Sentences with phrase «use of condoms»

Back in 2004 Rhonheimer used the prominent journal of «loyal dissent», The Tablet, to spread his novel idea that the prophylactic use of condoms in marriage might be consistent with the teaching of the 1968 Encyclical Humanae Vitae.

Maybe we should have Planned Parenthood in our bedrooms to ensure proper use of their condoms?

[2] For an explanation of the wrongness of condomistic intercourse in the absence of contraceptive intent see Luke Gormally, «Marriage and the prophylactic use of condoms», The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 5 (2005): 735 - 49; reprinted in Faith 38/2 (March - April 2006): 16 - 24.

Examples are abuse by clergy, how it handles divorce issues, birth control specifically teaching in African countries that use of condoms spreads aids, ect.

If risk exists for STI / HIV (including during pregnancy or postpartum), the correct and consistent use of condoms is recommended, either alone or with another contraceptive method.

This seems to be the line which the distinguished priest - philosopher Martin Rhonheimer develops (certainly beyond Pope's Paul's intention) in his recent controversial suggestion that certain uses of the condom within marriage are permissible.

Precisely that is deliberately prevented by the choice to make use of a condom.

Rather than reinforcing a moral emphasis upon abstinence, AIDS has shifted concern to what is called «safe sex»: increased care in choosing sexual partners, along with the habitual use of condoms.

In both situations, there appears to be limited use of condoms.

They were also told to abstain from sexual contact or use of condom until they have tested negative for the virus twice.

Relatability is certainly a key component of Knocked Up «s inherent appeal, as it plunders for humor that most nightmarish of singles» fears, unwanted pregnancy, via the story of Alison (Katherine Heigl) and Ben (Seth Rogen), a mismatched twosome whose polar - opposite lives are accidentally entwined by a drunken one - night stand that, due to miscommunication over use of a condom (the momentous phrase in question being «Just do it already!»)

Safer sex practices will be discussed including the correct use of condoms and dental dams.

Conclusion: High school students exhibited positive sexual behaviors and high levels of self - esteem, yet they put themselves at risk by inconsistent use of condoms.

As for lies about condoms — your pope claimed that use of condoms in Africa would make the AIDS crisis worse.

In 1994, when Notre Dame's health services director provided to its employees a brochure describing the proper use of a condom, while concurrently the University was objecting to the Bishops» proposed regulations for implementation of Ex Corde Ecclesiae, Professor Rice was quick to point out the hypocrisy in Notre Dame's willingness to seemingly exceed the demands of an Indiana law while, at the same time, rejecting the authority of the Magisterium.

We made some suggestions towards a synthesis of this vision with some of John Paul II's insights in our March 2009 editorial, «The Assault upon the Sexes: Fostering the Papal Defence», and would also refer to Luke Gormally's pieces in our March 2006 issue, «Marriage and the Prophylactic use of condoms» and in our March 2004 issue, «Marriage, the true environment for sexual love».

I still don't understand how they can insist on this though, since even the Vatican had approved the use of condoms back in 2010.

Women having babies they don't want or can't provide for, demonizing the use of condoms spreading aids and STDs, and claiming problems can be solved by prayer rather than science.

Just look at the progress that has been made in Africa with regard to the use of condoms preventing the spread of AIDs... do these GOP and «holy» people not see this?

In 2010, Pope Benedict XVI endorsed the use of condoms for male prostitutes, saying condoms «can be a first step in the direction of a moralization, a first assumption of responsibility,» and could help «in the intention of reducing the risk of infection.»

So should you or your wife contract the virus through tainted blood, would you support the church's stance that the spread of the disease can not be prevented by the use of condoms?

The use of a condom in the sexual intercourse of a man and a woman has a different moral meaning than the intercourse of a man with a man.

The Tablet's editorial tells us that «more than nine out of 10 (respondents) do not think that the use of a condom is wrong».

Benedict's comments on resignation come in a book which has been making headlines for its revelation that the pope may consider the use of condoms morally justified in some circumstances.

But of course, @n @l s & x or the use of condoms heteros & xually would be unacceptable.

And didn't this same pope recently excuse the use of condoms, so long as they were used by h0m0s during @n @l s & x?

The same goes for ridiculous health policies perpetuated by the church, which thinks that it's «sinful» to protect people from AIDS if it involves the use of a condom.

They surely know about safe sex, for as Magic Johnson and others have pointed out, one of the side benefits of his announcement is the public attention now given to the use of condoms.

Denying birth control (including the use of condoms), abortion and sterilization to the population in general is stupid.

Not only does birth control prevent unwanted pregnancy, the use of condoms also helps prevent the spread of STDs.

But such an application does not work because the use of a condom intrinsically impedes the nature of the act.

People who think homosexuals should not have special legal entitlements as a minority group, parents who do not want their eight - year - olds instructed in the use of condoms, those who insist that abortion is very bad for unborn children and their mothers — bigots one and all.

In contraceptive sex, the spouses do not «reveal themselves to each other» (and this should be especially evident in the case of the use of condoms).

The general argument that the use of condoms is morally permissible in such a case is that, since the purpose is prophylactic and not contraceptive, their use does not contravene Humanae Vitae - whose scope would be limited to a condemnation of contraception.

This is true of all contraceptives (lUDs, pills, etc.), but is especially evident in the use of condoms (even if contraception were not the direct purpose of their use).