christians and cures

omni in the 'longterm solution' thread. first. is this the case, that christians are opposing an hpv vaccine in order to try to scare women into abstainance?second. what effect does the lack of responsible sexual education have on the knowledge of hpv among women who will possibly be deprived of this vaccine?third. does this mean that christians have or will oppose cures for other diseases regarded as sexually transmitted?fourth. dare i tread into an aids conspiracy?i have a friend whose mom had cervical cancer. she got it from her first husband AFTER they were married. so, because her husband was a bastard, she almost lost her child and lost the ability to have others. the question here (for those who don't know.) is that cervical cancer is caused by hpv. from about.com: social issues, please.This message has been edited by brennakimi, 01-24-2006 10:20 AM

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

quote:

---

first. is this the case, that christians are opposing an hpv vaccine in order to try to scare women into abstainance?

---

This is true. The Christian Right is against this vaccine, and their stated reason is that it would "encourage" sexual promiscuity. I like Katha Pollitt.

---

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

Chris Mooney discusses the HPV thing in his book The Republican War on Science. It's a pretty bizarre position for the Fundy Right to take....abstinence or death?

It is a shame that "the right" hasn't learned from history. Through the ages they seem to have been thorn in the side of curing some diseases from what I have read.It would be nice if they would stick to dictating to their own believers and not the rest of society.Hopefully if Dr. Rath continues his research, people will still have options for protection from diseases.

---

There are two ways of spreading light: to be the candle or the mirror that reflects it. -Edith Wharton

Hi, brenna. That's my post you're quoting, and I'm glad you made a thread of it.The subject of the religious right (RR) and sex/health education and STDs, etc. is a revealing one.RR web sites routinely claim, falsely, that condoms offer no protection against STDs, and that an abortion increases the risk of breast cancer. They do, indeed, want to maintain teen pregnancy and potentially deadly STDs as barriers to teen sexual activity--a few deaths "to encourage the others" eh?The federal funds earmarked for abstinence-only programs are frequently used to push such misinformation.This attitude is also, I believe, the essential reason many on the RR oppose abortions: not because they are genuinely persuaded the fetus is a human life, but because an abortion enables a woman to "beat the rap." There was never much outcry or enforcement effort devoted to stopping illegal abortions--it was only the availability of safe procedures that brought the issue to the forefront: as long as you had to risk septic death to avoid a life-ruining pregnancy, okay. The safe option was unacceptable.In many ways, the self-named pro-lifers are really pro-death.

there's a prof at my mom's school that's working on a cure. it's in the outside testing stage right now. mmmm experiment replication.

oh thanks. fixed it. i get distracted by the green in the picture.yeah, it's really terrible. and all my life i had believed that my mother was reasonable and stuff and now she sounds just like them and it drives me crazy.the best thing about hpv of course is that guys don't suffer at all from the ones that cause cervical cancer. it's god's special punishment of slutty girls. i hate when christians make a mockery of my god. frankly, i think this is enough to make me change my name. i have a friend who got hpv when her boyfriend cheated on her. she had sex with her boyfriend because she didn't think she was worth waiting even though she wanted to. (it is valuable to some people to wait.) she didn't think she was worth waiting for because she was sexually abused by other boyfriends and probably someone else though i never knew about that. often, promiscuity in women is linked to prior abuse. child molestation is not something christians are interested in screaming about. so, not only do they, by default, support fucking little girls, they support fucking up little girls, and then of course those little girls fuck and then they get fucked because the fundies supress cures.amazing.of course. once upon a time i went to a missions conference and i was very pleased to hear two african missionaries (both from and to) say that condoms must be part of the ministry. there is a line between responsible, reasonable action that is like christ and that which is like paul--hateful and degrading. i want a revolution. and i want it now.This message has been edited by brennakimi, 01-24-2006 10:30 AM

The problem is not with Paul, nor with his contextual edicts of his day. The problem is with modern interpretations of Biblical verses to attempt to manipulate and control people. Your revolution begins within each human heart!As far as Creation/Evolution is concerned, the debate is whether the power to change comes through impartation to us or from evolution within us.

i'm not really sure how much evolution has to do with ethical social change.

What's amazing is the disinformation you guys are willing to believe about Christians.

i grew up in the church. nobody ever said anything about child molestation and i know it was all around. no one said anything about preventing it when i suffered from it. no one talks about preventing it now. no. they're all hung up on 'the dangerous fags' and those evile women who kill their babies.

Perhaps there is a better word than disinformation, randman.I base my appraisal of Christians on the behavior of people who self-identify as Christians, including the folks here, and on the groups they comprise.Disinformation, I believe, is more properly a term used to describe a deliberate attempt to promote falsehoods about something. No one is doing that in this thread so far: we are reaching our conclusions based on observations of Christians and Christian organizations over time. Are you denying that the predominant Christian response to the HPV vaccine to date has been opposition for exactly the reason (a consequence of increased sexual activity) that we describe?Now that you're amazed, Rand, how about you? Would you immunize Christian children against STDs?

I say send the girls to a nunnery and the boys to a monkery until they agree never to play loud music in my neighborhood anymore.ABE: edited title.This message has been edited by robinrohan, 01-24-2006 11:04 AM

I think all of this stems from some strange desire of Christians to effectivly eliminate sin via our own works rather than doing what they should be which is proclaim the ultimate sin remover Jesus Christ.Peoples bedrooms should not be the business of anyone especially Christians. The invasions into other peoples lives goes directly against love thy neighbor and it is so utterly obvious how so many are so tied to this world that they would rage against sin so fiercely.Overall, Christians need to stop worrying so much about sin and start working more about the redemption of sin. Fighting sin is a futile effort and this should be known by those who do it. Stop trying to keep people from sinning and start trying to show people how to wash away those sins. If stopping sexual immorality is not going to get people to heaven, then what is the point?{ABE} Sorry for the mis-reply AdminThis message has been edited by Jazzns, 01-24-2006 10:14 AM

---

No smoking signs by gas stations. No religion in the public square. The government should keep us from being engulfed in flames on earth, and that is pretty much it. -- Jon Stewart, The Daily Show