.jpg)
Richard Dawkins spoke at a press conference at the University of Valencia. He was there to receive an honorary degree. Reportedly, he said "I wonder on what basis anyone can say condoms make Aids worse. The Pope is either stupid, ignorant or dim. If people take his words seriously he will be responsible for the deaths of thousands, perhaps millions of people."
It was also reported that he said that people should think for themselves, which likely would lead them away from belief in God. And, he feels that if Catholics around the globe embrace the pope's way of thinking, the pope will have blood on his hands.
He congratulated President Obama for overturning George Bush's stem cell research restrictions.
Richard Dawkins will be speaking at the American Atheists convention on April 11th in Atlanta, Georgia.
Comments
Clearly, Mr. Dawkins is missing the larger vision. Condoms, while perhaps 'helpful' in preventing the spread of AIDS, are merely Band-Aids to a larger, more central issue. Self-restraint, concern for others, discipline and common sense are the tools that, in the end, prevail over the spread of AIDS. Adults are not children; they understand that having sex, when they carry a virus, can infect another human being. The sex act is not a requirement to live, like the ability to breathe. Let's all stop making excuses for excesses and start looking for some personal responsibility.
Lisa,
The position of "stop making excuses for excesses and start looking for some personal responsibility" is one of the most hypocritical stances I can envision for anyone defending the Church.
During the revealings of the various pedophilic scandals, the Church did nothing but excuse the behavior by shuffling priests around and keeping it within their own robed organization.
Even for these adults, it appears that the sex act, while certainly not a requirement for life, is a compelling drive. It is much like the one that exists for happiness, for finding meaning, or for searching for pleasure. Are they sina qua non FOR life? Of course not. But if you strip a man or woman to their bare essentials (food, drink, and shelter), you'll discover there are more things that fit into a better quality of life, as even these priests proved in their vows of celibacy.
To not recognize that certain conditions of squalor promote the pursuit of pleasure in a cheap is heinous, more so when one refuses to recognize a possible mediator to a horrible disease.
To encourage condom use is treating a symptom, but I'm shocked you or the Pope could be so callous about the lives in the here and now while focusing simply on those lives that have yet to begin from the womb (the rhetorical pro-life).
You might call the position as focusing on eternal life, but without any proofs to that event beyond faith, it's a hard burden to shoulder in policy, and do expect people to be critical of it.
"Let's all stop making excuses for excesses and start looking for some personal responsibility."
That's a funny statement, given that Christianity is all about giving up personal responsibility.
"Adults are not children"
No, but many adults are uneducated about contraception, reproduction, and disease.
"The sex act is not a requirement to live, like the ability to breathe."
Why don't you leave that choice up to each individual? Why are you trying to impose your choices on others by withholding information?
The poor Pope! It's his job to try to find solutions within the context of Catholicism. Just because every word out of his mouth hits the national news it seems that people like Mr. Dawkins forget this and think that the Pope speaks for everyone, and to everyone. Let the guy run his little corner of the world in peace (which does, of course, give you the absolute right to ignore his advice and in fact makes it easier). Seriously, why should atheists always be reactive? Apply that much-praised reason and simply make a positive statement, ie 'Condoms are a very useful tool against AIDS. Let's go distribute some free/at low cost!'
"The sex act is not a requirement to live, like the ability to breathe."
Oh precious Lisa, I'm sorry to be the one divulging this gross information, but your mother and father connected their privates to bring you into existence. I know the stork theory that you've been taught is compelling considering the level of coodies that men carry, but your parent's sex act was "a requirement" in order for you to live.
But I shouldn't criticize you. Maybe we should start a "JUST JERK IT!" campaign and distribute porn, dildos, and fleshlights from Rabat to Cape Town.
UP WITH THE LUCK, DOWN WITH THE F@#K
Oh, and the Pope's an idiot, Elizabeth. Unfortunately, at this time, those most affected by the AIDS virus is Africa don't look to Richard Dawkins for advice. Many of them are deeply religious, and when the Pope(a hopeless virgin, by the way) recommends barebacking every woman in the village, maybe he deserves a little scolding.
Grow up and stop being so nice to everyone. If someone sends something stupid, particularly when that something may result in millions of deaths, please start standing up for humanity and calling them on their idiocy.
Elizabeth,
The Pope is the leader of the single largest religion in the world. There is no such thing as "his little corner of the world." When he makes statements, in his role as Pope, his followers are EXPECTED to take it as, pardon the phrase, gospel.
Some statements, especially those made by world leaders, deserve negative reaction when they themselves are not only misrepresenting fact, but actually have the potential to cause harm.
Stating that condoms make AIDS worse is an irresponsible statement made by one whom is considered virtually infallible. There are going to be many people who believe this because the leader of their faith declared it to be so.
On your other points:
Atheists have been shown to be reactive, in part, because the religious leaders of this world have repeatedly made public statements which are outrageous, but still followed by the blind followers of their respective faiths.
I applaude your feeling that we should apply our reason to make positive statements. There are plenty of examples of this very thing taking place. For example, in Colorado, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and Kansas City, there is a billboard ad campaign that merely states, "Don't believe in God? You're not alone." That is a very non-confrontational, positive, inclusive message that is being portrayed.
When it boils down to it, anything said publicly by a group of atheists is going to be viewed in poor light merely because they are atheists. It continues to amaze me that the theist communities around the world have every right to state their views in the public forum and consider themselves to be untouchable. However, when atheists try to oppose them, we are often considered to be worse than terrorists.
Please try to look at both sides of an argument. Your arguments will be more likely to be considered.
So what had Dawkins done to try to curb the worldwide AIDS epidemic?
"Just keep having sex as much as you want with as many people as you want! Be sure to use a condom, though. Sure, odds are that one will eventually fail and you might catch the HIV virus, but so what! At least you're not listening to that awful, backwards, dim-witted Pope or any other Christian."
Say, anyone know what the rate of HIV infection happens to be among Catholics and other Christians? Just curious. No one talks about it.
Agree ! All talk another standup comedian, entertaining people with funny quotes. criticiziing everybody but doing nothing.
Of NO value to the human race !!!!
"Say, anyone know what the rate of HIV infection happens to be among Catholics and other Christians? Just curious. No one talks about it."
Strong religious beliefs tend to correlate with high rates of teenage pregnancy, abortion, STDs, violence, murder, and family dysfunction.
This is true at many levels, but it is particularly obvious at the national level. Here, the US is by far the most religious among the rich western democracies, and it has absurdly high rates of gonorrhea, syphilis, and genital herpes compared to other rich nations.
www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article571206.ece
Mr. McHue,
I expect the trends would follow much of the normal population patterns, and that's based on simple correlation design.
There are a lot more people who consider themselves Christian or Catholic who do not follow the traditions or restrictions given by their respective churches, yet if questioned or assessed, they would probably be lumped into a group of "religious" irrespective of what type or what you might call "how devout" they are.
Consider the Pew research of 85% of the country considering themselves to be part of a religion or professing faith in a higher power. Well that it no way concludes they follow a particular orthodoxy to the letter.
I would expect the rates to be slightly lower, but not to a significant degree.
One thing you might be interested to know is that in 2000 there was a commotion over Catholic priests having a higher rate of deaths due to AIDS (ranging from seven to four times) than the general prevalence rate of the greater population. That may not have been your question or aim, but if we're going to consider the presumed deterrence of faith, I believe looking to a leadership within a faith is a good indication. (Let's throw around the behaviours of Ted Haggard while we're at it)
If Dawkins commanded the prestige of the Pope, your criticism might be warranted, but given the Pope's stature, it is definitely within anyone's prerogative to question Benedict's standings and policies.
Either way, your remark borders ad hominem and is certainly dishonest unless purely for rhetorical effect. Is Dawkins' criticism wrong in itself? His history or efforts shouldn't matter with the argument at hand.
And Dawkins is hardly alone in condeming the popes words Jinx, I take it you've asked everyone who thinks the Pope's words were moronic to task on what they have done for aids? Or at least made up stupid quotes for all of them?
Jinx, attributing quotes to people that they didn't make is dishonest.
As for sex, anal or vaginal sex with a condom has a risk of less than 0.1% per sex act. Even if you're fairly promiscuous, you're more likely to die from a car accident or obesity.
The Pope's position in this matter, as well as his silence on other deadly lifestyle choices, is not just irresponsible, it is reprehensible, immoral, and evil. The Catholic church isn't "pro-life", it is pro-death and pro-suffering.
Ah Jinx, you will be pleased to know that Dawkins was actually misquoted.
What he actually said was "The Pope is either stupid, ignorant or wicked."
Jinx, teaching abstinence and teaching safe sex are not mutually exclusive. You can teach people that they should try to abstain from sex and also teach them that if they feel they absolutely have to have sex, they should use a condom.
When you teach abstinence only while claiming condoms are ineffective; those that fail to abstain (and there will be more than a few), are in more danger because they don't take the precaution of using a condom.
Lu, Brooke
Thanks for reading. But it's not about being nice, it's about making a rational decision about a public figures actual importance. There is nothing inherent in being a leader of a religion that makes a person a medical expert, and to expect expert medical advice from such a source is a bit illogical. That's probably a more useful message than arguing issue by issue. Which I did not make as clear as I should have.
What the pope fails to understand is that while many profess to follow the church and its teachings, in reality they don't.
It has been that way for a thousand years or more.
Elizabeth Margareta Griffith
What the Pope said is tantamount to genocide. People will die, because he told them not to use condoms.
But you would much rather masturbate about how "reactionary" atheists are than consider that religious leaders' words have consequences for their followers.
Mike says: "Jinx, attributing quotes to people that they didn't make is dishonest."
Sometimes. Other times it's satire.
Now, wouldn't you agree that calling someone stupid when they obviously are not is dishonest? Or ignorant when they obviously are not? Or wicked when they obviously are not?
The key word here being "obviously". What the Pope said was obviously wrong.
Dawkins' words were harsh, but no less harsh than what may happen to those who follow the Pope's advice.
Jinx, the Pope's statements contradict established facts. That means that the pope is either ignorant of the facts, doesn't understand them, or deliberately ignores them.
Whatever the source of the Pope's error, his position on this and many other issues is an offense to human dignity and the value of human life. The Pope's and the Vatican's conduct and their theology are intrinsically immoral and evil and should be condemned clearly.
Elizabeth,
The issue then is whether or not he should be making comments like this at all, if he is indeed ignorant about medical issues. The Pope should be held accountable for his actions counsidering that so many people see him as having a direct channel to god. I'm not anti-Pope, I'm just anti-making_comments_that_could_lead_to_thousands_of_deaths.
The Pope is right. People who think using condoms will protect them from AIDS while they continue to sexually misbehave will cause AIDS to spread because condoms give them a false sense of security. A blockhead like Dawkins either doesn't get that or he's just trying to twist peoples' words to bash Christianity. It's similar to how people like him just assume that millions of women who can't get abortions will automatically reach for a coat hanger. He sells everybody short, assuming they're all as immoral as he is. Without the endorsement of condoms maybe a lot of people will clean up their act, and without abortion being so routine babies might get a chance to live to say "Merry Christmas Mom, I love you."
Dawkins is a jerk.
TAKE ONE TO KNOW ONE.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!