tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post7641863417884641372..comments2024-01-24T04:59:45.518-05:00Comments on Jewish Atheist: The Pope on Condoms in AfricaJewish Atheisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04616617537150446818noreply@blogger.comBlogger47125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-18160546820125346632009-04-06T01:04:00.000-04:002009-04-06T01:04:00.000-04:00So, myth stories about talking snakes are better t...So, myth stories about talking snakes are better than unbiased education and proper public health practices?Tigerboyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06794153016636051988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-58693715469515059942009-03-29T20:05:00.000-04:002009-03-29T20:05:00.000-04:00That Harvard Report & Mr. Green's claims h...<I>That Harvard Report & Mr. Green's claims have been dismissed as "ludicrous" by the chief of UN AIDS.<BR/>www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article5987155.ece</I><BR/><BR/>That's a good article, but your take on it is a bit misleading. It's true that the UN's chief AIDS bureaucrat still hews to the conventional wisdom, but everyone else quoted thinks Green is onto something.<BR/><BR/>Premarital testing etc.? I'm not saying it's a bad idea, but it seems to be founded on assumptions about African sexual behaviour that are not, on the whole, true. <BR/><BR/>It's becoming clear that one of the factors promoting the spread of AIDS there is the prevalence of multiple, concurrent sexual relationships among large parts of the adult population, especially among more-educated, wealthier classes, and including relationships entered into voluntarily by women. The keyword to listen for is "concurrency". This contradicts the convention wisdom on several points, but it is the emerging consensus. <BR/><BR/>The notion of HIV-infected men forcing themselves on their innocent brides (who should therefore be encouraged to use condoms for marital sex) is a piece of feminist/progressive folklore. I'm not saying it is never true - any plausible scenario is no doubt true sometimes - but it is generally false. One study, for example, found that in couples where one partner is infected with HIV and other is not, the woman is the infected partner about 30-40 percent of the time. In other words, she got it from someone other than her husband. <BR/><BR/>It's something we need to get our heads around: patterns of behaviour that are uncommon here, or restricted to small groups, are normal and widespread over there. And differences in the overall pattern can make a huge difference to the spread of STDs (tipping points and all that).<BR/><BR/>The whole debate about condoms vs. behavioural change is really a question of how to deal with these patterns. Do we (1) insert a technology (condoms + education) or (2) try to change values, typically by invoking religious values held, but not practised, by the population. Or, can we (3) successfully combine the approaches. The condom skeptics have argued that #1 hasn't worked, #2 has to some degree, but #3 is possible only to a limited extent (e.g., targeting prostitutes - who aren't nearly as important a factor as once believed). <BR/><BR/>Really and truly, the best thing well-meaning Westerners can do about the African AIDS crisis is to chuck their old assumptions and open their eyes, 'cos the cliches are falling like dominoes.<BR/><BR/>intellectual pariahAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-54033509005446594892009-03-29T15:36:00.000-04:002009-03-29T15:36:00.000-04:00That Harvard Report & Mr. Green's claims h...That Harvard Report & Mr. Green's claims have been dismissed as "ludicrous" by the chief of UN AIDS.<BR/>www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article5987155.ece<BR/><BR/>@shoshi,<BR/>I wholeheartedly agree with your idea of pre marital testing for AIDS. Sadly it seems many mothers & fathers of brides don't insist on such testing- because in countries like Zimbabwe & Swaziland women have shorter life expectancies-the main reason of this is that they get AIDS from their infected husbands.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-66683795125955193752009-03-26T03:28:00.000-04:002009-03-26T03:28:00.000-04:00"condoms are infinitely preferable to no cond..."condoms are infinitely preferable to no condoms & infecting their poor, young virgin wives."<BR/><BR/>for this reason, I think premarital testing should be made mandatory in those countries. No-one in their right mind would marry their virgin daughter to someone who will transmit her a deadly disease.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-75448062212438010272009-03-24T03:29:00.000-04:002009-03-24T03:29:00.000-04:00Behavioral changes always work & condoms almos...Behavioral changes always work & condoms almost always work, but not always. In cases like rape, none work.<BR/><BR/>Even if behavioral change is the best way to combat the crisis, I don't see any behaviour changes or return to traditional morality amongst the Catholic French, the Poles, the Italians or the Irish, if anything they seem to be going further away from traditional morality(nothing wrong with that!)<BR/>How do they avoid unwanted pregnancies or diseases? Condoms & artificial contraceptives. <BR/><BR/>Also, whether feminazis have always blamed African men or not, its an unfortuante fact that French women in all probability have greater personal autonomy than most Sub Saharan women(barring some matrilineal tribes) Most Sub Saharan women are often not in a position to refuse their husbands demands for sex. In countries like Swaziland & Zimbabwe, women have a shorter life expectancy than men, which is unnatural. They might marry young & as a virgin, but their older husbands might be infected, passing on the infection to these poor chaste women. Distributing condoms at least to prostitutes & having condoms widely available in markets like Senegal does would give sexually active men the option of using those.<BR/><BR/>Also Catholic dogma not only preaches against condoms, it also outlaws them wherever Catholicism is unfortunately taken seriously. Condoms are not widely available in Philippines.<BR/><BR/>As someone who's spent her childhood in Iran, I know how much sex education & family planning work. Iran is a country where Khomeini declared 9 the best age for girls marriage(yes!) but it was also the only country where a couple had to take family planning classes pre marriage. <BR/><BR/>The result? Iran reduced its birthrate the fastest in the world, now Iranian women marry on avarage at 24, men at 26(earlier the age gap was 7 years)& Iran has a birthrate of only 1.71 children per woman, less than U.S.A. & France. <BR/><BR/>Teach men & women abstinence by all means as the best policy, but also teach them about condoms, pills & make those widely available. Tell people Abstinence=best policy, but should they have sex, condoms are infinitely preferable to no condoms & infecting their poor, young virgin wives.<BR/><BR/>FawziaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-30754646795076481472009-03-23T18:36:00.000-04:002009-03-23T18:36:00.000-04:00As the person who first posted the link, I am happ...As the person who first posted the link, I am happy to see that it is getting serious discussion.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-82608443165867089222009-03-23T17:57:00.000-04:002009-03-23T17:57:00.000-04:00I wouldn't distinguish bias so sharply from dogma....I wouldn't distinguish bias so sharply from dogma. I agree that if the pope is right, and the pro-condom people were acting on bad information, then there's no blame. "We did what we could with the information available at the time."<BR/><BR/>On the other hand, if there was a ideological commitment to (say) Western-style sexual freedom, I would see that as equivalent to the pope's commitment to Catholic dogma. I might want to distinguish a soft dogmatic position from a hard dogmatic position:<BR/><BR/>Soft dogma:<BR/><BR/><I>It is wrong to [interfere with sexual liberty | undermine marital fidelity] by [not distributing | distributing] condoms. Moreover, we're convinced that doing so will cause AIDS to spread more widely than it would otherwise.</I><BR/><BR/>If the people holding these beliefs are completely sincere, I'd almost call them blameless, not so different from the first case. But you tend to suspect their sincerity: wondering if their precommitments are causing them to make bad-faith judgements about the facts. An intelligent Catholic, for example, may accept dubious anti-condom arguments ("they have holes!"), which he wouldn't accept if his biases didn't affect his judgement. Sometimes that kind of prejudice can be culpable.<BR/><BR/>Hard dogma:<BR/><BR/><I>It is wrong to [interfere with sexual liberty | undermine marital fidelity] by [not distributing | distributing] condoms. Even if doing so would save lives, it is still impermissible. The principle is more important.</I><BR/><BR/>Cases like this much more open condemnation - unless you accept the principle upheld in the dogma. Which opens a whole can of worms, since (as far as I can see) all absolutist arguments are of this form. Absolutist arguments against the use of embryonic stem cells are an example; but so are absolutist arguments against torture.<BR/><BR/>Anyway, I think the "dogma" argument cuts both ways on the AIDS issue.<BR/><BR/>i.p.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-10664119769566817742009-03-23T15:31:00.000-04:002009-03-23T15:31:00.000-04:00On the other hand, if behavioural change is the be...<I>On the other hand, if behavioural change is the best way of reducing AIDS and over-emphasising condoms has hindered that, then the shoe's on the other foot. It would be the mainline AIDS organizations that have many deaths on their consciences.</I><BR/><BR/>I don't think that's quite equivalent. It's true that if the pope is right, those groups bear responsibility for giving incorrect advice, they were wrong because they didn't know better or perhaps were biased. The pope, if he is wrong, is wrong because of dogma. He is ideologically opposed to condoms wholly separately from the AIDS epidemic.Jewish Atheisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04616617537150446818noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-74593804845584976562009-03-23T14:14:00.000-04:002009-03-23T14:14:00.000-04:00But, if (and that's certainly an "if") Benedict is...<I>But, if (and that's certainly an "if") Benedict is really responsible for a million deaths because of his dogma, that's an enormous evil that's pretty hard to overcome by also doing good works.</I><BR/><BR/>Very true, JA. On the other hand, if behavioural change is the best way of reducing AIDS and over-emphasising condoms has hindered that, then the shoe's on the other foot. It would be the mainline AIDS organizations that have many deaths on their consciences.<BR/><BR/>IMO (as a non-Catholic) pope's recent comment ("the distribution of condoms... even aggravates the problems.") is actually quite reasonable given our current state of knowledge. The heated reaction against him likely has two causes: (1) the persistence of old shibboleths about AIDS in Africa, which are finally showing signs of breaking up (witness the UN report cited by another commenter), and (2) social liberals' loathing for the the Catholic Church as one of the last major defenders of traditional sexual morality.<BR/><BR/>i.p.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-58128112820563902712009-03-23T10:05:00.000-04:002009-03-23T10:05:00.000-04:00This is the U.N. Report on the AIDS Epidemic.http:...This is the U.N. Report on the AIDS Epidemic.<BR/>http://www.unaids.org/en/CountryResponses/Regions/default.aspAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-82891556193487457512009-03-22T12:40:00.000-04:002009-03-22T12:40:00.000-04:00"All the charity" . . . give me a break.Joey Rats ..."All the charity" . . . give me a break.<BR/><BR/>Joey Rats lives the most fabulously ostentatious lifestyle on the planet. Bill Gates doesn't live as good as this guy!<BR/><BR/>He lectures poor people, some of whom are literally starving and living in mud huts, that they are SINNERS for practicing a little family planning! Are you kidding me?!?<BR/><BR/>Appalling.<BR/><BR/>Charity from a group like "Doctors Without Borders" I can respect. They don't help the poor because it provides them power and fabulous antiques-filled palaces. They don't spend the money that is donated to them on gold candlesticks, hand-embroidered silk dresses, and jewel-encrusted thrones.<BR/><BR/>They spend it on medicine and supplies.<BR/><BR/>They don't use guilt and scare tactics to control people.<BR/><BR/>They don't call people "sinners" for not following orders.<BR/><BR/>The Catholic Church uses apocalyptic propaganda to frighten people into submission.Tigerboyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06794153016636051988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-25115560198179352392009-03-22T10:24:00.000-04:002009-03-22T10:24:00.000-04:00Theresa:What's up with overlooking all the charity...Theresa:<BR/><BR/><I>What's up with overlooking all the charity and making a religion out to be evil because they don't support rubbers? That seems kinda short sighted and egotistical that you are so certain you are right about the virtue of condoms against that of charity.</I><BR/><BR/>I recognize and applaud the church for all the good work that it does. (It does, as people have pointed out, often have ulterior motive, but good works are good works.) But, if (and that's certainly an "if") Benedict is really responsible for a million deaths because of his dogma, that's an enormous evil that's pretty hard to overcome by also doing good works.Jewish Atheisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04616617537150446818noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-84370913442546393982009-03-22T01:04:00.000-04:002009-03-22T01:04:00.000-04:00@ Theresa,The reason of "overlooking all the ...@ Theresa,<BR/><BR/>The reason of "overlooking all the charity" is precisely because this charity has a very strong motive-converting more Heathens to Christ.<BR/>However, more heathens won't be of much use when these heathens have a single child or two children, like the Italian Catholics or even African Tunisian Muslims are having. So the best way to keep numbers big-ban condoms & artificial contraceptives.Natural contraceptives are difficult to implement, might lead people to slip up & then at least a single, if not a couple of new Catholic babies will be born. <BR/><BR/>Ironically, those people who fund "all the charity" don't really practice all this self restraint on themselves. Its the richie rich Italians, French, American Catholics,Irish, even Poles who're rich by African standards who fund all this mission & then the Pope & Catholic Priests preach to poor gullible people that condoms are baad, baaad,BAAAAD, along with all the charity, hoping that they'll make loads of Catholic babies & keep the Church's numbers up. However, the rich, well educated & more rational Italians, Poles, French & Irish will mostly have sex before marriage, often have kids before marriage(more than half of French kids were born out of wedlock last year)& freely enjoy themselves, with all their contraceptives & plan their families to 1-3 kids.<BR/><BR/>Isn't it hugely exploiting poor & gullible people who take all their guidance from religion by telling them that God doesn't like condoms, when the people funding "all the charity" have free access to condoms? These African people have to keep a strict eye on themselves,not have sex before or outside marriage, plan their families within marriage with very complex natural methods, be burdened with pregnancies which condoms or artificial contraceptives could've easily avoided so that those doing "all the charity", having sex out of wedlock & having 1-2 kids can have the satisfaction of seeing loads of Catholics come into the world in Africa?<BR/><BR/>And if the Italians or French want sex without either diseases or kids, they could always buy condoms. If Africans want sex? Due to "all the charity" by the rich folks, they will have to quickly restrain their urges, oorr have sex & suffer the consequences.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-56862638654698406742009-03-21T22:43:00.000-04:002009-03-21T22:43:00.000-04:00This graph is just a straight plot of Percent HIV ...This graph is just a straight plot of Percent HIV infected plotted against percent Catholic per country in Africa. The HIV numbers are old. I plotted the graph to see if it was accurate using the numbers currently in wikipedia and it came out similar showing no trend between HIV rates and Catholism in Africa.<BR/><BR/>http://www.godandscience.org/images/catholicvshiv.gif<BR/><BR/>Although the picture is much more complicated than just plotting the two variables together, there is a huge range in the percentage of Catholics in these countries, and it doesn't seem to affect the AIDS prevalence one bit.<BR/><BR/>What's up with overlooking all the charity and making a religion out to be evil because they don't support rubbers? That seems kinda short sighted and egotistical that you are so certain you are right about the virtue of condoms against that of charity.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17238412920657745866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-42054703812426711902009-03-21T14:08:00.000-04:002009-03-21T14:08:00.000-04:00I wonder if Green (the Harvard guy) is religious.....I wonder if Green (the Harvard guy) is religious...If so, that would cast some light on his support for the Pope. This isn't enough evidence, but I see he's written in the journal of "Christian Connections for International Health," and on studies of religious change to christianity.<BR/><BR/>Also, this seems to be a massive topic. Green has many opinions on all sorts of AIDS related issues, including the fall of HIV in Uganda (here: http://www.springerlink.com/content/h00r4n6521805w27/ ) which he attributes to a decline of multi-partner sexual behaviour. <BR/><BR/>Also, it seems that condom distribution doesn't necessarily translate into condom use. See this article on Liberia and the "treatment" of AIDS and ethnomedical treatment of STDs.<BR/><BR/>The point is, it's apparant that there's far more to the debate of the effectiveness of condoms in africa than "condoms dont help prevent AIDS and also increase it" verses "yes it does."Jewish Sceptichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11262751671021588424noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-17507682131826612462009-03-21T04:08:00.000-04:002009-03-21T04:08:00.000-04:00Teaching people that they should feel guilty and d...Teaching people that they should feel guilty and dirty about their sexual urges may be a somewhat effective way of preventing them from having sex. Educating people about respecting the health and well-being of themselves, and their partners, is quite different.<BR/><BR/>Sex prevention is NOT a noble goal. People are allowed to have sex. Not only is it a given that people WILL have sex, they are ENTITLED to do so.<BR/><BR/>It's a HUMAN RIGHT.<BR/><BR/>Human beings are entitled to accurate information about their health, and how best to protect themselves. Abstinence is an excellent strategy to prevent AIDS infection. There are others.<BR/><BR/>Isn't the suggestion that Africa must be taught mythology, instead of safer sex practices, more than a bit paternalistic? Using the concepts of "sin" and "eternal damnation" to educate people about sex is condescending, degrading, and insulting. <BR/><BR/>Abstinence, objective medical advice, accurate sex education, and proper condom usage are all good strategies to prevent AIDS infection.<BR/><BR/>Guilt and rosary beads are not.Tigerboyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06794153016636051988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-34030391931943543812009-03-21T01:25:00.000-04:002009-03-21T01:25:00.000-04:00I just checked up on this about HIV\AIDS in Haiti....I just checked up on this about HIV\AIDS in Haiti. Seems in faraway Haiti too, HIV\AIDS is booming!Its already nearing 4%<BR/>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HIV/AIDS_in_Haiti <BR/><BR/>I'm not very clued in on the Harvard Report, so I can't give a very educated opinion on the condoms v. abstinence thing, but<BR/>regardless of whether condoms are the best cure or not,I think its unfair to either ban condoms or preach against them, its very much a matter of personal choice & unlike abortion, it does not involve any potential deaths either.<BR/><BR/>Lets face it, Catholics in the world live in two sorts of countries-the Catholics of France,U.S.A., Spain, Poland, Italy or Ireland have sex outside wedlock pretty often, the reason they have less AIDS is because they're very aware of contraceptives, including condoms. I don't think they practice a great deal of abstinence themselves. These rich people fund Catholic missionary programmes in Africa & the Church tells the poor Africans to avoid condoms, hoping for loads of Catholic babies, which Italy or Poland won't provide. Unlike the rich Irish or French, the Africans put a lot of emphasis on their priests & religious teachings & deprive themselves of condoms coz thats what their Priests tell them to do. <BR/><BR/>Isn't it unfair that Irish & Italians will plan their families as well as enjoy pre marital or extra marital sex but Africans who have it drilled into them that condoms are sinful can't? As it happens Africa is poorer so they're worse off in material stuff,now they have to keep even their sexual instincts under the strictest control while Italians & French have all the fun, while nominally adhering to the same faith?<BR/><BR/>FawziaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-35609034751298424382009-03-20T19:27:00.000-04:002009-03-20T19:27:00.000-04:00Another article, from the Journal of International...Another article, from the <I>Journal of International Development</I> (2004):<BR/><BR/>Tim Allen (LSE) and Suzette Heald (Brunel Univ.), "HIV/AIDS policy in Africa: what has worked in Uganda and what has failed in Botswana?"<BR/><BR/>http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/109751930/abstract<BR/><BR/>From the abstract: <BR/><BR/><I>the promotion of condoms at an early stage proved to be counter-productive in Botswana, whereas the lack of condom promotion during the 1980s and early 1990s contributed to the relative success of behaviour change strategies in Uganda.</I><BR/><BR/>It could be the pope.<BR/><BR/>(Well, he'd say it in Italian or German and in more flowery language, but still...) <BR/><BR/>i.p.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-50368409281892975872009-03-20T18:36:00.000-04:002009-03-20T18:36:00.000-04:00Here's the article I referred to:http://www.medici...Here's the article I referred to:<BR/><BR/>http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=85545Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-42331404313208190852009-03-20T18:34:00.000-04:002009-03-20T18:34:00.000-04:00Hi Tigerboy,My apologies for threatening to domina...Hi Tigerboy,<BR/><BR/>My apologies for threatening to dominate this thread. I've rarely posted about the AIDS/Africa issue, so I find it interesting to work out my ideas in this thread.<BR/><BR/>I agree that properly used, condoms could stop could stop AIDS in its tracks. It hasn't happened so far. <BR/><BR/>Unfortunately for would-be social engineers, the notion of educational programs can be an <I>idee fixe</I>. One can always <I>imagine</I> that some new educational campaign will push condom use to an effective level; just as World War I generals could imagine that the next push across no-man's-land would be the war-winning breakthrough. <BR/><BR/>It's kind of a weird argument, the assumption that condom use can be changed (somehow), but sexual behaviour can't be. In fact, despite being driven by a powerful instinct, sexual behaviour varies enormously, from Senegal to... uh, whatever African country has the most permissive sexual mores. Moreover, sexual behaviour <I>does</I> change, and it is said that every major reduction in AIDS prevalence in Africa has been accompanied by more-chaste sexual behaviour.<BR/><BR/>Condom programs have yet to show similar success on a societal level.<BR/><BR/>Here's another good article, a summary of the <I>Lancet's</I> article on "HIV/AIDS: 10 Myths". Well worth reading. Myth #6: "Condoms Are the Answer". Myth #10: "Sexual Behaviour Will Not Change".<BR/><BR/>(To be fair, they quote a pro-condom critic as well.)<BR/><BR/>i.p.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-14972927932806813752009-03-20T17:25:00.000-04:002009-03-20T17:25:00.000-04:00Hi meercat,Unfortunately, no one is talking about ...Hi meercat,<BR/><BR/>Unfortunately, no one is talking about solving the AIDS crisis in Africa, just on reducing it. What kind of programs work is an empirical question, wouldn't you agree?<BR/><BR/>The argument has been made that programs emphasising chastity have shown some success, while those emphasising condom use have been failures. In other words, that the pope is basically right.<BR/><BR/>This is certainly not the last word on the subject. But let's look where the thread started. This blog's author, an intelligent, well-informed and well-intentioned secularist said, <I>"How many additional people are going to get sick and die because of this idiot and his religious dogma? A million?"</I><BR/><BR/>This is not an extremist view. Millions of well-meaning, well-educated progressives hold a similar opinion. The message: Not only is the pope wrong, he is <I>outrageously, absurdly wrong</I> - he is a stupid old man blinded by dogma, and his views are far outside the range of respectable opinion.<BR/><BR/>Now it turns out, maybe the pope is right. Whether, in the end, he turns out to be right, he is at least making a valid contribution to the debate.<BR/><BR/>It seems to me that a bit of self-criticism is in order among the pope's detractors - for reacting out of ill-informed fury to arguments that merit respectful examination. JA has been exemplary here.<BR/><BR/>i.p.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-88670943623767166892009-03-20T16:26:00.000-04:002009-03-20T16:26:00.000-04:00Abstinence and fidelity would be a fabulous way of...Abstinence and fidelity would be a fabulous way of solving the AIDS problem, but then reality steps in and ruins everything.<BR/>Check out this new blog:<BR/>http://noreligionformethanks.blogspot.commeercathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01863597365252798739noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-32011175470204189412009-03-20T16:17:00.000-04:002009-03-20T16:17:00.000-04:00No one is arguing that reducing sex partners isn't...No one is arguing that reducing sex partners isn't a good idea.<BR/><BR/>No one is claiming that being absolutely faithful to a single partner, and your partner doing likewise, isn't a good goal.<BR/><BR/>---"The pro-condom people assume that you can leave the structure of desire unchanged and just apply a technology."<BR/><BR/>I have never argued that reduction of partners isn't a good sex-education goal, but the "structure of desire" exists within the human DNA. People are hormonally-driven to have sex.<BR/><BR/>The average age of the entire population in Nigeria is 17. The average age of many African countries is below 25.<BR/><BR/>People will have sex.<BR/><BR/>Telling people that proper use of a condom is SINFUL, which is, and always has been, the position of the Catholic Church, is evil.<BR/><BR/>Distribution of condoms, without proper sex-education, may not be without problems--a tendency to take greater risk seems to be Green's point--but that does not change the fact that a condom is an inexpensive technology that, when PROPERLY used, greatly reduces infection rates. <BR/><BR/>Teaching proper condom use, rather than the "sinfulness" of condom use, seems a better goal.<BR/><BR/>Teaching people about "talking snakes" and "virgin births" and "lakes of fire" may, in fact, prevent some people from having sex.<BR/><BR/>Isn't TRUTH a better goal of health education?Tigerboyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06794153016636051988noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-47765582673606650992009-03-20T15:40:00.000-04:002009-03-20T15:40:00.000-04:00You're only 15? I'm 51. Man, you're a great writer...You're only 15? I'm 51. Man, you're a great writer. I was utterly clueless at your age.<BR/><BR/>i.p.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13054771.post-73328242456839820362009-03-20T15:32:00.000-04:002009-03-20T15:32:00.000-04:00Thanks IP,Call me Fawzia, I have a Google account ...Thanks IP,<BR/><BR/>Call me Fawzia, I have a Google account then I just decided to post as anonymous. I'm a former Muslim 15 year old originally from Iran now in a non Muslim country & my parents are cooler with my apostasy than JA's parents were.<BR/><BR/>I'm interested in Judaism only because I think the OT & the Quran can rival each other in misogyny & violence, yet the two groups of people are so different in real life- I've often pondered how it is so. Islam is 1400 years old, I've often also wondered whether the Mid East Jews in the approximately 1400 years before Talmudic times were as bad as today's Muslims are. <BR/><BR/>Islam is my ex religion & my least favorite religion BTW, but I'm able to see how it can contribute something positive someplace in the world.<BR/><BR/>When will Shalmo arrive mentioning that Ayesha was probably 19 or any other such silly thing, so I can debate him? ;-)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com