The Pope visits Africa, a continent beset by problems. Strongman governments rob the people, several countries are struggling with epidemic violence, the level of education is generally low, there is little economic development and few opportunities for those who are able to get an education. Developed countries continue to raid the continent of anything valuable and leave the rest behind. The Western media naturaly ignores these hard issues and focuses on its favorite topic, sex. Most of our culture is obsessed with sex, and the media both exploits this fact and suffers from it like an addiction.
They all print the same story: Pope condemns condom use, clearly showing that he values religion above people's safety because experts say condoms are the only thing that can prevent the AIDS epidemic.
Any reporter who took the time to listen to the Pope would realize he is acutely aware of the problems facing Africans and believes that only an approach which values the whole person can answer those problems. The "enlightened" approach, on the other hand, stinks like old racism, since it assumes that African libido is uncontrollable and the best we can do is wrap the problem in latex.
Actually, the evidence is extremely strong that the biggest risk for HIV is multiple concurrent partnerships, and so reducing concurrent partnerships will reduce the risk. This is the abstract from March, 2009 issue of Studies in Family Planning:
The global diversity of HIV epidemics can be explained in part by types and patterns of sexual partnerships. We offer a typology of sexual partnerships that corresponds to varying levels of HIV-transmission risk to help guide thinking about appropriate behavioral interventions, particularly in the epidemics of sub-Saharan Africa. Declines in HIV prevalence have been associated with reductions in numbers of sex partners, whereas many other prevention strategies have not been demonstrated to reduce HIV transmission at a population level. We suggest a reorientation of current prevention efforts, based on the epidemiology of sexually transmitted HIV epidemics and trends in sexual behavior change. Concurrent sexual partnerships are likely to play a large role in transmission dynamics in the generalized epidemics of East and Southern Africa, and should be addressed through improved behavior-change interventions.
All this basically means that the money spent on condoms was wasted and the Pope's idea of promoting monogamy has better success. As a side note, male circumcision also notably reduces the risk of HIV infection.
Now can we stop thinking about sex and discuss some of Africa's other problems?
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Subscribe to Fr. Ben's Podcast
Subscribe to Fr. Joel's Podcast
Subscribe using iTunes
8 comments:
Yes, Fr. Benjamin, the Holy Father has it right that it is only in the value of the whole person can any effort of help be extended to solve problems, whether it be one country to another, or one person to another.
I give credit to Fox News for reporting: "The pope said that "religion and reason mutually reinforce one another" and urged Catholics and Muslims to work together "to build a civilization of love."
A civilization of love is certainly needed everywhere, starting with the whole persons trapped in the habits of the Western media. Freed from this trap, we may one day see these kinds of headlines about Africa, and the world over: How to prevent children from being exploited as soldiers or slaves, aiding efforts to build clean water wells, and the beauty of monogamy.
Wow...so many issues, here.
I'm not sure why anyone (e.g. the Pope) feels they can push their brand of religion on the world. And I'm not sure why anyone would push "religion". It's about so much more than that. And again - God spoke against "religion" many times. I think that when millions of people are living (or have died) from HIV/AIDS/ARC - it's insane to speak against anything that might help save lives.
With regard to the media - I heartily agree with you. About the ONLY thing I heard with regard to the Pope's trip to Africa was about condoms. AIDS is a serious issue, BUT... what else ya got?
I probably don't agree with everything you've said, here, but to help support your argument, I believe that the head of Harvard's AIDS research project also agrees with the Pope. People feel "safe" with condoms, and so they have more sex with more people. People can't preach "abstinence-only" or "monogamy-only" or "condoms-only". It's irresponsible, and, IMHO - downright dumb. "Whatever it takes" should be the motto here... for all sides.
Jim, in response to your comment, religion is not Diet Pepsi. It is ironic that the Pope gets more flak for "pushing religion" than PepsiCo does for pushing Diet Pepsi Max. If people are happy with Diet Coke, why upset them with your add campaign?
Religion is fundamentally a vision of human beings and of the world that is centered on transcendent values rather than material ones. In the case of Catholicism, union with God and a life pervaded by love (which is the same thing since God is love) are the highest possible values, and all other ones (economic growth, national prestige, personal health) are subservient to these. The Catholic response to AIDS seeks to preserve transcendent values. To say this position is stupid is to say that material values & a long life should not be subservient to union with God - an explicit rejection of religion's claims.
While you might not agree with religion's claims, you cannot complain about it being pushed. You should certainly complain if your neighbor believes that Jesus saves and does not care enough about you to tell you, but how could you complain if he did tell you, provided he did it respectfully?
However, while you might not agree with religion's claims you cannot say that "whatever it takes" is not a good solution. E.G. children of obese parents tend to be obese, and obesity is approaching a national crisis here in the United States. We could confiscate the children of overweight parents and have them raised by parents who eat well. It would solve the problem, but in a way that undermines key values of society, especially the importance of the family. Solutions must respect fundamental values.
The Pope vs. media conflict is not a conflict of methods but of values. Media believes sexual expression is a fundamental value, and solutions to the AIDS crisis should respect this value. Promoting abstinence and fidelity threatens sexual freedom.
The Pope believes that sexual responsibility is a fundamental value, and it should not be undermined in addressing AIDS. He thinks promoting condoms does just that.
Different theories support different solutions, as in science so in society. The fact that the results of the Papal solution are better suggest that the Papal theory of life is more accurate, but further research needs to be done.
Have you tasted Diet Pepsi Max? Yuck.
If my neighbor told me that "Jesus saves", and did so - respectfully - that would be fine. If he said that I must follow his beliefs or perish, he can go back to his house. While Christianity works for me, God is far too large for one religion. To expect the world to adhere to one set of beliefs is ignorant and arrogant. It reminds me of some conservative Christian I saw on 60 Minutes a few years ago, who basically said, "We love the Jews, and they're going to hell." What man has any place saying such?
My "religion" is about a personal relationship with the Christ. Share your beliefs with me, but don't insist that I follow your interpretation of God's word. God has made sure - on a daily basis - for many years - that I follow His interpretation of His Word. ;-)
The media believes not that sexual expression is a fundamental value, but a fundamental right. Along with each and every right comes responsibility, and if - for whatever reasons - one is unable to assume those responsibilities, then they lose those rights. But lets not try and vilify the media using whatever means necessary. Part of the media is 'religious', and -the media does a great job vilifying themselves. ;-) I don't think they need any help.
Having worked with the homeless and with HIV/AIDS patients for a number of years, I know for a fact that what the Church wants to force on people is unrealistic. It might be ideal and Godly, but it's just not reality. I'm a firm believer in monogamy, and I don't view sex as a recreational activity. But the truth is, much of society just isn't that way. And there are many cultures that just aren't that way.
Again, with millions who are HIV-positive, or who have already died of AIDS, preaching against condoms is just - dumb.
Thanks for sharing your views. I might disagree totally with you, but I always print out other views, and study what's been said and why it's been said. Maybe one of these days I'll figure out why the Popes have said some of the things they have said. ;-)
Jim,
As a Catholic I believe the Pope is infallible when it comes to issues of faith and morals.
Papal teachings on abstinence outside of marriage fall into this category. While the world would have you believe abstinence is an 'unrealistic solution' to controlling the spread of AIDs, I believe it is very possible. God works through sinners - all of us flawed human beings - who by our own power would find abstinence highly improbable. If the sinners are receptive to His grace, and have frequent recourse to the sacraments, the improbable becomes the doable.
The sinners take one step closer to heaven. The spread of AIDs via sexual contact declines. And the Pope is right.
Thanks for the comments, Happy. :-)
I have MUCH more to say, but I'll keep it to myself. I'll respect the purpose and intention of the author of this blog.
Interesting blog, yourself!
After reading these additional comments, can we return to the idea from the Pope: that we value the whole person when trying to solve a problem? I think we all agree that 'wrapping a problem in latex' as Fr. Benjamin wrote, does not involve the whole person!
Here is another issue in Africa, and I would like us to make a 'whole person' value judgment about it. Which is better: providing food, vitamins, and nutrition information to breastfeeding women living in impoverished areas, or simply shipping them baby formula that gets mixed with comtaminated water?
Do we agree on what is meant by the whole person - heart, mind, body, soul and free- with freedom meaning doing what is right, avoiding vice or becoming enslaved?
As someone who actually lives in Africa, I have witnessed first hand the failure of the governments obsession and failure of condoms. Leaving religion aside for a second, I really think people need to grow up and accept responsibility for what they do. You screw around, you are likely to get AIDS. Not punishment from God. Just a fact. One of the more irritating issues is that we who try and lead moral lives have to subsidise the immoral clowns because medical aid compamies are not allowed to 'discriminate' against people with Aids with regards to benefits. I will not preach at you if you don't steal my money. Personally, I feelwith |Herbert Spencer: The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools.
Post a Comment