Post User Polls

Are you surprised by the pope's statement?

Pope Benedict XVI says in a new book that condoms can be justified for male prostitutes seeking to stop the spread of HIV, a stunning comment for a church criticized for its opposition to condoms and for a pontiff who has blamed them for making the AIDS crisis worse. Read the full article.

By Abha Bhattarai  |  November 20, 2010; 7:01 PM ET  | Category:  National Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati  
Previous: What would be the theme of your Capitol Hill inner office? | Next: Do you think Sarah Palin is qualified to run for president?

Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



The pope's comments were cleverly worded to paint condom use as something between homosexual males. So he pretty much makes sure that anyone who might do as he allows (1) isn't waiting for the pope's approval of them to begin with and (2) can be labelled as homosexuals. The latter is important, especially in Africa.

Overall, I'd say the pope's words are cleverly worded so as to sabotage/smear/undermine anyone who is known to use condoms.

Posted by: AsperGirl | November 20, 2010 10:12 PM

Nothing the Pope could say would surprise me. The church is trying to remain relevant, and losing the battle. The sooner we stop paying any attention at all to the blabbering of those archaic fools, the better.

Posted by: ramgolfball | November 20, 2010 10:23 PM

It's predictable that the Pope would consider a formerly forbidden contraceptive okay for gay men, but not for married women who wish to avoid HIV and pregnancy. Absurd but predictable.

Posted by: readerny | November 20, 2010 10:56 PM

How difficult is it to get good and accurate reporting? The Pope's own words:

"There may be a basis in the case of some individuals, as perhaps when a male prostitute uses a condom, where this can be a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility, on the way toward recovering an awareness that not everything is allowed and that one cannot do whatever one wants. But it is not really the way to deal with the evil of HIV infection. That can really lie only in a humanization of sexuality."

Papa is saying that in the case of a male prostitute who doesn't want to spread HIV, the use of a condom indicates a change in that person, although imperfectly, towards realizing sex isn't a carnival ride (my words) and brings with it much more. It's akin to a terrorist who planted a bomb at the last minute making a phone call to warn those in the vicinity to get out.

Don't believe the media hype and simplistic analysis.

Posted by: crabstu | November 20, 2010 11:16 PM

POSTED BY: CRABSTU | NOVEMBER 20, 2010 11:16 PM:

"Papa is saying that in the case of a male prostitute who doesn't want to spread HIV, the use of a condom indicates a change in that person, although imperfectly, towards realizing sex isn't a carnival ride (my words) and brings with it much more. It's akin to a terrorist who planted a bomb at the last minute making a phone call to warn those in the vicinity to get out.

Don't believe the media hype and simplistic analysis."

What an abtruse exercise in indirection! The fact that he has to thus rationalize the morality of why it's okay for a homosexual who doesn't want to get infected to have a first step toward moral change and not a woman who doesn't want to get infected, kind of highlights both the hypocrisy and how thin rationalizations support the prejudiced pronouncements of this pope.

If it's okay for a homosexual male prostitute to use condoms as it represents the first step toward a personal ethic - a growth of moral responsibility, then it should be so for females in heterosexual relationships as well.

Posted by: AsperGirl | November 21, 2010 5:16 AM

The male prostitutes of the world can now breathe a huge sigh of relief. Now you're vindicated.

Sorry females (prostitutes and non-prostitutes), for you, it's still a sin - even if you are using condoms to protect yourself from a spreading disease, or a pregnancy you may not be able to physically, financially or emotionally handle.

Am I the only one who sees this as a ridiculous slap in the face against women?

Posted by: LGmin77 | November 21, 2010 10:38 PM

One has to ironically laugh at the sight of this piety mouthing hypocrite who with the rest of his ilk has for so many decades facilitated priestly sodomy upon young boys, presuming to lecture anyone on sexual morality.

Kind of like Ted Bundy giving a seminar on how to treat young women.

Posted by: samscram | November 23, 2010 10:25 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company