Pericles, Ambo, Robert.

If the Catholic Church believes that there is a transcedent morality(I'm not asking you to accept the fact, just the proposition) then does it have a right to promulgate teachings which are contrary to it?

"If the Catholic Church believes that there is a transcedent morality(I'm not asking you to accept the fact, just the proposition) then does it have a right to promulgate teachings which are contrary to it? "

No-one is asking the Catholic Church to "promulgate teachings" that are contrary to its belief systems, simply to suspend judgement for a while in order that a few "sinners", who would otherwise die, might live.

I still fail to see that this is too much to ask of a human being, whatever their rank, status or position.

I could happily ignore the Catholic Church's belief systems if they didn't have such a devastating effect on people's lives.

The ban on condoms, the illusion of abstinence as contraceptive is hardly transcendant just horrifically ignorant and wilfully inhumane.

Am I being objective? No; unnecessary human anguish just makes me very angry indeed.

Those so insecure that they place principles above everything else and then sink to the depths of playing mind games in an open forum gain nothing but my complete contempt.

Sorry Pericles,

The whole point of Greg Barn's article was and I quote,

"The Catholic Church was then, and is today, responsible in a direct way for deaths caused by AIDS. By refusing to sanction the use of life protecting sexual protection devices such as condoms"

What Greg Barns wants is not a "suspencsion of judgement" to use condoms but a full blown sanction. Greg argues that the Catholic church is malicious in not sanctioning contraceptives. I think that you are begining to recognise what is being asked of the Catholic church with regard to the condom matter. It believes the evil of contraception a trancedent truth, but Greg judges it evil for preaching it. Greg is asking it to do something wrong and then pillories it for not doing it. By the way, the Catholic Church does not Judge you. God does. If you are going to argue about Catholicism then at least now a bit the basic theology.

As for Ambo enough of the rubbish.
Give us some figures. How may people have died as a result of listening to the Pope? Quote me an article. Where is the study?
I am sick of this line being bandied around as some basic truth when I see no evidence of it anywhere.
The Catholic church is in the business of saving souls not lives. It has always taught that suffering is an evil but not the worst evil. Ending up in the hot place is. It tries to keep people out of there no matter what the cost. The Catholic church gets pilloried when people do not take notice of its teachings(premarital sex, adultery,etc) and then it gets pilloried when people get in trouble doing what it said they shouldn't. According to you any principle can be changed in the presence of suffering. It is the love of comfort disguised as high principle.

slumlord

"The Catholic church is in the business of saving souls not lives."

There's your proof. Religous nonsense

I gain nothing but complete contempt from Ambo? Bummer.

Much as the reasoning skills of many here may need some work, I'm sure that everyone here will at least be able to admit that were everyone to abide by Catholic teaching regarding sexual intercourse -- that is, exercise it only within the confines of holy matrimony -- then Aids (as well as other venereal diseases) would die out in time. Surely any person willing to exercise his reasoning will admit to the truthfulness of this.

Another bit of reasoning for y'all to engage in:

1. Do practising Catholics engage in sex outside of marriage? If so, can they be considered practicing Catholics?

2. What is the likelihood of a practicing Catholic passing on a venereal disease to his spouse? (See question 1.)

3. What is the percentage of Catholics who are converts and so able to pass on a venereal disease, acquired before conversion, to their spouses?

3. Are most Catholics in Africa practicing Catholics? If so, are they the types of Catholics who are likely to contract and spread venereal disease? (See question 1.) Or are they mostly recent converts (i.e. post-1983)? (See question 3.)

I'll leave these questions for y'all to mull over.