Ponderable

This is from YOUR link, not mine:

"At the peak of the HIV crisis in the 1980s, the country of Uganda had one of the highest infection rates – almost 25 percent of the population were HIV positive by 1991, according to the Washington Post. With the help of the country’s religious leaders, Uganda President Yoweri Museveni adopted the simplest and least expensive intervention possible in the poor and war-torn country – a public education program stressing abstinence before marriage and faithfulness afterward, largely de-emphasizing condom use except for those most at risk. In just eight years, the country saw the most significant decline in HIV infection rates in the world. According to a 2004 article in the “Journal of International Development”, it was “the lack of condom promotion during the 1980s and early 1990s (that) contributed to the relative success of behavior change strategies in Uganda.” But just as Uganda was seeing a significant decline, the United States intervened, restructuring the country's approach and focusing more on condoms and less on abstinence and monogamy. In an op-ed for the Washington Post, Harvard's leading HIV researcher Dr. Edward Green and Wilfred Mlay, then-vice president for World Vision Africa, wrote that while the United States was generous in offering their help, the Western ideologies and approaches may have actually undermined the success previously seen in Uganda. “The Ugandan turnaround was well underway by the time foreign AIDS experts began to arrive in the early 1990s, bringing with them the Western public health approaches—and values. They began to retool Uganda's AIDS prevention efforts away from abstinence and fidelity—goals that many Westerners felt were unrealistic. As condom use increased, the percentage of young singles having sex rose from 27 percent to 37 percent between 1995 and 2000. Health officials worry that infection rates may increase as well,” they wrote. The problem with condoms Regardless of religious belief, condom use to curb HIV infection proves problematic for several reasons. One of the biggest issues with the promotion of condoms as a solution to HIV is that most people do not consistently or correctly use condoms, even after going through sex education. A study published by “The Annals of Pharmacotherapy” found that out of 500 couples who were repeatedly told by their doctors to use condoms, only eight percent did so consistently, despite knowledge that one partner had herpes. A different study found that only 50 percent of couples in which one partner had HIV used condoms consistently over time. Another part of the problem is something called risk compensation. In an interview with the BBC, Dr. Green said that risk compensation happens when people use risk-reducing technology in a way that assumes the technology cancels out all risk. As an example, in an interview with BBC, Dr. Green compared condom use to sunblock. He said the protection offered by sunblock is cancelled out when the person using sunblock assumes they are completely protected and therefore spends even more time in the sun. Similarly, people using condoms are more likely to engage in risky sexual behavior because of the assumed protection, when in fact repeated exposure to infected persons decreases the protection that condoms offer. The phenomenon of risk compensation also means people using condoms are more likely to have a greater number of sexual partners, increasing their risk for certain STDs which in turn increases the likelihood of the transmission of HIV. Many STDs create open sores, which act as portals of entry for HIV infection. Another reason condoms alone fail at protecting people against HIV is because of the likelihood of disease transmission over time. According to a 2001 article in The Lancet, the more frequently one changes sexual partners, the more likely it is that they will spread HIV. This is because HIV is highly contagious when it is first contracted, but it is often not detectable until later. Therefore, an infected person could think they are HIV-free and go on to infect more people before they realize they have HIV. The study found that if there were at least six months in between sexual partners, the rate of HIV infections would significantly decrease. "

Tell me again how this proves your point? But I'll give you an B for effort...
Again, if you think condoms are a detriment to stopping STDs including HIV, you are either delusional or fooling yourself. Read through that section very carefully and all the ifs and when you don't use correctly. Using a condom correctly is pretty easy to train. If you are trying to block their usage to begin with based on some ancient mythology, than you can come to your own conclusions about how they are not safe enough. I taught my kids to use sunblock and condoms. Also to visit DR's when they need to. Also Dentists.
 
This is from YOUR link, not mine:

"At the peak of the HIV crisis in the 1980s, the country of Uganda had one of the highest infection rates – almost 25 percent of the population were HIV positive by 1991, according to the Washington Post. With the help of the country’s religious leaders, Uganda President Yoweri Museveni adopted the simplest and least expensive intervention possible in the poor and war-torn country – a public education program stressing abstinence before marriage and faithfulness afterward, largely de-emphasizing condom use except for those most at risk. In just eight years, the country saw the most significant decline in HIV infection rates in the world. According to a 2004 article in the “Journal of International Development”, it was “the lack of condom promotion during the 1980s and early 1990s (that) contributed to the relative success of behavior change strategies in Uganda.” But just as Uganda was seeing a significant decline, the United States intervened, restructuring the country's approach and focusing more on condoms and less on abstinence and monogamy. In an op-ed for the Washington Post, Harvard's leading HIV researcher Dr. Edward Green and Wilfred Mlay, then-vice president for World Vision Africa, wrote that while the United States was generous in offering their help, the Western ideologies and approaches may have actually undermined the success previously seen in Uganda. “The Ugandan turnaround was well underway by the time foreign AIDS experts began to arrive in the early 1990s, bringing with them the Western public health approaches—and values. They began to retool Uganda's AIDS prevention efforts away from abstinence and fidelity—goals that many Westerners felt were unrealistic. As condom use increased, the percentage of young singles having sex rose from 27 percent to 37 percent between 1995 and 2000. Health officials worry that infection rates may increase as well,” they wrote. The problem with condoms Regardless of religious belief, condom use to curb HIV infection proves problematic for several reasons. One of the biggest issues with the promotion of condoms as a solution to HIV is that most people do not consistently or correctly use condoms, even after going through sex education. A study published by “The Annals of Pharmacotherapy” found that out of 500 couples who were repeatedly told by their doctors to use condoms, only eight percent did so consistently, despite knowledge that one partner had herpes. A different study found that only 50 percent of couples in which one partner had HIV used condoms consistently over time. Another part of the problem is something called risk compensation. In an interview with the BBC, Dr. Green said that risk compensation happens when people use risk-reducing technology in a way that assumes the technology cancels out all risk. As an example, in an interview with BBC, Dr. Green compared condom use to sunblock. He said the protection offered by sunblock is cancelled out when the person using sunblock assumes they are completely protected and therefore spends even more time in the sun. Similarly, people using condoms are more likely to engage in risky sexual behavior because of the assumed protection, when in fact repeated exposure to infected persons decreases the protection that condoms offer. The phenomenon of risk compensation also means people using condoms are more likely to have a greater number of sexual partners, increasing their risk for certain STDs which in turn increases the likelihood of the transmission of HIV. Many STDs create open sores, which act as portals of entry for HIV infection. Another reason condoms alone fail at protecting people against HIV is because of the likelihood of disease transmission over time. According to a 2001 article in The Lancet, the more frequently one changes sexual partners, the more likely it is that they will spread HIV. This is because HIV is highly contagious when it is first contracted, but it is often not detectable until later. Therefore, an infected person could think they are HIV-free and go on to infect more people before they realize they have HIV. The study found that if there were at least six months in between sexual partners, the rate of HIV infections would significantly decrease. "

Tell me again how this proves your point? But I'll give you an B for effort...

"...most people do not consistently or correctly use condoms..."
 
Yeah, but he still wants free stuff.

There used to be a guy who posted here who denied that Oaks Christian (and other "private" schools) give athletic scholarships in the face of news articles where young athletes cluelessly admitted it. Was that him? If so, he has learned the code words well - "financial aid application" etc.
 
Again, if you think condoms are a detriment to stopping STDs including HIV, you are either delusional or fooling yourself. Read through that section very carefully and all the ifs and when you don't use correctly. Using a condom correctly is pretty easy to train. If you are trying to block their usage to begin with based on some ancient mythology, than you can come to your own conclusions about how they are not safe enough. I taught my kids to use sunblock and condoms. Also to visit DR's when they need to. Also Dentists.
Seriously Andy... you need to go back and read my post about condom use and STDs. And the article does not support your stance as you said it did... that was my point. You really should read what your posting before you post it.
 
Federal court takes steps to unseal documents in Jeffrey Epstein related case
John Sexton Mar 11, 2019 7:01 PM
Top Pick
Virginia-Roberts.jpg

“…Maxwell approached her and asked her whether she wanted to become a masseuse for Epstein.”
 
Seriously Andy... you need to go back and read my post about condom use and STDs. And the article does not support your stance as you said it did... that was my point. You really should read what your posting before you post it.
If you read the WHOLE Wiki article, it is as I stated. Showing a mix of opinions. I don't need Wiki to know two things.

1. The Catholic Church actively dissuaded the use of condoms during the worst parts of the AIDS crisis in Africa. Uganda was just one country affected. There is not one bit of argument about that fact. The Catholic Church agrees with that fact.
2. Using condoms blocks at almost a 100% rate the risk of AIDS when used correctly and all the time. Not an arguable point. Just a fact.

I consider any organization that dissuaded the use of condoms during a full blown AIDS epidemic as evil. That would be my opinion of any organization. Not just the Catholic Church.

My opinion based on research at the time is that pushing back against the use of condoms was not a winning strategy. As part of the ABC strategy, many were led to follow the first portion abstinence and maybe fidelity but many in Kenya and other areas were being taught by churches and others that condoms were actually an evil plan to let HIV in and not effective. Where the education on actually using condoms, saw a decrease in new cases.

My opinion does not matter. The points 1 and 2 are truths.
 
What " You " are stating is correct...

I " Think " Andy was trying to convey that the Catholic Church has set
a practice of abstinence that does not work with basic human nature.
Over the last ( just ) 500 years or so it is obvious the ingrained deviancy
that has been practiced within the Catholic Church.
There are many many subjects that I will not discuss on this forum that
the Catholic Church has swept under the rug so to speak and instead opted
to either pay off the accusers or use other more serious methods that could
be deemed quite evil/murderous in nature.


Andy's Original Comment below :

" I have a problem with abstinence.
It is unnatural and it does not work.
When abstinence is taught to kids as the only safe way to not get pregnant, teen pregnancies go up.
Same with all STD's including AIDS.
The Catholic Church worked hard to stop governments from handing out condoms.
They actively worked against NGO organizations that were doing great work to stop AIDS.
And as far as BIAS......
I posted the article from the Catholic Church to show the source of this evil idiocracy.
The church itself. "

He could have presented his argument much more eloquently
and touched on specifics that have/are destroying the inner workings
of the church...
But I do see what his basic premise was...and the Catholic Church has
been guilty for quite some time ( as in hundreds and hundreds of years. )
As for the influence of the Catholic Church in Latin America, that is
a subject that has been debated many times....some say it goes the
other way .....


https://www.americamagazine.org/faith/2018/08/21/how-latin-america-influenced-entire-catholic-church
Hold the presses. Nono actually made sense.
 
Personally I'm capitalist enough to know that there are times the socialism works better. I just don't think it should be the default position.

I remember when my dd was in 2nd grade she was placed in the GATE program at school. Then Bush passed the "No Child Left Behind" act and all the funding was taken out of the gifted program and instead used to improve the scores of the lowest achieving students. While I appreciate the idea that all the resources and focus going to the weakest that is the backbone of the socialist model... I just think this type of narrow minded focus, when the rubber hits the road, is the path to stagnation. Because quite simply it's the smart / strong / aggressive that will one day go onto be the innovators who will be the rising tide that will improve life for the rest of us.
Don’t we already know the only systems that work are social democracies...but those are in releatively homogeneous countries with shared culture and values...tough to replicate.
Capitalism is failing the masses, we see it every day. It requires more wars to capture new markets and resources and greater subjugation of labor and the powerless...
Socialism is obviously failing, we see that every day.
Scandinavia and even Switzerland ensure free health care and education and no homelessness.
People get bored though and the ones who want to get rich come to America.
 
A.If you read the WHOLE Wiki article, it is as I stated.

B. 1. The Catholic Church actively dissuaded the use of condoms during the worst parts of the AIDS crisis in Africa. Uganda was just one country affected. There is not one bit of argument about that fact. The Catholic Church agrees with that fact.

C.2. Using condoms blocks at almost a 100% rate the risk of AIDS when used correctly and all the time. Not an arguable point. Just a fact.



D. My opinion based on research at the time is that pushing back against the use of condoms was not a winning strategy. As part of the ABC strategy, many were led to follow the first portion abstinence and maybe fidelity

E. but many in Kenya and other areas were being taught by churches and others that condoms were actually an evil plan to let HIV in and not effective. Where the education on actually using condoms, saw a decrease in new cases.

My opinion does not matter. The points 1 and 2 are truths.

Now you are just arguing to argue... but I'll play.

Did you find my post about my tale on condoms and STDs? If you did then why do keep posting about that? If not, then you're gonna feel pretty foolish once you do.


A. You keep saying the link you posted supports your opinion when it clearly does not. Yes! I read the entire article but either you did not or are having a difficult time understanding it. I even posted a section of it for you to read and you still can't figure it out.

B. The Catholic Church never said don't use a condom .

C. Condoms are readily available( for free at CSUF) and yet we still have teen pregnancies and STDs.. why? Because they are not used properly or all the time. Abstinence works 100% of the time. In fact, the HIV infection rate in Africa was declining when abstinence was being taught as the best prevention.

D. Your research? You mean the article you posted?

E. Again, what's your source for that?
 
Don’t we already know the only systems that work are social democracies...but those are in releatively homogeneous countries with shared culture and values...tough to replicate.
Capitalism is failing the masses, we see it every day. It requires more wars to capture new markets and resources and greater subjugation of labor and the powerless...
Socialism is obviously failing, we see that every day.
Scandinavia and even Switzerland ensure free health care and education and no homelessness.
People get bored though and the ones who want to get rich come to America.

I'd be interested in see those European social democracies balance the budget without Uncle Sam paying for their defense. Case in point, I was reading the other day Sweden spends just enough on defense so they can hold out for two months (or maybe it was three months) if they were ever to be attacked because by their best estimate that's the time they think it would take allied forces to come save them. Guess who they mean when they say allied forces?
 
Now you are just arguing to argue... but I'll play.

Did you find my post about my tale on condoms and STDs? If you did then why do keep posting about that? If not, then you're gonna feel pretty foolish once you do.


A. You keep saying the link you posted supports your opinion when it clearly does not. Yes! I read the entire article but either you did not or are having a difficult time understanding it. I even posted a section of it for you to read and you still can't figure it out.

B. The Catholic Church never said don't use a condom .

C. Condoms are readily available( for free at CSUF) and yet we still have teen pregnancies and STDs.. why? Because they are not used properly or all the time. Abstinence works 100% of the time. In fact, the HIV infection rate in Africa was declining when abstinence was being taught as the best prevention.

D. Your research? You mean the article you posted?

E. Again, what's your source for that?

There is no doubt that abstinence works. However, the rate of actual abstinence conduct by those who claim to practice it is lower than the rate of actual condom use by those who claim to use condoms.
 
I'd be interested in see those European social democracies balance the budget without Uncle Sam paying for their defense. Case in point, I was reading the other day Sweden spends just enough on defense so they can hold out for two months (or maybe it was three months) if they were ever to be attacked because by their best estimate that's the time they think it would take allied forces to come save them. Guess who they mean when they say allied forces?

Sweden is officially neutral, so Switzerland?
 
I'd be interested in see those European social democracies balance the budget without Uncle Sam paying for their defense. Case in point, I was reading the other day Sweden spends just enough on defense so they can hold out for two months (or maybe it was three months) if they were ever to be attacked because by their best estimate that's the time they think it would take allied forces to come save them. Guess who they mean when they say allied forces?
Protecting the peace around the world is what has made America the richest and most powerful nation in the world, til now.
 
Sweden is officially neutral, so Switzerland?

Hmm... went looking for where I heard the two month quote and saw that wiki says they don't even spend enough on the military to pay for that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_Army
The Swedish Army formed a Rapid Reaction Organisation (Insatsorganisation in Swedish) in 2014. Under the organisation the training regiments of the Swedish army would be able to form two combat brigades and a number of independent combat battalions within a few days. This plan, however, was considered by the Supreme Commander to be impossible due to the economic situation at the time.[1]

In 2013, the Armed Forces issued a statement saying that the reorganisation would only suffice for a reasonable defense of Swedish territory for one week.[2] The force was to include the following units:[3]
 
Protecting the peace around the world is what has made America the richest and most powerful nation in the world, til now.

Given Europe's long history of constant warfare... I'm not sure it would be cheaper to let them build up their own armies like in the days of yore? Don't know that we've even paid off all the debt from WW2 yet.
 
Last edited:
Now you are just arguing to argue... but I'll play.

Did you find my post about my tale on condoms and STDs? If you did then why do keep posting about that? If not, then you're gonna feel pretty foolish once you do.


A. You keep saying the link you posted supports your opinion when it clearly does not. Yes! I read the entire article but either you did not or are having a difficult time understanding it. I even posted a section of it for you to read and you still can't figure it out.

B. The Catholic Church never said don't use a condom .

C. Condoms are readily available( for free at CSUF) and yet we still have teen pregnancies and STDs.. why? Because they are not used properly or all the time. Abstinence works 100% of the time. In fact, the HIV infection rate in Africa was declining when abstinence was being taught as the best prevention.

D. Your research? You mean the article you posted?

E. Again, what's your source for that?

You might want to re-think your capital B there, fella...

spokesperson for the church later clarified that the use of condoms was still considered immoral and that the pope had not intended to take a position "on the problem of condoms in general."[1]
 
Protecting the peace around the world is what has made America the richest and most powerful nation in the world, til now.

Another useless factoid that you should probably not quote me on either, because I don't remember where I read it... but compared to the rest of the world, 75% or American's have a standard of living that put them in the top 10% versus the rest of the world.
 
You might want to re-think your capital B there, fella...

spokesperson for the church later clarified that the use of condoms was still considered immoral and that the pope had not intended to take a position "on the problem of condoms in general."[1]
By the way, your C is really stupid, too. Hey if we have condoms how come when people don’t wear them they still get stds and pregnancy? When they don’t have sex, they don’t get those things.
Therefore, abstinence (a fiction) better than condoms. Condoms are bad.
I think the Catholic Church is insane, just like your arguments.
 
Now you are just arguing to argue... but I'll play.

Did you find my post about my tale on condoms and STDs? If you did then why do keep posting about that? If not, then you're gonna feel pretty foolish once you do.


A. You keep saying the link you posted supports your opinion when it clearly does not. Yes! I read the entire article but either you did not or are having a difficult time understanding it. I even posted a section of it for you to read and you still can't figure it out.

B. The Catholic Church never said don't use a condom .

C. Condoms are readily available( for free at CSUF) and yet we still have teen pregnancies and STDs.. why? Because they are not used properly or all the time. Abstinence works 100% of the time. In fact, the HIV infection rate in Africa was declining when abstinence was being taught as the best prevention.

D. Your research? You mean the article you posted?

E. Again, what's your source for that?
 
Now you are just arguing to argue... but I'll play.


B. The Catholic Church never said don't use a condom .

C. Condoms are readily available( for free at CSUF) and yet we still have teen pregnancies and STDs.. why? Because they are not used properly or all the time. Abstinence works 100% of the time. In fact, the HIV infection rate in Africa was declining when abstinence was being taught as the best prevention.



?
B. Yes they did and still do. That is not arguable. They openly did and still do. In 2010 way after the crisis the POPE (infallible voice of God himself) stated it is finally OKAY to use condoms for one reason, just not getting AIDS ......but it is still immoral and wrong on every front except AIDS. Way after the fact and when they had been so wrong. That was 2010. Remember LIVE AID was 1985. This was well after the epidemic had partially burned out. The biggest cause of less AIDS in Africa before then was from death not abstinence or condoms.

C. And where condoms are readily available, you have less STD's and less teen pregnancies. We have had a significant dropping in teen pregnancies across the US over the last 30 years and mostly because of rounded programs including birth control are available. Where teen pregnancies are still predominate, there seems to be a correlation to being red states.

Because you won't look up anything yourself.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wo...atholic-ban-on-condoms-in-historic-shift.html
https://www.womenshealth.gov/30-achievements/09
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/teen-births/teenbirths.htm
 
Back
Top