The Dawkins Delusion: "90% safe is better than 100% safe"

"The Dawkins Delusion: Benedict XVI is 'stupid, ignorant or dim'", Gerald Warner - Telegraph

What the Pope actually said about condoms on March 18, 2009:

"I would say that this problem of AIDS cannot be overcome with advertising slogans. If the soul is lacking, if Africans do not help one another, the scourge cannot be resolved by distributing condoms; quite the contrary, we risk worsening the problem. The solution can only come through a twofold commitment: firstly, the humanization of sexuality, in other words a spiritual and human renewal bringing a new way of behaving towards one another; and secondly, true friendship, above all with those who are suffering, a readiness - even through personal sacrifice - to be present with those who suffer. And these are the factors that help and bring visible progress." -Catholic News Agency

Like many others who have attacked the Pope over these remarks, Richard Dawkins apparently thinks it a bad thing to criticize the distribution of condoms in the fight against AIDS. After all, condoms often block transmission of the HIV, which causes AIDS. Dawkins claims that "the Pope is either stupid, ignorant or just dim".

But condoms, according to the United Nations, have only a 90% protection rate against HIV transmission. On the other hand, marital fidelity and abstinence from premarital sex has an essentially 100% success rate at preventing HIV transmission.

The Pope's critics may not wish to acknowledge that objective data demonstrates promiscuous condom users are at a much higher risk of HIV infection and AIDS than individuals who reserve sex to marriage. Their loud, indignant objections are not based on science, but upon other interests that influence their judgment.

Consequently Dawkins can't fathom how a 100% effective plan is better at stopping AIDS (and ennobling individuals) than the destructive and dehumanizing gamble of rubberized, promiscuous sex.

Petulant Professor Pillories Pope to Promote Pathetic Paperback

Guest Voices: Impeach the Pope - On Faith at washingtonpost.com

Sure-fire formula to earn money and the fawning attention of the media:

1) Present Yourself as an educated Catholic.
2) Express Your outrage: write a book attacking the Catholic Church, its doctrine, and the Pope. (Straw-man arguments resting on blatant distortions or willful ignorance will do just fine, especially if You are already a genuine, elbow-padded professor type.)
3) Write editorials and make TV appearances fulminating against all things Catholic and plugging "My Latest Book".

By some quirk of human nature, lots of people will just eat this up without ever questioning Your claims.

Note: Don't follow this sort of approach if You are Muslim or Jewish, as that would be considered bigoted and incur the indignation of the tolerant.

______________

Note to the Washington Post:

McElvaine's screed is worthy of publication by a purportedly respected publisher? How the great have fallen!

How about some SERIOUS discourse on the Pope's position? The professor's frothing diatribe contributes nothing of value.

Can't the Post find someone able to write a coherent analysis and commentary on the Catholic Church's position on contraception? My high school daughter could do a far better job than this petulant prof from ...what school was that?

Pope says condoms are not the solution to AIDS

Pope says condoms are not the solution to Aids - they make it worse -Times Online

The Pope is correct.

Promotion of condom usage encourages a casual attitude toward promiscuous sex, a major factor in both the spread of HIV and in the continued sexual exploitation of women.

But the World Health Organization and its corporate friends are threatened by this truth.

Therefore the Pope must be mocked.