Surprise, surprise: Common sense is just that
What are the chances that a married person who is faithful to his or her spouse is going to contract AIDS? Pretty much zero. Common sense would therefore tell you that the best way to avoid contracting AIDS would be to abstain from sexual intercourse outside the confines of marriage.
Apparently this is not so obvious to people like Rebecca Hodes, head of policy, communications and research for the Treatment Action Campaign in South Africa. WND reports that she “blasted the pope for not advocating wide access to condoms as a means of combating AIDS.” Commenting to the AP, she said, “His opposition to condoms conveys that religious dogma is more important to him than the lives of Africans.”
WND reports, however, that “a senior Harvard research scientist confirmed that Pope Benedict XVI, who endured heavy criticism for declaring that condom distribution programs worsen the AIDS epidemic in Africa, was actually correct.”
“There is,” Green added, “a consistent association shown by our best studies, including the U.S.-funded ‘Demographic Health Surveys,’ between greater availability and use of condoms and higher (not lower) HIV-infection rates. This may be due in part to a phenomenon known as risk compensation, meaning that when one uses a risk-reduction ‘technology’ such as condoms, one often loses the benefit (reduction in risk) by ‘compensating’ or taking greater chances than one would take without the risk-reduction technology.”
…In Uganda, according to a report in Science magazine, teaching about AIDS and promoting monogamy has led to a dramatic turnaround in the country’s AIDS epidemic.
“Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) is preventable if populations are mobilized to avoid risk,” states the report’s summary. “Despite limited resources, Uganda has shown a 70 percent decline in HIV prevalence since the early 1990s, linked to a 60 percent reduction in casual sex. The response in Uganda appears to be distinctively associated with communication about [AIDS] through social networks. Despite substantial condom use and promotion of biomedical approaches, other African countries have shown neither similar behavioral responses nor HIV prevalence declines of the same scale. The Ugandan success is equivalent to a vaccine of 80 percent effectiveness.”
It would appear, then, that it is Ms. Hodes, not the Pope, who is more interested in dogma (in her case that of free sex) than in saving lives. Yet another case of a liberal projecting her own ulterior motives/character flaws onto others.
Liberals generally have much lower standards and expectations for people than conservatives do. Libs tend to think of people as “mouths” that consume resources and destroy the planet, and need to be dependent. Whereas conservatives see people as “minds” who can create wealth and improve the planet when motivated to do so.
I think that I agree with Roland Martin when he says:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/03/18/martin.condoms/index.html
Hmmm, I must have missed the part where he showed that driving was a sin. Pastors are supposed to tell their congregations to protect themselves if they’re going to sin? I can see the new slogan at churches everywhere: “Sin smart or sin not.”
I disagree. The Harvard researcher noted “a consistent association shown by our best studies, including the U.S.-funded ‘Demographic Health Surveys,’ between greater availability and use of condoms and higher (not lower) HIV-infection rates.” That flies directly in the face of what Martin is saying.
Common sense is not all that common. I side with the Pope. It’s all about education. If people can at least gain an understanding of the risk inherent they would be less likely to engage in risky activities.
Ryan