So, I wonder what the Pope’s been up to lately…
March 19th, 2009Because, you know, the Pope never makes me cross.
First of all was the story of Jose Cardoso Sobrinho, the Archbishop of Recife’s decision to excommunicate a woman who helped her daughter get an abortion. The daughter was nine. She needed an abortion because her Catholic stepfather raped her. The rapist was not excommunicated. The Vatican supported all of this, so the only way these actions make any sense is if the Vatican considers abortion worse than raping a nine-year-old girl. And that nearly makes sense, except that the girl would probably have died in childbirth, so even if you consider her twin fÅ“tuses ‘people’ you still have to be pretty warped to expect her to die for the crime of being raped. (Warped, or Muslim.)
After that, the Vatican calmed down a little and celebrated International Women’s Day, by — I know, this has to be gold, doesn’t it? — by publishing an article asking the question “What in the 20th century did most to liberate Western women?” and reaching the rather brilliant conclusion that it was probably the invention of the washing machine. Not the right to work. Not women’s suffrage. Definitely a machine that makes cleaning clothes (which clearly is Women’s Work) easier. I mean, even if that’s pragmatically true (which it isn’t) don’t say so right after you’ve okayed raping small girls.
After that piece of light-hearted batshit whimsy, the Pope decided to refocus his efforts on Catholicism’s core competency: ruining innocent people’s lives with arbitrary and idiotic dogma. This time, it’s Africa’s turn. Speaking about the AIDS epidemic there, the Pope himself, not a lackey this time, said “the distribution of condoms… aggravates the problems”. The Telegraph have found themselves a priest to defend him — and let’s mention now that I’m only inferring he’s a priest from his photo. Nowhere do they bother to actually mention that he works for the Pope, because that might be a bit too much like declaring one’s interests for the mainstream media. Their priest, George Pitcher, rehashes the same old argument I’ve heard over and over again: “that the Church’s historic teaching that chastity outside marriage and fidelity within it would prevent the spread of killer diseases such as Aids”. And this is true, but alas irrelevant, because nobody is criticising that teaching. (At least, I’m not. At the moment.) What we are criticising is the Pope’s claim that distributing condoms will make the AIDS epidemic worse. This claim is demonstrably false. It turns out that if you grow up and go with the facts instead of just making shit up, you can actually make a difference and save some lives.
The problem I have with the Pope’s speech is not that he advocated abstinence: it is that he specifically lied about something that we know works. Even if nobody acts on his advice, if they believe the epidemiological claims that he makes then they will make bad decisions and people will die.
Tags for this article: Catholicism , Christianity , Pope , Vatican
[?][More Help]

March 19th, 2009 at 00:25
Furthermore: http://www.chickengirl.net/2009/03/18/no-just-no/
March 19th, 2009 at 00:59
I wish there was a ’share with literally everyone’ button.
March 19th, 2009 at 09:14
But the Pope is an eminent scientist, didn`t you know that? (Also, he`s infallible, so get out of that one!!!) However, the biggest laugh was in learning that “this is the first time that the Pope has used the word condom”. (I`m not making this up you know!!) As I said on Graham Nunn`s blog yesterday (http://creativeyear.wordpress.com) I sincerely hope he washed his lovely mouth out with soap and water and said three “Hail Mary”s afterwards!!!!!
March 19th, 2009 at 09:29
I`ll try again, for those who want the link. It`s creativeyear.wordpress.com and well worth a daily visit!! Sadly, Graham has decided that he will not be able to continue for the full year, which is not altogether surprising, as I have no idea how he comes up with new ideas every day (he didn`t have a “bank” to begin with, as he wanted to be topical wherever possible) nor how he can devote so much time to it when he has to earn a living!!! It`s been great fun while it lasted though, and, as Richard can attest, I have made one or two small contributions myself on occasion!!!!!
March 19th, 2009 at 09:30
I`m giving up!! What am I doing wrong?!!
March 19th, 2009 at 09:50
Sorry, I meant Andrew, not Richard!! I think I`d better go back to bed today and start again!!!
March 19th, 2009 at 10:50
I don’t want to appear rude, abusive and angry, but I am, so:
What an insufferable cunt
March 19th, 2009 at 10:59
Infallible? That’s pretty easy to get out of: the Vatican has ‘changed’ what he said.
Your mistake was applying the rules of logic and reality to the Vatican.
Oh, and Graham Nunn’s blog link: http://creativeyear.wordpress.com – easy.
March 19th, 2009 at 13:16
If you’re going to use Latin endings, shouldn’t that be foetÅ«s?
March 19th, 2009 at 13:16
No idea. I looked it up and trusted that.
Edit: I’ve put in the Anglicised ending; much safer.
March 19th, 2009 at 14:29
I see now. You make an “infallible” remark, and if it proves wrong it is later “amended” to become something else!! That`s REALLY clever!!! There`s an hilarious cartoon on “jesusandmo” today on this subject. See http://www.jesusandmo.net (Will THAT come up as a link I wonder?)
March 19th, 2009 at 14:41
Bingo!! – So what was I doing wrong before? Incidentally, does this mean that Il Papa will now admit that the “evidence” that the HIV virus could pass through condoms was entirely bogus, and that he was thus complicit in misleading millions of people and causing the deaths of many of them? What a slime-ball!!!
March 20th, 2009 at 09:34
“Nowhere do they bother to actually mention that he works for the Pope, because that might be a bit too much like declaring one’s interests for the mainstream media. Their priest, George Pitcher…”
George Pitcher is an Anglican vicar, as such doesn’t “work for” the Pope… (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Pitcher)
Nick
March 20th, 2009 at 10:54
I think The Who pretty much hit it on the head
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arvG9lVACr0&feature=PlayList&p=8AE24CB321CCCF54&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=38