Customer Discussions > religion discussion forum

Pope Francis


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 201-225 of 388 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on 3 Apr 2013 16:25:18 BDT
Drew Jones says:
"Maybe I can draw a parallel."
Turns out you couldn't!

"If I am going to cut open the arm of a little girl, does it make it OK if I use a sterilized knife rather than a rusty one to reduce the rate of infection?"
Yes. It makes a big difference. Do you have what you'd call 'final cause' for cutting cutting open the arm of a little girl?

Posted on 3 Apr 2013 16:27:45 BDT
Roma says:
Tom, Tom, Tom, No one is saying that availability of condoms will eradicate AIDS. All agree that a change of lifestyle is also necessary. Lifestyle is a contributory factor in many illnesses. While trying to address long term problems, we do not ignore means that are available to help control or cure these problems. In that respect, condoms can be regarded as a prophylactic method of spreading disease no different from wearing a face mask to prevent the spread of respiratory diseases. I think that were AIDs a d STD s are concerned it would be better to regard condoms in a medical rather than a moral light.

Regarding the effectiveness of condoms in helping spread disease, i wouldn t put my faith entirely in scientific reports.As far as I m concerned, it s lime the common cold. Studies may tell you you can t catch a cold from being socked: common sense tells me you can.

I have read Plato, Hume, Aristotle et all but don t see their relevance. Simple human compassion tells me that where help exists it should be made available to those who need it.
I hope that one of the first things Pope Francis will say is that if anyone risks transmitting a disease then they are morally bound to use any protection available to them.

Finally, most Catholics who do use natural family planning do so to follow the rules. They do not see any moral difference between this method and using condoms. I fully expected the Church to change its teaching just as my child rearing days ended.

Cheers and don be mean to me because stupid idiot that i am i crashed my car today. Thankully no one was hurt.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Apr 2013 16:39:38 BDT
Tom M says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Apr 2013 16:46:54 BDT
Tom M says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Apr 2013 16:53:51 BDT
Last edited by the author on 3 Apr 2013 16:54:30 BDT
Drew Jones says:
"Is there anything incorrect about any of my posts? Do point it out my little ratiophobe."
OK: the name you go by.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Apr 2013 17:13:53 BDT
K. Hoyles says:
'What studies are you sourcing Hoyle that were more extensive or better argued than the Hearst UNAIDS study and Green's Harvard study?'

A more up to date, unbiased and reliable one than yours, obviously.

Posted on 3 Apr 2013 17:15:36 BDT
Dan,

The odious Tom M was deleted from the stateside Amazon Forum for his atrocious behaviour. It's only a matter of time before he gets himself kicked off here as well.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Apr 2013 17:29:20 BDT
Last edited by the author on 3 Apr 2013 17:32:43 BDT
Garscadden says:
You are misrepresenting because you appear to be saying that condom usage is not a successful strategy, when what Hearst, Chen and Epstein are all saying is that the problem is that those in long term relationships tend to just _not use_ condoms, and this is a major part of the problem.

You also quote an article from 2009 saying UNAIDS isn't listening to this, but Epstein in 2008 herself said: "Even UNAIDS' documents now say concurrency is an important factor contributing to hyper-epidemic situations where you have very high rates of HIV."

Would you say Epstein, Hearst and Chen think abstinence (another great idea of the Catholic Church), has a better success rate than serial monogamy (especially when that monogamy is short lived - and thus there is a greater choice of condom usage)?

Just so you know - I have Hearst and Chen's paper from 2004 open on my desk, and am using that as my reference for them. For Epstein I am just using an interview with her and an article she wrote as my source. I'm afraid I'm not filtering my views through a Catholic propaganda website.

If you have JSTOR access the Hearst and Chen report is Source: Studies in Family Planning, Vol. 35, No. 1 (Mar., 2004), pp. 39-47

The acknowledgments at the end of the paper are interesting. :)

Pop quiz - do you think the Hearst and Chen say something along the lines of:
"Consistent condom use is effective for reducing HIV transmission."?

"...Anything less could encourage inconsistent condom use-certainly not an effective means of HIV prevention."

[EDIT - for my _sins_ i used Heasrt instead of Hearst]

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Apr 2013 19:16:04 BDT
Bellatori says:
Garscadden says: "..."

That is totally unfair. You are using reputable source material direct from the horses mouth as it were. I really must protest. Where does that leave people like me and Tom? I have to spend time working hard to find references on the internet and Tom has to get creative and make his up.

I really must protest...

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Apr 2013 19:30:21 BDT
AJ Murray says:
-"Dan, look up "a-n-a-l-o-g-y""

I got up as far as the "l" and then Google caused me to faint.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Apr 2013 19:31:05 BDT
Garscadden says:
I do apologise - I'll stick to using Catholic propaganda in future :)

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Apr 2013 20:05:15 BDT
C. A. Small says:
Hi Karen- I have pointed out to the liar and verbose buffoon Tom M where he misrepresented Green, the study and other studies he "quotes". But he still carries on with his lies and misrepresentations. He wouldn't know the truth if it hit him on the head. He is a typical catholic.

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Apr 2013 20:29:13 BDT
Spin says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 3 Apr 2013 22:54:40 BDT
K. Hoyles says:
Hi Clive - he seems convinced the 'Catholic solution' will solve the problem, ie, 'catholic moral teaching'. It gives me the creeps.

Posted on 4 Apr 2013 00:32:56 BDT
Last edited by the author on 4 Apr 2013 00:35:33 BDT
Tom M says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 4 Apr 2013 00:55:26 BDT
Garscadden says:
Are you saying I am making quotes up?

Posted on 4 Apr 2013 04:58:58 BDT
Last edited by the author on 4 Apr 2013 05:52:39 BDT
Tom M says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on 4 Apr 2013 05:13:56 BDT
Last edited by the author on 4 Apr 2013 05:18:03 BDT
Tom M says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on 4 Apr 2013 05:23:49 BDT
Last edited by the author on 4 Apr 2013 06:08:52 BDT
Tom M says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 4 Apr 2013 05:49:27 BDT
Last edited by the author on 4 Apr 2013 06:11:09 BDT
Tom M says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 4 Apr 2013 06:46:57 BDT
Garscadden says:
Are you saying I am making quotes up? Have the courage of your convictions for once, and give a simple answer.

Posted on 4 Apr 2013 07:37:58 BDT
Garscadden says:
In fact Tom - don't bother.

You don't seem able to read primary sources. Indeed, you wouldn't recognise one if it kicked you up the bum. Your position is intellectually cowardly - and i use that term guardedly, as you show about as much intellect as a parrot.

You harangue others for believing what they are fed by the media, but rather than accepting quotes from the source you quote that media. The thing you are correct about is that the media interprets and distorts, but you then don't appear to have the intelligence to accept the implications of that yourself - this shows a distinct lack of any kind of intelligence.

If you really want to educate:
- Include primary source references for what you say.
- Answer the questions put to you.
- Give concise answers, not content free verbiage and cut/paste drivel.

In reply to an earlier post on 4 Apr 2013 09:16:38 BDT
Anita says:
Some parrots may feel deeply offended by this comparison.

What I find slightly amusing is when people who (consider themselves to be?) believers have no problem using the "OMG" acronym.

Sorry for barging in

In reply to an earlier post on 4 Apr 2013 09:23:09 BDT
K. Hoyles says:
Hi Anita, you are welcome to barge in, I do. Yes, most belief systems tend to be hypocritical at best, and at worst, downright dishonest. In my humble opinion...

In reply to an earlier post on 4 Apr 2013 10:04:02 BDT
Bellatori says:
"Green's unequivocal endorsement" He used the word 'may' which only someone whose first language is not English could possibly put forward as unequivocal.

You also misquote the last Pope who far from saying the equivocation 'might' actually said " the problem cannot be overcome by the distribution of prophylactics: on the contrary, they increase it" which is about as unequivocal as you can get.

It was only later AS I HAD TO POINT OUT TO YOU that the Vatican published a retraction.

SO that is twice you have mendaciously adjusted peoples statements to support your position.

The whole AIDS/HIV problem can be solved in an instant were no one to have sex... However this flies in the face of human nature, something that the Catholic church is very slow to learn. It is why, in spite of repeated injunctions to the contrary, a very significant proportion of Catholic women use contraception, and why, finally, the Pope has endorsed the use of Condoms as part of an AIDS strategy.

The problem you have, Tom, is that you want the Catholic church to be recognised as the trail blazer whereas the actuality is that it has to be dragged kicking and screaming into the present. Its current AIDS strategy is very meritorious. It is NOW the worlds biggest distributer of anti-viral AIDS drugs. The strategy MAY be having some effect BUT what you will undoubtedly refuse to accept is that for nearly 30 years from when the problem was first identified, the homophobic stance and resistance to condoms undoubtedly contributed to the spread of AIDS in Africa and the inability of the local body politic to effectively control AIDS. That latterly the church has performed an about face at least means that we have a chance to do something but no one can be under any illusions as to the harm they did first.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


ARRAY(0xb0223d80)
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  religion discussion forum
Participants:  30
Total posts:  388
Initial post:  13 Mar 2013
Latest post:  14 Apr 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 1 customer

Search Customer Discussions