Bishop Opposes Vatican Ban on Condoms

[chickens4life]

[quote name='PadreSantiago' date='Dec 3 2005, 01:27 PM']By keeping condoms banned you are just killing people.  You have to ask yourself this question:  Which is morally more unacceptable, people dieing or people having sex?  To me this is a no brainer, but maybe some of you see death as the lesser evil...i just don't know what you are thinking by allowing this disease to continue by not using protection.  When you get in a car you wear a seatbelt, when you are going sky diving you wear a parachute and when you are having sex in africa you wear a friggin condom.
[right][snapback]809648[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
condoms aren't elligel, their imoral and any one that is not going to stop people that are going to fornicate inspite of the churches teachings(like Laudate said).

People suffering and getting dead has never been and never will be imoral, because that is part of the plan. Without death you can't get to heaven, and with out suffering you have no oproritunity to grow in faith and charity.
And besides you and I and every one else are going to die, and if it isn't AIDS then it will be some thing else.
God Bless

[fatboyluis]

ahhh man i had this conversation with a believer in "energy" (LOL)
he kept saying that the Pope killed these ppl in Africa by saying that they shouldn't use condoms,!!!
what! like ludate said they dont care about what the Pope says and its simple JUST DON'T HAVE SEX!! i mean is that soo hard ?
outside of marriage that is


anyways God Bless

Edited December 4, 2005 by fatboyluis

[MichaelFilo]

Another "haha heretic" bishop. I hope he finds his rightful home in the afterlife. It's nice when a bishop starts opposing Catholic truth; it's really helpful for Satan I'm sure. Especially because he needs so much help nowadays.

Seriously... why does the Vaticna put these people into those offices. I can't imagnine they couldn't find someone more orthodox.

God bless,
Mikey

[Norseman82]

[quote name='MichaelFilo' date='Dec 3 2005, 10:33 PM']

Seriously... why does the Vaticna put these people into those offices. I can't imagnine they couldn't find someone more orthodox.


[right][snapback]810176[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Some may slip through the cracks or they may not have those views when consecrated. And I remember hearing that there were a lot of bishops in the early 300s that supported the Arian heresy.

But as Gamaliel said in Acts, if it is of man it will pass away, but if it is of God you cannot stop it.

[Norseman82]

[quote name='Didacus' date='Dec 2 2005, 03:41 PM']The shocking truth is this:

We do not need sexaul relations in order to live a happy fulfilling life!
Shocking isn't it?!
When exactly did sex go from being an act of love within a marriage - open to life, to sex being about a 'need' like breathing or drinking water!?!?!?
[right][snapback]808644[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


Probably during the 60s and the advent of the contraceptive mentality which took away the fear of pregnancy outside of marriage and the advent of the proponents of free love.

Now granted, we all have a drive due to our human nature, so in a sense there is a 'need', and the Bible acknowledges that not everyone can handle celibacy (see Matthew 19:10-12, all of 1Corinthians 7, and 1 Timothy 5:11-16). But the Christian response is not to become a bunch of fornicating bums like the secular free-lovers and lesbo-feminazis are trying to justify; the Christian solutiion is marriage (provided one is eligible, that is).

I do have one thing to note, though. I find it ironic when someone who says you don't need sexual relations is himself/herself married!!!

[Ash Wednesday]

The Church is not telling people to go around having sex with multiple partners without a condom, simply because they have a ban on condoms. People forget to mention the Church teaches absticence and monogamy within marriage, too. I would like to know what kind of Catholic has no moral qualms about sleeping around on his wife, or sleeping around period, and YET wants to obey the Church about slapping on a rubber. I'd like to know just how many of those Catholics exist. Very few people in the Catholic population worldwide actually consciously assent to the Church's teaching on contraception to begin with.

From a basic secular standpoint, even if the Church had somehow allowed and advocated condom use, it wouldn't change anything. Much of the spread of AIDS has much to do with cultural beliefs on the continent. For example, many men in Africa prefer "dry" sex -- they cannot stand the woman's "moisture" -- and they don't like the feel of condoms. Period. So for people to paint this picture of poor Africans desperately yearning for condoms and evil Mother Church locking those Trojans in a vault somewhere in Rome is just preposterous.

I personally also don't think that you can "educate" people into naturally enjoying condoms, since it really doesn't jive with mother nature, anyway. Even in "civilized" places like the west in all our so-called progress, enlightenment and education, people get caught up in the "heat of the moment" and don't want to bother with condoms no matter how many times they've heard it in high school.

[Guest Rick777]

this is a TRAGIC story, especially because this is a BISHOP who should be setting a superb example to his fellow Catholics and non-Catholics.
very bad press.

[N/A Gone]

If they have aids they shouldnt be having sex period. Even if they were a condom it is still very possible to spread aids. All aids does is stop the "lil boys" it doesnt stop the sweat or all the lady liquids. Plus, a majority of the time the condom does not even seal properly.

I did a ton of research on this issue when I reverted and I have come to the conclusion in that research that the only time that a form of birthcontrol would have an advantage is a situation that should not exist anyway. Like this, people have aids. Well, you dont get it from the air. If they keep their pants on first and obey the other sex laws than it wouldnt be an issue. I agree this place is sad, and this issue will forever be something the culture will try to put a black eye on the church. But it is wrong. I am proud for the church standing strong on this.

btw, we should have an NFP talk sometime. I dont wanna open it up here because it needs terms that are not good for children, but the ethical difference between NFP and Depo is always a great debate

[Didacus]

[quote name='Fides_et_Ratio' date='Dec 2 2005, 04:22 PM']Umm, no.

"safe sex" (truly!)= between a man and a woman who are married and were both virgins (entirely) before marriage.
[right][snapback]808695[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Oops... sorry, forgot to put on my sarcastic face...

[CreepyCrawler]

Well, you can't get AIDS from sweat and you can be a virgin and have AIDS (for example, a child who gets it from the mother, or having a blood transfusion in an area where the blood isn't tested, or using a dirty needle, or getting stuck with a needle in a hospital). BUT, if you have AIDS, you should care about others enough not to put them at risk, even if it means giving up your sex life. I mean, if you really love someone, esp. your spouse, you should be willing to give up physicial pleasure for their physical well-being.

I like what someone else said earlier about this stemming from a lack of respect of women. It's that and a lack of respect for marriage in general. If you are married, do not sleep with someone else. If you have a disease, do not sleep with your wife. It's that easy.

The problem with condoms is that people think that they will save lives. Perhaps it will put you at less risk, but really, if you want to eliminate risk for getting and transmitting AIDS, you will change your behavior, as well. The problem is that people do not want to change their behavior and physicians do not want to tell their patients to change, either. It's such a shame. At least the Church has said, be abstinent, be monogamous, do not use condoms. That is the best way to prevent disease and have a good society. Too bad most doctors are chicken or brain-washed...

[Matty_boy]

[quote name='Fides_et_Ratio' date='Dec 2 2005, 03:24 PM']perhaps not for long...
Precisely.

Thus, condoms are ALWAYS morally unacceptable, regardless the circumstance and situation. We are not animals, we can abstain from sexual relations and it won't kill us.
[right][snapback]808626[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I disagree. Fighter Pilots carry condoms to collect water to drink in case of a crash.

{Yes, I'm gonna be "That Guy"}

Edited December 6, 2005 by Matty_boy