For some reason I cannot fathom, there is an OLD story from the Telegraph with the most misleading headline of all time that is currently floating around the Facebook walls of my friends. No clue why it’s popping up, and why people who I generally know to be reliably skeptical didn’t bother to read the timestamp before hitting the ‘Share’ button.
The story is supposedly about a “dramatic shift” that the Pope made with regard to the Vatican’s stance on condoms. I covered this story when it was actually news:
Come the fuck on, Ratzinger! Condoms are only appropriate in exceptional situations? Apparently in the Pope’s world view, it is better for a woman to become pregnant with a child she does not want and cannot afford to raise than it is for her to protect herself during sex. It’s better for a man to become inextricably yoked to another person for the rest of his life than it is for him to use a piece of latex.
And why is it a male prostitute?
Not all sex results in pregnancy (and I thank my lucky stars for that fact), but there’s always a chance. Many people want to have a child, for whatever reason, and are in a position to provide for it. Using condoms, unlike implants or hormone therapies or other intrusive forms of birth control, do not prevent people who want to have children from doing so. It is a simple technology that harms nobody (unless you count sperm, which I don’t).
Whatever claim to some kind of moral insight or authority that the Catholic Church pretends to have is repeatedly undermined by the ethical stupidity that is repeatedly on display from the Vatican.
The Pope deserves no cookies for saying that an HIV-infected (male) prostitute MIGHT be okay to use a condom. That’s not a “shift” in anything. That’s just him continuing to be a gaping asshole.
So today’s video is in honour of Pope Benedict XVI (seriously… 16? Get some new names going on, guys!):
A bit of humorous absurdity to balance out the totally-not-funny absurdity that is the internet today.
Like this article? Follow me on Twitter!
“Pope Benedict XVI (seriously… 16? Get some new names going on, guys!)”
There have been twelve who’ve taken the name ‘Pius’, but zero who have taken the name ‘Sanctimonius’. I think it’s about time some new pope told it like it is:-)
From day 1, I think he should have gone with “Sidious”
If you want to set yourself up as the Antipope, you may have to fight Charles Stross for the title: antipope.org
Well, to be fair, the Telegraph posts the current date/time at the top left corner of their page which can mislead the reader. Though that’s not why I made this mistake. I did that whole not-being-skeptical thing, my bad.
Just give it time. I bet they’ll retire the name after Benedict DCLXV.