Vatican does NOT change tune on condom use for HIV

So AFP reports that the Pope now allows condom use to reduce risk of HIV (reported here at TheAustralian.com.au), but in fact, he did not say that:

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.

When asked, "Are you saying, then, that the Catholic Church is actually not opposed in principle to the use of condoms?" he replied: She of course does not regard it as a real or moral solution, but, in this or that case, there can be nonetheless, in the intention of reducing the risk of infection, a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality.

[Italics are quoted from what Pope Benedict XVI said in the interview, emphasis is mine, however]
Apart from the link to Dr. Janet Smith's clarification of this above, Jimmy Akin provides more insights in the National Catholic Register.
The Pope says that condoms are not regarded as a real or moral solution, and if it is not moral, then it is immoral, and is therefore wrong. However, he speculates what is actually a valuable insight: it does demonstrate a growing awareness of responsibility or some moral consideration involved for one who would use condoms with the HIV risk in mind. This simply supports the point that the Holy Father is making: that not everything is simply permitted, and there ought to be a more human view of sexuality.

Non-evidence on preventing AIDS by condom: in mainstream media (of course)

Not that I expect to see this printed, but I sent the following letter to The Age in response to "The evidence on preventing AIDS is clear", which was full of unclear assertions with few details and no references:

Professors Toole and Moodie wrote assertively about AIDS in Thailand and the Philippines without references. That circumcision reduces the risk of AIDS is not conclusively proven (see http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/HIV/, which provides references to studies). Something else about the Philippines was unmentioned: men are sexually conservative by western (and Thai) standards. This is the most avowed Catholic country in the region. The good professors also failed to cite Dr. Edward Green's studies on Uganda (see http://www.usaid.gov/pop_health/aids/Countries/africa/uganda_report.pdf, an official report submitted to USAID). He is the Director of the AIDS Prevention Research Project of Harvard University. Dr. Green recently cited "no consistent associations between condom use and lower HIV-infection rates, which, 25 years into the pandemic, we should be seeing if this intervention was working.” (see http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article5987155.ece). Instead, the Guttmacher Institute was cited. But Alan Guttmacher was president of Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion and contraception provider in America, whose international projects include spending money and lobbying for legal safeguards in the Philippines for abortion and contraception (http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/the_filipino_front_in_the_culture_wars/). Finally, condom success in Senegal was cited, but a USAID report cites abstinence education, partner reduction along with condom use (see http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/global_health/aids/TechAreas/prevention/condomfactsheet.html) as deciding factors.

'or something worse may happen to you'

In the gospel reading from last Tuesday, Jesus heals a man who was apparently unable to walk for many years (John 5:1-3,5-16). Afterward, Christ warns him:

‘Now you are well again, be sure not to sin any more, or something worse may happen to you.’

I'd read in some commentary someplace (can't remember by whom) that sin and sickness were commonly associated in ancient times. But it would not be a very Christian attitude to allude irrational superstition to the Son of God. There is, in fact, a lot of empirical evidence for the association.

I can think of a few sins that involve behavior that risks one's health. Violence has its own risks, and a violent life, and certainly when unwarranted (not in war or law enforcement), carries unwarranted extra risks. Substance abuse? Sexual promiscuity certainly comes to mind, too. It is now considered conventional medical wisdom (for example) that there is a strong correlation between promiscuity with multiple partners and STD contraction. If environmentalists can cite violations against the ecosystem, why can't we cite destructive human behavior, too? It doesn't even take being a Catholic to understand that. Perhaps all you need are facts.

Taking AIDS less than seriously

It is incredible how AIDS is both taken seriously and not seriously enough. In this typical example, with a global warming spin on it, there's the rightly somber tone that says "this is a serious problem that needs to be fixed!" And then the supposed solutions (after considering how long it will be before modern medicine can find a vaccine) are listed as such:

"He said it was important to strengthen preventative measures proven to work, like condoms and circumcision, and continue to investigate other more hopeful avenues, like microbicide sex gels and anti-viral drugs to block infection."

Apparently, they don't take human beings seriously enough to consider that they might actually be capable of simply abstaining from sexually promiscuous lifestyles. Nor do they take the risks seriously enough to consider that the supposedly small risk of HIV contraction in spite of condoms is compounded by the unabated promiscuity that modern day morals and their apologists are tolerating, and, in effect, promoting.

There is something seriously wrong about this unwillingness to face the unpleasant and fatal truth: AIDS kills, and sexual promiscuity is a major vehicle of contraction.

Pray for a Bishop in South Africa

I realized with some horror a few days ago that I do not pray enough for those who dissent from the Catholic faith, and/or oppress Catholics/Christians. Sometimes, the grace of God shines through and I do pray, but rarely so, since I have made myself dense through an excessively but unnecessarily busy life.

Well.. here's one to pray for. Bishop Kevin Dowling from South Africa needs prayers. His concerns over the HIV epidemic is not the problem. It is commendable, but he doesn't realize that promoting condom use promotes HIV transmission. Condoms are only effective by a percentage that fluctuates somewhere between 85-95%, it seems, and the increased use of condoms means a compounding of the chances of HIV contraction. He imagines the pope as the Pharisees who refuses to lift a finger, and himself as the non-Pharisee who practices genuine compassion. Pray that he realizes before it is too late that, rather than saving these women, he is instead pushing them onto the path of greater harm.

False scientific reports

A Georgetown University report promotes condoms and blasts behavioral change promotion from faith-based communities. Tragically, the reverse is true instead, as scientific data substantiates clearly. This goes beyond ideological competition: formulating government policy based on this erroneous report will cause more people to contract and die from AIDS. Unfortunately, such false reporting is common in many countries where condom profits and lifestyle agendas are more important than the truth.

The never ending fallacies of AIDS and condoms

People are still wrongheaded about what they think condoms can do, despite the facts that contradict what they're saying. I came across this tragic case of lies and misconceptions almost 3 years ago. Two years ago, there were the same lies and more statistics that contradict those lies, yet the saga continues. Some people, notably foreigners, are still selling the idea that condoms prevent AIDS. But look at these statistics that come from ongoing research:

"Between 1993 and 2001 in Botswana, as condom sales rose from 1 million to 3 million, HIV prevalence among urban pregnant women shot up from 27% to 45%. During the same period in Cameroon, as condom sales increased from 6 million to 15 million, HIV prevalence rose from 3% to 9%."

"In the late 1980s, before Western AIDS experts arrived to tell Africans they had it all wrong, Ugandans designed their own homegrown AIDS-prevention health message. It was called ABC (for Abstain, Be Faithful, or if you cannot or will not do either, use Condoms). The ABC message was everywhere: on billboards, in churches, in government offices, in schools. As a result, rates of 13- to 16-year-olds having sex in one district plunged from nearly 60% in 1994 to less than 5% in 2001. Fewer than 10% of unmarried Ugandan women reported multiple partners (compared with 20% to 65% of women in other African countries, such as Kenya and Malawi). Meanwhile, national HIV infection rates in Uganda dropped from 21% to 6%."

And there's still the contradictory accusation about the Catholic Church causing AIDS to spread by forcing people to avoid condoms. If only the accusers could explain how the same people who faithfully follow Church condemnation of condoms fail to uphold Church teaching on abstinence and sex exclusively with one's own spouse.