Engaged couple, one having AIDS

[hamburglar]

Let’s say we have an engaged couple. The male is HIV positive, the female is not. Condoms are not permissible for any reason. The Church calls those with AIDS to abstain (which I agree with).

Is this couple to abstain from sexual intercourse? How does this couple make the marriage indissoluble if they cannot perform the marital act?

 

[rpp]

Let’s say we have an engaged couple. The male is HIV positive, the female is not. Condoms are not permissible for any reason. The Church calls those with AIDS to abstain (which I agree with).

Is this couple to abstain from sexual intercourse? How does this couple make the marriage indissoluble if they cannot perform the marital act?

It seems to me that the man finds himself (through choice or mishap) to be in a position where he must remain celibate. The lady should find herself someone else to marry so as not to risk infection.

Condoms are not a guarantee the infection will not be passed. All it takes in ONE accident.

 

[allhers]

When we speak of giving all of ourself to the other, somehow, I don’t think this is a very good example of what we mean.

If you really love someone and you have aids wouldn’t you love them enough to not marry them? Wouldn’t you instead choose to remind single and out of love for the other remain celibate and not risk giving someone else a deadly disease if you truly loved them?

Personally if I aquired aids, like through a blood transfusion or something, the last thing that would be on my mind would be to have intercourse with my husband and I seriously doubt that that would be on his mind either.

IF by some remote possibility that I could be in any way, shape or form wrong, then I would just say no.

I have read that the aids virus is small enough to get through a condomn anyway, for those who think this method would be alright. source:
“The rubber comprising latex condom has intrinsic voids about 5 microns in size.” The HIV virus is 0.1 micron. Roland, Rubber World. June 1993. Roland and Sobieski, Rubber Chemistry and Technology. Vol. 62, 1989.
and
In one test, 33% of latex condoms leaked HIV sized particles. Sexually Transmitted Diseases. vol.19. 1992
hli.org/condom_facts_sheet_failure.html

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Re the value of condoms I recently encountered the following:

Now some actual facts:

AIDS victims in 1987: Philippines 135 / Thailand 112

In 1991 the WHO predicted the Philippines would have 80,000 to 90,000 cases and Thailand 60,000 to 80,000 AIDS victims.

Thailand promoted the use of condoms in massive campaigns where Catholic Philippines promoted 'Abstinence' and 'Be faithful'.

The prognosis of the WHO was wrong for both countries:

1999: Philippines 1,005 / Thailand 755,000 AIDS victims

Source: British Medical Journal, volume 328, April 10th 2004

 

[Blade_and_Blood]

Let’s say we have an engaged couple. The male is HIV positive, the female is not. Condoms are not permissible for any reason. The Church calls those with AIDS to abstain (which I agree with).

Is this couple to abstain from sexual intercourse? How does this couple make the marriage indissoluble if they cannot perform the marital act?

In my opinion, I don’t think they should have intercourse–but not for religious reasons. It’s only the safe thing to do because, although condoms do lower the risk of getting an STD, it still has that incredibly small chance of it not working.

As far as their choice to engage in sexual relations or marriage, it’s entirely up to the couple. I only say that to be fair.

Ironically Yours, Blade and Blood

 

[allhers]

Re the value of condoms I recently encountered the following:

Quote:
Now some actual facts:

AIDS victims in 1987: Philippines 135 / Thailand 112

In 1991 the WHO predicted the Philippines would have 80,000 to 90,000 cases and Thailand 60,000 to 80,000 AIDS victims.

Thailand promoted the use of condoms in massive campaigns where Catholic Philippines promoted ‘Abstinence’ and ‘Be faithful’.

The prognosis of the WHO was wrong for both countries:

1999: Philippines 1,005 / Thailand 755,000 AIDS victims

Source: British Medical Journal, volume 328, April 10th 2004

…and that only proves this exactly:
“Increased condom use will increase the number of [HIV/AIDS] transmissions that result from condom failure” and “a vigorous condom promotion policy could increase rather than decrease unprotected sexual exposure if it has the unintended effect of encouraging a greater overall level of sexual activity.” “Condoms and seat belts: the parallels and the lessons” The Lancet, 29 Jan 2000
In one test, 33% of latex condoms leaked HIV sized particles. Sexually Transmitted Diseases. vol.19. 1992
Ontario Ministry of Health campaign to promote condoms by means of televised AIDS messages made respondents more inclined to use condoms but less inclined to avoid casual sexual partners. Wilde, Target Risk, PDE Publications, 1994.
IPPF indicates that the risk of contracting AIDS during so-called “protected sex” approaches 100 percent as the number of episodes of sexual intercourse increases. Cates Medical Bulletin, IPPF 1997.
The only sure ways to avoid sexual transmission of diseases (including AIDS, chlamydia, genital herpes, genital warts, gonorrhoea, hepatitis B, and syphilis) are not to have sex at all or to limit sex to one uninfected partner who is also monogamous. Food and Drug Administrationc (USA) Consumer Magazine Sep 1990.

source:
hli.org/condom_facts_sheet_failure.html

 

[rpp]

Re the value of condoms I recently encountered the following:

Thank you, Joe. Great statistics!

 

[1ke]

Let’s say we have an engaged couple. The male is HIV positive, the female is not. Condoms are not permissible for any reason. The Church calls those with AIDS to abstain (which I agree with).

Is this couple to abstain from sexual intercourse? How does this couple make the marriage indissoluble if they cannot perform the marital act?

I’m not sure a priest would marry a couple in this situation. They would not be able to consummate the marriage, and therefore, it would be dissoluable.

A man or woman who is HIV positive would need to remain celibate.

 

[hamburglar]

I’m not sure a priest would marry a couple in this situation. They would not be able to consummate the marriage, and therefore, it would be dissoluable.

A man or woman who is HIV positive would need to remain celibate.

Okay, this really addresses my question. Basically, the male should remain single for the rest of his life, because he should not have sex, which would endanger his wife. Since the marital act would not take place, the marriage can not be consummated.

A man in this situation would be distraught by this situation, but we all have our crosses. However difficult, we must never resort to immoral practices such as condoms.

By the way, isn’t it part of the marriage vows that one must be open to children, and therefore, promise to not use artificial contraceptives?

 

[MarieCB]

There are dating sites for people who have communicable diseases like herpes and AIDS, specifically because they can’t ever guarantee not infecting their non-diseased partner. Just looked it up - positivesingles.com

I think that HIV-positive moms can now give birth to healthy children, with much medical intervention, although it’s recommended that they not breastfeed.

I would never risk having sex with someone who had AIDS, even with a condom. They break, for one thing. For another, there are still bodily fluids passed between partners even with condoms.

 

[1ke]

By the way, isn’t it part of the marriage vows that one must be open to children, and therefore, promise to not use artificial contraceptives?

Yes.

 

[Joe_Kelley]

Quote:
Now some actual facts:

AIDS victims in 1987: Philippines 135 / Thailand 112

In 1991 the WHO predicted the Philippines would have 80,000 to 90,000 cases and Thailand 60,000 to 80,000 AIDS victims.

Thailand promoted the use of condoms in massive campaigns where Catholic Philippines promoted ‘Abstinence’ and ‘Be faithful’.

The prognosis of the WHO was wrong for both countries:

1999: Philippines 1,005 / Thailand 755,000 AIDS victims

Source: British Medical Journal, volume 328, April 10th 2004

…and that only proves this exactly:
“Increased condom use will increase the number of [HIV/AIDS] transmissions that result from condom failure” and “a vigorous condom promotion policy could increase rather than decrease unprotected sexual exposure if it has the unintended effect of encouraging a greater overall level of sexual activity.” “Condoms and seat belts: the parallels and the lessons” The Lancet, 29 Jan 2000
In one test, 33% of latex condoms leaked HIV sized particles. Sexually Transmitted Diseases. vol.19. 1992
Ontario Ministry of Health campaign to promote condoms by means of televised AIDS messages made respondents more inclined to use condoms but less inclined to avoid casual sexual partners. Wilde, Target Risk, PDE Publications, 1994.
IPPF indicates that the risk of contracting AIDS during so-called “protected sex” approaches 100 percent as the number of episodes of sexual intercourse increases. Cates Medical Bulletin, IPPF 1997.
The only sure ways to avoid sexual transmission of diseases (including AIDS, chlamydia, genital herpes, genital warts, gonorrhoea, hepatitis B, and syphilis) are not to have sex at all or to limit sex to one uninfected partner who is also monogamous. Food and Drug Administrationc (USA) Consumer Magazine Sep 1990.

source:
hli.org/condom_facts_sheet_failure.html

Thanks - I have a friend who can use that.

 

[phantasm]

Now some actual facts:

AIDS victims in 1987: Philippines 135 / Thailand 112

In 1991 the WHO predicted the Philippines would have 80,000 to 90,000 cases and Thailand 60,000 to 80,000 AIDS victims.

Thailand promoted the use of condoms in massive campaigns where Catholic Philippines promoted ‘Abstinence’ and ‘Be faithful’.

The prognosis of the WHO was wrong for both countries:

1999: Philippines 1,005 / Thailand 755,000 AIDS victims

Source: British Medical Journal, volume 328, April 10th 2004

Updated numbers from the United States CIA World factbook,but still very low numbers.

Don’t put all of your eggs into one basket, as you won’t have much of an argument if ( when) the Philippines approaches secular Canada’s also very low rate of 0.3% of the population with HIV.

I just don’t think your argument is as persuasive as you all would like to believe.

Philippines

HIV/AIDS - adult prevalence rate: less than 0.1% (2003 est.)

HIV/AIDS - people living with HIV/AIDS: 9,000 (2003 est.)

 

[Newbie2]

If you really love someone and you have aids wouldn’t you love them enough to not marry them? Wouldn’t you instead choose to remind single and out of love for the other remain celibate and not risk giving someone else a deadly disease if you truly loved them?

Exactomundo.

“The rubber comprising latex condom has intrinsic voids about 5 microns in size.” The HIV virus is 0.1 micron. Roland, Rubber World. June 1993. Roland and Sobieski, Rubber Chemistry and Technology. Vol. 62, 1989.
and
In one test, 33% of latex condoms leaked HIV sized particles. Sexually Transmitted Diseases. vol.19. 1992
hli.org/condom_facts_sheet_failure.html

Sorry, serious topic, I know. It just strikes me as funny that there is a publication named “Rubber world”. I picture all sorts of articles about rubber tree plant care, how to make tires, etc, etc.

I’m not sure a priest would marry a couple in this situation. They would not be able to consummate the marriage, and therefore, it would be dissoluable.

.

Well, they would be able to consumate the marriage, but at a serious risk. It would be up to them whether or not they would engage in such a risk. But I wonder too about how a priest may not want to marry such a couple in that circumstance.

Okay, this really addresses my question. Basically, the male should remain single for the rest of his life, because he should not have sex, which would endanger his wife. Since the marital act would not take place, the marriage can not be consummated.

A man in this situation would be distraught by this situation, but we all have our crosses. However difficult, we must never resort to immoral practices such as condoms.

By the way, isn’t it part of the marriage vows that one must be open to children, and therefore, promise to not use artificial contraceptives?

Well, no. The promise to be open to children doesn’t necessarily mean not using artificial contraception. That’s sort of covered in being a proper Catholic.

Yeah, I can’t really picture someone wanting to marry another knowing of the risk of killing them, indirectly.

 

[manualman]

Isn’t there theoretically something called a Josephite Marriage? I’m no expert, but I recall hearing the term before somewhere.

 

[Seatuck]

Isn’t there theoretically something called a Josephite Marriage? I’m no expert, but I recall hearing the term before somewhere.

Extremely rare and for spiritual reasons not because one spouse could pass along a disease.

 

[Rob59]

I’d suggest doing some research regarding the reliability of HIV tests. In the popular mind, these are considered a virtually infallible indicator of whether or not someone has been infected with an HIV retrovirus, which is said to be the cause of AIDS. Yet widely used HIV tests actually test only for antibodies thought to be associated with an HIV virus; they do not isolate an HIV virus itself. And medical literature indicates that the antibodies for which the Western blot and ELISA HIV tests look are not specific or exclusive to HIV. Try a Google search for “HIV false positives” or the Web sites of “Rethinking AIDS” or “Alive and Well Foundation,” or read these books: Peter Duesberg, Inventing the AIDS Virus and Christine Maggiore, What If Everything You Thought You Knew About AIDS Was Wrong. Or view these films: “The Other Side of AIDS,” “Questioning AIDS in South Africa.”

The discussion on this forum seems to be based on the assumption that HIV is an extremely dangerous virus causing death through AIDS, and that it is transmitted through bodily fluids, including through sexual relations. Many researchers do not agree with these assumptions. Since pure HIV itself has never been isolated in any study published in any medical literature, it would surely be difficult to prove this assumption to be correct.

 

[Annn]

The discussion on this forum seems to be based on the assumption that HIV is an extremely dangerous virus causing death through AIDS, and that it is transmitted through bodily fluids, including through sexual relations. Many researchers do not agree with these assumptions. Since pure HIV itself has never been isolated in any study published in any medical literature, it would surely be difficult to prove this assumption to be correct.

Huh

 

[rpp]

I’d suggest doing some research regarding the reliability of HIV tests. In the popular mind, these are considered a virtually infallible indicator of whether or not someone has been infected with an HIV retrovirus, which is said to be the cause of AIDS. Yet widely used HIV tests actually test only for antibodies thought to be associated with an HIV virus; they do not isolate an HIV virus itself. And medical literature indicates that the antibodies for which the Western blot and ELISA HIV tests look are not specific or exclusive to HIV. Try a Google search for “HIV false positives” or the Web sites of “Rethinking AIDS” or “Alive and Well Foundation,” or read these books: Peter Duesberg, Inventing the AIDS Virus and Christine Maggiore, What If Everything You Thought You Knew About AIDS Was Wrong. Or view these films: “The Other Side of AIDS,” “Questioning AIDS in South Africa.”

The discussion on this forum seems to be based on the assumption that HIV is an extremely dangerous virus causing death through AIDS, and that it is transmitted through bodily fluids, including through sexual relations. Many researchers do not agree with these assumptions. Since pure HIV itself has never been isolated in any study published in any medical literature, it would surely be difficult to prove this assumption to be correct.

The researchers who support your idea that HIV may or may not exist and is probably unrelated to AIDS also support other ideas like alien abductions, the Moon landings were faked by NASA, the 9/11 attacks were actually done by George Bush and planes did not really hit the Twin Towers or the Pentagon, that Area 51 is a real place where the remains of aliens were autopsied after their spaceship crashed in Roswell NM, that Marylin Monroe’s fatal overdose was administered by John F. Kennedy with the help of his brother Robert and their presence was covered up by the Secret Service and, of course, that the Mafia was complicit in the assassination of JFK.

 

[Rob59]

You made an ad hominem character attack, but did not cite a single source from medical literature indicating that HIV had been isolated or that Western blot or ELISA tests that supposedly identify the presence of antibodies exclusive to HIV are reliable for this purpose, using as a gold standard of reliability isolates of the HIV virus.

Millions (billions?) of dollars have been spent in research relating to HIV and AIDS, so the above documentation should be readily available if conventional thinking on HIV and AIDS had been proven through repeated experiments to be true.