Comments on: Why the Pope needs to take a Statistics class.

By: dumilewis

dumilewis — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 03:04:51 +0000

Ya'll are smart, no for real, I appreciate folks who think deeply about stuff, now for a comment or two:
I think the thing that gets me the most is that he's sticking to a doctrine that is “out of touch” with what people are doing and I would argue in that sense it's not doing what doctrine is supposed to do “guide people.” Reliance on the Pope is a whole 'nother question. Different folks “follow” for different reasons. I respect their right to do so, but also hope we all acknowledge that man is certainly fallible, which includes the pope! Had he simply made the statement that condoms don't end the problem, I wouldn't beef as much, but saying they make it worse is a causal statement. I know what he was “getting at” but as Timaree said, “he just falls under the category of people who err in believing that any discussion of sexual health or disease prevention will inherently increase sexual behavior and therefore risk.” And that is a HUGE problem. If we don't talk about sexual health in more complex ways we end up with the same narrow solutions which are driven by ideology but have little impact on curbing the issues we face.

By: timaree

timaree — Mon, 23 Mar 2009 02:35:46 +0000

i'm with rico on this, i never for a moment thought that the pope, with the infinite research methods courses required for his job, actually felt that correlation was causality. he just falls under the category of people who err in believing that any discussion of sexual health or disease prevention will inherently increase sexual behavior and therefore risk.

remember, this is the same church that believes the morning after pill is tantamount to an abortion. they're not real big on science. but they do love rhetoric.

By: dumilewis

dumilewis — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 22:04:00 +0000

Ya’ll are smart, no for real, I appreciate folks who think deeply about stuff, now for a comment or two:
I think the thing that gets me the most is that he’s sticking to a doctrine that is “out of touch” with what people are doing and I would argue in that sense it’s not doing what doctrine is supposed to do “guide people.” Reliance on the Pope is a whole ‘nother question. Different folks “follow” for different reasons. I respect their right to do so, but also hope we all acknowledge that man is certainly fallible, which includes the pope! Had he simply made the statement that condoms don’t end the problem, I wouldn’t beef as much, but saying they make it worse is a causal statement. I know what he was “getting at” but as Timaree said, “he just falls under the category of people who err in believing that any discussion of sexual health or disease prevention will inherently increase sexual behavior and therefore risk.” And that is a HUGE problem. If we don’t talk about sexual health in more complex ways we end up with the same narrow solutions which are driven by ideology but have little impact on curbing the issues we face.

By: timaree

timaree — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 21:35:00 +0000

i’m with rico on this, i never for a moment thought that the pope, with the infinite research methods courses required for his job, actually felt that correlation was causality. he just falls under the category of people who err in believing that any discussion of sexual health or disease prevention will inherently increase sexual behavior and therefore risk.

remember, this is the same church that believes the morning after pill is tantamount to an abortion. they’re not real big on science. but they do love rhetoric.

By: dumilewis

dumilewis — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 21:04:51 +0000

By: timaree

timaree — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 20:35:46 +0000

By: dumilewis

dumilewis — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 20:04:51 +0000

By: timaree

timaree — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 19:35:46 +0000

By: Dina B.

Dina B. — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 19:39:00 +0000

dumi, i love this. and i love statistics! it’s not just the pope, too many people go around quoting percentages/correlations, like if it really means anything on its own. statistics help you reach evidence for causation, not prove causation.

but for him to say it increases the problem…?? sounds like bush’s rhetoric here in the US with his ABC program. homie, people are having sex and have never listened to the talk about abstinence, and denying that truth is what “increases the problem” of HIV/AIDS. thanks for the commentary

By: Dina B.

Dina B. — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 17:39:38 +0000

dumi, i love this. and i love statistics! it's not just the pope, too many people go around quoting percentages/correlations, like if it really means anything on its own. statistics help you reach evidence for causation, not prove causation.

but for him to say it increases the problem…?? sounds like bush's rhetoric here in the US with his ABC program. homie, people are having sex and have never listened to the talk about abstinence, and denying that truth is what “increases the problem” of HIV/AIDS. thanks for the commentary

By: Ashwini

Ashwini — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 04:40:00 +0000

Read this a couple of days ago. With this and the excommunication of the doctors in Brazil who performed an abortion for a nine year old who had been the victim of rape and incest (they backtracked after international outrage: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article5917765.ece), the Vatican is really on a winning streak right now. Which raises the question–why can’t Catholics be Catholic without the Vatican? Or at least without such a rich, powerful, wealthy and destructive Vatican?

By: Ashwini

Ashwini — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 02:40:27 +0000

Read this a couple of days ago. With this and the excommunication of the doctors in Brazil who performed an abortion for a nine year old who had been the victim of rape and incest (they backtracked after international outrage: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/…), the Vatican is really on a winning streak right now. Which raises the question–why can't Catholics be Catholic without the Vatican? Or at least without such a rich, powerful, wealthy and destructive Vatican?

By: rico

rico — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 20:06:00 +0000

I’m not feeling the pope on this issue either. I think on some level what he meant (or what I hope he meant) was that the distribution of condoms may be dangerous because peole my feel “hell I’m wearing a condom I can’t catch HIV.” I think condoms, unless coupled with education about the disease, may be placing a band aid on cancer.

Ultimately, I think the Pope is well off because I think what he wants is celibacy more so than responsible sexual behavior and that’s simply unrealistic. If people are going to be having sex anyway, they are better off with a condom than without one.

Great post. Enjoyed the read.

By: rico

rico — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 18:06:17 +0000

I'm not feeling the pope on this issue either. I think on some level what he meant (or what I hope he meant) was that the distribution of condoms may be dangerous because peole my feel "hell I'm wearing a condom I can't catch HIV." I think condoms, unless coupled with education about the disease, may be placing a band aid on cancer.

Ultimately, I think the Pope is well off because I think what he wants is celibacy more so than responsible sexual behavior and that's simply unrealistic. If people are going to be having sex anyway, they are better off with a condom than without one.

Great post. Enjoyed the read.