Yabby,

I have carefully reviewed the historical evidence in relation to Rwanda and cannot reach the same conclusions as you. There is a very complex and tragic history behind the massacres, including foreign invasion. There is also a degree of local government disinformation. It would appear that this topic is worthy of debate in its own right. I respect your right to hold a different position to me.

I would merely ask you not to presume that Rwanda's people, unlike those of us in more prosperous societies, breed unthinkingly and have children they do not want. This places you inside the head of every mother and father in that country. Some would have children that were unintended, some would have children because of the mortality rate that hits families in poverty stricken societies, many will have children out of love.

Tony,you will find that alot of surveys are done in Africa, regards
"unmet needs" for contraception, by various NGOs. Here is just one
url that discusses them.

http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB5024/index1.html

What they all point to is one thing:- lots of women in Africa are
being forced to have far more children then they really want, due to
a lack of good family planning availability. Sadly the Catholic
Church stands condemned in doing what it can to prevent those women
having those various family planning measure available to them,
as we have in our first world.

Whichever way you look at Rwanda, it was a case of too many people
on too little space. I suggest that you read what Jared Diamond had
to say about Rwanda, in his book "Collapse".

All I am arguing for is that women have a choice. Those women that
are devout Catholics, who want 9 kids, ok, let them live with the
consequences. Those women who don't want 9 kids, should have that choice, just as Western women have.

My point is that Catholic dogma is actually responsible for hunger
and suffering in Africa. Without the Vatican's fanatical influence,
women in Africa would have more choices then they do now. They would
not need to try and feed children that they don't want and can't feed, no wonder there is so much sadness and misery there

Yabbie, you keep talking about the "Vatican's fanatical influence" in sub-saharan Africa. Since you clearly hold this as an article of 'faith', and presumably the countries with the largest Catholic populations are most easily influenced by the Catholic church, let's check out some numbers.

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Catholicism_by_country ... that does not explain Botswana, Swaziland, Zimbabwe, Zambia, Malawi, and to a lesser extent Namibia, Mozambique, Madagascar (and that is only from a cursory glance from a list which is not complete). In fact, all the countries in South Africa have a combined Catholic population of a mere 6.43 percent according to that page. What are the worst hit countries in the AIDS epidemic? Well, actually, the three with the lowest Catholic populations ... Botswana (4.94%), Swaziland (5.35%), and Zimbabwe (7.71%).

Now, let's assume that all Catholics in all countries in South Africa followed the Vatican's fanatical influence as you describe (but didn't really - because if they did, they would not have AIDS in the first place) and they all now have AIDS. That is about 2.8 million people. The total number of people with AIDS in South Africa is approximately 25.8 million. So, even assuming that the entire Catholic population in South Africa has AIDS, it still only accounts for 11 percent of the number of people with AIDS! Also, in 2005 alone another 3.2 million people were infected, which is more than the total Catholic populations of all the countries combined.

So, what was your point again?

Paulb, my point is that if you start with a flawed assumption, your number crunching is not worth the paper its written on. There are many reasons why HIV spread faster in South Africa and Botswana
for instance. The South African prez denied its existence for years,
there are large mining populations, so lots of money and hookers etc,
without condoms HIV will spread like wildfire in those places.

But back to the Vatican. Their spin and lobbying machine is enormous.
They have a seat on the UN. They influence WHO policy, US Congress,etc.
all places where funding for Africa is decided. In short, they obstruct contraception and abortion services for the third world, in any way they can. Just a few links for you, to get my drift:

http://www.religiousconsultation.org/un_talk_Dan_Maguire_Cairo.htm

http://www.cta-usa.org/watch5-99/vatican.html

http://www.population-security.org/29-APP3.html

http://www.seechange.org/media/The Case Against The Vatican.htm

Yabby,
I suppose you wish Africa reflected the same morals as Australia where condoms and the pill are readily available? Where less than 9% of the population is practising Catholics who observe chastity and fidelity in their exclusive relationship as taught by Christ.

AIDS and sexual disease is spread through the population by having multiple sexual encounters. Western immorality is not the epitome of sexual health, as disease is on the exploding increase and will leave our young girls infertile. These indulging with casual encounters young women are not following the teachings of Christ.

The fact is in Australia AIDS in primarily in the homosexual population and in migrants from Africa, and while they do not indulge with the broarder population it can be isolated; and ultimately they will die out.

Philo
I have absolutely nothing to say about this topic but want you to know a couple of things:-
1. I am a male. Priscillian is a Roman male name.
I have named myself after him because his would surely have been my fate if I had lived in the 4th century:-
From Wikipedia:-
Priscillian of Ávila (died 385) was a Spanish theologian and the founder of a party which advocated strong asceticism. He is still a mysterious figure, this first person in the history of Christianity to be executed for heresy (though the civil charges were for the practice of magic). His party, in spite of severe persecution for heresy, continued to subsist in Spain and in Gaul until after the middle of the 6th century. The first writings attributed to him, which had seemed securely lost, were recovered in 1885.

2. You are quite right. I do not write enough about what I believe and I do write a lot about what I don't believe. This is one of my sins and I do ask your forgiveness. I will try harder.