It seems like every person who watches the news knows about the AIDS epidemic in Africa. Every individual has millions of ways in which they think the problem should be fixed but a prominent voice in the entire epidemic is that of the Catholic church. This seems strange because the church tells those stricken with the disease that condoms have they have tiny holes in them through which HIV
can pass - potentially exposing thousands of people to risk. Where is the logic in that one? Tests have been conducted to prove that most STD's-including AIDS-can be prevented or the risk lowered when using a condome. Why so then does the church speak against their use in Africa? In reality the use of them is the lesser evil and would no doubt decrease numbers of those suffering because of the epidemic. The fact still remains that AIDS is genetic so then what does the chruch suggest doing about that?
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
The Catholic Church has a set of beleifs. One of those beleifs is that the use of contraceptives is bad. This, I imagine, comes from the belief that sex is bad unless it is for the purpose of having children. Religious rules tend to be incredibly strict and the Church does not feel that exceptions should be made for real-life situations.
...then why not just SAY that, instead of spreading false information about the effectiveness of condoms. I have said it before, and I will say it again...if you have to make s*** up in order to convince people to agree with your opinion, then its probably not a very good opinion to begin with.
percivale
-------------------------
"Vi Veri Vniversum Vivus Vici." ~ V.
Because their opinion isn't very good. ...In my opinion.
I didn't understand what you meant at the end by saying that AIDS is genetic, it can be, but it is usually acquired, hence the first leader meaning Acquired, though I did get your thoughts and I do agree that telling people things of that is wrong. Thanks.
-Caity =)
Caity, what I meant by the genetic part was simply that not only is AIDS acquired ,like you mentioned, but that when parents with the disease have children they pass it on to them
-x
Opinions should be stated not argued.
Only if a) HIV has infected the germ line. It's possible that that doesn't happen, or b) the MOTHER has HIV, and the baby contracts it at birth, due to contact with the mother's blood. That second one isn't genetic.
Oh, and please use the reply link at the bottom of the post to respond to a comment. It doesn't make much difference in a thread as small as this, but when there are many replies, it makes the conversation flow better.
~C
Read the news
Nominate a featured blogger!
(1) HIV infects T-cells. T-cells are immune cells, white blood cells. They are not germ-line cells.
(2) The problem he is talking about is called Mother-to-child transmission, and it can occur three ways. (1) HIV is a virus and can therefore cross the placenta and infect the child at any time during pregnancy. (2) There is often mixing of the mother and child's blood during labor and delivery. HIV can be transmitted that way. (3) HIV is excreted in the mother's milk, so HIV could be transmitted by breast-feeding.
This link has more information about how to prevent mother-to-child transmission.
Cheers,
Darwin's Beagle
===
If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing. - Anatole France
Thanks for the clarification, both of you, I appreciate you further developing the topic. If you have anymore information on the subject please let me know, I'm writing a thesis on the subject of AIDS and any source is helpful.
-x.
Thanks DB. I should've figured the breastmilk one, but ah well.
~C
Read the news
Nominate a featured blogger!