The Condom Controversy

Business Mirror
Thursday
10 March 2010

Thy condo(o)m come
Ding I. Generoso / Second Opinion
10 March 2010

Valentine’s Day may be a good day to distribute condoms to raise public consciousness about the need to protect Filipinos from HIV/AIDS—which is exactly what the Department of Health achieved last month.

But it isn’t exactly right to begin with because, in a way, the Church is right when it protested that the act seemed to “promote promiscuity.” That’s because to many Filipinos, or at least to many in Metro Manila and probably some other urban centers, Valentine’s Day is often associated with couples, married or not, making a bee line for hotels and motels to celebrate the Day of Love.

That being the case, the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) was partly correct when it protested against Health Secretary Esperanza Cabral’s distribution of condoms on Valentine’s Day.

The Church’s protest notwithstanding, Cabral made her point and succeeded in, at the very least, bringing the issue of condoms and AIDS to the fore, generating a controversy even and renewing the debate on condom use.

But the distribution of condoms on Valentine’s Day, in reality, does little because the problem with condoms and the Church is not limited to their relation to AIDS but extends to the issue of reproductive health and population management. But that is another matter altogether.

To be sure, the Philippine Catholic Church is just toeing the Vatican line on condoms. No less than Pope Benedict XVI has issued strong words against condoms and their supposed use as protection against HIV transmission.

In March last year, Pope Benedict XVI, on a visit to Cameroon, said condoms were not a solution to fighting AIDS and “even aggravate the problems.” The solution lies in a “spiritual and human awakening” and “friendship for those who suffer,” he said.

That statement earned the ire of many in the scientific and medical community, human-rights groups and even some Catholic leaders.

In a strongly worded statement, Britain’s The Lancet, one of the world’s top medical journals, accused the Pope of distorting scientific evidence and demanded he made a retraction.

“By saying that condoms exacerbate the problem of HIV/AIDS, the Pope has publicly distorted scientific evidence to promote Catholic doctrine on this issue,” The Lancet said in an editorial.

It added: “Whether the Pope’s error was due to ignorance or a deliberate attempt to manipulate science to support Catholic ideology is unclear. But the comment still stands, and the Vatican’s attempts to tweak the Pope’s words, further tampering with the truth, is not the way forward.

“When any influential person, be it a religious or political figure, makes a false scientific statement that could be devastating to the health of millions of people, they should retract or correct the public record. Anything less from Pope Benedict would be an immense disservice to the public and health advocates, including many thousands of Catholics, who work tirelessly to try and prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS worldwide.”

The pope’s comment was “irresponsible and dangerous,” Agence France-Presse reported, quoting Jon O’Brien, head of Catholics for Choice in the US. “Few Catholics and even fewer medical personnel agree with his stance,” O’Brien said.

He cited results of a poll commissioned by Catholics for Choice which showed that 90 percent of Catholics in Mexico, 86 percent in Ireland, 79 percent in the United States, 77 percent in the Philippines and 59 percent in Ghana agreed that “using condoms is prolife because it helps save lives by preventing the spread of AIDS.”

O’Brien said several bishops in Africa, including Bishop Kevin Dowling of Rustenburg in South Africa, “have been outspoken in their support of the use of condoms.”

“On a continent where millions of people are infected with HIV, it is morally reprehensible to spread such blatant falsehoods,” said Harry Knox, head of the religion and faith program at Human Rights Campaign, which advocates for equal rights for the gay, lesbian and transgender communities.

“The Pope’s rejection of scientifically proven prevention methods is forcing Catholics in Africa to choose between their faith and the health of their entire community,” Knox said.

The ban on condoms is just one of the many issues that, some reports say, has triggered a debate inside the Catholic Church since 2005 when Pope Benedict XVI took over from Pope John Paul II.

An Agence France-Presse report in 2005 said the Vatican’s hard-line stance has not only triggered the ire of bioscientists, doctors who work in reproductive health, and grassroots workers who fight against AIDS. “Analysts say it has also turned many Catholics into cherry-pickers, taking from their religion the bits they like and can follow—and ignoring the bits they find unpalatable or unfeasible,” the news agency reported.

In a predominantly Catholic nation, many Filipinos would probably feel the same, torn between the doctrine of their church and the practicality of certain Church restrictions. The choice comes between not using condoms and getting AIDS or using condoms and being “condemned” by their church. That puts God into the equation over a simple health issue—or probably a broader reproductive- health or family-planning issue. Not an easy choice to make for most Filipinos, especially when God is put into the equation.

And speaking of God, but in another vein, God is who Energy Secretary Angelo Reyes wants to blame for the energy crisis and the periodic blackouts we are now experiencing.

“If you want to blame somebody, blame God,” he said last week.

Well, some years ago, at the height of the Garci-tape scandal, President Arroyo told TIME magazine in an interview, “The Lord put me here.”

Just so we know who to blame.