It's Hard Out Here for a Pope

[vovat]

You've probably heard by now that the Pope has said that condoms would not help prevent the spread of AIDS in Africa, and could actually make the problem worse. I'm not entirely clear on how someone can be opposed to both abortion AND birth control. I mean, this isn't "life begins at conception," but "life begins long BEFORE conception" (or, as Monty Python put it, "every sperm is sacred"). The basic idea seems to be that sex is inherently bad, but whenever anyone suggests that, they'll pretty much inevitably receive a reply about how only SOME kinds of sex are bad. The thing is, these "some kinds" seem to include pretty much ANY variety that doesn't involve married people trying to procreate, which suggests that it's bad by default. That's one reason why, even if abstinence-only education worked (and we all know it doesn't), I still wouldn't be too keen on it. It's the role of the schools to educate students on the dangers of sex, not to pass value judgments on sex itself. Anyway, the procreation-only concept seems to me to be largely based on the ideas that: 1) people should have as many kids as possible (because you need SOMEONE to help with the farming and herding, and some of them are bound to die in childhood), and 2) sperm is such a precious commodity that any ejaculation that doesn't have the chance of fertilizing an egg (masturbation, gay sex, protected sex, etc.) is a waste of resources. We now know the latter is untrue, and while the former might still be appropriate in Africa, it still shouldn't be taken as a given that everyone wants children. So why hold on to this old dogma? Well, really, I'm not sure the Pope has a choice, even if he wanted to change things. Sure, he's technically infallible, but so were the guys before him, so he can't very well go completely against them. And why would the College of Cardinals choose a leader who was likely to have radical opinions, anyway? The Pope is the titular head of a major world religion, yet he's not really allowed to DO much of anything. On top of that, he's celibate, so maybe it's a given that he's going to be bitter. I can just imagine him thinking, "If God's representative on Earth can't enjoy sex, why should anyone else be allowed to?"

Comments

[suegypt.livejournal.com]

Oh. Yeah.

[zimbra1006.livejournal.com]

haha.. yeah. Abstinence education. When I went to Catholic school I had to take 7 different sex ed classes. And they taught us about every type of birth control, repeatedly. The constant message was technically "you shouldn't do it before you're married. But if you DO, use these things..."

[vovat.livejournal.com]

Well, it's good to know that the people running that school are apparently brighter than their bosses in the Vatican. {g}

[vilajunkie.livejournal.com]

I took a biology class in college, and when we got to the reproductive system, I learned about more (female) birth control methods than I cared to know about. And I'm not talking about the Sponge TM. *g*

[rockinlibrarian.livejournal.com]

I'm not entirely clear on how someone can be opposed to both abortion AND birth control.

Heh... yeah, you know I'm all big on Pro-Life, and how that means more than just anti-abortion but also means stuff like anti-capital-punishment and stuff too? ... yeah, somehow I always neglect to mention that the Church's Official Stance is that anti-birth-control is under the Pro-Life banner too....

Though, having two accidental pregnancies in just over as many years has made me lose faith in birth control, anyway!

[vovat.livejournal.com]

I can't exactly see HOW birth control is anti-life. It doesn't end anybody's life, does it? As for preventing potential life, well, it's not like you're not also doing that every second you're NOT having sex.

[rockinlibrarian.livejournal.com]

I think the idea is that you're not being Open to the possibility of new Life (and what makes that different than abstinence is that you're expecting the perks without accepting the consequences? Like?) ...but, like I said, given that no birth control but abstinence is 100% effective, I've come to the conclusion that Life is going to do what it wants to anyways, and if Somebody is really meant to be, that failure percentage is going to go into effect JUST THAT ONE TIME at least... So what does that mean in the long run? I have no idea.

[vovat.livejournal.com]

I've come to the conclusion that Life is going to do what it wants to anyways, and if Somebody is really meant to be, that failure percentage is going to go into effect JUST THAT ONE TIME at least...

Well, I guess anyone who accepts the virgin birth of Jesus would pretty much HAVE to think that, right? I mean, even abstinence didn't work for Mary. {g}

[chhinnamasta.livejournal.com]

why hold on to this old dogma?

Because it's a great way to grow your church.

[vovat.livejournal.com]

True, assuming all those kids also become Catholics. Which they probably will, but I'm personally hoping they grow up to be gay relativists. {g}

[chhinnamasta.livejournal.com]

I'm personally hoping they grow up to be gay relativists.

Me too!