Tus your efforts to think outside the square and present an original perspicacious viewpoint are commendable. However, you are focusing on one item of evidence to the exclusion of the bigger picture.

Evidence that is inconsistent with a larger body of evidence is not indicative that the received wisdom is in error or a misunderstanding of the 'truth’. Idiosyncratic results do not always offer a new and effective way to view the problem.

It is more likely that they are due to an artefact of the analysis or way the data was collected, or a faulty understanding of the underlying relationships between the variables.

It seems a trifle obsessive and/or disingenuous of you to continue to insist that the evidence for the success of abstinence in Uganda is significant and provides a novel and useful way of understanding the issue.

The evidence that abstinence does not work is quite overwhelming and irrefutable

Really Molly, how many people get sexually transmitted diseases by not having sex?

If you do a quick search on the internet you will see that the sub saharan african countries with the highest catholic populations tend to have the lowest rates of AIDS and vice versa.

This begs the question whether the church has the most blood on its hands regards the AIDS pandemic in Africa and whether a reversal of the contraceptive ban by Benedict 16 will make much difference to the problem.

t.u.s

TUS

I'll say this veerry sloowly, abstinence doesn't work because most people want to have sex. Get it? Not too complex for you?

Check out Ambo's link - seems alot of catholics like to have sex too and don't pay too much attention to the vatican.

Lots of Love to absolutely everyone whether you like it or not.

Xena, if Catholics "don't pay too much attention to the vatican", why worry about what the Vatican says regarding condoms when nary a Catholic will (apparently) listen to them?

But let me reiterate. Uganda is the ONLY African country to decrease its incidence of Aids. It's done so by following an approach that advises Abstinence, Fidelity and, failing any of these, Condoms for high-risk groups who are not going to be abstinent or faithful anyway, like prostitutes, soldiers and truckies (hardly practicing Catholics). And Uganda's approach has been in THAT order.

Countries like Botswana, on the hand, have followed the approach of emphasising condoms over other things like abstinence and marital fidelity -- with disastrous consequences. Whereas the less-developed country of Uganda has dramatically reduced its incidence of Aids from a whopping 35% of the population in the 1980s to a current low of 6%, the better-developed but condom-emphasising Botswana has only seen the incidence of Aids in its population grow -- now at a staggering 36% of the population in Botswana.

A fascinating point of view, Braz, and most illuminating.

"...failing any of these, Condoms for high-risk groups who are not going to be abstinent or faithful anyway, like prostitutes, soldiers and truckies (hardly practicing Catholics)."

Help me out here, are you saying that you do condone the use of condoms for non- (or non-practising) Catholics? So it is only your own people that you leave to rot?

Do your evangelists hand out warning notices? "Conformance to our religious convictions can damage your health"

Pericles, I don't condone condoms, I think they are useful, but for Cathloics it might be more of a problem.
My only point is that the Catholic Church does not look like the big culprit in the AIDS epidemic. Where the rate of Catholics is high, generally the rate of AIDS is lower in sub-saharan Africa and vice versa. not exactly a smoking gun.

And Xena, I love sex and enjoy it on a regular basis and did so before I was married too.

The good thing is, in Australia, we don't have an AIDS rate approaching 30 per cent.

t.u.s