DOH says no to condoms in population control drive


The Philippine Star 01/24/2005

Health officials in this mostly Roman Catholic country said yesterday they would not endorse the use of condoms to stem the country’s galloping population growth.

Health Secretary Manuel Dayrit said in a statement that "we don’t promote it as a regular type of contraceptive," despite condoms’ effectiveness in preventing the spread of sexually transmitted diseases like HIV/AIDS.

The department, which coordinates the country’s population control program, limits itself to presenting married couples with options while actively promoting "natural family planning" without the use of contraceptives.

Dayrit remarked that the government’s population control program was separate from its AIDS prevention program, which acknowledges that condoms prevent the spread of the condition while mostly leaving the distribution of condoms to non-governmental groups.

A total of 2,176 people in the Philippines are confirmed to have been infected with AIDS but experts warn that the actual figure could be much higher.

The Philippines, with a population of 84 million people, has a population growth rate of 2.3 percent, one of the highest in the world.

President Arroyo said last year that she intends to bring the rate down to 1.9 percent but did not explain how this would be done.

Business groups and economists have warned that the growing population poses major risks to the country but Arroyo, a devout Catholic, has largely refused to endorse artificial contraceptives.

This is widely seen as a concession to the Catholic church which counts most Filipinos as its followers. The church, which disallows the use of contraceptives, is known to campaign against officials who promote their use. — AFP

Catholic Sex

In a book published in 1995, Father Andrew Greeley says surveys reveal that Catholics have sex more often, are more playful in their sex lives, and enjoy sex more than non-Catholics.

If those surveys are correct, they expose widespread hypocrisy among Catholics and a failure of the Church's "moral" teachings to influence most of them.

Despite Greeley's descriptions of sex-positive behavior, Catholic sexual doctrines are still extremely repressive. The Church denounces contraceptives, premarital sex, homosexuality, masturbation, abortion, artificial insemination, and voluntary sterilization. It also demands lifelong celibacy for priests, nuns, and monks - and all others who never marry.

Occasionally, the Church even shows signs of its old opposition to so-called "bad thoughts" about sex (i.e., thoughts associating sex with pleasure), and to marital acts of sexual intercourse engaged in for pleasure rather than procreation. One example is when the current pope, John Paul II, urged husbands "not to commit adultery with their wives by desiring sex for its mere pleasure and the satisfaction of instinct."

Commit adultery with their wives? His nonsensical comment deserves the response one person gave to the idea of the pope, a lifelong celibate, issuing directives about sex: "You no playa the game, you no makea the rules."

Clearly, the Church's teachings could hardly be more sexually repressive. And if one remembers the "forbidden fruit" effect, which Catholic leaders apparently haven't learned from their own Bible, it shouldn't be surprising that the sexual behavior of so many Catholics is inconsistent with those teachings.

As shown in Edith Simon's book on the history of the Knights Templars, the same outcome occurred in Catholic history. She reports that when Catholic philosophy dominated Western society in the Middle Ages, the Church's extremely repressive sexual doctrines led to an obsession about sex.

Studies of modern societies also reveal serious problems caused by repressive sexual teachings, such as those espoused by the Catholic Church. And persons who take the teachings most seriously are the ones who suffer the most.

For instance, in the book Religion May Be Hazardous to Your Health, psychiatrist Eli S. Chesen denounces the traditional Christian sexual ethic. He says it "shows up clinically in vast numbers of cases of impotence and frigidity, which usually involve people who learned as children that sex is dirty and not to be enjoyed."

An article on "Sexual Desire" in the July 6, 1992 issue of U.S. News identifies more problems: "Therapists confirm that children who learn that sex is dirty or evil are especially prone to sexual desire disorders later in life." The article blames strict religious environments as a frequent source of such attitudes. And it says the attitudes can lead to various forms of deviant and sometimes antisocial sexual behavior.

In his book Crime and Immorality in the Catholic Church, ex-priest Emmett McLoughlin writes that some conscientious persons who take to heart the Catholic Church's sexual doctrines "become introverts, develop a variety of neurotic disorders, and may land in a sanatorium or an insane asylum." He warns that "the Church's sexual code is not only frustrating but . . . it unbalances people mentally."

On the other hand, Catholics who don't take the teachings seriously usually become hypocrites. This is seen in surveys showing that Catholics use birth control and resort to abortion as often as Protestants.

Of course, the whole subject of sex leaves many Catholics in a difficult dilemma. For example, Anne Biezanek wrote in the New York Times: "The Catholic wife is under great pressure. . . . If she uses contraceptives, she is called wicked by her parish priest. If she follows the advice of her priest and refrains from sexual intercourse, she is called cold by her husband. If she doesn’t take steps, she is called mad by society at large."

In his 1949 treatise The Catholic Church and the Sex Problem: The Stupidity, Futility and Insolence of Its Ethic, former priest Joseph McCabe wisely argued for replacing the Catholic sexual ethic with a scientific and humanistic one. This new ethic would view sex as "in itself as normal a pleasure of life as wine or art but . . . subject to a restraining in certain conditions because of consequences. . . ." Amen.

The evidence is overwhelming: Catholic sexual teachings are inconsistent with human nature and produce sorrow, guilt, and hypocrisy. Those results should induce Greeley and other Catholic leaders to advocate that the Church's sexual doctrines be brought out of the Dark Ages and into conformity with modern scientific knowledge.

"....the Church's sexual doctrines be brought out of the Dark Ages and into conformity with modern scientific knowledge." ...that it's ok to have sex whenever and whoever you want for pleasure, because with scientific knowledge, you have abortion pills, and better contraceptions/abortion.....make it OK to have sex? I am conservative, and I think that sex should be between two people in love under marriage. Would you want a wife who's been with more guys more than the number of times you brush your teeth? Say you are walking with your wife, and a guy sees you and says "hey, does she still do that thing with the tongue?"

"modern scientific knowledge" has so much to offer, huh? why is it that we have all these problems and STDs in "modern" times.

aargh! it's gonna take the Church far longer than the Galileo Incident to recognize its error regarding the population issue...

most especially here in the Philippines.

catholics no to condoms? that means more babies.

ahhh another example of how the catholic church is keeping the country in the middle ages. I think the best way to battle the population growth rate is to educate people, the more educated population the growth rate will definately go down.

Sometimes, the church can be dumber than the dumbest gov't official, I swear..LOL

funny how all that ails the Philippines boils down to lack of education huh? and how in the agenda of the current P!GMA, education is not in her priority, like how environment protection is not priority at the national level... what the...!

The people should control themselves. In Catholicism, s3x should be done only by an husband and wife.

yup yup. Not only in catholism, but everyone should.

"ahhh another example of how the catholic church is keeping the country in the middle ages."--RL33

So the somewhat "closed sex" in the middle ages is wrong? because now that it is "modern"?

Whoa...

Wow you've opened my mind your totally right i was wrong, horray for over population and ignorance. Hey leave it to god right? he will solve everything...sooner or later.

damn straight you're wrong. Unless you horray for all the STD's and dead fetuses.

I agree with Viet Punk

If you ask me, the DOH decision reflects the beliefs of the Roman Catholic church (read: there is NO separation of church and state on this one)...

no offense to catholic, but as long as Cardinal Sin involve himself with politics, i don't think democracy and seperation of state and church is relevant. i think this is the only times i really miss marcos.

Cardinal Sin is no longer the Archibishop of Manila since 2003.

Gaudencio Rosales is the current Manila Archibishop.

but think of all that time since the collapse of marcos and his part starting with cory's regime. only until barely two years ago did he get out. and remember his spoof with mitra in the nineties

This is a much better line...

LOl i seriously hope u saw through my sarcasm. And since when was i talking about abortions??? as for stds arent they prevented (to point) by condoms and by educating ppl as i suggested?

makalumang pananaw
pulitika
paghihiwalay ng estado at simbahan

ano ang kaugnayan ng bawat isa?

Dahil nga sa kapos sa kaalaman ang nakararaming mamamayan, ang kanilang pananaw ay nakapako pa rin sa pagtuturing sa mga anak bilang kayamanan. At hindi nga sila nalalayo sapagkat, sa mga panahong maaari nang ipaalila ang kanilang mga anak ay papatigilin na ito sa pag-aaral at dadalhin sa mga lungsod upang maging katulong.

Lahat ng pulitiko ay hindi magagawang salungatin ang simbahan sapagkat marami pa rin sa mga Filipino ang Katoliko na naniniwala at nahahatak ng mga pari o kura paroko o ng kahit sino pa mang pinuno ng iba't-ibang simbahan. Kung sasalungat ang isang pulitikong nakaupo sa posisyon, aba, sayang ng boto ng isang parokya para sa susunod na eleksyon, hindi ba?

Kaya habang may botanteng bahagi ng isang parokya, hindi mawawalay ang estado sa simbahan. At habang hindi nababago ang pananaw ng nakararami patuloy na dadami ang Filipino sa Pilipinas.

no, i hope YOU saw MY sarcasm. You are still wrong. yes they are preventable, don't have sex with just anyone you see for pleasure. But you can do all the educating. The way i see it, people are still going to take the risk even if they know the potential danger. You're wrong. I'm right. Shut it.

ohhh now your the ultimate judge of what is wrong or right...LOL, u do know i was talking about the "philippine" catholic church right ??? and education is not some instant cure all people are still gonna fu-k around (no $hit) thats thier choice. But its a start now that thier a little smarter ,now that they have more options in life and more to lose theyll be careful the next time.

Speaking of education, why don't you start. Did you not understand when i said shut it? as the years go by, education is growing, more people "know". Also the number of problems is growing. hahaha. now, shut it.

<IMG SRC="http://www.acclaimimages.com/_gallery/_SM/0006-0408-3016-3006_SM.jpg">

LOL i could just easily say im "right" so stfu, doesnt make your opinion better nor mine. As more people get educated they will learn to deal with these new problems duhhh , wait what does this have to do with the Phil catholic church??? hahaha

no YOU stfu. Go get educated and find a cure for AIDS, then come back here. Again, stfu.

$hit, it's up to the people to protect themselves from contracting STDs or getting pregnant...who gives a flying fu-k if the government endorses condoms or not? does that mean they shouldn't use it them? what would they rather have, abortions and more AIDS cases? stupid concession IMO...people are going to have sex no matter what, it's completely natural to

HAHAHAHAHHAHA WEAK!!!!!!! is telling me to shut up and resorting to personal attacks the best u can do??? now who needs an education again LOL

By posting the above post, is that a really strong come back? again, YOU need an education. Have you even graduated from hs? suprise me with your e"du-ma"cion. hahaha

Nope im still in elementary school ...hahaha strong comeback??im not even trying ur the one coming up with all the childish stuff ("no u shut up im right"LOL)..edumacion??? sarcasm again right hahahaha take that $hit outta here

guys, guys enough with the fighting. Lets try to keep filipino chat peaceful.

Q: WHAT FOR YOU IS SEXUAL PERVERSION?

A: It is a religious disease, sexual perversion.... It is a religious disease. All the religions of the world are responsible for it because first they started forcing celibacy on people, which is unnatural. Unless you are impotent, you cannot be celibate. And the strangest thing is: not a single impotent person has become enlightened in the whole history of man.
That means that all these people ― Gautam Buddha, Jesus Christ, Krishna ― all these people were more sexual than ordinary people. It is their over-sexual energy that does not feel contented with women and children and the ordinary, mundane world. After all this experience they are still too full of energy and they want to go on some higher quest. All these people are over sexual.
No impotent person has contributed anything to the world, because he cannot be creative. His basic creative energy, sex energy, is missing. Telling people to be celibate and then putting monks in one place, in one monastery and putting nuns into another place, and not allowing men and women to meet, you are creating the situation for homosexuality. So Catholics are responsible, Hindus are responsible, Buddhists are responsible ― they are creating the situation.

Please don't talk about Jesus that way.

wow, you're in elementary? impressive. I find this word funny: E"du ma"cion you . hahaha. I think you might need some help there hahaha.

::EDIT:: respond to DaiNamViet
Wow you talked to Jesus AND Buddha? And you asked if they were more perverted than "ordinary" people? But really, it's not your quote, but you obviously agree with it to put it up. Written by an atheist in an attempt to denounce all religions, I assume.

^ that was not my quote, just something related to religion

Well then that article is bull. Jesus can't be oversexual, because he is beyond/above human desires.

All sides should have their say..


That is possible...

Yes but they should keep it to themselves. I don't wanna hear all that mumbo jumbo aethist cr@p. I don't force my Catholic beliefs upon anybody else why should they force down their aethist views down our throats. Its always the Christians, there are Muslims and Hindus too but they are always targeting the Christians.

Yes but they should keep it to themselves. I don't wanna hear all that mumbo jumbo aethist cr@p. I don't force my Catholic beliefs upon anybody else why should they force down their aethist views down our throats. Its always the Christians, there are Muslims and Hindus too but they are always targeting the Christians.

Saving yourself for that certain special someone would be all good and nice but the bottom line here is that the church in the Philippines is not stopping people from having sex, well not the majority anyway. All it is really doing is hindering the government from being able to deal with the problem of its growing population. People need to be educated about the uses of contraceptives in the Philippines and the stigma along with it needs to be lifted.

yeah and u really believe that too huh hahaha. Wait u forgot to say "shut up im right" ???? how odd of u.

Yes u agree that "all side should have thier say" but then they should keep it to themselves??? shutting your ears (and saying u shut im right.. LOL) will not help the situation. Atheists annoy me as much as the next guy but thats the fisrt time ive heard anyone refer to thier views as "mumbo jumbo" lol.

stfu. there, happy?