If you're pro-life, how far do you take that?

[Catholic_Lady]

The message given in Africa was never "have sex without a condom." It was "abstain from having sex." If this was actually practiced, it would have done more good than anything else in the prevention of pregnancy and the spread of aids.

That is true.... "if".
But, knowing human nature, that condition is impossible to uphold.
The Church, as the institution allegedly "advised" by God himself, should be fully aware that such a message would result in the opposite of its intention.
Actually, there are two messages:
- Abstain from sex, except with your spouse.
- When having sex, it must be with the purpose of conception, so no contraception is permitted.

While some (dare I say most?) people would have no problem following both messages, there are enough people in Africa for those that won't follow one or the other or both to cause chaos. And chaos was caused.
And repeated in South America.

If there was an actual supernatural entity determined to keep human suffering to a minimum, would that entity not have passed on a different message, at a time when AIDS and a few other very nasty diseases were spreading?
Instead, we have an institution that claims to speak for a god that in unchanging. Because of that, the message must be unchanging. What would have been valid in the middle-ages, must remain valid in the 80's and 90's and today and forever.
But the message comes not from a god, but from a human mind, a philosopher... and that potentially erroneous message is being touted as god's... and causing all the harmful diseases to spread further than they should ever have.
Some clerics have been known to go as far as pronounce condoms as unable to protect from viruses, nor to prevent the propagation of sperm, in an attempt to get people not to use them. And this should be a criminal act, but is completely allowed in a culture where the cleric holds the power.
Which tells us that the whole thing is solely about power. That old human weakness... so very human...

Just an FYI, the second thing you said (bolded) is not true. You can certainly have sex with your spouse without the purpose/intent of conception lol. I did it for years (though bitterly regretting it now, it wasn't immoral). That is why NFP is widely taught and advocated in Catholic circles. So that married couples can learn their infertile weeks of the month and enjoy intimacy during that time when they are trying to avoid pregnancy.

I understand that unfortunately many people will keep sleeping around despite having aids, or knowing that aids is widespread in their area. But that doesn't change the fact that abstinence in these circumstances would still give the best outcomes and is also the more moral thing to do. The Church has a duty to advocate morality, and it just wouldn't be within the realm of our understanding of morality to tell these people to "keep having sex, just wear a condom!", when we know it doesn't 100% protect against aids and other things.
Of course, people have the a right to their own free will and will either follow the advice or not.

It is unfortunate that most won't follow that and in turn the aids prevalence will continue to increase. But we can't advocate for a "solution" that we don't believe is moral. We have to advocate for the one we think is moral.

With that being said, if anyone says that sex with a condom doesn't help protect at all in comparison to sex without, that's a lie and I certainly don't stand behind the clergy people who said that.

---

Would you do the same thing if you had as long as you wanted to decide which to save?

Probably