Box Turtle Bulletin

Box Turtle BulletinNews, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
This article can be found at:
Latest Posts

Pope: gay hustlers can use condoms

Timothy Kincaid

November 20th, 2010

This is just bizarre: (bloomburg)

Pope Benedict XVI has opened the door on the previously taboo subject of condoms as a way to fight HIV, saying male prostitutes who use condoms may be beginning to act responsibly. It’s a stunning comment for a pontiff who has blamed condoms for making the AIDS crisis worse.

Benedict said that condoms are not a moral solution to stopping AIDS. But he said in some cases, such as for male prostitutes, their use could represent a first step in assuming moral responsibility “in the intention of reducing the risk of infection.”

It appears that Papa Ratzi’s logic is that by using condoms, male prostitutes are not really blocking procreation, unlike heterosexuals who use condoms. He appears to remain opposed to condom use for married heterosexuals in cases in which one party is infected with HIV.

I understand the thinking; I just can’t wrap my head around the morality. Yet, I accept it as perhaps a step in the right direction, a tiny inclination towards placing the good of the people above the Church’s somewhat arbitrary opposition to a piece of latex.

Comments

POST COMMENT | COMMENT RSS 2.0

John in the Bay Area
November 20th, 2010 | LINK

Of all groups to single out for an exception, he chose male prostitutes. Picking this particular group may say far more about Ratzinger than the Catholic Church’s attitude towards condom usage.

Candace
November 20th, 2010 | LINK

This Pope’s thinking is s anachronistic and bizzare that anything short of sending us all to Gaywitz is a step in the right direction.

MarcusT
November 20th, 2010 | LINK

Here’s an article with his comments in full: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11804798

As far as I can tell, he’s saying that if a male prostitute uses a condom, he (the prostitute) is taking the first step towards a “more human way of living sexuality” (quoted from the article).

Overall, it sounds from the excerpt like he thinks a condom in this case would be better than no condom, but that people are using condoms as some kind of substitute for reforming sexuality as a whole.

EZam
November 20th, 2010 | LINK

What if the male prostitute is doing a woman?

Jonathan
November 21st, 2010 | LINK

Well, the man’s a good academic. You’ve got to give him that. Well developed, internally consistent, massively thorough theory of ethics he’s got there.

And as long as he hides in crowds of people that love him and his very own city-state, he can keep pretending that theory is an accurate description of real life.

lurker
November 21st, 2010 | LINK

I wonder how many gay male prostitutes there actually are who would NOT use a condom before because of the church’s prohibition on condoms . . . but who will now change their behavior ‘cuz of this statement.

Methinks not many.

I guess they’ll have one less thing to bring to confession, but it seems pretty minor in comparison with all of their myriad of other “offences”

Jafuf
November 21st, 2010 | LINK

I guess he’s just saying it’s OK for members of his own personal ‘stable’ of male prostitutes to use them so he doesn’t run the risk of getting AIDs himself.

darkmoonman
November 21st, 2010 | LINK

::sarcasm:: Wow, that is such a relief. I’d never do anything not sanctioned 100% by the wise & worldly Pope.

gar
November 21st, 2010 | LINK

Welcomed, I suppose, but so bizarre on so many levels. . .

Steve in Colorado
November 21st, 2010 | LINK

My initial reaction is to give credit when credit is due. Yes, it’s a baby step in the right direction. Despite that, I don’t see an substantive change in the Catholic Church’s teaching on homosexuality and sex (in general) in my lifetime. If I remember my Catholic catechism correctly, the church believes that the only purpose of sex is for procreation. Period. So be it that the world is overpopulated and that we are destroying this planet. So be it that humans are suffering from the effects of overpopulation. As long as it is physiological impossible for gay sex to result in a child the church will always view gay people as degenerates and lower life forms—even though gay people are not contributing to world overpopulation.

RobNYNY1957
November 21st, 2010 | LINK

How long before the Primate of Rome lands a lucrative endorsement deal with Trojan?

Fg68at
November 21st, 2010 | LINK

Oh. The “gay hustler”/”male prostitutes” is not only in German, it is also in English.

But from where it comes? I can not beliefe, that the Pope has spoken primaly about gay hustler. And all original citation i have read, there is nothing about this. There are only prostitutes.

Sadly i can only sort german news on date in Google News.

MarcusT
November 21st, 2010 | LINK

So, this gets even more confusing.

http://blogs.reuters.com/faithworld/2010/11/21/grammar-experts-needed-for-pope-comment-on-condoms/

Apparently it’s not even clear whether he was talking about male or female prostitutes.

Mark F.
November 21st, 2010 | LINK

Well, considering that anal sex can’t ever result in children anyway, you aren’t making what is already said to be a bad sin any worse by using a condom. Seems logical.

Adam
November 22nd, 2010 | LINK

@Mark F.

Except if the reports that the Pope specifically singled out male prostitutes are accurate, then it is not logical, because it seems to assume that female prositutes do not engage in anal sex with their clients.

Or possibly it assumes that female prostitutes don’t get HIV.

Whatever, I have trouble calling this position “logical” insofar as it is limited to male prostitutes.

Aeval
November 22nd, 2010 | LINK

The inconsistency of religion:

Me: “If I did not know about God and sin, would I go to hell?”
Priest: “No, not if you did not know.” Me: “Then why did you tell me?”

God is not religious:

“If there is a God, atheism must seem to Him as less of an insult than religion.”

-Edmond de Goncourt

Nathan
November 22nd, 2010 | LINK

Does nobody else get the impression that this is merely the RCC’s attempt to link the concepts of ‘gay’ and ‘condoms’ to further demonize both of them? This just seems like the same hypocritical posturing the RCC used when accused of harboring, protecting (and assisting!) child-rapist priests, by diverting attention to the RCC’s ‘gay priest’ issue.

It’s was a diversion, nothing more. And the RCC and its Nazi-youth Pope are just trying the same propaganda tactic, to link ‘gay’ with ‘AIDS’ and ‘condoms’.

BobN
November 22nd, 2010 | LINK

However weird you think Catholic theology is and however incalcitrant this Pope is on matters of sexuality, this is an important step. No organization has done more to prevent condom distribution than the Catholic Church. Besides removing an obstacle to condom distribution worldwide for male prostitutes, this opens the door to allowing ANY condom distribution. If some of the rubbers intended for male prostitutes happen to find their way into the hands of female prostitutes, well, gosh, I’m sure the distributors didn’t mean for that to happen. Wink, wink, nudge, nudge.

Mark F.
November 22nd, 2010 | LINK

@Adam

I don’t think the pope wants to actually say “anal sex.” So saying “male prostitute” makes people think “anal sex.”

Name: Mark
November 23rd, 2010 | LINK

Fr John’s seeing this condom use as not aggravating an already gravely immoral situation – therefore merely a prevention of further disorder ; bearing no laudible credit whatsoever…a neutralising of aggravation is not direct moral agency – like kicking a cat into the road but waiting till the bus passes rather than kicking it under it.

Mark F.
November 23rd, 2010 | LINK

The Vatican is now saying that using a condom is still not moral, but it’s less immoral than having unprotected sex and transmitting HIV.

Spartann
November 23rd, 2010 | LINK

From the pages of ‘The Telegraph’, we learn today that a spokesman for Pope Benedict XVI has confirmed that the pontiff’s remarks were meant to cover women and transsexuals as well. A spokesman for His Holiness reported how he asked the pope if there was a serious distinction in the choice of male instead of female and he said “no”. The Pope further went on to say, “If it is a man, a woman or a transsexual who does it, we are always at the same point, which is the first step in responsibly avoiding passing on a grave risk to the other.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/vaticancityandholysee/8154176/Pope-women-as-well-as-men-can-use-condoms.html

Hey coming from the Pope it’s a start…and shouldn’t that be the message all of society acknowledges instead????

Richard Rush
November 24th, 2010 | LINK

Instead of endorsing the limited use of condoms, why didn’t the Pope just invoke the power of prayer? Well, probably for the same reason that he travels around in public protected by bulletproof glass.

Nothing says “faith in God” quite like the Popemobile.

Spartann
November 24th, 2010 | LINK

to Richard Rush…

A faith in God is not demonstrated by foolishly tossing one’s hands up…. but instead, knowing God will provide the impetus necessary to overcome any adversity………. In other words my friend, it means you’re given a choice….. Now it’s up to you to do the next right thing.

Priya Lynn
November 24th, 2010 | LINK

Right Spartann, because no religious person with faith in your god has ever failed to overcome any adversity.

TJ
November 24th, 2010 | LINK

WOW…So he really thinks that male hustlers are all gay. Stop thinking that all gay men go around giving it up the butt. I know a lot more str8 men and women that love to give band receive up the butt then gay men. You must first be educated on the sexual practices of humans before making a stupid statement like that. Wake up people I think your Antichrist is ahead of the churches and will say anything to start violence and chaos. Live and let live and leave the poor alter boys/girls alone.

Spartann
November 25th, 2010 | LINK

to Priya Lynn…

True I feel at times my understanding of God makes my relationship with him extremely personal. However, it’s ridiculous for any one to suggest God only belongs to one person. Having said that,,,, you need to read my initial comment above. In it you’ll find where I point out how God presents the best method for problem solving, not the outcome…. The end result always depends on the way any individual applies the Lord’s principles.

Better luck next time Lynnie

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.