November 24, 2010 ( – All theological arguments aside, it makes no sense to engage in sexual activity while one of the persons is infected with AIDS. To do so would be to endanger the life of the sexual partner.  To do so with a condom also endangers the life of the partner because condoms break, and because even when they don’t break they can’t possibly offer 100% protection against AIDS. It is Russian roulette.

Moreover the idea of promoting condoms in the battle against AIDS internationally is a very bad one. Why? Because it gives people a deadly false sense of security about promiscuous sex. They wrongly think it is ‘safe sex,’ and thus will highly likely contract venereal diseases and perhaps even HIV.

This is exactly why Pope Benedict stated, back in 2009, “One cannot overcome the problem (of the spread of AIDS) with the distribution of condoms. On the contrary, they increase the problem.” This set off a firestorm of criticism from the media and even political leaders.

However, the Pope got backing in his assessment from one of the world’s foremost AIDS researchers Edward C. Green, director of the AIDS Prevention Research Project at the Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies.

“The pope is correct,” said Green in an interview at the time, “or put it a better way, the best evidence we have supports the pope’s comments.”

“There is,” Green added, “a consistent association shown by our best studies, including the U.S.-funded ‘Demographic Health Surveys,’ between greater availability and use of condoms and higher (not lower) HIV-infection rates. This may be due in part to a phenomenon known as risk compensation, meaning that when one uses a risk-reduction ‘technology’ such as condoms, one often loses the benefit (reduction in risk) by ‘compensating’ or taking greater chances than one would take without the risk-reduction technology.” (see the full interview with Green here)


Commenting Guidelines

LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.