|
So why should anyone listen to him? And the idea isn't that some prostitute is going to get AIDS and we can save her if we just teach her to give up prostitution, because she's not going to convince some rough, AIDS infected man to spare her. The idea is that some prostitute is going to give AIDS to all her customers, who will then give it to their wives, and this can be prevented if the men are talked into using condoms. And they will use a condom if they think it can spare them from AIDS. What they won't do is give up sex with prostitutes.
So, win-win. They don't get it from their one time with that one prostitute, and their wives don't get it. And don't give birth to babies with AIDS.
Now, of course, theoretically, the Pope is right. Don't have sex until marriage and then have sex with only your spouse and yes, you'll put an end to AIDS. But how is a priest who has--presumably--been celibate most of his life trustworthy when it comes to knowing how logical or reasonable this suggestion is to a large population of men as compared to condom use? How is a European priest in a very different country with many different tribal cultures trustworthy when it comes to judging if even Catholics in those countries will do as he tells them? Catholicism certainly didn't change men in Latin American cultures. In the past, at lest, Latin American cultures saw virility as a sign of masculinity and religion did diddily-squat to alter that. Latin American men did not, by and large, remain celibate till marriage or faithful after marriage.
On the other hand, I really don't know why anyone is surprised by this. What else do you expect the Pope to say? All those people and more will die of AIDS, and the Pope won't say, 'Oops, my bad!" He'll just say, "Will of god. They shouldn't have sinned." Neat the way such people always manage to prove themselves right to themselves, no matter the facts.
|