Pope Defies Reason... surprise surprise
Offline
In a mind-numbing display of backward logic, the pope has declared that the use of condoms increases the spread of AIDS. How could a person possibly reach this conclusion except by beginning with the conclusion and trying to find some way to make the facts fit?
I know, I know... giving out condoms encourages people to have sex, and somehow or another, this actually increases the spread of AIDS. But let's get down to the nitty gritty of this claim, shall we?
Let's suppose for a moment that condoms are 95% effective at blocking the HIV virus when used properly. Don't quibble with me about the number. It's just a number, and I'm not claiming it as the gospel truth. This is about demonstrating a principle. What this means, in practical terms, is that a person infected with HIV could reasonably expect to have sex with a hundred women, and we should be quite surprised if significantly more than four or five women contracted HIV.
So, let's suppose we have two individuals -- Evil McEvil and Reynold Responsible. Both carry the HIV virus, but EE never uses a condom, while RR always does. The thing is, a single encounter with an HIV infected individual is not a guarantee to become infected. It's kind of hard to find accurate information about this. A google search has yielded figures from 1/2000 (for a single encounter) to 1/2. Just for the sake of simplicity, let's say that you have a 1/5 chance in a single encounter to contract HIV from an infected partner. Again, don't hate on me for the number. It doesn't matter.
So, let's say that RR has sex with 100 women. His condom breaks 5 times, and there's a 1/5 chance that he's going to infect his partner. So, out of one hundred sexual encounters, we should expect, on average, one infection out of a hundred.
Now, EE also has sex with 100 women. Since he is unprotected the whole time, we should expect around 20 women to become infected.
Let's return to the suggestion that handing out condoms encourages people to have more sex. Even if that's true, RR would have to have sex with 2,000 women to infect as many people as EE having sex with 100.
I don't want to put words in the Pope's mouth. As far as I know, he hasn't explicitly stated that giving out condoms encourages more sex, but regardless of whether condoms are 95% effective, or 80% effective, or 99.5% effective, the numbers are clear. For condoms to NOT help curb the spread of AIDS, people would have to have a LOT more sex after being given condoms.
Anyone have any reasonable grounds for believing that's what would happen? Any studies from schools where condoms were passed out? Do they have 20 times more sex?
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
- Login to post comments
"Anyone have any reasonable grounds for believing that's what would happen? Any studies from schools where condoms were passed out? Do they have 20 times more sex?"
No, I have not heard of such a study. In my experience and opinion there is absolutely no reason to allow for what Benedict said to be considered anything more than what the Church has always done with regards to sexuality. And that is to control it. I sleep better at night treating religious prognostications (from whatever source) as mere curiosities, and predictably outrageous ones at that.
I wonder if that's the same quote I posted in the topic Brian made blasting the pope. *goes to check*
Nope, different quote. You found an even better one. Or worse one, depending on your point of view.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
"... [dangerously] outrageous at that". People actually listen to the Pope and the Catholic Chruch by extension (or is it the other way 'round?). I don't have the figures Hamby wants to see, but it's not necessary to have them. The simple point made is that condoms help curb the spread of the virus. The Pope has suggested that condoms do not do this and has so much but said that they encourage sex. It's nothing new out of the Vatican. It's not even a new twist on their tired argument. It is as backward and damaging as it has been and today it has renewed vigor.
BigUniverse wrote,
"Well the things that happen less often are more likely to be the result of the supper natural. A thing like loosing my keys in the morning is not likely supper natural, but finding a thousand dollars or meeting a celebrity might be."
Very well said. It's almost enough to make a guy think the Catholic church (and a veritible parade of others) really does not care or the suffering of brown people. Oh! Check that, of bloody course they dont! *Just remembered world history of European colonialism*.
"Neca eos omnes; Deus suos agnoscet."
The larger point is that his claim that they exacerbate the problem is absurd. Even if condoms are only 90% effective, they still must, mathematically speaking, significantly reduce the risk of transmission.
I've been digging a bit, and I have found a couple of references: De Vincenzi I. (1994) 'A longitudinal study of human immunodeficiency virus transmission by heterosexual partners', the New England Journal of Medicine; 331:341-346
1 out of 123 is .08%, so even if there had been a single instance of infection, the rate of effectiveness would be over 99% after continued sexual encounters -- That is, we can extrapolate that the single incidence chance of infection is miniscule, since 123 sets of partners had multiple sexual encounters. For us to have 0 infections, we can estimate the P value to be extraordinary. In other words, for the >99% number to be due to chance would be a miniscule probability.
So, let's return to my numbers, and continue to use 1/5 as a number for infection with unprotected sex. Let's assume that each of these 123 couples had sex only ten times during the study. (I suspect its more, but this is just speculation for shits and giggles.) That means that for our consistent condom user to infect 20 people, he'd have to sleep with not just 2,000 women, but 20,000.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
Taken in context of the times when this was first (or at least most famously) said, as well as the implied motivation and intent- to say absolutely nothing of who he was and who/what he represented- very possibly the most horrifying statement actually uttered. IMHO.
The suffering of anyone has never been a particular obession with the Catholic chruch. Rather, the Catholic chruch is built upon suffering. I do believe some members of the Church have even said just that. What the Church seems most to care about is the number of adherents and the amount of control it exerts over them and the people of that largely poor continent called Africa are ripe.
BigUniverse wrote,
"Well the things that happen less often are more likely to be the result of the supper natural. A thing like loosing my keys in the morning is not likely supper natural, but finding a thousand dollars or meeting a celebrity might be."
It is as I have said countless times: The fact that anyone at all continues to take this organization seriously is an intellectual emergency.
"Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.
-Me
Books about atheism
"The larger point is that his claim that they exacerbate the problem is absurd. "
Please understand that I mean no disrespect, nor am I just be flippant. But when has the spokesman for any church made a societal pronouncement that was NOT absurd? Discounting of course those occasions when the religious are simply joining what the rest of us understand as common sense.
Goddammit, Will. Kill all.. God knows... something...
Damn you language people.
Damn you all
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
It's a very fair point. This particular issue just aggravates me more than others, I suppose.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
LOL!! I am fairly new here, and have not seen that post before. But I find it morbidly hi-larious!!!
An intellectual emergency indeed! As long as they exist, it seems to not bode well for the continued well-being of humanity. But then, I doubt they are too interested in that either. Oh yeah, many of them expect it to end any moment, don't they. Blast!
One particular distinction that strikes me is the part where the abusrdity of the Vatican affects so many people. The absurdity of other religious institutions, largely, don't seem as big a crisis.
Deludedgod, I agree. I understand that there's not much more that can be said than that.
BigUniverse wrote,
"Well the things that happen less often are more likely to be the result of the supper natural. A thing like loosing my keys in the morning is not likely supper natural, but finding a thousand dollars or meeting a celebrity might be."
"This particular issue just aggravates me more than others, I suppose."
I understand that, I really do. I thought it was a joke when I first heard that he said it.
"Read it [the bible] because we need more Atheists and nothing will get you there faster than reading the damn bible."
One of the truest statements ever.
DG, Thomathy, Bebe,
The thing that is a constant dilemma for me is this: There are some things that are so obviously absurd that we wonder if it's worth our time to address it. If someone can't work out the simple math that condoms help prevent the spread of HIV, is there anything that can be done for them? There are atheist bloggers who address the simple arguments, day in and day out, and they are constantly bombarded by thousands of theists who display the intelligence of a smart baboon. Do any of them ever change their minds?
It seems absurd to have to point out how incredibly wrong the Pope is, but then again... apparently it's necessary.
I like to think that I only try to address myself to theists who are capable of understanding basic critical thought, but sometimes I wonder if I shouldn't spend more time pointing out the obvious.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
You are not being fair to the Pope, after all, he has a medical degree. We should listen to him.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
Oh, and for crying out loud, will someone translate Will for me? I know I've heard that phrase before, but I'm just not a language guy.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
I think it means "Kill them all and God will know his own."
Hehe... cool... I had some of the words right.
I hate feeling stupid.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
It all has to be pointed out. Ceaselessy. If it ever gets into their heads, we must be at hand to collectively say, 'We told you so.'
I wonder if the effort will ever prove anything but futile?
On the Pope, though, how is it that he can sell the same product and get better results than predecessors?
BigUniverse wrote,
"Well the things that happen less often are more likely to be the result of the supper natural. A thing like loosing my keys in the morning is not likely supper natural, but finding a thousand dollars or meeting a celebrity might be."
I by no means can even suggest it is so, but from your semi-translation and other posts the first thing that comes to mind is:
Kill them all, let god sort them out.
Of course, I might just be remembering one of the best lines from the movie Doom.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
Here is another one for you:
"Crappy deum"
"Cease the toilet"
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
"It seems absurd to have to point out how incredibly wrong the Pope is, but then again... apparently it's necessary.
I like to think that I only try to address myself to theists who are capable of understanding basic critical thought, but sometimes I wonder if I shouldn't spend more time pointing out the obvious."
I think that I understand your dilemna. Unfortunately, I now operate under the following assumptions:
+ Most theists display no ability or desire to think critically,
+"obvious" has a different definition for theists and atheists,
+ it is a waste of my time to discuss certain topics with those who do not share a significant percentage of my baseline dataset.
And I seriously wish it were not so.
If people want to know why we at RRS get so angry at religion....
The 'truth' of religious pronouncements is of the truly Orwellian kind.
Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality
"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris
The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me
From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology
Bebe was correct: "Kill them all, God will know his own."
This was the sickening reply of the Abbot of Citeaux to the Earl of Leicester when asked how the crusaders should proceed with discriminating common civilians from 'heretics'.
No means of testing your claim? Hey, no problem!
What can I say that hasn't already been said?
As though his pronouncement alone isn't sickening enough, the man has the gall to decide to cruise in his fancy (not to mention bullet-proof) pope-mobile through the poorest region of the world while wearing his extravagant robes, jewelry and crown. Nothing says 'solving the problems in Africa' like showing the locals how rich and powerful you are while looking down your nose at them and waving.
- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940
Pope Benedict XVI gets it right yet again.
Well, the Vatican retracted their excommunication of the doctors in Brazil...anyone want to bet that the Vatican will retract this statement as well? Say, $20?
Anyone?
Damn, could have made an easy $20...
Frankly, though, if I have to eat those words, I won't mind doing so. But I doubt it will happen.
*cough*
Life happens with people, not with digits.
If you know African natives, you’ll know that condoms are not the answer.
99.99% of these people will never use condoms, and that is not the pope’s intellectual discovery.
Whats scary is the Catholic Church is one of the more 'moderate' western branches of christianity. Most 1st world catholics ignore the pope on anything important and the church does support evolution , the big bang etc even if its against some of the applications of science.
In fact, condom use is likely still inreasing in Africa, though that increase may have droped off. As of 2006 it had increased ~1.4% a year from 1993 to 18.8% total use in a study conducted in 18 African countires. (study cited here) The increase in use can be atributed to education. Clearly, the education surrounding sexual education and AIDS prevention strategies in Africa are mixed and confusing or altogether misinforming. Different organizations have different policies and some of those are very clearly detrimental to the implementation of devices that actually do curb the spread of sexually transmitted infections. The Catholic Church is one such organization. Further to that are the detrimental policies of ostensibly dark age thinking governments and local mythos and distrust regarding condoms and the intentions of the 'white man'.
To put it very simply, however, it is certainly not the case that 99.99% of African 'natives' will never use condoms for some uncited reason.
BigUniverse wrote,
"Well the things that happen less often are more likely to be the result of the supper natural. A thing like loosing my keys in the morning is not likely supper natural, but finding a thousand dollars or meeting a celebrity might be."
Pray tell why wouldn't they use them? Are they somehow different from you? Is there some magical barrier preventing them from useing them? No the only reason people don't is lack of education. So don't say 99.99% will never use a condom, with proper education they will. More and more people are using them.
But what I want to know what is the solution if you think condoms are not? What would you propose? total abstonance? good luck with that, it will never happen.
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
Oh, sorry Balk.
For some reason I thought I'd read Bebe saying the same thing prior to you.
*Ahem*
- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940
So Pope Palpatine's solution is to condone the pandemic by denying the education that seems to be working (according to real statistics - not those pulled from your nether regions).
Tell me, why do the Catholics want Africans dead? Trying to make that pile of bodies higher so Jesus doesn't have to make such a big step down?
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
People in Africa don't use condoms because even if AIDS doesnt kill them by 30 famine, war , lack of clean water/food or a 100 other reasons will.
Education is one issue but poverty is probably more signficiant
Agreed - and the Church has done precious little to solve that problem also.
Yes, they are very different from the other races.
Every race has its unique peculiarities and values.
You, Tapey, stay in South Africa I guess and you should know it.
For African natives the sex is major part of the life.
To ask them to use condoms is like to ask them to breathe clean air with gas helmet.
I don’t defend the church (I don’t like church) and I suppose that it makes it worst in this particular case, but if you speak to African natives you’ll find out that church has nothing to do with their refusal to use condoms.
Why did I say 99.99% and how do I have that statistic?
Just speak to them and ask about condoms.
Count how many on hundred are using condoms.
I deal with average class African natives and I haven’t met one who uses condom.
Few people said that they did try but will not use EVER again condom.
Jacob Zuma (from Tapey’s avatar picture) had sex with woman who has aids and did not use condom. On the trial for rape, they asked him why he had sex without protection, although he knew that the woman has aids.
He said that he took shower after the act (!)
This man will probably be the next South African president.
Technical point, Truden: you would have to talk to 10's of thousands of individuals, randomly sampled, to have any justification for that 'statistic'.
Furthermore, if you asked such a question in the presence of others of their social group, where frequently the common attitude may well be that condom usage is regarded negatively, you are going to tend to have even those who may use them saying that they don't. Not saying that always happened in all cases where you raised the issue, but unless you carefully allow for such factors, even if you had asked 20,000 Africans about their condom usage, you still could not have good confidence in such a figure.
I think finding societies where sex was not a pretty significant part of their life would be also be rather difficult.
Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality
"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris
The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me
From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology
Ok you oviously mean something way different. Education will solve it. Look at the emerging black middle class in south africa talk to them. It is the mainly the poor who are uneducated about this. im not arguing about 99.99% (although way off) more that you say they will never use them. I don't know who you talk to but i've never met anyone who says they will never use a condom. Maybe because I don't go talking about condoms with people, kinda wierd tbh.
But you are right about Jacob Zuma. He is our next president like it or not. The fact remains he is an idiot. People identify with him and with the struggle. The man is also facing charges of corruption. If it goes to trial he will be tried for corruption while president of South Africa. Really not the best choice
Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy.
Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend.
No animal shall wear clothes.
No animal shall sleep in a bed.
No animal shall drink alcohol.
No animal shall kill any other animal.
All animals are equal.
Truden, humanity is ONE fucking race.
Fixed.
Ridiculous. Unsupported. Moronic. I could go on, but this covers it well enough.
Pure bullshit. I have seen more than enough statistics on the church's interference and its successes in teaching the natives not to use condoms. This bald faced lie does nothing to affect reality.
You do that. You go around the entire fucking continent and ask each and every African what he thinks about condoms. Write down all their names and answers and come back.
If you make it back, you will have first hand experience of how much of a complete and total moron you are.
Bullshit.
Snap! You just admited it was bullshit. That's rare. Thanks.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
WTF is wrong with you people.
How that f'ing 99.99% are making your CLEVER arguments.
It's a f'ing figure of speech.
Comment on the rest.
But how would you comment if you haven't been in Africa?
Vastet, they may bann me for my words, but you are the worst IDIOT I've ever seen in my life.
Your attitude is the best possible way to disgust people from atheism.
WTF is wrong with us?
So... your evidence is that you have a made up statistic that isn't supported by any study ever, and your errant belief that there's something significant to the concept of race. (This belief, by the way, would be dispelled by even a first year course in biology.)
And you wonder why we are calling bullshit? No, kiddo, you don't just get to make up whatever you want and proclaim it to be true. Outside of church, in the real world of facts and evidence, you have to actually prove your claims.
Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin
http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism
In case my post was missed, Truden, please read it and then tell me what the fuck is wrong with you!
It's just unreasonable to say that the entire population of an entire continent is not using condoms nor will ever use condoms for any of the reasons you suggested. In fact, your 'figure of speech' number aside, there's still no reason to believe that there is anything significantly different from the population of Africa regarding condom use except for education. Your having spoken to some people from some country from that continent doesn't somehow override the fact that there is condom use and that it has been on the rise. You don't offer any reason at all which would indicate to anyone why your opinion on the use of condoms in Africa should have any validity. Are you going to push your case or were you really just spewing an ignorant opinion? 'Cause that's exactly what it looks like!
BigUniverse wrote,
"Well the things that happen less often are more likely to be the result of the supper natural. A thing like loosing my keys in the morning is not likely supper natural, but finding a thousand dollars or meeting a celebrity might be."
When one person calls you an idiot, ignore them. When two people do it, ignore them. When 10 different people have called you an idiot, begin to wonder if you're an idiot. At least ten people have now called you an idiot. It is long past time for you to consider the possibility that it is true.
How UNCLEVER that you can't respond to them.
Now you've hopefully learned that making wild speculations like this will only get you slapped.
Still waiting for you to provide evidence for your assertions.
You aren't going to get banned for calling me an idiot. And I don't even mind that you do. I expect it. I've been dealing with your kind for far too long to expect otherwise. You people do it because you can't address the arguments. I (almost) always start off nice, but when it's clear that I'm being ignored I drop my gloves. If you aren't willing to make the effort to have a productive conversation, then I'm not going to treat you with respect. After all, you aren't extending me any.
As for your suggestion that my attitude is the worst possible way to convince people that atheism is better than theism, tell that to the more than 50 people that I have personally converted from stupidity into enlightenment.
Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.
I didn't miss anything.
You miss the point.
Live the f'ing percetnige out.
I might be wrong with few percents but I promise you that in whole Africa is it over 90%.
I have friends working as doctors in hospitals and I know the real problem.
Every month people that I know die from AIDS.
I speak to my black friends about everything including this problem.
I know how they think.
I know their mentality.
Why don’t you comment on the example with Jacob Zuma.
It is very indicative and shows the real problem.
But most of you guys don’t really want to talk about the problem
You want to show how stupid theists are and how clever atheists are.
Whites in Africa are very religious but they don’t have AIDS.
In South Africa blacks go to school.
They watch TV, read adds about AIDS, bury their relatives who die from AIDS and still don’t care about protection.
I gave you example with gas helmet but their favorite is - “can you salt the bread through the glass”
How would you comment on this?
How would you comment on Zuma’s personal example and do you think that if the future president does not use condom the rest of the blacks are cleverer than him?
1. Commenting on Zuma - his ignorant statement show how badly education on STDs, HIV and condom use is needed. Good religious Americans have said similarly asinine things so it's not just South Africa.
2a. Would you like to take bets on how many of those religious white South Africans use condoms during sex?
2b. You don't think the good cathlolics and other theist jackholes telling them that hell waits for them if they use a condom has anything to do with their not using condoms.
Why do I think your conversation with the few you claim used condoms and never will again went like this:
Truden: Did you use a condom when you had sex:
African person: Yes.
T: You know that's a sin, right?
A: No, really?
T: Absolutely, the Pope said so as head of the Church. You don't want to go to hell, do you?
A: No.
T: Well then - go to confession, do your penance and promise never to use condoms again and heaven will be your reward.
A: OK. I will never use a condom again. I don't want to go to hell.
I'm sure the doctors have told you the real problem. Probably your friends did also. However, you decided to ignore all that and side with the Pope. Why?
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
In this particular case the pope has it right.
There is no point sending books to people who don't like reading or don't even know how to read.
It is the same with the condoms for black Africans.
I see no solution here and I'm not saying that we must not try with everything, but putting too much efforts will be waste of time, especially with the condoms.
South Africa is the most civilised country in Africa and they don't accept condoms. What about central Africa?
Can you even imagine how much time it takes for them to accept shoes or hats?
If the priests in the church start teaching them to use condoms they will laugh at them and the church will lose its authority.
I don't like church and communism but if there is no communism in China and church in Africa, believe me the world will be much worst place than it is now.
1. Then you educate them in general and add in the other stuff as they can understand it. Isn't that better than "Condoms will send you to hell - don't use them"?
2. Didn't you post earlier how the black South Africans go to school, read the AIDS ads, bury their loved ones and still don't use protection? Self-contradiction or an indication that you really don't know what you're talking about?
3. I wouldn't ask a priest to do it anyway. If he's true to his vows, he's incompetent to teach about sexuality. If he's not, he might be way too interested in "hands on" experience. As for the church's authority - it's only slightly more laughable than Ted Haggard's claim of complete heterosexuality.
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin