinful" - they were behaving like that long before your idea of sin came about.

[havok579257]

[quote name='philbo' date='11 January 2010 - 05:01 PM' timestamp='1263247319' post='2035031']
Because sex was around for aeons before anyone dreamt up marriage. It's part of the instinct of every reproducing animal.


"Intrinsically evil"??? Oh, please. That's got to be one of the silliest things I've read on this site. What is intrinsically evil about a bit of latex?


Leave out the strawmen, too. If this is the level of your debate, please go back to school and learn a bit more. Then try again.


If everyone waited, and only had sex with their spouse, all STDs would eventually die out. But I live in the real world, not some fantasy one. If you can't get your priests to stay celibate, what chance is there for a people whose culture for the last x thousand years has been to have sex early and often? Just because you belong to a bunch of people who call that sort of behaviour "sinful" - they were behaving like that long before your idea of sin came about.
[/quote]


1. We are not animals, just so you know. Its so convientient when people like you use animal instincts to justify one or your points, but then the next, discredit animal instincts when it goes against another point. Animal instincts don't work because humans can rationalize and they can act AGAINST their animal instincts. So no go there. I mean its not animal instinct to abort your own baby, but humans do it. So don't give me animal instinct, human are not animals. We can reason and rationalize and make decisions against so called animal instincts.

2. A little piece of rubber than keeps a husband and wife from sharing everything during sex. Its simple fact, if a condom is used, the spouses are not being completly self giving with each other. Which means your holding out on your spouse. Anyone who is not giving their spouse everything during sex, is doing a discredit to thier marriage.

3. No, there is no strawman. Your saying that although the catholic church is against pre-marital sex. Although it is against condom use since the spouse's don't totally give to themselfs during sex. Although the catholic church is against extramarital sex. That although this, they should comprimise their beliefs because we can't expect everyone in the world to follow God's word? That's the exact same thing I brought up. The same point that you just brush off because you have no defense for it. Fact is, someone should not comprimise their morals, their beliefs, just becuase what they believe to be right, is considered very hard by society. So its hard. Got news for you, life is hard.

4. Why do you instist that every priest can not remain celibate? Why doo you try to paint it that every priest can't abstaine from sex? Why don't you get some facts first buddy. Let me ask you, how many priests do you know who haven't remained celibate. Until you can provide some hard facts that all priets or even the majority, better yet, how about even 10% can not remain celebate, your just spewing stuff to try and sound good, when your logic is flawwed. Priests can and do abstaine from sex. And guess what, so do regualr people. There are a lot of people who don't have sex before marriage. Oh gasp, its actually possible. Its possible in the real world that is. Not in fairy tale land where everyone has sex before marriage and no one can remain faithful.

One final point. Just look back 50-60 years. Compare pre-marital and extramarital sex in the 50's to the 2000's. Are you really going to try and say people were having as much premarital and extramarital sex in the 50's as they are in the 2000's? If not, then your theory is bunk. Cause history proves you wrong. History proves that people can abstaine from sex before marriage and extramarital sex. So if it was possible for the majority of people 50-60 years ago, why can't it be possible for the majority of people today?

[philbo]

[quote name='havok579257' date='12 January 2010 - 03:11 AM' timestamp='1263262275' post='2035118']
1. We are not animals, just so you know. Its so convientient when people like you use animal instincts to justify one or your points, but then the next, discredit animal instincts when it goes against another point. Animal instincts don't work because humans can rationalize and they can act AGAINST their animal instincts. So no go there. I mean its not animal instinct to abort your own baby, but humans do it. So don't give me animal instinct, human are not animals. We can reason and rationalize and make decisions against so called animal instincts.[/quote]
We have animal instincts - many of them. Sometimes people can think their way around them; at other times people seem to rationalize the way they are behaving instinctively. The sex drive is a very strong instinct in all of us, and is probably when we are at our most animalistic: if you can really think clearly during intercourse, you're probably not doing it right

[quote name='havok579257' date='12 January 2010 - 03:11 AM' timestamp='1263262275' post='2035118']
2. A little piece of rubber than keeps a husband and wife from sharing everything during sex. Its simple fact, if a condom is used, the spouses are not being completly self giving with each other. Which means your holding out on your spouse. Anyone who is not giving their spouse everything during sex, is doing a discredit to thier marriage. [/quote]
Twaddle.. unless you really want (and can support) a house filled to the gunwales with children, or just do without sex completely (wouldn't that "discredit marriage" even more?). However much you personally would like everybody never to have sex except when married, you have to accept that people do. *most* people do - the majority of people have had sex with someone other than their marital partner. Just because you want the world to be different doesn't change things.

[quote name='havok579257' date='12 January 2010 - 03:11 AM' timestamp='1263262275' post='2035118']
3. No, there is no strawman. Your saying that although the catholic church is against pre-marital sex. Although it is against condom use since the spouse's don't totally give to themselfs during sex. Although the catholic church is against extramarital sex. That although this, they should comprimise their beliefs because we can't expect everyone in the world to follow God's word? That's the exact same thing I brought up. The same point that you just brush off because you have no defense for it. Fact is, someone should not comprimise their morals, their beliefs, just becuase what they believe to be right, is considered very hard by society. So its hard. Got news for you, life is hard.[/quote]
You said that "or since murder will never stop, the catholic church and governments should push for less restrictions and make murder more acceptable?" - that is a complete strawman argument. It's not even worth spending the time on a rebuttal.

You also said "since there will always be heroin users the catholic church and governments should pass out free needles to help promote better heroin use" - if you were to limit that to existing heroin addicts, the suggestion does have merit (and is fairly close to what UK policy was 40/50 years ago). What you'd be doing is taking a situation you don't like and making it less bad: why is that a bad thing?

[quote name='havok579257' date='12 January 2010 - 03:11 AM' timestamp='1263262275' post='2035118']
4. Why do you instist that every priest can not remain celibate? Why doo you try to paint it that every priest can't abstaine from sex? Why don't you get some facts first buddy. Let me ask you, how many priests do you know who haven't remained celibate. Until you can provide some hard facts that all priets or even the majority, better yet, how about even 10% can not remain celebate, your just spewing stuff to try and sound good, when your logic is flawwed. Priests can and do abstaine from sex. And guess what, so do regualr people. There are a lot of people who don't have sex before marriage. Oh gasp, its actually possible. Its possible in the real world that is. Not in fairy tale land where everyone has sex before marriage and no one can remain faithful.[/quote]
Where did I insist that every priest cannot remain celibate? I merely stated an inarguable fact that there are priests who don't. And if there are those in the priesthood who don't ("let's not forget people are fallible"), then expecting everybody in the general population to be celibate outside marriage is simple hypocrisy. And if you're going to accept that sex outside marriage does happen (however much you personally may dislike the idea), then condom use at least reduces the number of babies born out of wedlock.

[quote name='havok579257' date='12 January 2010 - 03:11 AM' timestamp='1263262275' post='2035118']
One final point. Just look back 50-60 years. Compare pre-marital and extramarital sex in the 50's to the 2000's. Are you really going to try and say people were having as much premarital and extramarital sex in the 50's as they are in the 2000's? If not, then your theory is bunk. Cause history proves you wrong. History proves that people can abstaine from sex before marriage and extramarital sex. So if it was possible for the majority of people 50-60 years ago, why can't it be possible for the majority of people today?
[/quote]
If there had ever been a time when there was no extramarital sex, you might have a point.. but even with society being overwhelmingly disapproving of sex outside marriage, it still happened. It always has, and always will. There is more extramarital sex around now because there are fewer people with hangups about it being a bad thing.. I'm not a judgmental sort who'll say this is of itself a bad thing, however.

[Winchester]

[quote name='philbo' date='11 January 2010 - 05:01 PM' timestamp='1263247319' post='2035031']
"Intrinsically evil"??? Oh, please. That's got to be one of the silliest things I've read on this site. What is intrinsically evil about a bit of latex?
[/quote]
Excellent response. You've unhinged the argument completely with your train of logic. All that's missing is "LOL!". And possibly a rolling eyes smilie.

You must be the king of Debate Club at your middle school.

[philbo]

[quote name='Winchester' date='12 January 2010 - 03:13 PM' timestamp='1263305638' post='2035323']
Excellent response. You've unhinged the argument completely with your train of logic. All that's missing is "LOL!". And possibly a rolling eyes smilie.

You must be the king of Debate Club at your middle school.
[/quote]
Middle school is but a distant memory and attempts at sarcastic put-downs ping off my rhinoceros hide.. and presumably you think latex can be intrinsically evil?

[Winchester]

[quote name='philbo' date='12 January 2010 - 11:10 AM' timestamp='1263312651' post='2035378']
Middle school is but a distant memory and attempts at sarcastic put-downs ping off my rhinoceros hide[/quote]
So, apparently, does logic.

[quote]
.. and presumably you think latex can be intrinsically evil?
[/quote]
If it helps shut you up, then sure.

But that's an argument you've framed in such a manner as to demean, as opposed to deal honestly with, the opposing viewpoint.

[philbo]

[quote name='Winchester' date='12 January 2010 - 05:47 PM' timestamp='1263314823' post='2035393']
So, apparently, does logic.
[/quote]
If you start using logic rather than sarcasm, I'll deal with it. As it is, you've not exactly given me anything to counter, have you?

[quote name='Winchester' date='12 January 2010 - 05:47 PM' timestamp='1263314823' post='2035393']
If it helps shut you up, then sure.
[/quote]
Would you care to back that up with something about *why* an inanimate object can be considered intrinsically evil?

[quote name='Winchester' date='12 January 2010 - 05:47 PM' timestamp='1263314823' post='2035393']
But that's an argument you've framed in such a manner as to demean, as opposed to deal honestly with, the opposing viewpoint.
[/quote]
I notice that you've spent your sarcastic barbs complaining about that rather than answering any of the other points raised - not exactly dealing honestly with the opposing viewpoint, is it? Come to think of it, your rhetoric is doing exactly what you're accusing me of...

[Winchester]

[quote name='philbo' date='12 January 2010 - 12:04 PM' timestamp='1263315875' post='2035407']
If you start using logic rather than sarcasm, I'll deal with it. As it is, you've not exactly given me anything to counter, have you?[/quote]
You're not dealing with the arguments that spurred my evaluation.

[quote]
Would you care to back that up with something about *why* an inanimate object can be considered intrinsically evil?[/quote]
You're the one who made the statement that it's silly--the statement lacked substance and since you're the invading force here it's up to you to assert something.

[quote]
I notice that you've spent your sarcastic barbs complaining about that rather than answering any of the other points raised - not exactly dealing honestly with the opposing viewpoint, is it? Come to think of it, your rhetoric is doing exactly what you're accusing me of...
[/quote]
Calling "that's silly" a point is stretching it. I'm not really arguing with you, I'm giving you criticism to spur you to refine your argument, which thus far is not very good.

[havok579257]

[quote name='philbo' date='12 January 2010 - 06:24 AM' timestamp='1263295489' post='2035299']
We have animal instincts - many of them. Sometimes people can think their way around them; at other times people seem to rationalize the way they are behaving instinctively. The sex drive is a very strong instinct in all of us, and is probably when we are at our most animalistic: if you can really think clearly during intercourse, you're probably not doing it right


Twaddle.. unless you really want (and can support) a house filled to the gunwales with children, or just do without sex completely (wouldn't that "discredit marriage" even more?). However much you personally would like everybody never to have sex except when married, you have to accept that people do. *most* people do - the majority of people have had sex with someone other than their marital partner. Just because you want the world to be different doesn't change things.


You said that "or since murder will never stop, the catholic church and governments should push for less restrictions and make murder more acceptable?" - that is a complete strawman argument. It's not even worth spending the time on a rebuttal.

You also said "since there will always be heroin users the catholic church and governments should pass out free needles to help promote better heroin use" - if you were to limit that to existing heroin addicts, the suggestion does have merit (and is fairly close to what UK policy was 40/50 years ago). What you'd be doing is taking a situation you don't like and making it less bad: why is that a bad thing?


Where did I insist that every priest cannot remain celibate? I merely stated an inarguable fact that there are priests who don't. And if there are those in the priesthood who don't ("let's not forget people are fallible"), then expecting everybody in the general population to be celibate outside marriage is simple hypocrisy. And if you're going to accept that sex outside marriage does happen (however much you personally may dislike the idea), then condom use at least reduces the number of babies born out of wedlock.


If there had ever been a time when there was no extramarital sex, you might have a point.. but even with society being overwhelmingly disapproving of sex outside marriage, it still happened. It always has, and always will. There is more extramarital sex around now because there are fewer people with hangups about it being a bad thing.. I'm not a judgmental sort who'll say this is of itself a bad thing, however.
[/quote]


1. Dude we are human, animal instincts do not control us, logic does. An animal will have sex with any type of female that it can. That's obviously not the case with humans. Unless you are going to tell me, humans, will have sex with anyone of the opposite sex just to have sex. How does thinking clearly during intercourse at all relate to someone deciding to have sex with someone, when they just meet? Are you telling me, that when YOU meet a women, your brain shuts off and all you can think about is having sex with the women. That you almost can't control your urge to have sex? Come on man, your logic is flawed and your reaching to try and make your illogical point. You don't have sex with every female that you can from the opposite sex, so your theory is flawwed. People use logic to decide things, not animals instincts. If a person can not control themselfs when just thinking about sex with someone else, they have mental problems. Your logic is flawwed.

2. A women is only pregnant not even 10 days a month. Something you would know if you bothered to look up a women's cycle. So once again your logic is flawwed. Millions of humans have had sex throughout the centuries without condoms and never had 50 kids. Its very rare that women will have children in large numbers due to the difficulty in getting pregnant since a women is not fertaile the majority of days a month and nearly all couples do not have sex every day of their life. Once again, flawwed logic.

3. So just because the world has lots of premarital sex I just need to accept it? Well duh! But what I and the catholic church does not have to do is comprimise our morals. No one should ever comprimise their morals because of the majority of american's. If that was the case slavery and segragation would still be around. Are you for that. Cause the majority of america was for it when it was abolished. so should the american people who fought against slavery (and just for the record, the civil war was not fought over slavery, it was fought over seccession) just have acted it since the majority were for it?

4. Once again you keep saying strawman but have no rebuttal. You complain about winchester not giving you any rebuttal yet you do the same thing. Its called pot... kettle... black.

5. You insisted every preist by the way you framed your arguements. You tried to insinuate that all priests can not remain celebate, so don't even try to back track. We don't put our faith in a fallable man, we put them in an infalliable God. But your logic is faulty once again. Cause by your logic, if a few priests became murders, then how can we expect the majority of humanity to not become murderes? This is getting so old. Get some logical arguements here.

7. Dude your logic is flawwed again. You say since premarital sex and extramarital sex will never completly stop, then we will never get rid of stds, so we should just give everyone condoms. Well what if I said, sinces condoms are not perfect, whats the point of even giving them out since they could break. YOur arguing my point for me here, don't you see that.


Did you honestly want to come here and debate logically or did you just want to try and attack the catholic church?

[Winchester]

[quote name='havok579257' date='12 January 2010 - 01:43 PM' timestamp='1263321793' post='2035470']
4. Once again you keep saying strawman but have no rebuttal. You complain about winchester not giving you any rebuttal yet you do the same thing. Its called pot... kettle... black.[/quote]
Thank you. I perform a valuable service.

[MithLuin]

[quote]Just because you want the world to be different doesn't change things. [/quote]

Very true. We aren't going to just wish the AIDS epidemic away.

Please refer back to my description of Uganda's ABC program - handing out condoms was done to targeted populations who were likely to engage in risky behavior. In other words, men who showed up at clinics for sexually transmitted diseases (not just HIV) would be given free condoms. There was plenty of preaching of abstinence going on, and that was in fact the main drive of the program.

The Catholic Church says not to use condoms. It also says not to fornicate or commit adultery. If people obey both teachings, there's no problem - with AIDS, STDs or a lot of other things. The Church is teaching moral behavior, and it isn't going to call something wrong right just because a lot of people do it. It can be wrong and common/popular. Many sins are quite common, human nature being what it is, but they're still sins. I will grant that it is the responsibility of the Church to teach that fornication and adultery are very serious sins, and people should never think it is 'okay' just because they managed to not use a condom while doing so. That would be akin to thinking it was okay to rob a bank if your getaway driver obeyed the speed limit.

You are saying that a nonMuslim culture does not have a tradition of chaste sexual behavior among young people, and thus they cannot be encouraged to live chaste lives with any effect. That's...pretty deterministic. Everything is just the way it is and it won't change. Cultures change all the time. Uganda [i]has[/i] seen cultural shifts because of the abstinence education they've used. In Masaka, Uganda, "among 15-year-old boys and girls, the proportion who had never had sex rose from about 20% to 50% between 1989 and 1995." [url=http://www.who.int/inf-new/aids2.htm]source[/url]

Using condoms is also counter-cultural in Subsaharan Africa. I do not want to get into details about what styles of sex are preferred, but certainly there is some pretty strong resistance from the men when it comes to wearing condoms.

In fact, to speak of AIDS openly at all is counter-cultural. Most people do not admit they are HIV+, knowing they will be shunned by their community. The disease is a taboo. Speaking about sex is often taboo (though it depends where you are for that). It is not unusual for the gov't to try to downplay or deny the severity of the problem, which seriously undermines programs to educate and prevent the spread of the disease. The countries who have made a difference are ones where society has decided it was time to change the culture, not just give up:

[quote]The West African country of Senegal is one of the few countries in sub-Saharan Africa to have succeeded in containing the spread of HIV from the outset. Since the first cases appeared in the country in the mid-1980s, infection rates have remained consistently low at under 2% -- largely due to the success of a nationwide campaign to modify sexual behaviour. This has led to a massive increase in the use of condoms and [b]a delay in the age at which teenage girls first have sex.[/b] [url=http://www.who.int/inf-new/aids3.htm]source[/url][/quote]

There are many cultural challenges to confronting the AIDS epidemic (in the countries of Africa and in other nations). Encouraging abstinence and fidelity is just one of them. We don't give up on any of the others, and we shouldn't give up on that, either. The Catholic Church has done many things to help counter cultural prejudice. For instance, in Burundi (where 75% of the population is Catholic), the Church has said that they will not marry anyone who has not gotten an AIDS test. The results don't need to be shown to the Church (not their business), but they think it very important that the spouses-to-be are honest with each other on this issue. [url=http://www.thebody.com/content/news/art23456.html]source[/url] Sure, there are people who would 'rather not know', but this gets it out in the open. Testing is one of the important ways of combating the disease.


The Church does what it can to help. No, they aren't going to pass out free condoms. But...that doesn't mean the Church is 'doing nothing' about AIDS. If other groups what to pass out condoms...be our guest. AFAIK, they're not illegal in any African nation. The Catholic Church seeks to build strong and just societies. Yes, that means doing something about AIDS, but that is one issue only. The Church also wants the family to be a stable place where children can be raised with love. It takes a lot more than a health worker to assure that that is so, which is why the Church has such a variety of ministries. The Church doesn't say prostitutes can't use condoms. Rather, she says that the woman should not prostitute herself at all. It's a more compassionate approach to get the woman out of that job than to just supply her with condoms, anyway.

Edited January 12, 2010 by MithLuin

[Socrates]

[quote name='jkaands' date='09 January 2010 - 12:31 PM' timestamp='1263058266' post='2033233']
Subs-Saharan (not Muslim) Africa does not have a tradition of virginity, abstinence or fidelity in marriage. Both boys and girls, but particularly boys, have sex early and often. Many men have sex on the road, infecting their wives and through births of infected mothers, their children. [b]It is a complete waste to promote abstinence among countries who do not have this anywhere in their traditions[/b], to the exclusion of barrier and gel contraception, male circumcision and HPV vaccination (to deter cervical cancer, which is an STD). Condoms work in these countries to decrease the spread of HIV and AIDS. Male circumcision works too, to decrease the spread of STD's in general, and is now being promoted widely. The HPV vaccine is shown to be very well tolerated and effective in the US and will also enter widespread use.
[/quote]
God forbid Christians (much less the Pope!) dare promote virtue and try to change immoral "traditions"!

The Church has often worked to change immoral "traditions" in many places through history - including polygamy, slavery, infanticide, and human sacrifice. Contrary to the dogmas of that pc religion of "liberal Catholicism," it is the duty to of the Church to promote virtue and oppose immorality, whether it is popular or not - not to bow to popular opinion and offer easy fix "solutions" that are contrary to morality.
Promoting chastity is the best solution to the problem of AIDS. There's nothing wrong with vaccines and circumcision, but contraception is immoral and cannot be promoted by the Pope. Throwing shiploads of condoms at Africa has done little to eliminate the AIDS epidemic, anyway. Nobody ever died from sexual abstinence.

No one said promoting virtue and morality where it is not commonly practiced is easy, but it is what we all must do as Catholics and Christians, and especially our Holy Father on earth.

And rubbers and contraception are not part of the African tradition either, for that matter.


[quote name='jkaands' date='09 January 2010 - 12:34 PM' timestamp='1263058480' post='2033235']
The countries in Africa with the lowest STD and HIV rates are in Muslim Africa. I, for one, would not like to live in countries with a 14th century moral code, and when the rights of both men and women, but especially women, are severely restricted.
[/quote]
Yeah, God forbid we Christians oppose the "rights" to fornicate and sodomize with careless abandon! Much better to suffer from an epidemic of AIDS and other disgusting diseases than to live by some repressive medieval moral code!
Gotta love "liberal Catholicism."

As most people on here are aware, I don't support the excesses of Islamic penal code regarding women, but there is certainly nothing wrong with promoting the virtue of chastity and opposing promiscuous sex.

If the Muslims can reduce AIDS in Africa by promoting sexual morality, why can't we Christians?

[Winchester]

So it's ridiculous to try to assert women's rights in countries that don't have this in their traditions.

Yeah. I can totally see the UN adopting that stance.

[Socrates]

Blaming the Pope for the AIDS epidemic in Africa is utterly ridiculous.

If people in Africa were actually listening to the Pope and Church teachings, they wouldn't be fornicating, committing adultery, and engaging in prostitution and sodomy with reckless abandon.
If such behavior was discontinued, and chastity practiced, in accord with the Church's constant moral teaching, you can guarantee the spread of AIDS would be drastically reduced.

In addition to the problems with condoms brought up by others here, the entire blame-the-Pope game is absurd. Obviously, people engaging in fornication are not paying any heed to what the Pope says about sexual morality in the first place. Do you think someone who sleeps around with many different women, visits prostitutes, or engages in bi-sexual activity (all common practices in much of Africa) is suddenly going to pay reverent attention to what the Pope says when it concerns wearing a rubber?

Of course, rather than attack the root problem - the popular practices of sexual promiscuity and immorality - it's so much easier (and much more politically-correct) to blame the Pope for an unpopular Church moral teaching. Do this, and you'll receive a pat on the back and congratulations from all the other liberal opinionists for your "courage."

Edited January 13, 2010 by Socrates

[philbo]

[quote name='havok579257' date='12 January 2010 - 07:43 PM' timestamp='1263321793' post='2035470']
1. Dude we are human, animal instincts do not control us, logic does. An animal will have sex with any type of female that it can. That's obviously not the case with humans.
[/quote]
You obviously know as little about animals as you do about humans: I can guarantee over 50% of animals do not "have sex with any type of female"... (and among most species, not even male animals will have sex with any type of female) logic doesn't control humans (if it did, there would be no religions - faith without evidence as about as illogical a behavioural trait as you can get).

[quote name='havok579257' date='12 January 2010 - 07:43 PM' timestamp='1263321793' post='2035470']
2. A women is only pregnant not even 10 days a month. Something you would know if you bothered to look up a women's cycle. So once again your logic is flawwed.
[/quote]
I assume you mean a woman can only get pregnant.. however, trying to get your timing right is the most inefficient form of birth control, and doesn't work - there's nothing wrong with my logic. I really didn't think it was that hard to understand.

[quote name='havok579257' date='12 January 2010 - 07:43 PM' timestamp='1263321793' post='2035470']
Millions of humans have had sex throughout the centuries without condoms and never had 50 kids. Its very rare that women will have children in large numbers due to the difficulty in getting pregnant since a women is not fertaile the majority of days a month and nearly all couples do not have sex every day of their life. Once again, flawwed logic.
[/quote]
All four of my grandparents came from families with >10 children, and that wasn't considered unusual at the time - go back another couple of generations and it was the case that you needed a lot of children to see enough survive through to childbearing age.. but with the vast improvements in health care, such reproductive profligacy is not sustainable as almost all children survive.

[quote name='havok579257' date='12 January 2010 - 07:43 PM' timestamp='1263321793' post='2035470']
3. So just because the world has lots of premarital sex I just need to accept it? Well duh! But what I and the catholic church does not have to do is comprimise our morals.[/quote]
It's up to you whether you get on your moral high horse and try and stop people from having sex... you may want to change things, but you have to accept that it does happen.

[quote name='havok579257' date='12 January 2010 - 07:43 PM' timestamp='1263321793' post='2035470']
4. Once again you keep saying strawman but have no rebuttal. You complain about winchester not giving you any rebuttal yet you do the same thing. Its called pot... kettle... black.
[/quote]
Oh, FFS - are you really as stupid as you're coming across? You *really* see a moral equivalence between helping prevent the spread of serious disease and helping people kill people?

If you believe that your comment was not a strawman, then what you are saying is that it is morally the same thing to use condoms to help reduce the spread of AIDS as it is to help murderers - is this really what you're saying?

[quote name='havok579257' date='12 January 2010 - 07:43 PM' timestamp='1263321793' post='2035470']
5. You insisted every preist by the way you framed your arguements. You tried to insinuate that all priests can not remain celebate, so don't even try to back track.
[/quote]
Can you read? What I said was:
[quote]After all, it doesn't work 100% for priests who have had years oftraining and taken vows of abstention, why would you expect lecturingfrom the pulpit to make people decide not to have sex?[/quote]
..at what point does saying "abstinence doesn't work 100%" mean "every priest"

[quote name='havok579257' date='12 January 2010 - 07:43 PM' timestamp='1263321793' post='2035470']But your logic is faulty once again. Cause by your logic, if a few priests became murders, then how can we expect the majority of humanity to not become murderes? This is getting so old. Get some logical arguements here.[/quote]
Again, you're ascribing things to me that I didn't say - where did I talk about "majority"? I didn't say "most", just "not none". Please try and read what I've actually said rather than making inaccurate assumptions and misquotes.

[quote name='havok579257' date='12 January 2010 - 07:43 PM' timestamp='1263321793' post='2035470']
7. Dude your logic is flawwed again. You say since premarital sex and extramarital sex will never completly stop, then we will never get rid of stds, so we should just give everyone condoms. Well what if I said, sinces condoms are not perfect, whats the point of even giving them out since they could break. YOur arguing my point for me here, don't you see that.
[/quote]
I really think you ought to do a course in critical thinking, and how to think logically. You seem repeatedly unable to draw an accurate conclusion from what's being said.

If you're waiting for a perfect means to stop transmission of STDs, you'll probably be waiting forever. Just because condoms aren't perfect, doesn't mean they shouldn't be used if they make an imperfect situation better.

[quote name='havok579257' date='12 January 2010 - 07:43 PM' timestamp='1263321793' post='2035470']
Did you honestly want to come here and debate logically or did you just want to try and attack the catholic church?
[/quote]
Where have I attacked the Catholic church? Disagreeing with church policy on condoms isn't attacking the Catholic church. If you only want people who toe the party line, why have a "debate" forum at all?

Would I be right in summarizing your arguments as being: "if you insist on being immoral and having sex outside marriage, then we want you to catch a life-threatening illness so you can join your fellow fornicators in Hell as soon as possible"?