Michelle Backman: Cure for cancer, I mean gays


Just when I thought I wasn’t going to find anyone crazier than Sarah Palin.  You get another batshit-crazy wingnut in Michelle Bachmann.  This is good stuff.  Read on!

Okay, it’s official, Michelle Bauchmann was just kidding about running for president.  How do I know, you ask?  She has hit that point of no return.  Any person with the slightest bit of intelligence knows better than to have stake in actions as radical as the following video.  Her husband, Marcus, a PhD I might add, runs a clinic to cure homosexuality.

Let’s say that I’m wrong, and she is serious about running, would anyone vote for this barbarism?  Okay, a few will; but I’ll bet they look over their shoulders to ensure no one is watching who they choose.

A clinic devoted to curing gays.  lol  This is excellent.  The Christians are doing my job for me.  I love it!

About Lyn May

Designer, engineer, producer; I haven't really decided yet. Maybe I'll keep it that way - it's much easier to be undecided any way. I love graphic design, writing, photography, video production, animation, playing guitar, singing, engineering and pretty much any other medium that allows me to express my self artistically/logically.

Posted on July 14, 2011, in Politics, Theism and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 47 Comments.

  1. Begin the clocks now: I’m taking bets on how long it takes Mr. Bachmann comes out as a self-hating gay.

  2. They always do, though. Conservatism is completely against human nature, at it’s very core. It’s always funny to me. Look at Sen. Larry Craig of Idaho. You know, “Wide Stance.” lol

  3. This is tough, Lyn. I have a criticism of your post, however. You should have put the undercover video on. This video shows only the opinions of Chris Mathew & his commentators. They also, so like MSNBC, do not have a counter point argument. They show only a TINY clip of the video with Mathews simply asking, “we could show more of the clip, but what would we have seen if we watched more?” and allowed the commentator to paraphrase the video.

    I, for one, would like to see the actual video to make my decision, thank you. I don’t need others to paraphrase it for me. I would appreciate the source video before I give ANY credibility to people who have been tirelessly attempting to defame Bachmann & other conservative women for years.

    On a last note: I realize this is a very sensitive topic. But I think liberals need to give some room to people who see homosexuality as something that can be ‘cured’. There is evidence that suggests that some homosexuals (especially those raped when they were young) were ‘made’ into homosexuals through their experiences. Studies show that almost all boys raped when young come to practice homosexuality as adults. The speculation is that their first sexual experiences, though extremely emotionally damaging, created new impulses and desires not present before the rape.

    As for women, I know for a fact that they can go either way. Many times, it is frustration with men- or a previous rape that turns them toward women. Women’s homosexuality is especially suspect to me. Some seem to be born that way, but many just seem curious- just like Bachmann’s husband said in the radio interview.

    I’m not sure what the barbarian statement was all about- I would have to hear the whole interview. Perhaps he used it as a metaphor at the beginning of the interview and make an awkward transition at the end. Like I said, I want the whole thing before I decide.

    If that is so, it points to learned behavior. If there is any of the gay population that was led to the lifestyle through learned behavior, even though it is a small amount through violent rape, it still is a profound discovery. Something to look into.

    Most gays are unhappy about being gay. Probably because society doesn’t accept it 100%. Some people want a relief from it. If they want it and go to this therapy and it helps them, who are you to criticize? Isn’t that between the patient and the therapist?

  4. How do you figure that conservatism is against human nature? Homosexuality, by definition, is against human nature. Hence, it rareness.

    I never find sarcasm to be funny when serious issues are on the table. I find that the delivering individual is almost always a liberal. Laughing at a topic doesn’t make it go away. Neither does finger pointing, lambasting and name calling.

  5. “Homosexuality, by definition, is against human nature.”

    Incorrect. By YOUR definition, it’s against human nature. But I don’t agree with your definition. And I bet Lyn doesn’t either, though I could be wrong.

    “Studies show that almost all boys raped when young come to practice homosexuality as adults.”

    Post or link to these studies.

    “Most gays are unhappy about being gay.”

    Post or link to any studies or documentation that backs up this statement.

    Most gays I have personally met are unhappy with being persecuted, attacked, and stereotyped. They’re perfectly happy being homosexual.

    “If they want it and go to this therapy and it helps them, who are you to criticize?”

    Because if the therapist’s ideas are faulty (which they are), the ‘therapy’ can lead to severe psychological harm.

  6. I will give you that “we need the entire video.” I’m all too aware of how things can be taken out of context. BUT, I’m pretty dag-gone sure there will never be an “Aha!” moment that surfaces. Where I might say, “Okay, now I get it.”

    And what you speak of about sexual preference is my whole point about conservatism. Life is not a black and white issue. It’s not a “you’re either straight or your gay” kind of thing. There isn’t a shirts on this team and skins on that team. Sexuality is a very, very grey area. I’m not gay, but I have thought about what it would be like to have sex with a man. That’s not gay, that’s human.

    And people can have both. And just because someone is pushed to one side or the other due to mental trauma does not classify as a sexual preference. I have had relationships in the past where I felt a closeness to a girl, but was not sexually attracted to them. Same thing could happen to a woman.

    It’s not a black and white issue, is all that I’m saying. I prefer women. You might prefer a man. That should not mean that we HAVE to. And who decided that procreation is the only reason to have a mate? I believe we’ve evolved to a point to where survival through offspring is no longer a carnal necessity. We can have mates because we want to. If I find love in a man, but could only have children with a woman, then I guess I will skip parenthood. At least in the traditional sense.

  7. And I don’t feel that anyone is attacking Michelle Bachmann because she’s a conservative. People are attacking her because she’s bat-shit crazy. Just two weeks ago she signed a 14-point petition. Wanna know what’s in that petition? Oh, things like, “African-American children were much better off as slaves with two parents than babies being born into this country under our nation’s first African-American president.” And how about this one, “Marriage is a union between a man and a woman; not polygamy, gay, etc.” And we can’t forget the ban on all forms of pornography. Come on! Conservatism! No way. Crazy? Yes. NOT because she’s a conservative. Or a woman. When she first came out, I took notice of her eloquence and obvious talent at debate. I might even be able to produce a Rant’s comment with this, actually.

  8. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1320864/posts This lists many, many studies showing that boys who are introduced early in childhood through rape end up demonstrating very high percentages of homosexual behavior later in life.

    Homosexuality is by definition an aberration of human nature. Hence, its rareness. It also serves no evolutionary purpose. It is a mutation that exists in the human genome. Nothing to be proud of. Something to be accepted, however.

    Whatever the reason for being unhappy, they are unhappy. If they seek counseling to end this unhappiness- who are you to tell them not to?

    You have no proof whatsoever that prayer and practice hurt any homosexual who seeks it out. So can it.

  9. Well, let’s wait for that ‘aha!’ moment, shall we?

    Who said it was black & white? In fact, you argue my point for me. It is EXACTLY because it is not black & white that people who are seeking to end their homosexual thoughts or activities might benefit from prayer & practice. If THEY seek it, who are YOU to tell them not to? No one forced them to go to this therapy.

  10. Lyn, if you are going to call someone ‘bat shit’, you need to get your information straight. Shame on you! First, she did not say anything. Second, she signed a pledge defending marriage. Within that pledge introduction is the following statement:

    “Slavery had a disastrous impact on African-American families, yet sadly a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household than was an African-American baby born after the election of the USA’s first African-American President.”

    Your ‘paraphrase’ is nothing more than wishful thinking. Where do you get your info? A bar room?

    Your second quote is also wrong. The part of the pledge she actually did sign contained the following vow:

    “Vigorous opposition to any redefinition of the Institution of Marriage – faithful monogamy between one man and one woman – through statutory-, bureaucratic-, or court-imposed recognition of intimate unions which are bigamous, polygamous, polyandrous, same-sex, etc.12″

    What is wrong with this? I, too, agree that marriage is only between a man and a woman- the basic building block of every society that has been and ever will be. Homosexual marriage is 100% unfair to heterosexual babies who will eventually be handed over to them should ‘marriage’ be granted. These children will forever be denied either a female role model or a male role model- completely depriving it of the sexual identity information it needs to develop sexually. That is child abuse.

    You may not agree with me (though you have yet to provide any good reason other than you ‘just don’t agree with me’), but I am certainly not bat-shit. I have very good reasons that have nothing to do with homo-‘phobia’ or homo-hate. I am neither afraid, nor do I dislike homosexuals.

    You, a liberal, have indeed lambasted Bachman- a beautiful conservative woman- without any proper quotes, reasoning or proof. What do you call that, Lyn?

  11. Lyn, I would go as far to say that you should remove your video unless you have some PROOF of what you say. Since when did good journalism rely on heresay, innuendo, and opinions clearly biased parties? At the minimum, I expect the standards of this blog to post factual information, reliable information- and THEN provide a logical commentary to it. Otherwise, it is just a junk site.

    This steams me.

  12. I think it’s commendable to actually hear a Christian say that homosexuality is a gene-mutation. That means you believe that they are BORN that way.

    Second, the ownness is on you, the Christians, to prove that prayer DOES exist. Not the other way around. Doesn’t work that way. That’s synonymous with me saying that you yawned this morning. You can’t prove to anyone that you didn’t yawn. Therefore, until you can prove that you didn’t, you are guilty of yawning this morning.

  13. Wo, wo, wo… the SITE’s purpose is to Rant. First. Second, it is of MY opinion that she is bat-shit crazy. You can’t see it because YOU are on the team purporting that Christian faith is real. So you can’t possibly understand how absurd a notion as prayer is to someone who doesn’t believe in it. So I will NOT take down the video. The video serves several purposes. You can like her, that is your right. I don’t like her, which is mine. But to censor an opionion because it does not align with your own is wrong. Simple as that. Don’t agree with it. But don’t ALSO call the site junk if it simply doesn’t align with YOUR ideals.

    John, did you hack Shortie’s computer?

  14. “It also serves no evolutionary purpose.”

    Population control.

  15. My statements hold. Paraphrased and inaccurate, yes. Different meaning? NO. The meaning is the same. You can spin it all you want. It’s right there in black and white, from the horses mouth.

  16. Lyn, SOME gayness is genetic. Yes, I do believe that. However, a lot is learned- this is evidenced from prison rape, and child rape statistics which I have provided. It is sad, but true. EXPOSURE to gay sex can lead to gay behavior. Further, women are not so genetically bound, it seems to me. They go one way, they go another. All depending on their experiences. Some do seem to be genetically gay- but most don’t.

    I agree that gayness is, as you say, not black & white. I certainly don’t need to prove prayer ‘exists’. That is completely irrelevant to the topic. People WHO WANT TO SEEK PRAYER can do so. They certainly don’t need to prove anything to you or to anyone.

  17. Lyn, the reason you should take it down is because it is libel. If you subscribe to libel, then I can’t respect that. You, yourself, libeled Bachmann. You got her quotes completely wrong and can’t admit it.

    You are very, very incorrect that I believe in limiting free speech & opinion. I have never done so in the past and am more than happy to skewer any liberal to the door for their silly arguments.

    You posted something FALSE. If that is what a rant is, than I want no part of it.

  18. First, if that’s all it takes to lose your respect, steer clear of the rest of the internet; you will be sorely disappointed. Second, you’ve been beating up Obama and many other liberals since you started writing for this blog. Why have you all of a sudden grown a conscience? Because it’s Backmann?

    Listen, I’m not going to defend my opinions any longer. You don’t agree with them, fine. You can’t respect them, that’s fine as well. I base my findings on what I know. Those findings might change. They often do. But today, she’s bat-shit crazy.

  19. Further, you wrote, “a clinic dedicated to curing gays”. Prove that, Lyn. Or are you in the slander business, now?

    What I have noticed about liberals is their need to paraphrase, exaggerate, and outright lie to make their points. Sarcasm & laughing is also prevalent. Jumping the gun is yet another lovely trait.

    I thought this site had some sophistication- yes, even in its Rants. I guess I was wrong. This article is 100% proof of the level of QUALITY present. Or should I say, the LACK there-of.

  20. Lyn, let me be clear. BASHING isn’t the issue. Lack of factual information is. When I state my displeasure for your great leader, it is based on FACTUAL information- things he has actually done.

    Why don’t you try that?

  21. Wait, is it not a fact that Michelle is married to Marcus? Is it not a fact that Marcus runs a clinic that just so happens to deal with “curing gays?” And did you miss the point of my entire post, or were you too busy fuming to see my black and white letters? I said, and I’m not paraphrasing here, “Any person with the slightest bit of intelligence knows better than to have stake in actions as radical as the following video.” You’re saying these things are not factual. How much more evidence should I provide?

  22. Here are the inaccurate statements:

    ““African-American children were much better off as slaves with two parents than babies being born into this country under our nation’s first African-American president”

    That is an incorrect paraphrase. This is the actual phrase:

    ‘Slavery had a disastrous impact on African-American families, yet sadly a child born into slavery in 1860 was more likely to be raised by his mother and father in a two-parent household* than was an African American baby born after the election of the USA’s first African-American President.’

    completely different intent. one implies that slavery was better for a child than being under Obama. Ridiculous. The other says that a child was more likely to have two parents during the age of slavery than under Obama.

    “And we can’t forget the ban on all forms of pornography.”

    Again, and incorrect paraphrase. Here is the real phrase:

    “Humane protection of women and the innocent fruit of conjugal intimacy – our next generation of American children – from human trafficking, sexual slavery, seduction into promiscuity, and all forms of pornography and prostitution, infanticide, abortion and other types of coercion or stolen innocence.17″

    Completely different meaning. Your comment said ALL pornography, implying a free speech infringement. The actual statement makes it clear that it is CHILD pornography that is involved. That IS illegal and should always be so.

    You said, “A clinic devoted to curing gays. lol This is excellent. The Christians are doing my job for me. I love it!”

    You have no proof of this. “Devoted” implies that this is the clinic’s main focus and spends most of its time on it. Is that true? Further, you say ‘curing’ gays. You have no proof of this either. The video clip doesn’t show that ‘curing’ gays is the point at all. It simply states that it is possible for a gay person to cease their behavior and thoughts through practice & prayer. I see a medical cure here. I see behavior modification. For consenting adults who seek the counseling. Further, the video makes it clear that the counselor is answering targeted questions on gay people. This proves more that the ‘sting operator’ was attempting to trap the counselor than the clinic’s sole purpose was to ‘cure’ gays. In fact, the counselor says he is not an expert. That would imply, not a focus of the clinic- who would have trained him on this- but rather, a lack of focus from the clinic.

    These are just a few of the factual inaccuracies of this article and your comments that I referenced.

  23. OOPS! I can’t edit my comment (at 12:58), so I must do so as another comment. I meant, “I DON’T see a medical cure here.” Makes all the difference!

  24. OOPS! I can’t edit my comment (at 12:58), so I must do so as another comment. I meant, “I DON’T see a medical cure here.” Makes all the difference!

  25. Can you prove your statements? Your proof is anecdotal. Everyone who is persecuted feels some discomfort in the persecution. Catholics, for example, have been persecuted for more than 2000 years. On every excuse.

    If a man goes into a smoking cessation seminar, do you think he’s just curious? Same is true for homosexuals who want to learn to deal with the cross God gave them to bear.

  26. Actually, Lyn, life IS very black and white. Right is right, no matter how many don’t think so, and wrong is wrong, no matter how many think so. The objective right or wrong is objective. It’s how we humans react to it that’s not black and white. It’s like running a red light. There is never a point on a correctly functioning stop light when the light is neither red, yellow, or green. Yet how many people try to get out of the ticket when it inevitably comes? Taking something from someone that belongs legitimately to that person is wrong. Period. But nobody, or very few, would fault a starving man from stealing food from someone, and in most cases would likely be forgiven for it.

    There is no law against being attracted to someone of the same sex. God made some of us that way. They are human beings and deserve the same respect as anyone else. And if they request help to deal with something they perceive as a problem, then Dr. Bachmann seems to be someone who can provide help and strength to that person. I don’t think he goes around collecting homosexuals and browbeating them about their homosexuality. If that was the case, I’d be with you. But someone truly seeking help should be given help for their concern.

  27. “It’s like running a red light. There is never a point on a correctly functioning stop light when the light is neither red, yellow, or green.”

    And yet, if you are a police officer, firefighter or ambulance driver, it is allowed and expected for you to go through red lights. Thus making the issue neither black nor white. It’s situational.

  28. I guess you need to learn to read. What is situational is…the situation. It is black/white whether the light is red, green, or yellow. It is black and white that the law states that you aren’t allowed to run a red light. All of which I said in my comment.

  29. “It is black and white that the law states that you aren’t allowed to run a red light.”

    Except when you can, which was my point, making your ‘absolute law’ not so absolute.

  30. My point, exactly. The law is absolute. Red light = stop. Situations change-the game lets out, and there’s a man in the street directing traffic.

  31. Lyn, I also believe that God creates people with crosses they have to learn to bear. Being gay has two components-a natural attraction to those of the same sex, and a societal component when someone who has this same-sex attraction congregates with others of the same mien, and acts on their particular flaw. Yes, it’s a flaw, like Down’s syndrome, or being born physically deformed. God allows these things for a reason. For a Down’s syndrome child, it may be for the spiritual growth of the parent. When there’s a natural calamity, it might be to encourage reaching outside yourself to help others in need. In some cases, it’s just about learning to live with your flaws. I have a natural tendency to be lazy, but I know that, if I just stay lazy, I will just turn to a bucket of fat. So I try to work out on a regular basis. I also discipline myself to eat healthy, to not look to much at gorgeous women on the street, to do my job diligently, etc. I believe that those who are same-sex attracted are called to discipline themselves to not having sex, just the same as those who are not married are called to discipline themselves not to have sex until married. I totally understand that some do not have that discipline.
    My only issue with the gay community is that it’s trying to make people see it as normal, when it’s not. For the record, I don’t think there’s very many ‘normal’ people on earth-we’re all flawed in some way, and learning to deal with our flaws. Acting out on same-sex attraction is not learning to deal with flaws, it’s ‘going with the flow’.

    I believe that, if someone wants help learning to deal with their ‘gayness’, there are two ways to approach it-first, what are you looking for, an enabler or someone to deal with the real issue. Dr. Bachmann, as advertised, helps to deal with the real issue. I don’t know about other Christians, but Catholics do not impose their morality on anyone. They propose it as a way to deal with life’s problems, but it’s up to the fish to take the bait. If someone really wants help, the Catholic Church will help. We understand that men are weak, and we have pastoral care to help.
    By the way, did anyone realize that the Catholic Church is the only organization on earth that dealt with the AIDS epidemic in Africa right from the start? Others got into it when it started affecting Americans and Europeans, but when it was an Africa-only problem, only the Catholic Church responded with boots on the ground help.

  32. “Yes, it’s a flaw, like Down’s syndrome, or being born physically deformed.”

    Do you have evidence for this claim? Other than that your religion says so?

    “Acting out on same-sex attraction is not learning to deal with flaws, it’s ‘going with the flow’. ”

    Again, you have yet to demonstrate that this is a flaw. You’ve only claimed that it is. That isn’t the same thing.

    “By the way, did anyone realize that the Catholic Church is the only organization on earth that dealt with the AIDS epidemic in Africa right from the start? ”

    True. But they deal with it in wrong and harmful ways. The fact that they were the first actually makes that worse, not better.

  33. “But they deal with it in wrong and harmful ways. The fact that they were the first actually makes that worse, not better.”
    You have no evidence of this. Considering that the Catholic Church has absolutely no power to do anything to make people change their ways. Considering that every country that encourages condom use has rising AIDS/HIV cases.
    Regarding evidence of what I said, yes, I have evidence. My own two eyes. If homosexuality was good for mankind, more people would be homosexual. Same can be sadi about acting out on same-sex attraction-no good comes of it. Can you show some good that comes from gay sex?

  34. “Considering that the Catholic Church has absolutely no power to do anything to make people change their ways. ”

    Then why are you toting their accomplishments?

    “Considering that every country that encourages condom use has rising AIDS/HIV cases.”

    Evidence? Documentation?

    “Regarding evidence of what I said, yes, I have evidence. My own two eyes.”

    This is the worst kind of evidence. Not from you specifically, of course. But anecdotal evidence is the worst kind of evidence, regardless of who is giving it.

    “Can you show some good that comes from gay sex?”

    Physical pleasure. Love. Commitment. Relationships. Bonding. Affection.

  35. Because when people try what the Catholic Church suggests, it inevitably works.

    Yes,evidence-look at the increase in AIDS in South Africa since they began encouraging condom use to combat it, and then look at countries that have encouraged abstinence. http://www.zenit.org/article-21909?l=english

    “Physical pleasure. Love. Commitment. Relationships. Bonding. Affection.”

    What is necessarily good about physical pleasure? Drugs give physical pleasure, too. Do you even know what “love” is? There’s no evidence that gays are any more committed to each other than straights. In fact, there is evidence that, especially among men, promsicuity is more common. Relationships, bonding and affection are all possible in any human encounter.

    It’s funny how you accept some anecdotal evidence but not others. What I see in the gay community, and I live near a large one, the Bay Area, is that this is a recessive genetic trait, like Down’s syndrome. This is not to say that we’re not to treat everyone with their inherent human dignity. But we need to know and understand what’s what.

  36. “Because when people try what the Catholic Church suggests, it inevitably works.”

    But when people respond to Catholic Church lies, like that condoms have tiny holes punctured in them on purpose by condom companies, people die.

    “. http://www.zenit.org/article-21909?l=english

    So an interview on a Catholic website about a researcher working for a Catholic company who says that the Catholics are right is supposed to be convincing?

    “What is necessarily good about physical pleasure? ”

    It feels good.

    “Drugs give physical pleasure, too.”

    They do. And some have nasty side-effects. Provided both participants are healthy, physical pleasure doesn’t have any side effects.

    “There’s no evidence that gays are any more committed to each other than straights.”

    So? They can be more or less committed. You asked what could result from gay sex. And that’s the same things that come from any kind of sex. For some, I daresay most, couples physical interaction brings them closer together.

    “What I see in the Catholic community, and I live near a large one, is that this is a recessive genetic trait, like Down’s syndrome.”

    The above is an example of why anecdotes about genetic traits aren’t worth anything in the grand scheme of things.

  37. Proof that the Catholic Church says that condoms have tiny holes punctured in them? Source please?

    Regarding the source, yes. But go out and look for yourself. I suppose you have proof that condoms prevent AIDS???

    Feeling good good. As I said, drugs make people feel good, but wreck their lives.

    It seems you have less proof than I do…you think that research by condom producers is more reliable? I don’t.
    So now it boils down to “who do you believe”? Who has a financial stake in all this? I’d say that would be the drug companies and so on that stand to profit off of the world-wide AIDS research fiasco. The truth is, if you don’t have sex with someone you shouldn’t have sex with, you more than likely will not get AIDS.

    FWIW, the reason condoms are condemned by the Church is that the promises made about condoms are lies. The Church is against extra-marital sex, whether straight or gay.

  38. “Proof that the Catholic Church says that condoms have tiny holes punctured in them? Source please?”

    Certainly.

    Here’s the source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/oct/09/aids

    And a few quotes from it, for good measure:

    [The president of the Vatican's Pontifical Council for the Family, Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo, told the programme: "The Aids virus is roughly 450 times smaller than the spermatozoon. The spermatozoon can easily pass through the 'net' that is formed by the condom.]

    [The WHO has condemned the Vatican's views, saying: "These incorrect statements about condoms and HIV are dangerous when we are facing a global pandemic which has already killed more than 20 million people, and currently affects at least 42 million."

    The organisation says "consistent and correct" condom use reduces the risk of HIV infection by 90%. There may be breakage or slippage of condoms - but not, the WHO says, holes through which the virus can pass .

    Scientific research by a group including the US National Institutes of Health and the WHO found "intact condoms... are essentially impermeable to particles the size of STD pathogens including the smallest sexually transmitted virus... condoms provide a highly effective barrier to transmission of particles of similar size to those of the smallest STD viruses". ]

    “I suppose you have proof that condoms prevent AIDS???”

    Studies from the World Health Organization, yeah.

    “As I said, drugs make people feel good, but wreck their lives.”

    Some drugs can do so, yes. And some STDs can. But STDs aren’t only traded by homosexuals. And gay sex doesn’t cause STDs to exist. So your point is kind of moot.

    “you think that research by condom producers is more reliable?”

    Yes. Because if their products start failing, then they get sued and lose money.

    “So now it boils down to “who do you believe”?”

    The evidence. And studies are done by more than just the producers of birth control. I trust the science.

    “The truth is, if you don’t have sex with someone you shouldn’t have sex with, you more than likely will not get AIDS.”

    Correct.

    But if you have sex with a healthy person and use protection, you won’t get anything, and you still get to have sex.

    That’s a win-win.

    “FWIW, the reason condoms are condemned by the Church is that the promises made about condoms are lies.”

    No, they aren’t lies. I understand the Church holding the position. But the Church is wrong.

    “The Church is against extra-marital sex, whether straight or gay.”

    And I believe they’re wrong about this too.

  39. From our estemed CDC:
    Latex condoms, when used consistently and correctly, are highly effective in preventing heterosexual sexual transmission of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. Research on the effectiveness of latex condoms in preventing heterosexual transmission is both comprehensive and conclusive. The ability of latex condoms to prevent transmission has been scientifically established in laboratory studies as well as in epidemiologic studies of uninfected persons at very high risk of infection because they were involved in sexual relationships with HIV-infected partners. The most recent meta-analysis of epidemiologic studies of condom effectiveness was published by Weller and Davis in 2004. This analysis refines and updates their previous report published in 1999. The analysis demonstrates that the consistent use of latex condoms provides a high degree of protection against heterosexual transmission of HIV. It should be noted that condom use cannot provide absolute protection against HIV. The surest way to avoid transmission of HIV is to abstain from sexual intercourse or to be in a long-term mutually monogamous relationship with a partner who has been tested and you know is uninfected. “

    Fact: Size of HIV virus particle .0001mm
    Fact: Michael Roland, head of the Polymer Properties Section at the Naval Research laboratory in Washington D.C. states: “Even intact condoms have natural defects, measuring five to 50microns in diameter – 50 to 500 times the sizes of HIV virus… The rubber comprising latex condoms has intrinsic voids
    about 5 microns in size. Contrarily, the AIDS virus is only 0.1 micron in size. Since this is a factor of 50 times smaller than the voids inherent in rubber, the virus can readily pass through the condom.”

    Fact, it’s not the Catholic Church saying it, it’s others, too.
    Fact: Condom producers are in no peril to say that condom use works to prevent AIDS because they go by perfect use stats. Research indicates that
    only 30 to 60 percent of men who claim to use condoms for contraception actually use them for every act of intercourse. Furthermore, even people who use condoms every time may not use them correctly.
    Fact: The failure rate of condoms as a pregnancy barrier is 16%. That means that, in a 5 year period of time, someone who uses a condom to prevent pregnancy is likely to cause pregnancy about 50% of the time. Since a woman is only fertile about 6 days a month, you can extrapolate that a 16% failure rate as a pregnancy preventer equates at 50% likely to contract an STD in a year. That’s pretty bad odds.
    Fact: If you tell people that perfectly used condoms prevent diseases and pregnancy, then define perfect use as
    1) “A new condom is used every time a person has sexual intercourse.
    2) The condom is put on after the penis is erect and before it touches any part of partner’s mouth, anus, or vagina.
    3) If the condom breaks during sexual intercourse, the penis should be withdrawn immediately, and a new condom should be put on the penis.
    4) Withdraw from the partner immediately after ejaculation, holding the condom firmly to the base of the penis to keep it from slipping off, so no semen is spilled.
    5) Water-based lubrication should be used to prevent condoms from breaking; oil-based lubricants such as cooking or vegetable oils, baby oil, hand lotion, or petroleum jelly
    should never be used with latex condoms. They can cause the condom to break.
    6) Condoms should be stored in a drawer or closet, somewhere cool, dry, and out of direct sunlight. Changes in temperature, rough handling or age can make the latex brittle or gummy. Never use condoms that are damaged or discolored, brittle, or
    sticky. Do not store them in a wallet or car glove compartment for a long time.”
    That’s lying to people. Most people who say they use condoms say that they don’t put them on immediately before initial penetration.

    So, the Church is not wrong in stating that the best way to prevent AIDS spread is abstention from sex. And it follows that what you believe about the Church bears no consequence.

  40. Ahhhh, the sound of crickets chirping…

  41. “Ahhhh, the sound of crickets chirping…”

    Why is there such a high correlation between Christian bloggers and displays of arrogance?

    “The surest way to avoid transmission of HIV is to abstain from sexual intercourse or to be in a long-term mutually monogamous relationship with a partner who has been tested and you know is uninfected. “”

    I never said this wasn’t the case. But first of all, there’s a majority of people who aren’t going to consider abstinence. And rather than dismissing them as ‘lost’ or some equivalent, I’d rather they have as much protection as they can.

    You won’t get into a car crash if you stay away from roads and don’t drive a car. But if you are going to drive, I’d much rather you wear a seat belt.

    “That’s lying to people.”

    No, it’s not. Whether people properly use condoms is there responsibility. I thought you were big on that?

    If people use a seat belt, it’s very good (but not perfect) at protecting them. If they wear it incorrectly, that ability lessens. But that’s not the fault of the seat belt or the manufacturers.

    We’ve gone a long way from homosexuals in this talk…

  42. Discussing AIDS transmission and prevention is nothing, if not about homosexuals.

    That’s ok, I find you arrogant, too.

    The point I was making about abstinance-sex outside of marriage is inherently sinful. Driving a car isn’t. Having sex just for pleasure, without thinking of the other half of what sex is for is like taking drugs without considering the crash after the high.

  43. “Discussing AIDS transmission and prevention is nothing, if not about homosexuals.”

    Because you, as a heterosexual, are inherently immune to AIDS?

    “The point I was making about abstinance-sex outside of marriage is inherently sinful.”

    I don’t believe that ‘sin’ actually exists.

    So there we are.

  44. Because me, as a chaste husband, don’t do anything to subject myself to AIDS. But I was a bit wrong, especially about AIDS in Africa being just about homosexuals. But AIDS only became interesting to the West when people in the US and Europe began dying of it. Before that, it was Catholics especially and Christians generally, who were giving aid to AIDS victims in Africa.

  45. “Before that, it was Catholics especially and Christians generally, who were giving aid to AIDS victims in Africa.”

    And my issue is that the Church gives that aid by saying “Don’t have sex. And if you do have sex, don’t use condoms.” Which leads to more, not less, deaths.

  46. Giving primary care to AIDS victims is dealing with those who already have it, counseling people to abstain from unknown sex partners is working with people who don’t have it yet.

    The Church’s position is don’t have sex outside of marriage. Period. Be human, not animal. If you have sex in marriage, condoms aren’t necessary to prevent AIDS.

    Very obvious that you’re not a scientist…

  47. “Be human, not animal.”

    Humans are animals.

    And part of being a human animal is having an instinctual desire for sex.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 212 other followers

%d bloggers like this: