Media Falls Way Short in Claiming Pope Has 'Justified' Condom Use
The media is practically falling over themselves with a report, propagated in part by the flimsy Nicole Winfield of the Associated Press, that Pope Benedict XVI has "justified" the use of condoms. (See this enormous (and misleading) headline at HuffPo, for example.) But is it true? In a word, no. Nowhere in his remarks does the Pope talk about "justifying" anything.
Rev. Joseph Fessio is the editor-in-chief of Ignatius Press, which is publishing the interview book Light of the World, from which the Pope's notable remarks are gleaned. Fr. Fessio is quoted in the New York Times, "It would be wrong to say, 'Pope Approves Condoms.' He's saying it's immoral, but in an individual case the use of a condom could be an awakening to someone that he's got to be more conscious of his actions."
Dr. Janet E. Smith at Catholic World Report has an excellent explanation of the Pope's remarks. She also provides the actual interview exchange from the upcoming book.
Dr. Smith's piece is a must-read for those who wish to examine this story. Although the following snippet from Dr. Smith does not do justice to her entire piece, here is part of what she wrote:
We must note that the example that Pope Benedict gives for the use of a condom is a male prostitute; thus, it is reasonable to assume that he is referring to a male prostitute engaged in homosexual acts. The Holy Father is simply observing that for some homosexual prostitutes the use of a condom may indicate an awakening of a moral sense; an awakening that sexual pleasure is not the highest value, but that we must take care that we harm no one with our choices. He is not speaking to the morality of the use of a condom, but to something that may be true about the psychological state of those who use them. If such individuals are using condoms to avoid harming another, they may eventually realize that sexual acts between members of the same sex are inherently harmful since they are not in accord with human nature. The Holy Father does not in any way think the use of condoms is a part of the solution to reducing the risk of AIDS. As he explicitly states, the true solution involves "humanizing sexuality." ...
Would it be proper to conclude that the Holy Father would support the distribution of condoms to male prostitutes? Nothing he says here indicates that he would. Public programs of distribution of condoms run the risk of conveying approval for homosexual sexual acts. The task of the Church is to call individuals to conversion and to moral behavior; it is to help them understand the meaning and purpose of sexuality and to help them come to know Christ, who will provide the healing and graces that enable us to live in accord with the meaning and purpose of sexuality.
Is Pope Benedict indicating that heterosexuals who have HIV could reduce the wrongness of their acts by using condoms? No. In his second answer he says that the Church does not find condoms to be a “real or moral solution.” That means the Church does not find condoms either to be moral or an effective way of fighting the transmission of HIV. As the Holy Father indicates in his fuller answer, the most effective portion of programs designed to reduce the transmission of HIV are calls to abstinence and fidelity.
In other words, there's a lot more to this than meets the eye. Careful analysis is needed in examining what the Holy Father actually said, and careful analysis is something that is too often lacking when the major media reports on issues related to the Catholic Church.
As Phil Lawler, from CatholicCulture.org reports: "Did the Pope really say that condom use is sometimes justified? No; that's not what he said."
-- Dave Pierre is the author of the heralded new book, Double Standard: Abuse Scandals and the Attack on the Catholic Church.
- Dave Pierre's blog
- Login to post comments
















Comments
So, those Expert Reporters...
Submitted by Tenebrous on Sun, 11/21/2010 - 5:02pm.
Can't figure out what the Pope said even though they hate the Catholic church? That's some massive incompetence, for a bunch of experts. Here's a hint for you, reporters: those sketchy websites that promise to make your chest bigger with a few pills don't work either!
Visions and Principles blog
Experience
Submitted by KC Mulville on Sun, 11/21/2010 - 5:39pm.
I was a Jesuit for eight years. That doesn't make me the world's expert on Catholicism, but I know something about the church. So when they botch it about something I know about, it's glaring. When the media so badly misunderstands, distorts, and utterly misinforms the audience about a subject I really know about, it only reinforces my belief in how badly they misinform the public about subjects I don't know about.
The media presents itself as the expert on everything, which means they're experts on nothing. But they have the arrogance to demand that "intelligent" people are those who swallow what they dish out. They're so arrogant, they think that being "informed" by the media is a qualification for president.
They don't know diddly about the church, but they feel perfectly empowered to "inform" the rest of us about what's going on in the church. They're clueless. It's like me explaining Chinese poetry. It's a world they don't understand, but they think they do, because they're the media. And so when they start popping off about economic policy, global warming, voter sympathies, and whether we're making progress in Afghanistan ... they're dealing with topics that they don't understand, and therefore shouldn't be trusted.
As for the pope's comments ... we're talking about moral theology. If there was ever a topic in which people sit around and make up "What if?" scenarios, moral theology is it. They even did it to Jesus ... remember the story where they asked Jesus what happened to a widow of all seven brothers? That's how almost all moral theology is done, because it's always a comparative weighing of values. The best way to examine it is to pit values against each other.
That's why I have to laugh at politicians who claim that they won't answer hypotheticals. Why not? Aren't you capable of thinking abstractly?
What's not to like about condoms?
Submitted by shawn. on Sun, 11/21/2010 - 5:58pm.
Catholics have a right to their opinion, and I respect it , however except for the fact that it might not feel good, condoms are great, they decrease the chance of being pregnancy by 97 percent.Actually, condoms are 95%
Submitted by Soldat44 on Sun, 11/21/2010 - 9:15pm.
Actually, condoms are 95% effective at best. NFP(Natural Family Planning) is 99%.
I will take
Submitted by shawn. on Sun, 11/21/2010 - 11:18pm.
.......-95 percent over 0. Condoms are not just for fornicators, they are for married people too, and many women do not like the pill because of side effects.Well, as was just pointed
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sun, 11/21/2010 - 11:23pm.
Well, as was just pointed out, NFP is more effective than condoms. But really, if you aren't Catholic, none of this matters does it? Papal edicts only apply to Catholics. We're not muslims you know.
Like I said Rad
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 12:26am.
It is a part of the religion, just Sikhs are not allowed to eat beef. I love nothing better than a good filet mignon, but It does not bother me at all that others don't eat it.
I am just saying Condoms are a wonderful invention. Hey the NFP might be more effective, but for some people that don't want to eat the Double Veggie on Honey oat for the rest of their lives, some of us want a Big Mac, Whopper with Cheese or a Taco Bell Grand Cordida crunch.
Sorry, even if you are married and decide to have the Veggie platter for rest of your life, you can only eat it when you want to grow more vegatibles. A marriage with no sex life, and only for pro creation sounds pretty boring, but hey thats just me.
shawn if you think Catholics
Submitted by Radical1979 on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 12:36am.
shawn if you think Catholics who practice NFP have no sex life, you are sorely mistaken. Remember when Catholic families had 10 or more kids? With NFP the only thing that has to change is the 10 kids part if you know what your doing.
I don't claim to be an expert Radical
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 12:41am.
...but it seems to me, that sex for fun and not for procreation is kind of frowned up. Sex is a very healthy thing in a relationship. Just seems to me condoms are good thing, and a very effective form of birth control. If 95 percent is not enough, then double up ;-)
Shawn, You are making the
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 12:55am.
Shawn,
You are making the mistake of some many before you.
Sex used ONLY for fun and pleasure is a sin. However, sex with fun, pleasure and open to procreation, between a married woman and man, is moral and accepted.
People today want to have their cake and it too. They want all of the fun part of sex with none of the responsabilities. If it were any other activity, we would all know how wrong this is. However, because sex appeals to our most inner animal instincts, we choose to ignore and deny the responsabilities that come with sex.
You keep on saying that sex is a healthy thing in marriage. Hmmmm....if this were the case, why is it that 60%+ of marriages today end up in divorce?
You seem to be talking about sex as only the pleasure part of the action. Sex is a lot more than pleasure.
Why do we in our society use others to fufill our pleasure, our animal desires? Is this healthy?
Actually LL I never said that
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 1:01am.
I said In a relationship I like the fact that a couple can have sex when they want without restrictions. Many thing are more important like give and take, trust and love.
If it is part of your religtion I am not one to judge, I just do not see how sex for fun is a sin. To each their own buddy.
Shawn, I love the easy cop
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 1:11am.
Shawn,
I love the easy cop out...."to each his own buddy"
Sex for fun is a sin because you are using one another to fulfill your most animal instinct, your animal desire. You are reducing the other person to an object, your own personal pleasurable object.
It is human instinct to feed ourselves, right? But what do we think of people who eat and eat and eat and eat? individuals without any self control, right?
It is an animal instinct to want to hurt others when they do us harm, right? but do you think it is moral and ok to hurt others merely because they also hurt you?
The point is that we must control our animal instincts and not reduce ourselve or our spouse to mere objects for our pleasure.
God commandment was, "....be fruitful and multiply..." you can't do this when you use sex ONLY for fun. As I said, NOTHING wrong with the fun part, Shawn, what is wrong is being closed to conception. to having children.
Sex is to show LOVE for your spouse and for conception. The fun and pleasure parts of it are more than ok when used within the context of showing complete and utter love for the spouse and being open to conception.
Why do you only speak about the fun part of it and remove the love part of it?
and we are having a discussion. I am not attempting to shove God's laws down your throat. It is up to you to see the Truth. and accept it. I am just informing you of what God's demands from all of us, whether we believe or do not believe.
It depends LL
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 1:26am.
If somebody messes with you, and want to force there will on you, you should fight back. Maybe not physicall, but humiliation. Sort of like what Sarah Palin is doing the MSM right now.
I said to each their own, because I do not agree with you and believe condoms are a great thing. If you disagree that is fine.
I love the fact that our society is evolving and people don't judge others for the way they choose to live life and the progams they choose to watch on tv or the music they listen to. Individual freedoms LL. Thats the way it should be.
Shawn, yes, individual
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 1:40am.
Shawn,
yes, individual freedoms, but with individual freedoms come INDIVIDUAL RESPONSABILITY!
You like the society we are evolving into? higher number of rapes, higher number of out of marriage children who end up homeless, in drugs, etc. teenagers having babies, because of the false sense of security of condoms. This is the society that you like we are evolving to? You like the fact that as studies have shown most New Yorkers have one or more STDs.
You like that we live in a society where STDs are a growing problem and more and more people have them thanks to what? the false security of using condoms, the believe that sex is all about fun without any responsability. This is the society you like we are evolving to?
I am not judging you Shawn, not even close. I am unsure why you are getting defensive. However, I will judge your actions. Using condoms is wrong, whether you agree with it or not. Just because you do not agree with me, it doesn't mean that your believe is right or moral.
But talking about individual freedom without talking about individual responsability is irresponsible at best, Shawn.
If you say so
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 1:42am.
goodnight.
Shawn, Yes, easy to run and
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 1:48am.
Shawn,
Yes, easy to run and go than to face the fallacy of your statements.
I am not saying it Shawn, it is constantly proven in societies which attempt to do what you are claiming is a good thing.
The FACTS are not a matter of opinion, they are FACTS.
The society we are evolving to is a complete and utter disaster, yet, for whatever reason, you are applauding it.
I am not running
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 2:07am.
Just tired of a debate that pretty much goes nowhere. Dude society in our country is getting ruined by high taxes, a socialist President and political correctness.
The last thing thing this country needs to worry about is what other people are doing with their lives.
Shawn, Sorry, I was
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 3:02am.
Shawn,
Sorry, I was watching "Batman, Under the Red Hood".
Anyway, I 100% agree that Obama, his policies, high taxes, etc are things that are destroying this nation. But this is just part of the story. The lack of moral behavior, the lack of respect we have for others, the lack of respect we have for ourselves, the fact that we have devalued human life. The fact that we live in a world where countless of people seek their own self-pleasure, where people are more interested in themselves than others is also destroying this nation and in fact, the Western world.
As I said, condoms have been sold as the solution to all sexual problems in our societies. It was suppose to end the spread of STDs, it was going to end having children out of wedlock, it was going to end having unwanted children. The truth is that the opposite has happened. Condoms are part of the problem and these have caused the problem to be much worse than it was.
A simple research on the studies that have been done in African nation of how STDs, AIDS mainly, is being spread, the nations that have the largest spread of AIDS are those which have embraced the use of condoms as a means to stop the spread of it. The African nations which have slowed down and in cases stopped the spread of AIDS are those nations which have embraced abstinance, self-control.
The problem with condoms are....
1) It gives you a false sense of security. It makes you believe that you will not get an STD and that you will not end up with a child.
2) It allows you to have sex without any of the responsabilities that come with the freedom of making love to another human being.
To speak of individual freedom without speaking about individual responsability makes zero sense, Shawn.
sex between couples should be fun
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 11:16am.
There are many reasons not to pro create. A couple may be too old, they have enough children, they cannot afford to have another child. The problem in Africa is that people do not use condoms enough.Shawn, You said, "A
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 12:47am.
Shawn,
You said, "A marriage with no sex life, and only for pro creation sounds pretty boring, but hey thats just me."
1) Shawn, when you believe marriage is great only when the sex life is great, well you'll end up like John Edwards and so many other human beings who cheat on their spouses when the sex is impossible to be done.
2) Hmmmm....who said Catholics believe sex is only for procreation? To simplify it, sex has two purpose a) Procreation b)Showing immense love for the spouse. The pleasure part of it, which there is NOTHING wrong with feeling it, was added by God so we would like obeying His commandment, "...be fruitful and multiply..."
3) Reducing sex to the mere pleasure means that we are using our spouse to fufill our own selfish needs and animal urges.
I do not understand people who claim that in order for marriage to not be boring they must have an amazing sex life. Sex is a by product of the deep and immense love between husband and wife. This love is also shown with the fact that when the love between husband and wife is expressed correctly, a child, the product of love, is shown. That we as humans have distorted this, just like everything else God has given us, is something else.
But do not believe for a second that those of us who practice NFP and are open to conception every time we have intercourse that we do not have a healthy sexual life.
However, there are many more important things in marriage than sex. That our society claims otherwise, is something else.
RAdical1979, Well said! NFP
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 12:28am.
RAdical1979,
Well said! NFP is a lot more effective than condoms.
The problem with condoms is that 99% of people do not use them correctly. Furthemore, tests of condoms have proven that the 95% claim are complete lies.
Natural Family planning and self-control are a lot more effective than man made condoms.
Another question about the NFP sex life
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 11:35am.
Are people allowed to ask questions orally?The use of condoms in
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 12:25am.
The use of condoms in marriage is removing one of the main reasons for marriage, procreation. When you devalue sex to merely pleasure, well you get the sexual mess we have around the world today.
I encourage you to read up on the history of what the RCC said when Protestants, in the 1930s, buckled to peer preasure and allowed the use of contraceptives. The Roman Catholic Church came out with various documents saying that the next step for our society was to accept abortion. Of course all the Catholic haters, the nay-sayers, the immorals and amorals came out back then and said that the Church was ridiculous for saying this. They all claimed that wide use spread of contraceptives would never lead to mass abortions. Well, what do we have today?
The historical documents are there for people to read.
When abortion became legal, the Church said euthanasia was next. Once again, the nay-sayers, the amorals, immorals, pro-abortions, pro-choicers said what? that the Church was ridiculous and being sensasionalist. What do we have today? Euthanasia being widely accepted and legalized.
We have devalued human life. We have devalued the precious things God has given humanity and distort them for human needs, not God's Commandments and it is leading the world into complete chaos.
Geez LL
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 12:29am.
I am trying to be respectful here and I want to ask you a personal question without being too explicit.
Do you mean that the super hot wife you keep telling me about. Unless you plan on having anymore children, that part of the relationship is off limits? Wow, I have to admire the will power.
Shawn, LOL, that part of
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 12:38am.
Shawn,
LOL, that part of the relationship is far from being off-limits.
1) There is something called self-control. Just because I want it or she wants it, it doesn't mean that it should be done.
2) Both my wife and I are 100% open to how many children God sends to us. If it is two, as we have right now, I respect and accept God's Will. If more, I respect and accept God's Will.
3) Being married is not an open invitation to have sexual relations at all times that we feel like it. We can and must practice chastity and Holy purity even within marriage.
4) When making love to a spouse the purpose of it must be a lot mor than merely pleasure for both sides. We MUST be open to conception, of course love for one another and yes, the pleasure that comes with it.
I travel a lot, Shawn do to my job. I practice self-control. When I return home, my wife and are passioante lovers, but if she doesn't want it, I do not get upset or mad, etc. There are non-physical ways to express my immense love and respect for my wife. Sex is not the only way to express love in a marriage.
People see the "extrict" commandments of God's as supposedly not allow sex, far from it. God commanded, be fruitful and multiply. Only one way to obey this commandment of God, right? LOL, It is all about mutual respect for each other.
Lol LL
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 12:48am.
Well of course if one of you does not feel like it, I am not saying it should be forced. ....yeeeh :-P Sorry to me, sex on a schedule takes lots of the romance out of it. Dude, without being too explicit about my sex life, before I was married, I took former flame out to watch Titanic, went out to dinner and well, lets just say If I did not have a certain something in my wallet, I would have had the biggest blue b@lls that night ;-)
Shawn, Scheduled? who said
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 1:00am.
Shawn,
Scheduled? who said that being open to contraception means being on a schedule and not being able to be spontaneous? LOL you have bought in into the many lies, misconceptions and stereotypes of Hollywood when it comes to practcing Roman Catholics and their healthy sexual life within marriage.
By the way, would you say that you do not "schedule" your sex around your wife's time of the month?
but you said it with your last comment. Your blue ball night was all about pleasure. You took the responsability of sex out of it and used it to fulfill yourself, put out the fire of your animal instinct and it looks like your lady friend did the same thing.
Why is it that so many people who talk about others taking responsability for their actions refuse to take responsability for theirs? In fact, they love to remove the responsability part of the action.
We live in a society which applauds as responsible giving in to our most animal instincts and desires, but without any of the side affects of giving in to these.
I had fun
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 1:21am.
and believe that using protection was responsible. No regrets. If the protection failed and a little shawn was on the way and she wanted to keep it to term, I would have been responsible.
However, it was a night that a newcoming Leonardo Dicaprio helped shawn be a very happy man for the night. Like I said LL, no regrets. NONE.
I don't applaud anybody for having sex or not having sex, I applaud a society that minds their own business and stop telling others how to live their lives.
Shawn, 1) I never talked
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 1:33am.
Shawn,
1) I never talked about you having regrets. That is between you and God. From the sound of it, as much as you want to claim you have no regrets....you actually do have them.
2) You say it all when you say, "...helped shawn be very happy many for the night." For you is all about Shawn having fun. It is all about Shawn.
You do not want to hear that your actions are wrong. You do not want to feel guilty about your actions. You rather not hear anything about whether your actions are moral or immoral.
a society that minds its own business? what you live in a bubble? Sorry, your way has been tried by many and usually it ends up pretty bad. History proves as much.
When society minds its own business and what is moral and immoral is not debated and taught, we end up with what happened in Nazi Germany, Spanish Civil War, USSR, etc, etc, etc.
Its not all about shawn
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 1:39am.
I had a willing partner, so it was about two people. She was willing and so was I. I'm sorry but I will not feel guilty about hurting nobody and a having a a great night
Shawn, Just because someone
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 1:56am.
Shawn,
Just because someone is willing it doesn't make it right.
As I will always teach the teenagers that I help, the sign of a true gentleman is to control oneself even when the lady doesn't control herself.
Having a willing partner does not mean that what you did was right or moral.
Is having a willing partner that wants you to kill her make the killing moral? Of course not. Same thing here.
Just because two individuals are willing to participate in a sinful act, it doesn't make the act any less sinful.
As I said, I never talked about guilt or regrets, you brought it. Obviously you need to deal with these.
Come on LL
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 2:06am.
I am not getting you. You are telling me that I am not taking responsiblity, so if that does not equal to you implying I should feeling guility or regret my actions for not taking reponsiliby and its all about shawn and my selfishess I am lost, that is why I said good night.
When I discuss this topic with you, i feel like the play button does not work so good and it is better to just watch another DVD.
Dude, without being too explicit
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 1:37am.
Dude, without being too explicit about my sex life, before I was married, I took former flame out to watch Titanic, went out to dinner and well, lets just say If I did not have a certain something in my wallet, I would have had the biggest blue b@lls that night ;-)
So you finally redeemed that 25% discount coupon for an inflatable "Sex Doll", huh Shawn?
Jer
No
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 1:49am.
The coupon is not as much as my membership discount
Dang Jer
Submitted by Denny Crane on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 1:54am.
How old are you?
We Are The 53%
Denny
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 2:05am.
I think he is a about the same age as Paul Stanley from Kiss, but instread of breaking a guitar I think if Jer was on stage he might break a hip.
Good one Shawn
Submitted by Denny Crane on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 2:20am.
I was thinking about using the one I found from 1912
But I didn't want to be too mean!!!
Denny Crane
We Are The 53%
I think when It comes to Jer
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 2:23am.
His attempt at burning me was more SS Minnow than Titantic.
LOL Shawn
Submitted by Denny Crane on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 3:23am.
I used to work across the street from that harbor.
That is Kaka' ako harobor in Honolulu. I worked in Ward Warehouse right across the street.
We Are The 53%
Denny...
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 2:33am.
Old enough to recall seeing both the original Titanic and A Night to Remember [although I was very young] when they were first released and had nightmares about being trapped in a big boat and going down in the Atlantic for a long time afterwards--but also became fascinated with stories about the Titanic. And that's why Cameron's Titanic--although the effects were spectacular--was a little disappointing. Too much DiCaprio and Winslet. The massive audience numbers were driven by adolescent girls--and Shawns--who paid to see it 5-10 times.
Why do you ask?
Jer
[just joshin' ya, Shawn]
Lol it's all in good fun Jer ;-)
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 2:36am.
Check out Mr Brattons forum thread when u have a moment. I called you out on your outlandish namecalling ;-)Oh, I knew that, Shawn [and
Submitted by Jer on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 2:43am.
Oh, I knew that, Shawn [and Denny]--as were my comments as well.
Jer
Jer..as much as we disagree
Submitted by Paul G on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 2:55am.
WE (BLONDE, MB etc) We all have fun here...but as you have witnessed 2nite with wrathful and me...it's not fun here anymore....I'm getting F'd from ppl that I would/should normally agree with, or F'd from ppl that I normally would have stayed away from..I don't know/care who this Denny troll is...but I can even deal with JWF. But....In all your yrs here u never have called any1 names..I just don't know whats happened here in the last few months...
and btw JWF...
Submitted by Paul G on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 2:56am.
this isnt a "whine"
Some Cheese
Submitted by Denny Crane on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 3:41am.
with that whine?
You brought up something from months ago, got taken to the woodshed, and are now complaining on a different thread?
I don't know/care who this Denny troll isIf you don't care then why did you say anything? "
Lib free or die" Denny Crane
We Are The 53%
Jer
Submitted by Denny Crane on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 3:28am.
Definately too much DiCaprio. But Winslet was kinda hot!
I remember going to see this with an Ex girlfreind (while she was my ex) and after we had a long talk about why she broke up with me. It may have been because we weren't using condoms!!!!
;-)
We Are The 53%
"because we weren't using condoms!!!
Submitted by Paul G on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 3:52am.
I don't wear a hazmat suit either...just becuz I have no reason to wear one. Sound familiar Denny? or doesn't ur bf..nm
~Hahahahahahaha!
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Tue, 11/23/2010 - 4:01pm.
Blessings be upon the Track function. It would have been a shame to have missed this priceless moment of FAIL as Paul ran from thread to thread to weep, wail, whine, thrash, flail, mewl, and puke.
What's not to like about condoms?
Submitted by Dave. on Sun, 11/21/2010 - 6:06pm.
Nothing as long as you don't mine feeling like you're wearing socks in the shower. :-^) -DaveVote for the American in November
And those socks won't
Submitted by JoeBob on Sun, 11/21/2010 - 7:02pm.
And those socks won't necessarily save you from athlete's foot, either.
Or
Submitted by shawn. on Sun, 11/21/2010 - 7:08pm.
Lubricated and ribbed.Dave buddy
Submitted by shawn. on Sun, 11/21/2010 - 7:09pm.
Dude i am sorry. I am married but if I was not. I find Lindsey Lohan hot. However I would sacrifice some feeling as oppsed to something falling Off.~"Falling off"
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Sun, 11/21/2010 - 7:21pm.
AKA "Shawn's BFF kicked the bucket".
;-)
Lol Bru
Submitted by shawn. on Sun, 11/21/2010 - 7:36pm.
There are times when I think you are NBs biggest prude then there are times when you can be fun. Nice one that was good ;-)~Shawn dahling
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Sun, 11/21/2010 - 9:30pm.
Only you would think that being against legalized prostitution = prude.
Hahahahahaha!
So while you're drooling over Lohan, is your wife buying you Old Spice? Rowr.
Brunette baby
Submitted by shawn. on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 12:17am.
Yes and some other cleaning products as well. ;-) "warning to all prudes, double entendre warning"
Can we please worry less
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sun, 11/21/2010 - 7:07pm.
Can we please worry less about what the Catholic Church requires of it's members, and worry more about what Islam requires of the rest of us, like death.
~This Protestant
Submitted by Wrathful Brunette on Sun, 11/21/2010 - 7:14pm.
Thinks you hit the nail on the head. I really don't care what any belief system requires of it's members as long as it doesn't involve doing things to non-members.
Ah, Radical!
Submitted by 26CX on Sun, 11/21/2010 - 7:17pm.
I see you are suffering from an acute case of Islamophobia!
You either need to take two aspirin and call me in the morning or put the lime in the coconut drink them both up... I can never remember which. ;)
26CX - to use a phrased by
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sun, 11/21/2010 - 8:08pm.
26CX - to use a phrased coined by our own missninja911, I am Islamasavie. Not sure the spelling is correct.
I have yet to see what the
Submitted by Thoreau on Sun, 11/21/2010 - 11:59pm.
I have yet to see what the Pope actually said in full context from the MSM. All I see is commentary, which means nothing.
The Pope
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 12:09am.
Aside from recommending that male prostitutes practice safe sinning, the news isn't telling us much.
I think it might give some Catholics a feeling of justification for using condoms, but only those who want to construe the message thus.
Cool Arrow, How much you
Submitted by Liberallies on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 12:17am.
Cool Arrow,
How much you love to distort the Roman Catholic Church's teachings.
Just like your immense error of Sola Scriptura, you completly misinterpret what the Pope said.
the last thing the Pope said was that male prostitutes should practice safe sinning. You and I both know it. However, you dislike of the RCC doesn't allow you to have an objective look at anything related to her.
I am unsure why Protestants or seculars care about this. Protestants have allowed contraceptives since the 1930s and well secularist have allowed it since forever.
The use of condoms is immoral, period. The Pope's answers did not contradict this moral FACT.
Another great example of
Submitted by wiwf on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 11:00am.
Another great example of cherry-picking a quote.But the lame stream media has
Submitted by Cowboy on Mon, 11/22/2010 - 1:28pm.
But the lame stream media has no agenda.....