Church spreading aids

quote:

---

Originally posted by gene90:
I condemn the first post in this thread for its religious intolerance and bigotry.

---

I'm not thrilled with the wording of the first post, but the point is good.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by gene90:
I really don't believe that the missionaries are saying "Have all the sex you want unprotected", but more likely, "Keep your pants on!"

---

I agree. Something to this effect probably is what they are being told. The trouble is that it is going to clash with the local cultures and end up not helping and possibly hurting. While passing out condoms is a lesser shock to the culture and may actually do some good. To me, the church is choosing doctrine over lives.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by gene90:
But it can be argued that promiscuity is the ultimate cause for the AIDS pandemic.

---

It can also be argued that a viral agent is the ultimate cause for the AIDS pandemic.

quote:

---

*IF* they kept their pants on more and used condoms more the disease would be placed in check.

---

It apparently has never been a problem before. I can't think of another STD that kills within the expected lifespan of the infected person, assuming that person lives in a third world country.

quote:

---

Also, if women were more equal with men and actually had say of whether or not a condom was used, it wouldn't be such a problem (in Africa or the US).

---

No doubt.

quote:

---

But I think what we are going up against is culture and and economics.

---

Absolutely. That is why the RCC's position is so infuriating. They must radically change the culture before their policy will have any effect, but during the time it takes to do that 100 million people die and a great many more suffer the repercussions.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by gene90:
It can also be argued that a viral agent is the ultimate cause for the AIDS pandemic.

​

You know what I meant.

---

Yes, I do know what you mean. Just being a pain in the butt? hmmm.... not entirely. With STDs, HIV in particular, there is a real tendency to treat them as moral issues, as behavioral shortcomings. They aren't. STDs are diseases just like colds, malaria, dysentry, or gangrene. But with these diseases the disease take the heat, (even though there are behaviors which can help control those diseases) not the person who contracted it.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by Metatron:
Is there any relevant information in this, I went cross eyed trying to decypher it.

---

Welcome to Brad... ------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by David unfamous:
And as for epedemics being averted through abiding to Gods laws, I'd like to now which law we broke to deserve cancer.

---

Cancer? Why stop there?What did we do to deserve smallpox? Influenza? Malaria? Hookworms? Downs Syndrome? Hydrocephalus? Dysentry? Come on funk, surely you have the master list?And what did cows do to deserve Mad Cow Disease? Or anthrax?What did cats do to deserve feline leukemia?------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
I know I'm going to take fire for this but God created sex as a gift to married couples, outside of this intended relationship your on your own. No one likes morals, any more than they like taxes, but they are there for a reason.

---

Actually, sex was a gift to be used inside polygynous married groups and between the patriarch and sex-slaves called concubines.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by gene90:
So they're bitter, and they hate morals.

​

I used to disbelieve the Fundie stereotype of atheists, but it seems to be getting more and more accurate all the time.

---

This follows from my synopsis of the cultural conditions described in the OT?------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by gene90:

quote:

---

This follows from my synopsis of the cultural conditions described in the OT?

---

​

How do you know God approved of those cultural conditions?

---

Well, he didn't tell anyone to stop and in fact blessed the participants in those cultural practices. All of the patriarchs were polygamists, I believe. Most were at any rate. Gideon, Solomon, David, Abraham... all had multiple wives. The Bible flaunts it. It is pretty clear.In Exodus 21:10, you have instructions pertaining to the taking of a second wife.Deuteronomy 21:15 has rules for dealing with two wives, one loved and one hated.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
No John again you are mistaken on your OT.

---

The Bible is pretty clear on this, funk.

quote:

---

I don't believe God ever condoned these things.

---

Why is that? Does God complain about it, or punish anyone? No. Does god bless the patriarchs with many wives? Yup. Does God give Nathan wives? yup!! 2 Samuel 12:8.Christ implies his approval when he tells a tale involving ten brides and one bridegroom. Matt. 25:1.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
No it's not really clear on it.

---

You have got to be joking? Why is it that your current moral sentiments trump the morality illustrated in the book that is supposed to be your moral standard?

quote:

---

It doesn't say go ahead and mary 18 wives.

---

God made no bones about telling people what not to do, but this was never condemned, nor even poo-poo-ed just a little bit. NEVER. In fact, the number of wives a man had is frequently cited as a measure of his success.

quote:

---

Don't misrepresent things here.

---

Your quarrel is with the Bible, not with me. I am the one accepting what is written, and you are the one saying it ain't so. And curiously, all you can do is say it ain't so. You can't provide anything to illustrate the point. Tell me who is misrepresenting?

quote:

---

Just because something happens in the bible doesn't mean it's something God condones.

---

Right. Of course not. How do we know what God condones? hmmmm..... do we pick and choose the bits we like? Nope. That hardly seems right, since the Book is supposed to be a guide. So what do we do? Well, God punishes people for certain activities and God expressly forbids most of those same activities. We know those are condemned. What God doesn't condemn he condones. Simple. It isn't like God didn't know this was happening.

quote:

---

Though you would very much like to draw this conclusion for your continued blasphemy.

---

I don't personally care what the Bible has to say, funk. It carries no weight for me. It is a book of mythology.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by gene90:
What's wrong with polygamy?

---

I don't have a problem with polygamy, provided that all consent.Funk, however, does appear to have a problem with it.

quote:

---

So far as I am aware, the only part of the Bible that suggests polygamy be avoided is 1 Timothy 3:2, the requirements of the bishop.

---

That's the only proscription I found as well.

quote:

---

And what do you, as an atheist, care about polygamy?

---

Polygamy is a social structure, as such laws for or against it effect me. Why wouldn't I care?

quote:

---

Do you not feel that banning it, when it is proscribed by religion, is more religious intolerance?

---

Funny that you bring that up. Banning it is religious intolerance, or at least cultural intolerance, and has no place in the legislation of a free country, IMHO. Contrary to what you probably imagine, I am not for legislating against any particular religion or ethnic group. I am for the removal of legislation that is based on particular religious ideals. Large parts of US law is based on particular religious ideals. Marriage laws are an example. Government should not have this sort of power over its citizens.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
Now as I think about it, I don't recall God ever saying polygamy was wrong.

---

Nor was it made a requirement.

quote:

---

Although he does show it to be undesirable. Any place in the old testament that a man married more than one woman, it was a guarantee that things did not go well.

---

hmmm... you'd have a hard time making a case, since pretty much every major male player in the OT had multiple wives.

quote:

---

I don't really know of any place where it was encouraged by God. Of course I'm probably wrong.

---

No. It seems to be a non-issue in the OT to me. It was just the way things were.

quote:

---

However I still hold to the fact that a change in morality is the only sure solution to the Aids epedemic. Though a near impossible solution to apply.

---

An impossible solution is a death sentence for maybe 80 million people, if I recall the death toll estimates correctly. The thread was started because the RCC is pushing the impossible solution instead of a practical one.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

Funkie, buddie... something is going wrong with your posts. I can't reply-quote them. Only two lines show up in the response window. Thought you might like to know.

quote:

---

Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
What I was getting at was it didn't work well.

---

It worked quite well for, probably, thousands of years. That is why they did it. That's why the practise got started and that is why it was maintained throughout the OT.

quote:

---

The wives squabbled, the children of different mothers fought and bickered.

---

hmmm... people didn't get along then? Go figure

quote:

---

It did not generally provide a positive outcome.

---

Polygamy is cross-culturally ( historically ) the most common form of marriage. That would not be the case if it did not produce positive results in many circumstances. That last element is key.

quote:

---

However this said, the root of the epedemic (not the virus) is a moral issue.

---

How many diseases are moral problems, funk?You've got a disease that intersects with your particular version of morality and so you ditch the fact that the disease is caused by a virus just like any other viral infection. The solution is behavioral, not moral. The rates among gay men in the US are lower than they were ten years ago. Why? Gay men are being more careful, though not careful enough. Is anal sex between men who use condoms not a moral problem? While it is a moral problem if the condom isn't used?------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

quote:

---

Originally posted by funkmasterfreaky:
I see where you say it worked in many cultures. I guess if the main goal was to have many children (sons if possible) then it was a sure fire system. However as a family unit it generally did not function well.

---

Funk, go get yourself some good books on cultural anthropology. No offense, but you are arguing from so much ignorance that it is painful to watch.

quote:

---

Again I will state that I don't accredit immorality to the existance of the virus. I accredit immorality to the rapid spread of the disease.

---

At least you don't make the "God made AIDS to punish fags" argument.Still, a great many, perhaps all, infectious diseases are assisted by our behaviors, yet you don't make these behaviors and diseases moral issues.

quote:

---

That said the only solution is a behaviour change.

---

This is different from dogmatism.------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com