Pope claims condoms could make African Aids crisis worse

  • Thread starter Thread starter averheyen
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
allhers said:
Yes, in my opinion, which always would defer to the Church, I guess I am, (if indeed the Church ever actally said that.)…after reading this especially. I also read things on the www.priestsforlife.org site and www.all.org site and www.hli.org site and www.ewtn.com www.thepillkills.org and many other trusted Catholic sites that speak the truth…

… There are several alternatives to the use of the birth control pill:
-Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (or NSAIDS) of which Ibuprofen is the most commonly known. Ibuprofen acts to actually stop the production of those pain-causing compounds we saw earlier: prostaglandins. A typical prescription dose is 600-800 mg. three times daily. Taken during menstruation this will be beneficial for most women. It is as simple as taking 3-4 Advil three times daily during menstruation.
-Natural progesterone given cooperatively with a woman’s cycle may actually reduce the amount of pain and bleeding a woman has in any cycle by supporting her body with natural progesterone, just like her body produces in the second half of her monthly cycle. This hormone is available everywhere by prescription in the form of a product called Prometrium. This natural hormone has NONE of the risks of birth control pills and actually makes most women feel better as opposed to most women getting ill with their first few cycles of birth control pills. For women charting their cycles with NFP (Natural Family Planning) this is given Peak + 3 through Peak + 12 at 200 mg. taken by mouth at night before retiring. This will help to oppose the effects of estrogen that may be building up the lining of a woman’s uterus excessively, thereby reducing the cramping at menstruation. Natural progesterone is also a smooth muscle relaxant having direct effects on the smooth muscles of the uterus reducing their contractions and thereby decreasing the pain. Again, there are NO KNOWN risks or complications with the use of natural progesterone. The product Prometrium is in a Peanut oil base and so women allergic to peanuts cannot use Prometrium and may need a pharmacist to compound a progesterone capsule for them without peanut oil elements… read more here: all.org/article.php?id=10162

** Plus, I really don’t think that what some people think or say about Humane Vitae is really what was said, maybe they really didn’t read it and just say what they have heard others say about it, true or not. I think sometimes, even some theologians, just give bad advice that some choose to listen to instead of finding out all the facts for themselves. I also don’t think that what any of our past and current Pope’s have said or what they are saying was always really listened to much. But I do believe that is changing, and I really think they ought to be always listened to. It isn’t like they just come off with this off the tops of their heads, they really do have access to the best scientific and medical advice, etc… (Not to mention the Holy Spirit). **

This was said in 2006 and is still effective today…
The very best article on Catholic teaching regarding the use of the birth control pill for medical reasons is actually written by a Catholic physician: Paul Hayes, M.D. His article is at all.org/article.php?id=10162

**(Which was the article I referenced above) **

You might also find the following article to be of use. It is a set of questions and answers prepared by Bishop Bruskewitz’s staff in the Diocese of Lincoln, Nebraska: dioceseoflincoln.org/purple/birth/

We have to remember that because the pill can abort a child, there is really no argument in defense of using the pill when so many alternative therapies are available…
source:
ewtn.com/vexperts/showresult.asp?RecNum=489115&Forums=0&Experts=0&Days=2008&Author=&Keyword=pill+for+medical+reasons&pgnu=1&groupnum=0&record_bookmark=5&ORDER_BY_TXT=ORDER+BY+ReplyDate+DESC&start_at=

This was also said back in 2002 by Judie Brown, (anyone listening now, 7 years later?)
The Catholic community already does support the work of Catholic scientists and researchers who already have come up with alternatives to using the pill for medical reasons. Perhaps you were not aware of the work of the Pope Paul VI Institute: popepaulvi.com

Now, if you really read all of those, I will comment to your comments, but if you just want to fire back a response, as some do, then I really don’t think I will be wasting my time looking all this stuff up just to have people ignore it and say something sarcastic. (Not saying you are like that, just saying IF you are, I’m not playing.)

(what I said was bolded)
Click to expand...
Interesting! Thank you.

However, the bottom line is the Magisterium has still allowed use of the Pill for medical reasons. As Paul Hayes says, whether it should be used is different from whether it could be used. And ithe Pill “could” be used.

Same logic goes for my question–why then can’t condoms be used for medical reasons, if the contraceptive effect is not the intention. Again, the argument is not whether it should be used (it’s not effective, it increases promiscuity, etc etc) but whether it could, given its medical uses.
 
Mike700 said:
This sounds like the Vatican has released a revised statement.

catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0901232.htm
Click to expand...
**
THIS IS BEAUTIFUL!!!**

This is the message we, Catholics need to know and bring to the world!
Viva Papa Benedict!!!
"The solution can only be a double one: first, a humanization of sexuality, that is, a spiritual human renewal that brings with it a new way of behaving with one another; second, a true friendship even and especially with those who suffer, and a willingness to make personal sacrifices and to be with the suffering. And these are factors that help and that result in real and visible progress.
Click to expand...
Amen! 👍
 
PRmerger said:
Interesting! Thank you.

However, the bottom line is the Magisterium has still allowed use of the Pill for medical reasons. As Paul Hayes says, whether it should be used is different from whether it could be used. And ithe Pill “could” be used.

Same logic goes for my question–why then can’t condoms be used for medical reasons, if the contraceptive effect is not the intention. Again, the argument is not whether it should be used (it’s not effective, it increases promiscuity, etc etc) but whether it could, given its medical uses.
Click to expand...
It would be a good idea to site your sources too, otherwise its just an opinion.
Earlier you sited the document of Pope Paul VI, Humanae Vitae, I read it, no where did I see that it said you could use abc. Why not give us what you seem to think is fact and we can read it for ourselves. What it did say was…therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases. So, does that mean that cramps and excessive bleeding are a disease now?
 
allhers,

As a psychologist who has also worked as an RN in gynaecoogy (as well as other areas) I would not dismiss the real and ongoing suffering of women with severe endometriosis as merely ‘cramps and excessive bleeding’ that are not disease.

There is a big difference between ‘normal’ menstrual cramping and bleeding, menstrual haemorrhage and endometriosis. It is a continuum and it is up to the woman and her clincians to determine how impaired her life and sense of wellbeing is by her menstruation and/or disease.

Are you aware that a woman with excessive menstrual bleeding can bleed to death? It is called a menstrual haemorrhage and is a medical emergency. She will need a blood transfusion and perhaps surgery to save her life. She may also suffer from anaemia serious enough to also need a blood transfusion and/ or treatment with iron supplements. Anaemia can cause heart failure, shortness of breath and exhaustion (and I’m not talking about feeling a bit tired).

Severe endometriosis can lead to disability, loss of the ability to earn a living, loss of mobility and relationship difficulties. It can also lead to the need for extensive and repeated surgeries. Endometrial tissue can be found in the lungs and around the heart, leading to difficulties breathing and impaired cardiac function. In addition endometrial tissue and cells have been found in the CNS. These cells and tissues enlarge and bleed into the tissues and organs affected every menstrual cycle. The pain alone can be unbearable.

So, yes, these ‘cramps and excessive bleeding’ are a disease. They impair health and functioning and as such affected women need treatment. If all treatments have been tried and failed, then the Church in her compasion, allows the use of a drug that as a side effect impairs fertility. However, as the ABC is not 100% (nothing is) one may argue that if God wants conception to take place then it probably will. (I digress however.)

Would you argue that a man with significant testicular pain and swelling should not have treatment either in case it impairs his fertility?

In addition, whilst some types of ABC cause failure to implant of the fertilized ovum (which the Church teaches as a type of abortion), not all ABC works this way. It is the woman’s (and couple’s) responsibility to ensure that if she is prescribed ABC for medical reasons it is not of this type.
 
allhers said:
It would be a good idea to site your sources too, otherwise its just an opinion.
Click to expand...
:confused:

Um…allhers? The sources are here, from your posts: *The very best article on Catholic teaching regarding the use of the birth control pill for medical reasons is actually written by a Catholic physician: Paul Hayes, M.D. His article is at all.org/article.php?id=10162 *

and here: you might also find the following article to be of use. It is a set of questions and answers prepared by Bishop Bruskewitz’s staff in the Diocese of Lincoln, Nebraska: dioceseoflincoln.org/purple/birth/

Your own sources state that the Pill is licit for medical reasons. This is not my opinion. 🤷
 
Fran65 said:
allhers,

As a psychologist who has also worked as an RN in gynaecoogy (as well as other areas) I would not dismiss the real and ongoing suffering of women with severe endometriosis as merely ‘cramps and excessive bleeding’ that are not disease.

There is a big difference between ‘normal’ menstrual cramping and bleeding, menstrual haemorrhage and endometriosis. It is a continuum and it is up to the woman and her clincians to determine how impaired her life and sense of wellbeing is by her menstruation and/or disease.

Are you aware that a woman with excessive menstrual bleeding can bleed to death? It is called a menstrual haemorrhage and is a medical emergency. She will need a blood transfusion and perhaps surgery to save her life. She may also suffer from anaemia serious enough to also need a blood transfusion and/ or treatment with iron supplements. Anaemia can cause heart failure, shortness of breath and exhaustion (and I’m not talking about feeling a bit tired).

Severe endometriosis can lead to disability, loss of the ability to earn a living, loss of mobility and relationship difficulties. It can also lead to the need for extensive and repeated surgeries. Endometrial tissue can be found in the lungs and around the heart, leading to difficulties breathing and impaired cardiac function. In addition endometrial tissue and cells have been found in the CNS. These cells and tissues enlarge and bleed into the tissues and organs affected every menstrual cycle. The pain alone can be unbearable.

So, yes, these ‘cramps and excessive bleeding’ are a disease. They impair health and functioning and as such affected women need treatment. If all treatments have been tried and failed, then the Church in her compasion, allows the use of a drug that as a side effect impairs fertility. However, as the ABC is not 100% (nothing is) one may argue that if God wants conception to take place then it probably will. (I digress however.)

Would you argue that a man with significant testicular pain and swelling should not have treatment either in case it impairs his fertility?

In addition, whilst some types of ABC cause failure to implant of the fertilized ovum (which the Church teaches as a type of abortion), not all ABC works this way. It is the woman’s (and couple’s) responsibility to ensure that if she is prescribed ABC for medical reasons it is not of this type.
Click to expand...
First of all, I am the second one who mentioned that Humanae Vitae said …the Church does not consider at all illicit the use of those therapeutic means necessary to cure bodily diseases, I also sited many sources for alternate medical means on post # 116, did you read them? If you are still in the medical field, you might want to in order to gain huge knowledge in the medical field about other uses other than artificial birth control, or do you work for Planned Parenthood, in which case I am sure you could care less. In that case, I’ll pray for you. (If we’re going to be throwing around assumptions here, afterall.)

Now, I think that I know the difference between normal cramps and excessive bleeding, etc…thank you. I also have a HUGE family and many women friends, etc…I was speaking to something specific here, perhaps it would do all good to read prior posts in a discussion, that would eliminate confusion.

I am not saying anything about diseases and their treatment, what I am speaking to is all the hype that some people put out there that says that the Church says that a.b.c. is alright to use, it doesn’t and I gave the sources for that too. Did you read any of those either? Far too many people assume that if they have menstral cramps and some excessive bleeding during those times that they MUST have a disease, not always, apparently, sometimes it is absolutely nothing to worry about, just normal, was for me anyway, but then I didn’t use a.b.c. They need to check with their Doctors and I recommend checking with a good Catholic Doctor that knows what he/she is talking about and doing and I even provided sourses for that. (since I am a good Catholic on a good Catholic site and all.)

We have more advanced ways than we had back in the 1960’s wouldn’t you agree?🙂
 
PRmerger said:
:confused:

Um…allhers? The sources are here, from your posts: The very best article on Catholic teaching regarding the use of the birth control pill for medical reasons is actually written by a Catholic physician: Paul Hayes, M.D. His article is at all.org/article.php?id=10162

and here: you might also find the following article to be of use. It is a set of questions and answers prepared by Bishop Bruskewitz’s staff in the Diocese of Lincoln, Nebraska: dioceseoflincoln.org/purple/birth/

Your own sources state that the Pill is licit for medical reasons. This is not my opinion. 🤷
Click to expand...
Um…PRmerger, I am asking for YOUR sources, not mine, I know what MY sources are thank you. I also read MY sources. You said something that wasn’t on MY sources, so I asked for YOURS.
 
PRmerger said:
Interesting! Thank you.

However, the bottom line is the Magisterium has still allowed use of the Pill for medical reasons. As Paul Hayes says, whether it should be used is different from whether it could be used. And ithe Pill “could” be used.

Same logic goes for my question–why then can’t condoms be used for medical reasons, if the contraceptive effect is not the intention. Again, the argument is not whether it should be used (it’s not effective, it increases promiscuity, etc etc) but whether it could, given its medical uses.
Click to expand...
Okay, lets start over, okay? YOU said this (see what I bolded above), and then I want to know what YOUR sources are for saying that.

MY sources say this:

Question:
-Is it wrong to take the pill for non-contraceptive purposes?

Answer:
I assume you meant the contraceptive pill. If it is prescribed for a genuine pathological situation and there is a very serious reason for its use and if there is no will of any kind for a contraceptive result, it possibly could be taken…

Question:
-If the Catholic Church would change its doctrine about artificial birth contraception, wouldn’t this cut down on the number of abortions?

Answer:
First, the immorality of the use of artificial birth prevention is a divine law, not merely a law or discipline of the Church. Therefore, the Catholic Church cannot “change” what God wills in regard to human conduct. She can only proclaim and teach it. Second, it should be kept in mind that many forms of artificial birth contraception are really abortifcaient, that is they prevent birth by abortion. These include the “pill”…

I also said that there are several alternatives to the use of the birth control pill and sited those on** post # 116**. What I see them saying is this:

If a woman is not sexually active, thus eliminating the contraceptive aspect of the birth control pill, there would be no wrong committed…

Even if a woman were married, birth control drugs COULD (whether or not they SHOULD be used is another discussion) be used to treat a medical condition as long as the husband and wife were to abstain from marital relations, thereby eliminating the contraceptive effect. Some would argue that a couple could use NFP in these situations and simply avoid relations on the days of fertility, thus making their actions consistent with the drug they are using, though I believe this to be in error as the birth control pill will more frequently eliminate any signs of fertility making the use of NFP impossible. Plus, the birth control pill ALWAYS has an abortifacient effect, putting any baby conceived at risk of death from the drug the woman is taking.

**Our Holy Father, John Paul II has stated over 15 years ago that “Contraception is to be judged so profoundly illicit that it can never be justified for any reason.” This seems to close the door on any attempt to use birth control pills for “medical reasons” if there is ever any possibility of a contraceptive effect. **

Now, here you said that the Magisterium has still allowed use of the Pill for medical reasons…

So, I’m asking, **what are YOUR **sources for saying this?

As you noticed, I bolded the points I wanted to bring out.
 
allhers said:
Question:
-Is it wrong to take the pill for non-contraceptive purposes?

Answer:
I assume you meant the contraceptive pill. If it is prescribed for a genuine pathological situation and there is a very serious reason for its use and if there is no will of any kind for a contraceptive result, it possibly could be taken…
Click to expand...
Do you disagree with the statement in red? Do you think that the Church has said that it’s illicit to use the Pill for medical reasons but that Bishop Bruskewitz is incorrect?
Now, here you said that the Magisterium has still allowed use of the Pill for medical reasons…
Click to expand...
So, I’m asking, **what are YOUR **sources for saying this.
Click to expand...
My source is the same as yours.

Again, my question, if the Church says that it is licit to use the Pill for medical reasons, provided that the contraceptive effect is not intended, why could the Church also not allow condoms for medical reasons, provided its contraceptive effect is not the primary reason for its use?

Arguments about why we *shouldn’t *use the Pill are irrelevant to my question. Arguments about the unreliability of condoms are also irrelevant. (As Paul Hayes says, whether it *should *be used is different from whether it could be used. And ithe Pill “could” be used.)

I’m talking moral principles here. Morally ok to use Pill for medical reasons? YES! says the Church. Morally ok to use condoms for medical reasons? NO! says the Church. I don’t understand.
 
PRmerger said:
Do you disagree with the statement in red? Do you think that the Church has said that it’s illicit to use the Pill for medical reasons but that Bishop Bruskewitz is incorrect?

My source is the same as yours.

Again, my question, if the Church says that it is licit to use the Pill for medical reasons, provided that the contraceptive effect is not intended, why could the Church also not allow condoms for medical reasons, provided its contraceptive effect is not the primary reason for its use?

Arguments about why we *shouldn’t *use the Pill are irrelevant to my question. Arguments about the unreliability of condoms are also irrelevant. (As Paul Hayes says, whether it *should *be used is different from whether it could be used. And ithe Pill “could” be used.)

I’m talking moral principles here. Morally ok to use Pill for medical reasons? YES! says the Church. Morally ok to use condoms for medical reasons? NO! says the Church. I don’t understand.
Click to expand...
You obviously aren’t reading MY sources then, you are just saying the same thing over and over, the Church says its okay!!!
Well it isn’t that simple, the Church isn’t saying its okay unless for very grave and specific reasons. Even then they can’t be used when a couple wants to do whatever they want while using it. You don’t seen to understand that, that is why I put MY sources up to begin with. IF you had read those I would think you would understand by now.

** A condomn stops the unitive and procreative intension of the marital act.** That is the very reason why a PILL can’t be used either, plus it kills the baby!

What you appear to be asking is this: Since we can use a pill why can’t we use a condom? There is far more to it than that, read all those sources and learn.

Here is some more for you.

Fr. Peter Damian Fehlner has written that such permission to contracept after rape is morally wrong because the intrinsically evil act of contracepting may never be done: www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/oct/07102305.html

It seems to me that if people actually read these documents and took in what they are really saying that this wouldn’t even be a question.

So, why didn’t you just say to begin with that YOU had no source other than Humane Vitae, which you obviously misunderstood to begin with?
 
allhers said:
You obviously aren’t reading MY sources then, you are just saying the same thing over and over, the Church says its okay!!!
Well it isn’t that simple, the Church isn’t saying its okay unless for very grave and specific reasons. Even then they can’t be used when a couple wants to do whatever they want while using it. You don’t seen to understand that, that is why I put MY sources up to begin with. IF you had read those I would think you would understand by now.

** A condomn stops the unitive and procreative intension of the marital act.** That is the very reason why a PILL can’t be used either, plus it kills the baby!

What you appear to be asking is this: Since we can use a pill why can’t we use a condom? There is far more to it than that, read all those sources and learn.

Here is some more for you.

Fr. Peter Damian Fehlner has written that such permission to contracept after rape is morally wrong because the intrinsically evil act of contracepting may never be done: www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/oct/07102305.html

It seems to me that if people actually read these documents and took in what they are really saying that this wouldn’t even be a question.

So, why didn’t you just say to begin with that YOU had no source other than Humane Vitae, which you obviously misunderstood to begin with?
Click to expand...
I read **every single word **of the articles.

I have no source *other than *Humane Vitae? :rolleyes:
That’s like saying a spelling bee referee has no source other than the dictionary.
 
PRmerger said:
I read **every single word **of the articles.

I have no source *other than *Humane Vitae? :rolleyes:
That’s like saying a spelling bee referee has no source other than the dictionary.
Click to expand...
Okay, I’m sorry, I didn’t realize you had a reading comprehension problem.😃
 
allhers said:
What you appear to be asking is this: Since we can use a pill why can’t we use a condom? There is far more to it than that, read all those sources and learn.
Click to expand...
Yup. That’s pretty much my question.
 
allhers said:
You must have read those sources as well as you read this forum, I’ve already answered that.
Click to expand...
You have no reason to be insulting. Twice you’ve criticized how well I read. Please stop making comments like that because it demeans all other comments you make.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top