MEA CULPA, MY BAD

This post is in reference to Monday’s post, “Will the Pope’s Pen Be Mightier than the Bullet?”

To begin, let me say that I am sorry about Monday’s blog. Perhaps that was a little irresponsible. To be honest I did not think anyone would buy the “Amour of Love Campaign” or the designer bulletproof vests with fashion accessories. I should have stuck with the initial urge to also include compassionate bullets. They are sanitary and would help cut down on infections from gun shot wounds. That, perhaps, would have done it. So, sorry and I have already gone to confession per Habemus Papem’s urging.

This false report was loosely based on an NPR segment about the Pope’s visit in Brazil. The news coverage was both skewed and consistent with most of the coverage that they Church in general receives. Be clear; I am not complaining about someone not agreeing with the Church but that there is no fair and impartial coverage of the real issues.

Take for example the issue of the free distribution of condoms. The only part of the Church’s message that got through (or ever gets through) is, “DON’T” while proponents receive sound bites and explanations of their positions. And, of course, the pro-condom group is made up of some really good people who see the problem of sexuality abused and how condoms can solve many of the symptoms of the abuse. They want to prevent pregnancy and illness. This can be difficult for Catholics to stand in opposition to. Who wants to be pro-death and pro-unwanted pregnancies? We can sound pretty stupid.

This was part of the frustration that spawned Monday’s article which had much the same effect. Notice that the fake article took gun fighting for granted. So the obvious solution was to give students bulletproof vests to keep them safe. Carol was the first to point out that it seemed ludicrous that parents were sending their kids to school in which they would regularly participate in gunfights! Wouldn’t you want the government (or concerned parents) to bring gun fighting to an end in the schools? Would not supplying more equipment for gun fighting not only give tacit approval of the fights but also encourage even more of them?

Adoro is the one who made the connection to sex. The Brazilian government is providing free condoms. Let us be very clear, condoms are not fail-safe guards against pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases. In fact, between improper use and product malfunction their success rate can be alarmingly low (considering that in order to have so called safe sex you would want them to be 100% effective.)

So then the government provides free condoms because, as you know “they are going to ‘do it’ anyway.” But with that condom there is the message that sex is expected and tacitly approved. With that comes a higher sexual activity rate and more and more people playing Sexual Russian Roulette and possibly having to deal with “unwanted children,” or aborting, or adopting out, or perhaps dealing with a debilitating or even deadly disease all under the banner of so called “Safe Sex.” (Some make the case that at least it is safer sex. I find this as absurd as handing out those bulletproof jackets.)

In both articles there are certain assumptions that are understood to be true. There are gunfights. People die in gunfights. Bulletproof vests save lives. If you are against bulletproof vests you are responsible for more people dying. That all seems perfectly logical.

Kids will have sex. Having sex leads to unwanted pregnancies and diseases. Condoms prevent this. If you are against condoms you are only going to create more unwanted children and spread AIDS. That, too, seems logical.

But notice that popular media are always silent when it comes to the Church’s WHY to its teaching. Why is “the Pope” against condoms? Are they evil? No. Not in and of themselves. Perhaps the reason is that condoms give a false sense of “safety” and therefore encourage risky behavior that only adds to the growing population of “unwanted children”; that creates a larger pool of “children raising children” (or grandparents raising children – or worse yet, abortion of children) or that it leads to more sexually transmitted diseases including AIDS.

Perhaps it has to do with trying to get a society to value the human person as a being deserving of dignity and love rather than an object to fulfill personal desires. Wow, with a society that uses each other thusly you might expect to see the divorce rate rise. Imagine that.

Perhaps it has to do with the fact that when people feel that they can have sex and not have to deal with any of the consequences of the act that they might be more inclined to cheat on their spouse causing children to grow up in split homes. A situation JPII referred to as being “orphans with living parents.”

Perhaps it has to do with stemming the tide of man turning in on himself and seeing sex as something to get from another. If we can remove all consequences from sex so that it means little more than two people using the other’s body for personal gratification, then that opens the way to redefining all aspects of the makeup of our culture.

Perhaps too it has to do with building up the human person, giving him control over his life and body, pointing him toward something greater, higher, and nobler.

Yes, people will always have illicit sex and people will always shoot each other. But like handing out bulletproof vests to an entire country in order to cut down on shooting deaths is no way to solve that problem, handing out condoms only adds to the problem, it does not solve it.

We’ve got the best message: Sex is so awesome and wonderful and powerful and it deserves your respect. Be safer, be healthier, prevent more unwanted pregnancies, have more true freedom, understand not only your own dignity but that of those around you, have and give more respect, have integrity, be holy, and live up to the consequences of your decisions.

The condom message: You body is a toy. Indulge in it. Have sex, avoid consequences, take the risk, have at least a better chance of avoiding birth, sickness, and possibly death than without it. Get away with one-night stands. Increase your chances of walking away without any undo attachments. Play the field. You can’t help it anyway.

Yet all we get printed is, “DON’T”