HIV-positive , should I use a condom with girlfriend???

[deep]

One priest told him no, and the other said it was a question of conscience.

Vatican newspaper condemns ‘shameful’ expose of fake confessions

By John Thavis
1/30/2007
Catholic News Service

VATICAN CITY (CNS) – The Vatican newspaper denounced an Italian journalist who posed as a penitent and confessed fake sins in order to write an expose on the sacrament of reconciliation.

"Fake confessions in search of a shameful scoop," the newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, headlined a commentary condemning the cover story of L'Espresso magazine, one of the country's leading weeklies.

"Shame! There is no other word to express our distress toward an operation that was disgusting, worthless, disrespectful and particularly offensive," the newspaper said.

The commentary said the article had exploited the good faith of confessors and offended the religious sentiments of millions of people.

"It was a sacrilege, because it violated the sacred space in which a self-recognized sinner asks intimately to receive God's merciful love," it said.

The reporter made his false confessions to 24 different priests in five Italian cities, including Rome. The magazine said the idea was to see how priests handle difficult pastoral situations and whether they followed the strict norms laid out by church teaching.

The reporter, for example, told two priests he was HIV-positive and wondered whether he should use a condom when having sexual relations with his girlfriend. One told him no, and the other said it was a question of conscience, the magazine reported.

More than once, the magazine said, priests gave quite different advice on his supposed "sins," which included matters relating to homosexuality, divorce, stem-cell research, euthanasia and prostitution.

One issue that found unanimous condemnation by confessors was abortion, the magazine said.

 

[UberBeaver]

I think it's rather awful advice, but I also think it's rather awful that the journalist went into confessionals, which is considered a sacred sacrement, and made shit up so he could write a story.

 

[deep]

i agree with both statement
to certain degrees

What if it was a school teacher or councilor, giving the same advice?

 

[redkat]

The journalist disgusts me. I like or did when I was a practicing Catholic that there were more liberal priests. Some diversity in the priesthood is a good thing.

So the journalist was looking for animatronic priests who all quoted Vatican doctrine word for word...

 

[UberBeaver]

i agree with both statement
to certain degrees

What if it was a school teacher or councilor, giving the same advice?

If a teacher or a councilor was giving out advice like that in a public school, they should be fired. It it were a private school, I feel they should be fired, but legally they can say what they believe. The priests that the reporter went after are guilty of giving shit advice, but they have every right to give it, it is their belief.

And doesn't everyone know the Catholic churches position on contraception? And pre-marital sex? This guy was just digging for a "shocking" story.

And they one who said it was a question of conscience, I think that's preist speak for, "I can't tell you 'yes', but I hope you're not so goddamn stupid that you can't figure it out yourself."

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

I think it's rather awful advice, but I also think it's rather awful that the journalist went into confessionals, which is considered a sacred sacrement, and made shit up so he could write a story.

I agree on both counts

And there certainly are more "liberal" priests who would give different advice- but it's a better story, and easier, to act as if there aren't. Doesn't make what the other priests said right, I don't agree with that and don't defend it.

 

[verte76]

As a practicing Catholic it upsets me that someone would do that with the Sacrament of Reconciliation. I think the first priest gave bad advice. I would tell anyone who's HIV positive to use a condom when having sex.

 

[MrPryck2U]

I'd say don't have sex. Why chance it ? I

 

[Vincent Vega]

I'd say don't have sex. Why chance it ? I

That's right. A condom wouldn't be safe enough either.
Don't risk it ever.

 

[adrball]

1. That this reporter made up fake confessions in order to obtain a story is just part of investigative journalism. Without this type of activity/behaviour, no scandles would ever be exposed.

2. That "One priest told him no, and the other said it was a question of conscience" is NOT newsworthy. Two people had conflicting views/responses - so fucking what. It should never have been published.

3. The vatican newspaper ought to have really ignored this trash.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

I wonder what the reporter would have said if a priest said "don't have sex"? Spin it to fit your slant or say that is good advice for someone who is HIV positive?

I'm sure there are many people who are HIV positive who do have sex, I don't know enough about it to say what and what number of precautions would be necessary to be the most effective. I have ideas based upon what I do know. Obviously abstinence would be the only guarantee.

 

[Irvine511]

I'd say don't have sex. Why chance it ? I

so an HIV positive person should be celibate for the rest of his/her life? are they allowed to have sex with other HIV positive people?

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

I just assumed we were talking about sex with someone who wasn't HIV positive, only because it wouldn't be an issue for two positive people.

 

[Irvine511]

That's right. A condom wouldn't be safe enough either.
Don't risk it ever.

this is demonstrably untrue and it's statements like this that lead to HIV-phobic attitudes that lead many to conceal their HIV status.

a condom, properly used, WILL protect you from transmission of the HIV virus, especially when used in conjunction with pre-ejaculative withdrawal.

i know HIV positive people who have never once infected another person, yet they maintain active and healthy sex lives. to further stigmatize such people is to induce unhealthy, secrative behavior that may actually lead to unsafe sex.

treat everybody -- until you're in a loving, monogamous relationship -- as if they are potentially HIV positive and use a condom, every single time; and if someone likes and respects you enough to reveal to you that they are HIV positive, don't punish them for it.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

this is demonstrably untrue and it's statements like this that lead to HIV-phobic attitudes that lead many to conceal their HIV status.

a condom, properly used, WILL protect you from transmission of the HIV virus, especially when used in conjunction with pre-ejaculative withdrawal.

i know HIV positive people who have never once infected another person, yet they maintain active and healthy sex lives. to further stigmatize such people is to induce unhealthy, secrative behavior that may actually lead to unsafe sex.

treat everybody -- until you're in a loving, monogamous relationship -- as if they are potentially HIV positive and use a condom, every single time; and if someone likes and respects you enough to reveal to you that they are HIV positive, don't punish them for it.

I agree with what you said about people who are HIV positive. I understand all that, and I would NEVER want to stigmatize anyone who is HIV positive or say they shouldn't have sex. That is entirely up to them and their partners. But condoms do also break, can be used incorrectly and that can cause pregnancy and other problems obviously. Maybe that's what Vincent was referring to, I don't know.

 

[vaz02]

The vatican should be ashamed of themselves for giving SHIT ADVICE on the HIV topic. The world will never progress when men in trusted positions give such terrible advice on this pandemic.

 

[Vincent Vega]

Yes, there are indeed cases in which condoms have little holes or something.
Even so quality control on condoms is very strict it is still a product of mass production.

At least you should tell your partner beforehand that you are HIV positive, so he or she could make a decission.
It is a life threatening disease, and still not curable.

It's not stigmatisation, it's just my believe that one should never risk to infect someone with such a disease in any way, doesn't matter how safe it seems to be.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

The vatican should be ashamed of themselves for giving SHIT ADVICE on the HIV topic. The world will never progress when men in trusted positions give such terrible advice on this epidemic.

But people should be going to qualified doctors for advice on HIV, not to priests and/or The Vatican. That doesn't at all negate of course that they shouldn't be telling people not to use condoms if they have HIV.

I agree, people should always tell someone they might be sexually involved with if they are HIV positive. I understand as well as I can the personal pain and fears and stigma and so much more that must be involved-but once you involve another person it's just the right and responsible thing to do.

 

[Irvine511]

At least you should tell your partner beforehand that you are HIV positive, so he or she could make a decission.
It is a life threatening disease, and still not curable.

this i agree with.

It's not stigmatisation, it's just my believe that one should never risk to infect someone with such a disease in any way, doesn't matter how safe it seems to be.

if you would have sex with someone of unknown status but then turn around and not have sex with them the minute they tell you they were positive, then it is stigmatization. you will make them regret they ever disclosed their status to you, and it will make them less likely to disclose it in the future if the result of disclosure is rejection.

believe me, i understand the fear. believe me.

but it's also an irrational one -- firstly, we should all be using condoms all of the time with new partners until a point in the relationship has been reached where there is mutual trust, disclosure, honesty, and monogamy. and irregardless, condoms work. can they break? yes, it is possible, but the chances are very, very low when used properly.

many people don't know how to use a condom properly, or how to take it off properly, or the fact that it's probably a good idea to both use a condom and to withdraw before ejaculation.

 

[Vincent Vega]

if you would have sex with someone of unknown status but then turn around and not have sex with them the minute they tell you they were positive, then it is stigmatization. you will make them regret they ever disclosed their status to you, and it will make them less likely to disclose it in the future if the result of disclosure is rejection.

believe me, i understand the fear. believe me.

but it's also an irrational one -- firstly, we should all be using condoms all of the time with new partners until a point in the relationship has been reached where there is mutual trust, disclosure, honesty, and monogamy. and irregardless, condoms work. can they break? yes, it is possible, but the chances are very, very low when used properly.

many people don't know how to use a condom properly, or how to take it off properly, or the fact that it's probably a good idea to both use a condom and to withdraw before ejaculation.

I think if she told me afterwards, I would feel cheated.
It's not a cold or a flu we are talking about, but HIV.

So, if she was knowingly carrying a potentially deadly disease, but didn't tell me beforehand, I would be very much disappointed. And mad.

I can understand she would feel very disappointed, too, but when it comes to my health (she risked) I would like to be able to - or allowed to - make my choice whether having sex with her again, or not.

Of course the risk is low if you're using a condom, but there still is some risk left, like a broken condom or even blood, if something unforseen happened.

So I don't think I have to feel guilty about making a decision considering my health/life, when she decided to hide some very serious fact in her own favour.

 

[Irvine511]

I think if she told me afterwards, I would feel cheated.
It's not a cold or a flu we are talking about, but HIV.

So, if she was knowingly carrying a potentially deadly disease, but didn't tell me beforehand, I would be very much disappointed. And mad.

I can understand she would feel very disappointed, too, but when it comes to my health (she risked) I would like to be able to - or allowed to - make my choice whether having sex with her again, or not.

Of course the risk is low if you're using a condom, but there still is some risk left, like a broken condom or even blood, if something unforseen happened.

So I don't think I have to feel guilty about making a decision considering my health/life, when she decided to hide some very serious fact in her own favour.

so is it your responsibility to ask, or her responsibility to tell?

why should you assume she isn't positive?

 

[Vincent Vega]

Well, if she knows it, and she knows of the dangers, why is it my responsibility to ask?
I don't understand that?
You can't delegate the responsibilty to the next person.
If I had to ask her, wouldn't she have to ask me?

I agree with you, always be considerate of it and use condoms, especially if you don't want children as well. But if she knows about it, she shouldn't hide it.

I don't really get why I am responsible to ask, but she isn't responsible to tell me.

 

[Angela Harlem]

Ohmygod why are people so dumb???
I'm not referring to anyone here, but why be so horrified at what the journalist did? LOOK at what it revealed! And yet, the church defends itself. The church is an institution of questionable integrity. This proves not only that, but the sheer stupidity of the Roman Catholic Church. How is it anything but sincere idiocy to suggest someone with an STD refrain from using a condom is beyond me.

 

[Vincent Vega]

Since the reporter was asking about having sex with his girlfriend, the proper answer should have been: "No sex before marriage!"
Otherwise it's a sin.

 

[Irvine511]

Well, if she knows it, and she knows of the dangers, why is it my responsibility to ask?
I don't understand that?
You can't delegate the responsibilty to the next person.
If I had to ask her, wouldn't she have to ask me?

I agree with you, always be considerate of it and use condoms, especially if you don't want children as well. But if she knows about it, she shouldn't hide it.

I don't really get why I am responsible to ask, but she isn't responsible to tell me.

why is it her responsibility to disclose? shouldn't you know the dangers of having sex? having sex is a calculated risk -- the chances of something bad happening are low, the activity itself is lots of fun, so one takes precautions but knows that risk is never totally absent (like flying in an airplane).

also ... what if she doesn't know?

utimately, i think both partners have a responsibility to be honest with one another. one should always ask, and one should always tell.

but people lie. so use a condom. and don't be a liar.

 

[Liesje]

if you would have sex with someone of unknown status but then turn around and not have sex with them the minute they tell you they were positive, then it is stigmatization.

[....]

firstly, we should all be using condoms all of the time with new partners until a point in the relationship has been reached where there is mutual trust, disclosure, honesty, and monogamy.

I disagree about the stigmatization thing. It's a personal choice, really, but honesty, trust, and disclosure were/are always necessary for me in a relationship before sex, not after. If I was in a relationship that progressed as far as sex and then found out my partner never told me about an STD (not just HIV), I'd be incredibly pissed and feel cheated by his dishonesty. Then if he accused me of stigmatizing against HIV+ people, I'd probably go into a rage. It's not just the HIV that would make me decide not to sleep with someone, it's the fact that that person knowingly put my life at risk and chose not to tell me. I've nothing against HIV+ people and it's not my business to judge them, but IMO not being honest in a serious relationship is a HUGE problem, before it gets to the point of sex, regardless of whether either partner has an STD. Luckily, I've avoided this situation since I made a choice to always ask and be honest before it's too late. Before I got serious with my now-husband, I went to the doc and he went to the doc, even though we both knew we didn't have any STDs. To me it's just not right to keep anything important hidden from the person you're committing your life to.

But anyway, I totally agree w/ Mrs. S. that priests would never be my first choice of people to ask about sexual health advice. I would expect than any priest who really cared would either make a point of learning the facts to give out, or say he is not in a position to give the proper advice and refer the person to a doctor or health counsellor.

 

[Irvine511]

i'm sorry, but you're doing a terrible thing to an HIV positive person if you rejected them when they disclose, but have sex with them when they don't. that inspires sneaky, devious behavior, and that can't be a good thing.

i think we can all agree that disclosure is the best policy, but punishment for disclosure is something else.

 

[Vincent Vega]

Like I said, since it's concerning my life, and the other person is putting this to risk, I think it's my right to be disappointed, pissed, and to decide not to have sex ever again.

Of course it's best to ask before, or visit the doctor.
But still, in my opinion the person having HIV, or any other STD, is responsible to tell if I forgot to ask.

It is a life threatening disease, it is putting my life into danger, so I claim every right for myself to behave egoistic or whatever.
But if she didn't tell me, she cheated on me.
My feelings would be hurt as well. She didn't seem to care about that.
She didn't care to tell me, so I don't think my decision to refuse any sexual contact with her will be the reason for her to not tell her next partner.

If I decided to have sex with her after I got to know after her disease, ok.
If she told me afterwards and I could come to the conclusion to do it again, ok.
If I decided not to take the risk, before or after she told me, ok.
There is no right of having sex. But there is the right of choice.
And there is the responsibility of the person, that knows that he or she is carrying a dangerous disease to tell others before, so that they can make a decision.
I don't think the responsiblity lies by the other person.

 

[Liesje]

i'm sorry, but you're doing a terrible thing to an HIV positive person if you rejected them when they disclose, but have sex with them when they don't. that inspires sneaky, devious behavior, and that can't be a good thing.

i think we can all agree that disclosure is the best policy, but punishment for disclosure is something else.

But I'd never have sex with someone before I asked and also disclosed about myself. I accept that it's MY responsibility to set my own standards and MY responsibility to ask because I care. If he were to lie, then I don't see how I'm the bad one if I get pissed. He'd be doing the terrible thing by lying about something so serious. I would hope he would disclose, but I wouldn't expect it. I never expect anything, which is why I ask. If he gets angry that I ask, then we wouldn't make good partners anyway, sex or no sex. I believe in honesty in general, even beyond the scope of sex, so if someone is lying to be about their health, I can't trust him in general. I can't accept that it's unfair to be honest and get health checks before entering into a serious, sexual relationship. Those are my personal standards. I don't expect others to feel the same, but I know that this is what is right for me and my health. If someone can't accept my personal standards and boundaries, we're not have sex, end of story. I'm not taking a gamble with my life and the lives of my future children for someone who would lie to me.

It's not just about HIV, but being open and honest. These are serious health issues. I'd feel the same way if I were asking my partner if he had a curable STD. If I found out he lied, it would be over, done. Lying is too disrespectful to simply be excused out of pity.

All my life I've been taught to make my own personal choices ahead of time and do my best to adhere to my own standards. I don't think it's fair to expect me not to ask or value honesty because it might hurt someone's feelings.

 

[yolland]

It must be very difficult for someone who has any STD, especially AIDS, to feel comfortable revealing that to a partner, particularly if you're not talking about the sort of relationship where you're involved for a long time before you start having sex. I'd imagine the reality is many, if not most, people would reject you in rather short order upon learning that. I can understand why someone would feel very, very reluctant to divulge it early on in a relationship. Not that I can't understand Lies' and Vincent's perspective at the same time...but...I wonder how likely most people would really be to give someone HIV-positive a chance if they learned about that before they were sure this was someone they could see themselves sticking with for a long, long time. Which realistically, most people nowadays aren't accustomed to waiting until that point to start having sex.