Scottish Christians believe it is better for wome n to die of cancer than have underage sex

[DominiConnor]

www.theherald.co.uk/news/68912.html

So, apparently, gangs of Christians are lobbying against cancer prevention just in case it encourage girls to have under age sex.
Being male, I lack the insight to confirm whether being innoculated against cancer makes girls want to have sex ?
Doesn't seem probable, but obviously it is better that women die of cancer than possibly (in the minds of Chrisitan leaders) have sex.

[expatinscotland]

What happened to your campaign against Catholic priests?

Have you switched gears now?

[DominiConnor]

So, you agree with the Scottish Christians then ?
Is that the cause of your dig at me?

[moondog]

lol

[expatinscotland]

It's can't just be any old Christians, now, it has to be Scottish ones. They're a different breed altogether.

[prettybird]

Looking at the article, only the Scottish Catholics are implicated - and they do tend to be quite conservative (small c). Has the Church of Scoltand made a statement?

Otherwise you can't claim, "Scottish Christians" oppose it. Where is the evidence?

[expatinscotland]

And why not, Domini, you seem to have no problem taking digs at everyone else - women, workers (they're all time wasters who need policed by you), Catholics (priests in particular), Jews, etc. (excepting the white, affluent, middle-age men like yourself who run everything, of course)?

It's a non sequitur that pointing that out to you means I agree w/them.

[SaintGeorgeMarple]

Not figured links out yet DC?

And you in IT as well, tsk.

[DominiConnor]

I said Scottish to avoid generalising.
I do note digs against me for this, and yet not one word saying that perhaps it is a bad idea.

Wonder why ?
That does seem to follow a pattern.
Someone points out that a chuirch has done something wrong and is showered with personal abuse, and silly generalisations of the form "some men are rapists so, the Catholic Church is no worse than anyone else".

So a simple questions.
Do the Christians around here think trying to stop innoculations against cancer is good if it "may" cause some girls to have sex ?

[prettybird]

I can't answer your question as I do not consider myself to be a Christian. Don't consider myslef to be any particular label - just don't have a beleif in religion.

Do I think opposing it is silly? Yes - but then I am generally pro-vacciniation.

[SaintGeorgeMarple]

In all honesty, if I had daughters I would probably opposes innoculation at the age they are suggesting (as young as 9)

HPV is sexually transmitted and I would be horrified of the thought of a child of mine having sex at such an age.

At 14-15 (or thereabouts) I would have no objection.

My religion has nothing to do with my opinion on this subject.

[SaintGeorgeMarple]

I'll correct myself before anyone else does:

HPV in relation to cervical cancer is sexually transmitted.


It can be transmitted by other methods but is highly unlikely to be the cause of cervical cancer by other transmission routes.

[expatinscotland]

I have HPV myself. Diagnosed by a biopsy same I donated in the US for use in the production of a vaccine.

'Someone points out that a chuirch has done something wrong'

It's wrong TO YOU. Not necessarily to someone else.

You seem to have absolutely no problem slinging extreme generalisations around here, which others construe as digs at them, so now you see how they note that.

FWIW, I'm a pagan.

[expatinscotland]

that would be sample. I donated my biopsy sample to medical research. A cervical smear caught my dysplasia.

[prettybird]

I can understand why they are proposing to vaccinate young - althugh I suspect the "nine" quoted is typical journalisitc exggeration. Knowing how disucssion documents are written, it may have been an age that was considered and then discarded.

Thier argument is for it to work best it has to be before girls are sexually active - hnece 14 or 14 may be too late!

But depending on how it is promoted, does not mean it is "encouraging" under age sex. But I may well be naive in that request. my parents were "telling" me from about the age of 14 that I was "beter safe than sorry" and that "the Family Planning Clinic won't ask your age" (this was in NZ, which had a big teenage pregnany problem) - and it only ever put me off!

Personally, I only lost my virginity at 21, so they'd have had plenty of time with me!

[Xavielli]

niether cancer( or anyother disease for that matter) nor sex before marriage are of God. They are of the devil and of the world. If an underage girl is truly a Christian, then they would protect themselves against the disease and still not have underage sex.

Personally, I don't see the link between the two in any religious or spiritual context.

[Bibliophile]

But DC is right here. What kind of freaks prefer their child risks dying of cancer than have a vaccination? It's like saying giving babies rubella vaccines encourages girls to have underage sex. The Daily Mail is running a similarly poisonous campaign at the moment. Ask a woman who has had cervical cancer if she would like their daughters innoculated, and I can tell you what she'd say.

[bogwobbit]

Well, according to the article, the Roman Catholic church in Scotland are concerned about the vaccine. There's nothing from any of the other churches in Scotland and from looking at the Church of Scotland's own website there is nothing either for or against it. So, I think it's a bit of an exaggeration to say that gangs of Scottish Christians are lobbying against it.
I'm Scottish and a Christian and I'm generally in favour of the vaccine.

[DominiConnor]

In amongst expatinscotland's personla vituperation am I to take it that you think it is valid to oppose this treatment ?

I hear the point about innoculating 9 yos being journos after a headline, but to be most effective you want to do this before sexual activity, not after, and we know that it does happen.

The Catholic "argument" is bizarre even by their standards. As Bibliophile says, there's any number of medical treatments that "encourage" sex. Thankfully their demented little minds never quite grasped antibiotics. Before them, infections assciated with pregnancy were one of the largest causes of female deaths.
We note also the Catholic stand against condoms used to prevent AIDS.
Anyone really think that is good ?

[nearlythree]

I think what is particularly offensive is the assumption that girls who lose their virginity at a young age are automatically going to sleep around. I lost my virginity at 14 to my long-term boyfriend; I've had three partners in total and have been faithful to the same man for the past 20 yrs. Incidentally, I have alwyas been a Christian and don't think what I did was hugely wrong, just stupid.

The logical age to give this vaccine, if it is long-lasting enough, would be before a girl starts school with the dtp booster (i.e. 4). That way there will not be any link between the jab and the girl becomeing sexually active. And let's face it, most teenagers think they are invincible, and the possible threat or not of cervical cancer (assuming they are even aware of it) isn't going to make one bit of difference to whether they have sex or not.

The Catholic Church's line on condoms and HIV is totally logical. Not having sex will stop you getting HIV. Unfortunately, that doesn't take into account the fact that people like sex too much for that.

[DominiConnor]

Good point about the "invicibility" of teenagers. It's hard to imagine that having innoculation against cancer will make 14 yo girls think "yippee, I can sleep with the local rugby team".

Must part company on the condom/HIV thing.
It's not logical, and doesn't (to me) even seem consistent with general Catholic doctrine where life is supposed to be sacred.

Millions of people have caught AIDS not througth sex, indeeed millions have caught it as virgins from their mothers.
Also a sadly huge number have caught it from blood transfusion and drug use. It has also killed medical staff through accidental cuts whilst treating AIDS victims.
Obviously it suits some religious types to cast people with AIDS as sexually profligate, but the numbers don't support that any more.

The current thinking is that it first reached humans from monkeys through the food chain (bush meat), so no sex there either.
Note the different class of "sin" the Catholic chutch uses for birth control.
Killing people is not an absolute sin. There are circumstances where it is not only OK, but your duty to kill. Not many, but they exist, like to save your life, or that of others. Also accidentally killing is not a sin at all. The test is of course your intent.
Using birth control or destroying church property are absolute sins. Always wrong. Thus using the pill to regulate periods (it's original use), or using condoms to avoid disease are sinful.
They have actually developed condoms with holes in them for artificial insemination. If it has a hole apparently, then it's OK, and of course prevents the vice of masturbation.

[Uwila]

Hmmm... I wonder. Do you think that a fifteen year old girl about to lose her virginity is worried about the possibility of contracting cancer. Do you think she;d thinking "it's okay cause I got the cancer jab" or "it's okay cause I got my depro jab". I'm thinking the latter is more likely. Therefore I can see this jab really weighs into the matter for a fifteen year old. Most teenagers I know think they are indestructable and most certainly aren't worried about getting cancer from having sex.

DC, is this your follow on from the whole anti church school stance?

[Uwila]

Sorry...
"Therefore I can't see this jab really weighs into the matter..."

[Greensleeves]

I've said it once and I'll say it again. DominiConnor IS Keith Miller off Eastenders.

[DominiConnor]

Indeed there are potential issues with the schedule of injections. This is perfeclty legitimate, and if anyone with appropriate medical qualifications raised such an issue, that would be fine.

However, at 9 there isn't much of a schedule.
Also, why precisely is the Catholic church in Scotland in on this gig ?
Does it make such pronouncements on the relative merits of antibioitics ? Hair replacement therapy ?
No.

So again I aksx my question.
Is there anyone who is a member of the group that wants to stop this vaccination against cancer who thinks their Church is ding the right thing.

(OK, expatinscotland you can answer, even if as the price, we have to read one of you boring attacks on me as well).