Cardinal backs limited condom use

knightlight72 said:

It is the freedom to choose. Part of my concern is that those who follow Jesus may get confused if you say you do as well, but then disredard things Jesus said. They may ignore things from Jesus thinking since you do it, they should to. Really, the truth doesn't get confused by lies. But for those who don't know the truth yet, it can be very confusing. They might think that picking their favorite verses of the bible is ok, since "everyone" is doing it.

But back on topic, if you agree that perfect use of condoms that are stored perfectly, and used perfectly each and everytime results in exposure to whatever your partner has once out of every 50 times, (similar to having intimacy an average of once a week, and exposing yourself every year, or for those who meet national averages of 2-3 times per week, that means exposing yourself every 3-4 months to whatever they may have), my question is now what is the real percentage of exposure for those who do not have perfect use, and perfect storage conditions with their condoms?

What is the percentage of failure at the real world use?

Click to expand...

We use condoms during our whole marriage and before we were married. two to be excatly.....two times it bursted. in the course of 23 years....and I think I live in the real world....... If you use them in the correct way, and that gets me back to education......sex education that also learns people (teens) to use them correctly and teaches them to act immediately if they burst (physician, MAP...and so on). And always get tested if you are sexual active......

Simple, isn't it.....

belladonic-haze said:

We use condoms during our whole marriage and before we were married. two to be excatly.....two times it bursted. in the course of 23 years....and I think I live in the real world....... If you use them in the correct way, and that gets me back to education......sex education that also learns people (teens) to use them correctly and teaches them to act immediately if they burst (physician, MAP...and so on). And always get tested if you are sexual active......

Simple, isn't it.....

Click to expand...

So you're saying real world use is on par with 98% effective?

I'm assuming you avoided that part of the question since you know the real world answer.

Why do you need to get tested if sexually active, and you use the perfect method of storage and perfect use of condoms each and every single time?

Here's the real world answer.

Condoms have a fairly high real world failure rate.

According to National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, condoms only protect 80-87% of the time from AIDs. That means a 1 in 4 chance of exposing yourself each and every time you are intimate if your partner has AIDs.

Ask yourself if you'd be willing to expose yourself to AIDs once every four times you have an intimate encounter. Better yet, ask your doctor if they'd be willing to have an intimate encounter with a partner who was infected.

The typical response is that condoms do provide a safer rate of exposure, than a complete lack of protection. And that's true. However, with a real world failure rate that high, you really need to accept that you will be exposed to whatever they have at the minimum once per year with perfect use each and every time, with perfect storage temperture and conditions. Worse, if you don't use it perfectly, and store perfectly, then you will expose yourself to whatever the partner may have even more often. Significantly more often.

So to be clear, I'm not saying condoms cannot be used, I'm saying that people are mistaken about how safe they are.

knightlight72 said:

Here's the real world answer.

Click to expand...

knightlight72 said:

Condoms have a fairly high real world failure rate.

According to National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services, condoms only protect 80-87% of the time from AIDs. That means a 1 in 4 chance of exposing yourself each and every time you are intimate if your partner has AIDs.

Ask yourself if you'd be willing to expose yourself to AIDs once every four times you have an intimate encounter. Better yet, ask your doctor if they'd be willing to have an intimate encounter with a partner who was infected.

The typical response is that condoms do provide a safer rate of exposure, than a complete lack of protection. And that's true. However, with a real world failure rate that high, you really need to accept that you will be exposed to whatever they have at the minimum once per year with perfect use each and every time, with perfect storage temperture and conditions. Worse, if you don't use it perfectly, and store perfectly, then you will expose yourself to whatever the partner may have even more often. Significantly more often.

So to be clear, I'm not saying condoms cannot be used, I'm saying that people are mistaken about how safe they are.

Click to expand...

I use condoms, so yes...I am willing.....and I have talked to a doctor who worked in Africa with people with HIV/AIDS.....He is willing too and he will tell you different numbers. Honestly, your numbers are silly and not based on facts......only if you use condoms incorrectly you have a greater change of getting infected. So, educated from 11 years and up how to use condoms and give them the RIGHT information. Like the bishops in Africa telling people that white people made the condoms permeable......

Facts:How effective are latex condoms in preventing HIV?
Several studies have demonstrated that latex condoms are highly effective in preventing HIV transmission when used correctly and consistently. These studies looked at uninfected people considered to be at very high risk of infection because they were involved in sexual relationships with HIV-infected persons. The studies found that even with repeated sexual contact, 98-100% of those people who used latex condoms consistently and correctly remained uninfected.

From the CDC (Centre for disease control)
HIV / AIDS

Laboratory studies ​

HIV, the virus that causes AIDS​

​

Epidemiologic studies ​

Bella, I'm a little surprised at you saying my information is not based off facts. It seems so strange that you would accuse me of just making up numbers such as 80-87% effectiveness. I'm not even sure why you feel that typical use suggests 98% efftiveness, since if that were true, STD's would not be so common as it is now.

I think it's odd that you suggest getting tested regularly, and then suggest that education is needed if you feel that typical use results in 98% effective.


What you state, and then what you say is needed to correct the "non existant problem" counter each other.

I remember earlier you said lying was wrong in one of your posts. What do you call it when you say something is not true, when you know that it is?

Bella said:

Honestly, your numbers are silly and not based on facts...

Click to expand...

That's not honest. They are based on facts.

http://www.niaid.nih.gov/dmid/stds/condomreport.pdf

The CDC is not crazy and would not state such numbers if they were wrong. It is after all the centre of disease control. I mean.......really...

From UNAIDS:
15 How effective are condoms in preventing HIV?
Quality-assured condoms are the only products currently available to protect against sexual infection by HIV and other sexually transmitted infections (STIs). When used properly, condoms are a proven and effective means of preventing HIV infection in women and men.

However, no protective method is 100% effective, and condom use cannot guarantee absolute protection against any STI. In order to achieve the protective effect of condoms, they must be used correctly and consistently. Incorrect use can lead to condom slippage or breakage, thus diminishing their protective effect.

How effective are condoms in preventing HIV transmission?
An overwhelming body of evidence demonstrates that condoms are highly effective in preventing transmission of HIV. Correct and consistent condom use should give you a high degree of confidence in your ability to prevent HIV transmission.

The effectiveness of condoms
At least four different types of evidence demonstrate the effectiveness of condoms in preventing HIV transmission. Laboratory studies have shown that the virus cannot pass through latex or polyurethane. There is also a theoretical basis for effectiveness: condoms prevent exposure to sperm or vaginal fluids that may carry the virus. Epidemiological studies, which compare infection rates among condom users and non-users, have found that condoms offer significant protection against HIV infection. Finally, in many countries that have significantly reduced HIV infection rates (such as Brazil, Thailand and the USA), reduced rates of transmission have been strongly associated with increased condom use.

Few prevention methods are 100% effective. Condoms do occasionally slip or break, although fortunately this rarely happens. Condoms that are outdated, poorly manufactured, or inappropriately stored are especially susceptible to breakage. Oil-based products (such as hand lotion or petroleum jelly) can also damage male latex condoms, so only water-based lubricants should be used during sexual intercourse with a male condom.
In general, condoms are most likely to fail when they are not used as directed. Opening a condom packet with your teeth, a knife or scissors, for example, can inadvertently cause the condom to tear. It is important to use condoms from the beginning of a sexual act, rather than just before [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse], to prevent exposure to potentially infectious pre-[bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] or vaginal fluids. Studies suggest that the frequency of condom failure declines as individuals become more accustomed to using condoms. That is one reason why effective HIV prevention includes both accurate information on condoms and measures to increase individual skill in using condoms correctly. As employees of the UN system, we are entitled to a facilitated demonstration of the use of both male and female condoms.
In reality, condoms are extremely effective in preventing HIV transmission when they are used. Because sexual intercourse is often unplanned, it is a good idea to always carry a condom in case you need one. If you have a steady partner, you should also discuss how you as a couple intend to reduce the risk of HIV transmission. Ideally, a couple's decision to use a condom results from a process of negotiation. The couple discusses the benefits of using a condom, addresses any concerns or resistance, and agrees on a mutually satisfactory approach. Sometimes, though, one member of the couple may lack the power to negotiate condom use. Many women, for example, report having difficulty asking their husband or partner to use a condom.


Of course UNAIDS doesn't know anything about it.......

Bella, I'm not saying the CDC has lied at all. I agree with you that if a condom is used perfectly each and every time, applied perfectly, the right lubricant used correctly, and the technique used perfectly each and every time, and stored in the appropriate location, and stored at the right temperature, not manufactured incorrectly, and kept up to date with a fresh supply rotated in will result in a lower exposure rate....just as you have stated as well.

I am in agreement with you that under these conditions each and every single time, that if you average intimacy with a partner 1/week, that means you will only expose yourself 1 every year.

And with the very conditions you speak of, and at the same percentage, if you average intimacy ith a partner the average of 2 or 3 times /week, then you will expose yourself once every 4-6 months to whatever you partner has.

Those failure rates are much lower than no protection. And keep in mind that's if you store your condoms at the right temperature. Kept fresh in rotation of date, avoid improper manufactured condoms, and used perfectly each and every single time.

knightlight72 said:

Bella, I'm not saying the CDC has lied at all. I agree with you that if a condom is used perfectly each and every time, applied perfectly, the right lubricant used correctly, and the technique used perfectly each and every time, and stored in the appropriate location, and stored at the right temperature, not manufactured incorrectly, and kept up to date with a fresh supply rotated in will result in a lower exposure rate....just as you have stated as well.

I am in agreement with you that under these conditions each and every single time, that if you average intimacy with a partner 1/week, that means you will only expose yourself 1 every year.

And with the very conditions you speak of, and at the same percentage, if you average intimacy ith a partner the average of 2 or 3 times /week, then you will expose yourself once every 4-6 months to whatever you partner has.

Those failure rates are much lower than no protection. And keep in mind that's if you store your condoms at the right temperature. Kept fresh in rotation of date, avoid improper manufactured condoms, and used perfectly each and every single time.

Click to expand...

Or what I have.....why is it always the partner that has something

We can discuss this forever. Fact is that if you have sex, you have to protect yourself and your partner the best way you can. Making love is fun, a lot of fun....and we should not let some stupid virus kill that fun. There are people who have HIV and have safe sex.....(also safe oral sex...it is not just one way....)....and they do not infect their partner. Research established that...See CDC WHO UNAIDS...and so on... Of course it would be better if you had a way to have 100% safe sex (abstinence is the only way...but I do not mean no intimacy.....you can be intimate and still be 100% safe.....There are so many ways to have fun with your partner..... )

Fact is that people have sex and good sex education involves teaching teens how to use condoms properly and tell them about ways to avoid getting infected or spreading infection. They have sexual contact....whether people like it or not.....And as a church you have to realize what you can do to make sexuality as safe as possible without screaming hell and fire when people have sex without being married (I am not saying outside of marriage because I disagree with being unfaithful....that is totally not the wuestion here....and even then use condoms....)

Bella said:

And as a church you have to realize what you can do to make sexuality as safe as possible without screaming hell and fire when people have sex without being married (I am not saying outside of marriage because I disagree with being unfaithful....that is totally not the wuestion here....and even then use condoms....)

Click to expand...

It's not the church's place to teach things that are against God. As we have established, if the church is using God's word as the base, it must hold to that standard. If you want to make up your own rules, and beliefs about what God wants, then I suppose you can make up your own church, and teach whatever you want. It doesn't make it right, but it does mean you won't be held to the standards of the bible in that particular church. However, I think god still holds you to His standard, and not our own)

In the end, condom use does mean you are at risk. We all say we accept it, then then start adding how it must be safe. I feel that you say we are at risk, but seemed to oppose me so much whenever the real world risk was approached. I also felt you seemed to hate the idea that I used 98% and used that number to show how often one is exposed still.

I also feel you keep trying to redirect to the safety of condoms. I think this is because while you admit there is risk, it certainly seems important to show how safe they are.

knightlight72 said:

It's not the church's place to teach things that are against God. As we have established, if the church is using God's word as the base, it must hold to that standard. If you want to make up your own rules, and beliefs about what God wants, then I suppose you can make up your own church, and teach whatever you want. It doesn't make it right, but it does mean you won't be held to the standards of the bible in that particular church. However, I think god still holds you to His standard, and not our own)

In the end, condom use does mean you are at risk. We all say we accept it, then then start adding how it must be safe. I feel that you say we are at risk, but seemed to oppose me so much whenever the real world risk was approached. I also felt you seemed to hate the idea that I used 98% and used that number to show how often one is exposed still.

I also feel you keep trying to redirect to the safety of condoms. I think this is because while you admit there is risk, it certainly seems important to show how safe they are.

Click to expand...

It is important.....Heck, of course it is important to have safe sex with condoms. Have you any idea how much wives in africa are infected by their husbands? becasue they refuse to use condoms? Have you any idea?????

And I still do not understand why you think 98% is such a horrible number....If they wrote on a package that it was 100% safe and you use it wrong and you get infected or pregnant, you can sue them....It is also a way to protect their company's butt...

Your calculations say that in 100 times, you be safe 98 times.....I wish I had these odds in the lottery.....LOL


Why do people always say that God created us, gave us brains and if we come up with certain solutions and changes and adaptations while evolving culturally, it is not accepted, yet we stil believe God gave us brains....Why do you think He gave those to us? To help Him safe lives!

The Church has to life in the now and not in the 2000 years ago....We have come so far scientifically, medically, socially and have discovered all sorts of things through i.e. anthropology.......Why stay in the past.......the long gone past? The Church has to wake up and realize God made us individuals, yet responsiible for things that happen around us. So, in this day and age of HIV the church has to reset it's old fashioned POV....

belladonic-haze said:

It is important.....Heck, of course it is important to have safe sex with condoms. Have you any idea how much wives in africa are infected by their husbands? becasue they refuse to use condoms? Have you any idea?????

Click to expand...

Here's a better example. Do you know many teens think condoms mean safety? You do understand that 98% does sound great. I'd love that on math and science tests in school. Unfortunately, 98% safe is not the same as 98% right.

Becuase in this case, 2% wrong, or 2% failure means it might be your life. If you failed at winning 2% of lotteries you just not gain the money. If you fail at 2% of exposure to HIV then you gain a disease without a cure.

Bella said:

And I still do not understand why you think 98% is such a horrible number....If they wrote on a package that it was 100% safe and you use it wrong and you get infected or pregnant, you can sue them....It is also a way to protect their company's butt...

Click to expand...

98% is a horrible number, because that number is only correct if you use a condom perfectly each and every single time. As long as the condom is not flawed in production, stored at the correct tempturature, and if kept fresh, rotated consistently each and every single time. I know that teens do not do everything prefectly each and every time. Hack, I'm 34 and still make mistakes.

Bella said:

Your calculations say that in 100 times, you be safe 98 times.....I wish I had these odds in the lottery.....LOL

Click to expand...

Yea, and if you exposed yourself the other 2 times to the disease that your partner did or didn't know they had, would you still be happy with the odds? This is my point, 98% has been equated to safe. Exposing yourself to whatver your partner has several times a year is not safe. This isn't a good lottery we're talking about here.

knightlight72 said:

In the end, condom use does mean you are at risk. We all say we accept it, then then start adding how it must be safe. I feel that you say we are at risk, but seemed to oppose me so much whenever the real world risk was approached. I also felt you seemed to hate the idea that I used 98% and used that number to show how often one is exposed still.

Click to expand...

Driving puts you at risk of accidents. Should we thus stop teaching driver's ed in the hope that people then won't drive?

knightlight72 said:

Here's a better example. Do you know many teens think condoms mean safety? You do understand that 98% does sound great. I'd love that on math and science tests in school. Unfortunately, 98% safe is not the same as 98% right.

Becuase in this case, 2% wrong, or 2% failure means it might be your life. If you failed at winning 2% of lotteries you just not gain the money. If you fail at 2% of exposure to HIV then you gain a disease without a cure.

98% is a horrible number, because that number is only correct if you use a condom perfectly each and every single time. As long as the condom is not flawed in production, stored at the correct tempturature, and if kept fresh, rotated consistently each and every single time. I know that teens do not do everything prefectly each and every time. Hack, I'm 34 and still make mistakes.

Yea, and if you exposed yourself the other 2 times to the disease that your partner did or didn't know they had, would you still be happy with the odds? This is my point, 98% has been equated to safe. Exposing yourself to whatver your partner has several times a year is not safe. This isn't a good lottery we're talking about here.

Click to expand...

Why is the partner always the 'bad' person? I am more likely to get HIV then my hubs. I have had five heart surgeries in the past four years. I get my blood tested for my heart condition every 3 weeks.....needles are stuck in me on a regular basis. I do not want to infect my hubs.

So, all and all, you think condoms should not be used by teens?
Because whatever you say or even demand from teens, they have sex...no matter if you say it is a sin or forbid it. Curiousity, the exploration of their own and other bodies, the hormones...even the fact that it is something adults say is only allowed to do when married makes it even more interesting. They have sex anyway. Most teens are sexually active at the age of 17...And with HIV I'd rather have the 98% with condoms then the 0% with the Pill....Teens should be informed properly. COndoms should be available on school and in bars and so on. And they should learn how to use it....properly. These are just facts of life.

Wait, let me sum up this thread..
Some people say that the church is not to blame because the church teaches not to have sex, and certainly not before marriage, right?

Forgive me if I am wrong, but every other day it seems a priest is accused of raping young children. Sex is in religion too.

It might be fair to say that abstinence towards sex is not a natural thing.

Conye said:

It might be fair to say that abstinence towards sex is not a natural thing.

Click to expand...

steen said:

Driving puts you at risk of accidents. Should we thus stop teaching driver's ed in the hope that people then won't drive?

Click to expand...

I'm not stating we shouldn't use condoms because of a failure rate.

If you want to compare apples to apples, would drive your car if the real accident percentage was 80% chance of you getting into an accident every time you drove?

belladonic-haze said:

So, all and all, you think condoms should not be used by teens?

Click to expand...

Actually, I've said I'm not opposed to condom use right from the start. Like you, I'm trying to make sure people are aware of what is really going on. 80%-87% failure rate is more realistic, since it takes into effect the non perfect use, the flawed condoms that do get packaged along with good ones, and the not properly stored condoms.

Bella said:

Because whatever you say or even demand from teens, they have sex...no matter if you say it is a sin or forbid it. Curiousity, the exploration of their own and other bodies, the hormones...even the fact that it is something adults say is only allowed to do when married makes it even more interesting. They have sex anyway. Most teens are sexually active at the age of 17...And with HIV I'd rather have the 98% with condoms then the 0% with the Pill....Teens should be informed properly. COndoms should be available on school and in bars and so on. And they should learn how to use it....properly. These are just facts of life.

Click to expand...

Why do you say 98% and facts of life at the same time? Teens do not use condoms perfectly each and every single time. Informing properly should mean telling them truth of actual failure rates that occur in the real world.

You pointed this out a while back, and suggested that people get tested, I think you too accept 98% isn't that real or great.

80%-87% according to the studies I included earlier from government sources is the real rate.

Conye said:

Wait, let me sum up this thread..
Some people say that the church is not to blame because the church teaches not to have sex, and certainly not before marriage, right?

Forgive me if I am wrong, but every other day it seems a priest is accused of raping young children. Sex is in religion too.

Click to expand...

YThat's a terrible comparison. You're saying that because a few priests are pedophiles, that the comparison is that that should be equated as the ok for premarital sex?

The church also says that we are not to murder, and if a priest kills someone, does that mean we have the ok to start killing?

I don't think so.

Conye said:

It might be fair to say that abstinence towards sex is not a natural thing.

Click to expand...

Desiring something doesn't mean something is now natural. There are many pedophiles that desire children. Desire does not equal natural.