Pope backtracking on condom statement

I find it absolutely appalling that in 2010, the Catholic church's official stance on condoms is that they are sinful. If I'm not mistaken, this also includes during sex between married couples, correct?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/23/world/europe/23pope.html?_r=1&hp

P.S. I'm Catholic.

 

Isn't the idea that people should only have sex to procreate? If that is the rule, then it really wouldn't matter if the couple using protection is married.

Now the rule itself? Hey, whatever floats your boat. It's not one I follow and it certainly seems like attempting to live by such rules has gone very badly a time or two.

 

As someone who watched a dear friend die from AIDS over 15 years ago, I'm all for anything that will help stop the spread of the disease. People are not going to stop having sex, but I'd love to see people stop dying from having sex.

 

You may be right. I was thinking it was more like, "You can have sex for fun, but if pregnancy is a consequence of that, then you have to deal with the consequences." I thought that the church sees birth control as a first-cousin of abortion? Of course, there are some times of the month when you know that pregnancy is an impossibility. Not sure if that counts as a sin or not?

 

It looks like there was reason to believe the Catholic Church was finally moving into the 21st century. Alas, it was not to be.

 

You're being awfully fucking generous with the 21st century designation. The church needs to crawl into the 20th century first.

 

It's actually never an impossibility.

The old joke goes, "What do you call people who practice the rhythm method? Parents." Describing the church's stance on birth control as "outmoded" is being kind.

 

Why exactly should the church "move into the 21st Century"?

Truth doesn't morph into whatever the culture decides is acceptable.

 

No?

 

What is that, a scene from the movie Backdraft?

 

Not really apples to apples. None of these have to do with the church, or any idea of a divine "truth" that, I assume, Hondo is alluding to.

That's not saying that the church hasn't changed over time, or that it hasn't made changes for the better over time, because obviously it has, just that I don't really feel like the pics make an applicable point.

 

Institutions should, from time to time, re-evaluate whether their "truth" still holds up.

Hence, the photos are applicable.