The Pope on Condoms and AIDS

NYT Editorial

Pope Benedict XVI has every right to express his opposition to the use of condoms on moral grounds, in accordance with the official stance of the Roman Catholic Church. But he deserves no credence when he distorts scientific findings about the value of condoms in slowing the spread of the AIDS virus.

As reported on Tuesday by journalists who accompanied the pope on his flight to Africa, Benedict said that distribution of condoms would not resolve the AIDS problem but, on the contrary, would aggravate or increase it. The first half of his statement is clearly right. Condoms alone won’t stop the spread of H.I.V., the virus that causes AIDS. Campaigns to reduce the number of sexual partners, safer-sex practices and other programs are needed to bring the disease to heel.

But the second half of his statement is grievously wrong. There is no evidence that condom use is aggravating the epidemic and considerable evidence that condoms, though no panacea, can be helpful in many circumstances.

From an individual’s point of view, condoms work very well in preventing transmission of the AIDS virus from infected to uninfected people. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention cites “comprehensive and conclusive” evidence that latex condoms, when used consistently and correctly, are “highly effective” in preventing heterosexual transmission of the virus that causes AIDS. The most recent meta-analysis of the best studies, published by the respected Cochrane Collaboration, concluded that condoms can reduce the transmission of the AIDS virus by 80 percent.

However, both groups warned that condom use cannot provide absolute protection. Condoms sometimes break, slip or are put on incorrectly. The best way to avoid transmission of the virus is to abstain from sexual intercourse or have a long-term mutually monogamous relationship with an uninfected person.

From a national perspective, condom promotion has been effective in slowing epidemics in several countries among high-risk groups, such as sex workers and their customers, but less effective in slowing epidemics that have spread into the general population, as in much of sub-Saharan Africa. That is probably because far too few people use condoms consistently and correctly.

Even so, health authorities consider condoms a valuable component of any well-rounded program to prevent the spread of AIDS. It seems irresponsible to blame condoms for making the epidemic worse.

Why does the pope secretly hate condoms, anyways? I say secretly because he keeps giving these lame arguments, and it’s clear that they’re not the reason why he dislikes them. So what is it? Is there a passage in the bible that prohibits the use of rubbers? But then why doesn’t he just say that? Or, is it bad manners even for the Pope to use the bible as justification for anything nowadays?

Well it sends mixed messages about reproduction/sex before marriage. 8-[

Or that they’re “unsafe”

Its funny the vatican goes on about the size of the HIV’s size to support not using condoms.

You CAN get HIV even WITH a condom but the chances are VERY low.

Avoiding high risk partners/no sex at all protects better than condom use. Most virus is in cells which can’t squeeze through a good condom but theres a small chance a free roaming virus could get through.

They STILL protect A LOT.

I assume the idea is that condom distribution makes sex seem trivial - that there aren’t any actual consequences - and that that attitude increases the likelihood in a general way of contracting AIDS (rather than saying that a particular person in a particular instance of using a condom is more likely to contract AIDS, which would be outlandish). Picture a population of people suddenly becoming promiscuous because of the availability of condoms, then something changes with regard to world politics and the condoms are suddenly unavailable. Now you’ve got a population of people without sexual self-control and no condoms. Yes, I think this is a naive and mistaken view of the actual situation, but I can understand the logic (admittedly, if this is the Pope’s logic - I’m not sure it actually is).

The (attempted) theological justification is that during sex, nature should be allowed to take its course. Anything that might stop life from being created during sex is seen as intereference in God’s work.

By the same vein, I imagine doing it up the arse and coming on her tits are also out of the question. Being a Catholic must get dull sometimes. :wink: