Anyone else have problems with this concept of "Safe Sex"?

[Whitacre_Girl]

So I was driving to the grocery store today and I passed a certain adult store that’s on the main drag in my town. Apparently this is “condom awareness month” for them, and they are running advertisements about “no glove, no love” and so on.

It just got me to thinking about how radically my views have changed, and it feels like my brain is racing to catch up. For example: in high school, I wasn’t a christian. I believed that sex should probably wait until you were an adult and could afford the consequences (kids, etc) but that it was always wise to use condoms, and practice safe sex. I considered myself a responsible and mature teenager, committed to healthful and wise decisions and respectful of authority. That authority said to always use condoms, wait until you were out of school, and practice safe sex. Now, as a Catholic, clearly I believe that abstinence is the ONLY safe sex, but when I pass billboards on stores like that my knee-jerk reaction is “Good for them!” And it isn’t until after a few seconds that I catch myself and kick myself for it and correct the thinking.

Does anyone else have this reaction? Does it go away, and how long until it does? LOL

 

[Adam1986]

So I was driving to the grocery store today and I passed a certain adult store that’s on the main drag in my town. Apparently this is “condom awareness month” for them, and they are running advertisements about “no glove, no love” and so on.

It just got me to thinking about how radically my views have changed, and it feels like my brain is racing to catch up. For example: in high school, I wasn’t a christian. I believed that sex should probably wait until you were an adult and could afford the consequences (kids, etc) but that it was always wise to use condoms, and practice safe sex. I considered myself a responsible and mature teenager, committed to healthful and wise decisions and respectful of authority. That authority said to always use condoms, wait until you were out of school, and practice safe sex. Now, as a Catholic, clearly I believe that abstinence is the ONLY safe sex, but when I pass billboards on stores like that my knee-jerk reaction is “Good for them!” And it isn’t until after a few seconds that I catch myself and kick myself for it and correct the thinking.

Does anyone else have this reaction? Does it go away, and how long until it does? LOL

Well, first off, you are correct in saying the ONLY safe sex is abstinence. The correct PC term is “safer-only”.

However,

“but when I pass billboards on stores like that my knee-jerk reaction is ‘Good for them!’”
Great! It is GOOD for them! It teaches people who are going to have sex anyway to not be an idiot and take a few seconds to put on condom and not screw up their lives forever or worse.

Billboards with safer-sex ads are PHENOMENAL! They help drill safer-sex into some real block heads. The more those people see those ads the more likely they are to use a condom.

“And it isn’t until after a few seconds that I catch myself and kick myself for it and correct the thinking.”
Why do you correct the thinking? In my opinion you are 100% right! Is it better to not have those ads and then have kids get other kids pregnant? That’s better? Or what about not having those ads and having some guy pick up HIV/AIDS and not know it and then pass it along to all his partners?

Those ads do good.

 

[white_sheep]

I sure don’t have that reaction, but I guess I have been aware of the evils of “safe sex” longer. Safe sex is a misnomer, it is actually more dangerous sex. Wearing a condom emboldens people to take more risks and chances than they would otherwise. Safe sex is sex with your spouse only. That’s it.

 

[Adam1986]

Wearing a condom emboldens people to take more risks and chances than they would otherwise.

How so? Do you mean by having sex during ovulation? Or just more partners? Sorry I just don’t know what you meant there.

 

[Whitacre_Girl]

I sure don’t have that reaction, but I guess I have been aware of the evils of “safe sex” longer. Safe sex is a misnomer, it is actually more dangerous sex. Wearing a condom emboldens people to take more risks and chances than they would otherwise. Safe sex is sex with your spouse only. That’s it.

I agree with this totally. It’s like teaching people that russian roulette with a 10 chamber gun is better than with a 6 chamber gun. The only thing truly safe? Don’t play with a loaded gun AT ALL. lol

I’m waiting for it to hit me, I guess. I’ve only been catholic 3 years, and spent the previous 6 as a protestant in a fold that promoted condom use among marrieds as acceptable birth control, and healthier alternatives for people who were “going to do it anyway”. shrug

 

[WetCatechumen]

Honestly, the idea of safe sex makes me sick.

It seems like a rejection of the other person, as well as a rejection of human life.

It feels so awful to me. It honestly just horrifies me.

This from someone who three years ago was a Protestant who masturbated pretty much daily and had no problem with contraception.

 

[thistle]

The problem with society today is that the sense of morality has disappeared. People only seem to act on the basis if something is legal or illegal and not what is moral or immoral.

 

[Ranklyfrank]

My Mentor told us that it is great to have perfect pitch, but to remember that the piano is tempered. So part of your question is what is right for you, and another is what is better for someone who isn’t of the Faith, as you were, and what is needful from their situation. So if you are reacting for you, well and good. But it might be someone else’s job, like your Lord’s, to decide what’s right for someone else in their context. So while you can say for yourself what’s right according to your lights, someone else may not have those and is in a different sort of struggle whose shoes you haven’t put on. That is between them and God, unless they ask you why you are so wonderful.

You can still hold for them what you have for yourself as an absolute, but your “perfect pitch” could just irritate them and maybe not enjoy the piano so much. So we usually try to meet someone on their level and move from there. Essentially they, just as you and I, are made in God’s image and likeness. First we honor that, then see clearly what the problem actually is in their terms, and then apply the remedy if there is receptivity. Otherwise we are in James Mitchner’s Hawaii, or in the Poisonwood Bible.

If your reaction upsets you, remember that you took a long time to acquire it. So unless you use some psychological short cut, what would you expect but contextual reactions? You trained yourself well. So stop being so self critical and making it worse. Just say “There goes my mind again…” and go on with your business. You are only driving it deeper if you give it attention.

 

[NewsTheMan]

“safe sex” is a contradiction in terms - at least in Catholic understanding, I think.

Something that is by definition giving of oneself, by definition the physical expression of love, by definition mutual sacrifice of the self… how can this be unsafe? “Safe sex” implies that one is using the other for sex. It implies that there is a danger to it. That danger comes from engaging in this poor, substitute version of love.

safe sex is rather the opposite. Safe sex by todays standards is unsafe. It’s immoral, and without even knowing it people are consenting to using each other - all under the guise of sexual liberation.

 

[white_sheep]

How so? Do you mean by having sex during ovulation? Or just more partners? Sorry I just don’t know what you meant there.

The idea behind the phrase safe sex is that by wearing a condom you will be protecting yourself from sexually transmitted disease. You will be safe. Safe=no chance of harm. Does it really seem safe to have sex with people who have STDs? That is what they are saying.

Try this statement:
“Go ahead, sure she(or he) has AIDS and herpes, but you have a condom, don’t worry about it, you’ll be safe. It’ll be fun, go for it.”

It sounds ridiculous when you actually just come out and say it, but that is exactly what the message is. It isn’t necessary to point out that condoms do not prevent the transmission of disease 100% of the time. Having sex with people who have STDs will lead to a higher rate of transmission of STDs than not having sex with people who have STDs, condoms or no condoms. It’s really common sense.

The effectiveness of condoms also varies from disease to disease. For instance, they have limited practical effect against genital warts, and who wants a ‘member’ that looks like a cauliflower? Good luck having normal marital relations when that thing comes out.

 

[Petergee]

Honestly, the idea of safe sex makes me sick.

It seems like a rejection of the other person, as well as a rejection of human life.

It feels so awful to me. It honestly just horrifies me.

Me too, and what makes me feel even sicker is that here in Australia and in many other countries the government is making us pay for these mendacious campaigns, reliance on which, as has been repeatedly shown, only results in **increased **rates of AIDS, other STDs and abortion.

 

[Joseph_L_Varga]

The annual failure rate of condoms for preventing pregnancy is 13-18%, and annual failure rate for preventing transmission of HIV is 31%. The annual failure rate for preventing HPV is probably around 100%, meaning no protection at all.

Now, let’s try this car advertisement: Buy our cars. They have a 5-star safety rating. Their annual failure rate with regard to traffic accidents is only 31%. That means, out of 100 drivers who drive our cars for a full year, 31 will go losing control, rolling over, and crashing into other vehicles or into trees on the side of the road. However, the other 69 drivers will not experience such accidents.

Would anyone in his right mind call such a vehicle “safe”, or “safer”?

Talking about condoms and safety in the same sentence is pretty ridiculous, if you ask me.

 

[st_lucy]

And I think that some are forgetting (or just not mentioning) that majority of condom users don’t wear them correctly which brings those numbers a lot higher.

Condoms are not safe.

 

[Ranklyfrank]

The annual failure rate of condoms for preventing pregnancy is 13-18%, and annual failure rate for preventing transmission of HIV is 31%. The annual failure rate for preventing HPV is probably around 100%, meaning no protection at all.

Now, let’s try this car advertisement: Buy our cars. They have a 5-star safety rating. Their annual failure rate with regard to traffic accidents is only 31%. That means, out of 100 drivers who drive our cars for a full year, 31 will go losing control, rolling over, and crashing into other vehicles or into trees on the side of the road. However, the other 69 drivers will not experience such accidents.

Would anyone in his right mind call such a vehicle “safe”, or “safer”?

Talking about condoms and safety in the same sentence is pretty ridiculous, if you ask me.

So basically you are saying that because the lifeboats on a ship don’t all work none of them ought to be used or we shouldn’t bother having them at all. Good one!

 

[centurionguard]

And I think that some are forgetting (or just not mentioning) that majority of condom users don’t wear them correctly which brings those numbers a lot higher.

Condoms are not safe.

Your Right!

And I think it bad enough that when driving down the main drag in our cities we have to see these huge advertisements on billboards and bright lights. We forget that our civic politicians are hauling in big tax revenue from these adult establishments. And they don’t give a damn in some cities where the plant them.

In my city there’s an Adult Massage Parlor and video outlet directly across from the Cathedral. Another Strip joint beside a High School.

What goes on in the minds of our civic leaders? :banghead:

Somebody hates Catholics?, Christians?

 

[st_lucy]

So basically you are saying that because the lifeboats on a ship don’t all work none of them ought to be used or we shouldn’t bother having them at all. Good one!

I think that what he is saying is that we should not call it “safe” when it is not. In your senero some of the life boats are working, but in the condom world you are never really sure if the one you are wearing, will actually protect you, even if you are wearing it correctly, which chances are you aren’t, but yet we still will call it safe.

 

[Whitacre_Girl]

you guys all make such good posts! I have loved reading them.

1. The “cauliflower” line - I shouldn’t have read that while enjoying my morning cereal…lol
2. The Driving analogy is great for putting the danger into perspective - however, playing devil’s advocate, I know that people reading that would say “Yes, but your option is to either walk everywhere and NEVER drive, drive with a 100% chance of crashing, or drive with a 60% chance of NOT crashing? We take about that same risk every day, and some os us will always choose to drive. I’d rather be safe- ER than the 100%.” (not that I agree with this at ALL, but I love your analogy and plan to use it, so could you rebut that for me? Thanks!)
3. Forgive me for being crass, but how the heck can you not use one PROPERLY? It seems pretty self-explanitoroy to me (and I’ve NEVER even been around one! haha)

 

[Whitacre_Girl]

So basically you are saying that because the lifeboats on a ship don’t all work none of them ought to be used or we shouldn’t bother having them at all. Good one!

This analogy only works if one is being raped and sex is FORCED on them, in which case I believe the church says you can take measures to protect yourself in this case. (If I am wrong, someone correct me!) The analogy of lifeboats just doesn’t work here.

 

[crazzeto]

So I was driving to the grocery store today and I passed a certain adult store that’s on the main drag in my town. Apparently this is “condom awareness month” for them, and they are running advertisements about “no glove, no love” and so on.

It just got me to thinking about how radically my views have changed, and it feels like my brain is racing to catch up. For example: in high school, I wasn’t a christian. I believed that sex should probably wait until you were an adult and could afford the consequences (kids, etc) but that it was always wise to use condoms, and practice safe sex. I considered myself a responsible and mature teenager, committed to healthful and wise decisions and respectful of authority. That authority said to always use condoms, wait until you were out of school, and practice safe sex. Now, as a Catholic, clearly I believe that abstinence is the ONLY safe sex, but when I pass billboards on stores like that my knee-jerk reaction is “Good for them!” And it isn’t until after a few seconds that I catch myself and kick myself for it and correct the thinking.

Does anyone else have this reaction? Does it go away, and how long until it does? LOL

I used to, honestly every now and again I catch my self being taken with some humor or something related to this subject at first. But, like you, I catch my self. I realize truely that the wisdom of the world is foolishness. “Safe sex”… Yeah right… The only truely “safe sex” is by placing sexuality in a sacramental context. It’s also the only fulfilling rewarding sex. Outside of this context, sexuality is devoid of any meaning. That’s why there is so much hurt frequently attached with sexuality out in the “real world”.

 

[Corki]

My biggest problem with the “safe sex” campaigns is that they are mostly aimed at teens. We are sending such a mixed message when we tell them we trust them to drive cars at 60mph down the highway and we trust them to go off and live responsibly at college but we don’t trust them to keep their hormones in check and exercise a little self restraint. Society has reduced the whole idea of sex to that of an irresistable urge, an animal instinct.

The ads that turn my stomach are the ones that say “If you love her, wear a condom”. It would be more realistic and truthful to say “If you respect her so little already, don’t make it worse by giving her a disease - wear a condom.” Or “If you have so little self-respect that you are going to give it away, don’t bring a child into your messed up life - wear a condom”

And while we are on the subject of driving, what’s the message there? Do we tell kids (and adults) that they should limit their risks of dying in an accident or going to jail by only driving on back roads when they are drunk? After all there’s fewer other cars and almost no cops there. NO We, individually and as a society say “DON’T DRINK AND DRIVE!” Period.