1. Comment #71323 by JemyM on September 18, 2007 at 12:47 pm

If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, "Let us go and worship god", do not yield to him or listen to him. Run! Run for your life!!!

Other Comments by JemyM

2. Comment #71325 by BAEOZ on September 18, 2007 at 12:50 pm

The catholic church is so moral, it'll kill you if you don't follow it's precepts.

Other Comments by BAEOZ

3. Comment #71327 by Linda on September 18, 2007 at 12:58 pm

Surely since this is a public health issue and the province is funding the programme that girls who wish to get the vaccine can do so at the closest public school.

Other Comments by Linda

4. Comment #71331 by pewkatchoo on September 18, 2007 at 1:04 pm

Wankers!

Other Comments by pewkatchoo

5. Comment #71333 by jimbob on September 18, 2007 at 1:06 pm

Question for the Catholic Church: In 50 years time what will you be apologizing for with regard to this present decade?

Other Comments by jimbob

6. Comment #71335 by Bruno on September 18, 2007 at 1:10 pm

Excellent question, jimbob.

Other Comments by Bruno

7. Comment #71336 by Bonzai on September 18, 2007 at 1:15 pm

That is ridiculous. They should cut all fundings to Catholic schools. If that is not feasible, at least tie the funding to fulfilling certain social responsibilities.

In the mean time the Conservatives in Ontario are compaigning to extending fundings to all faith schools as if this madness is not enough.

Other Comments by Bonzai

8. Comment #71343 by Quine on September 18, 2007 at 1:27 pm

Too sad to even ridicule.

Other Comments by Quine

9. Comment #71348 by Corylus on September 18, 2007 at 1:35 pm

Who's going to pay for the increased healthcare costs of treating rather than preventing this illness?

I know the Church will pay via their taxes!

.... Oh wait...

Other Comments by Corylus

10. Comment #71349 by Blue Lithium on September 18, 2007 at 1:37 pm

Why don't these people understand that rape happens? Even if you practise chastity until marriage rape could still happen to you. Or the husband may have contracted it and not known about it. these people are assholes. The Catholic Church is an institution of abhorrence.

Other Comments by Blue Lithium

11. Comment #71369 by Klaatu barada nikto on September 18, 2007 at 2:59 pm

A recent letter from the conference of bishops encourages Catholic boards to remember that the virus is sexually transmitted, and that sex is "appropriate only" through marriage.

Unless it's with an alter boy.

Other Comments by Klaatu barada nikto

12. Comment #71371 by js5535 on September 18, 2007 at 3:02 pm

And this organization tries to pass itself off as a leader in human rights...

I guess sex is worse than death to these elderly virgins.

Other Comments by js5535

13. Comment #71390 by Inferno on September 18, 2007 at 4:46 pm

I "pray" this won't happen. Aren't other catholics disgusted at these sort of policies?

Other Comments by Inferno

14. Comment #71391 by BAEOZ on September 18, 2007 at 4:50 pm

Klaatu barada nikto:

Unless it's with an alter boy

So it's inappropriate with the primer boy, but not the alter boy? Oh, you meant altar boy :P

Other Comments by BAEOZ

15. Comment #71392 by Will in Aus on September 18, 2007 at 4:51 pm

Ok, so, when you get married, what stops you from contracting the virus??? Nothing! Furthermore, there are so many other sexually transmitted diseases that simply vaccinating against 1 will not encourage promiscuity. I recently went to a Skeptics meeting where Prof. Ian Frazer (the Australian who developed the HPV vaccine) gave a guest lecture. He raised an interesting point: the vaccine is really only for personal protection, and so those who choose not to receive it are only putting themselves at risk.......some may say it's natural selection at it's best.....

Other Comments by Will in Aus

16. Comment #71398 by Pieter on September 18, 2007 at 5:10 pm

I guess since pregnancy, aids, herpes, the clap, and crabs, don't seem to be working as deterrents to pre-marital sex it would be a shame to lose cancer.

Other Comments by Pieter

17. Comment #71406 by Russell Blackford on September 18, 2007 at 5:34 pm

I suppose we need a reminder, now and then, as to exactly why the morality of the Roman Catholic Church is best thought of as a relic from more barbaric times.

Here's to a New Enlightenment!

Other Comments by Russell Blackford

18. Comment #71407 by mdowe on September 18, 2007 at 5:37 pm

I just can't believe these pinheads can, in Canada, get away with setting such a sick policy -- one that could cost some of these kids their lives in later years. And coming from a religious institution that has been sheltering paedophiles for years, the hypocrisy is just too much. Clearly they should be relieved of the burden of having to make such decisions in the future.

On another note, the CBC is currently featuring a short article on faith-based schools in Canada:

http://www.cbc.ca/ontariovotes2007/features/features-faith.html

Other Comments by mdowe

19. Comment #71462 by Ohnhai on September 18, 2007 at 8:30 pm

The sheer myopic callousness of this staggers me. 'you are not to have sex outside of marriage so we will deny you this cancer prevention, and prevent you getting any kind of accurate information on this topic till you are...so says god'

Keep them ignorant and let them die. Oh how great the church is... praise god, may he ROT

Other Comments by Ohnhai

20. Comment #71489 by atheist_peace on September 18, 2007 at 10:20 pm

This sick marriage of church and state has no place in Canada.

Other Comments by atheist_peace

21. Comment #71494 by EastCoastAtheist on September 18, 2007 at 11:38 pm

Disgusting. Just Disgusting.
The Catholic church makes me so sick. They preach against condom use in countries riddled with AIDs. They rape children and organize cover ups. Now they are doing their best to make sure that as many women as possible get cervical cancer.
sick sick sick sick sick sick!!!!

Other Comments by EastCoastAtheist

22. Comment #71533 by Philip1978 on September 19, 2007 at 1:31 am

I am almost tempted to drop the C bomb in a minute, these people are utterly without doubt some of the worst human beings in history.

I am with EastCoastAtheist here these people are nothing but sick in the head. What human being could ever want to not eradicate Cancer in any form at all? This is what really winds me up about religious attitudes towards sex, they like to turn it into the most depraved act in the world rather than admit that their efforts to combat it are KILLING PEOPLE!

I have changed my mind, I will not use the C word to describe these people because its an insult to the C word itself

I am disgusted

Philip

Other Comments by Philip1978

23. Comment #71535 by Quetzalcoatl on September 19, 2007 at 1:41 am

Of course they are completely oblivious to the fact that by withholding the vaccine, they are essentially saying that they don't trust the girls to be true to their faith, they don't trust the teachers to be able to do a proper job of teaching them the tenets of Catholicism, and they don't trust the parents to raise their children "the Catholic way".

Catholicism- eternal love, but no trust.

Other Comments by Quetzalcoatl

24. Comment #71536 by irate_atheist on September 19, 2007 at 1:44 am

pewkatchoo(#71331) -

Don't hold back, tell us what you really think of these ignorant fuckwits.

Other Comments by irate_atheist

25. Comment #71562 by action bastard on September 19, 2007 at 3:30 am

What about Hepatitis B? It can be transmitted by sex and syringe drug use. Is the catholic church condoning that behavior by allowing vaccines? This goes to show that the vatican remains public enemy number one on health issues.

Other Comments by action bastard

26. Comment #71566 by bamboospitfire on September 19, 2007 at 3:55 am

Re Comment #71392 form Will in Aus, whilst Professor Frazer is correct that those who choose not to use the vaccine only harm themselves, the real issue here is that the decision not to use the vaccine is not being made by the girls who are being put at risk as a result of the vaccine being withheld. This is where RD's child abuse point really crystallises. These girls have been branded with their parents' religion, and now they're going to be denied protection from cervical cancer because of it.

It's not even as though the threat of cervical cancer due to HPV has prevented promiscuity in the past. It will not do so now.

If they do go through with the proposed ban, it will be an absolute outrage.

The board's contact details are here: http://www.haltonrc.edu.on.ca/aboutus/

Other Comments by bamboospitfire

27. Comment #71568 by hyperdeath on September 19, 2007 at 3:59 am

How exactly is marriage supposed to protect from STDs? If a man is infected with the virus, and then marries a Good Little Catholic Girl, how is she supposed to avoid catching it?

Perhaps they believe that Jesus magically cleanses you of all viruses on your wedding day? (If so, that would be one of their more sensible beliefs.)

Other Comments by hyperdeath

28. Comment #71571 by mdowe on September 19, 2007 at 4:08 am

RE: Comment #71562 by action bastard

Hepatitis B can also affect bugg^H^H^H^H men (such as Catholic priests). You won't see them ban this one any time soon. HPV is only a serious problem for women, and we all know where they sit in the 3 so called "Great" Abrahamic religions.

Other Comments by mdowe

29. Comment #71575 by RickM on September 19, 2007 at 4:31 am

I'm tell'n you guys, the stupid genes are winning...there's no hope.

Other Comments by RickM

30. Comment #71612 by NJS on September 19, 2007 at 10:44 am

I was thinking about this in terms of morality. I maintain that my Atheist view that teaching people right and wrong in terms of the concepts themselves is "superior" to religion's "do this or you're damned" carrot/stick mentality.

This is a new twist: Don't have sex before you marry - not because its not right (on some sad argument) but because you'll go to hell and even better theres a nice little cancer to speed you on your way.

I'm sick of mincing words - its time to say it every time you hear the term catholic church - murderers.

Other Comments by NJS

31. Comment #71613 by Klaatu barada nikto on September 19, 2007 at 10:52 am

BAEOZ:

So it's inappropriate with the primer boy, but not the alter boy? Oh, you meant altar boy :P

I did botch the spelling on that one, but the boys do turn out altered.

Other Comments by Klaatu barada nikto

32. Comment #71622 by Spinoza on September 19, 2007 at 11:20 am

I live in Halton, and I went to a Catholic Highschool.

And I am PISSED about this.

FUCKING IDIOTS.

They think that it will "endorse" promiscuity.

That makes NO sense, given that we ALL had to get the Hepatitis B vaccine in grade 7 (age 13), and THAT is also an STD/needle-transmitted disease.

But it wasn't targetted at women, so it was okay.

Fucking MISOGYNISTIC BASTARDS!

AHHH I'm so fucking angry.

Hey Yorker, I feel you on this one.

I'm thinking of writing to the Champion (my hometown paper..) LAMBASTING the Catholic church for their idiocy.

Mandatory vaccines WILL result in some bad reactions and deaths... that is the price we pay for a CURE for a cancer that could potentially arise in over 80% of all females (approx. 80% have HPV).

AHHHH ASSHOLES.

Other Comments by Spinoza

33. Comment #71631 by Spinoza on September 19, 2007 at 11:29 am

... On second thought.. never mind:

http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2007/09/19/halton-hpv.html

They're not AS stupid as I thought.

Other Comments by Spinoza

34. Comment #71637 by ThomasB on September 19, 2007 at 11:44 am

#71631 by Spinoza:

It would seem that three out of seven catholic school board members are as awful as you feared - small consolation.

Does this me we needn't warn our sons about catching genital warts from unvaccinated catholic girls?

Other Comments by ThomasB

35. Comment #71639 by Spinoza on September 19, 2007 at 11:51 am

Well, just to be clear:

The vaccine, Gardasil®, protects against four HPV types, which together cause 70% of cervical cancers and 90% of genital warts.

So there is still a chance one would get warts in any case (although much much less).

And I suppose the other 30% of cervical cancers are still going to pop up every so often (but 30% is MUCH better than 100%).

Honestly, I think the irrational fear of vaccines is far more common than religious doctrine. There are non-believers who are conspiracy-theorists about vaccines... bugs the shit out of me.

Other Comments by Spinoza

36. Comment #71675 by jimbob on September 19, 2007 at 12:54 pm

While we're all on a C-bashing roll, here's a piece from the Catholic League web site:

September 7, 2007

Lying About the Scandal

The evidence is unmistakable: 81 percent of the victims of priestly sexual abuse were male, the majority of whom were postpubescent. Since 100 percent of the victimizers were male, we're talking about homosexuality, not pedophilia. Yet the cultural elite refuse to deal with reality, and have indeed waged an unprecedented cover-up.

Two items in today's New York Times are relevant. There is a review of a mime performance, "America LoveSexDeath," that makes mention of one of the acts, "The Priest and the Altar Boy." From another source, it is reported that this act "depicts a priest undressing a child clearly meant to be five or six and leaves little of the ensuing activity to the imagination." It is a sure bet that not a single artist in the nation would ever do a performance based on the typical case, namely one which depicted a gay priest hitting on a postpubsescent male.

The Times also has a news piece by Ian Fisher covering the pope's trip to Austria. He writes that among many Austrian Catholics, there is "lingering anger over pedophilia scandals." But the scandal has been a homosexual one all along, and anyone who reads the data knows this to be true.

Lying about the sexual abuse scandal in the Catholic Church is commonplace. And the central reason why the lying continues is because the elites do not want to bash gays (which is fine). They just want to bash priests.

So now you all know --- it's NOT pedophilia --- it's them elitist-supported gays!

"Alter boys" indeed! ;-)

Other Comments by jimbob

37. Comment #71712 by Eric Blair on September 19, 2007 at 2:14 pm

Here's a link to provide a bit of perspective, without defending the RCs. There's some controversy about the vaccine itself and concern that, if provided without education, some kids may see it as protection against any STD. (Not that that was the primary concern of the anti-vaccine trustees).

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070914.whpv15/BNStory/National/


EB

Other Comments by Eric Blair

38. Comment #71838 by Russell Blackford on September 19, 2007 at 6:39 pm

Even if some of the Church's sex scandals involved people old enough to give fully reasoned consent (and I have no knowledge of that, one way or the other), and did not strictly involve pedophilia, the issue would be not so much homosexuality as hypocrisy. I'm prepared to believe that some of the scandals have actually been exaggerated, but, Zeus-almighty, it looks as if some haven't been ... and in any event what do these incidents say about the whole culture of the Church?

As for the immediate topic, credit where credit is due: religious morality was trumped in this case by commonsense thinking. At the same time, it was only religious morality that made it an issue in the first place. It remains the case that religious morality is always potentially in tension with good public policy on sex and reproduction, and that there is always good reason to fear a cruel outcome if religious morality is not challenged and restrained.

Other Comments by Russell Blackford

39. Comment #72036 by stephenray on September 20, 2007 at 7:32 am

Who decides the kids are to go to a catholic school?
The parents, that's who.
It is this sort of situation that prompts RD and others to label indoctrination of children into a faith as 'child abuse'. In this case, the adverse consequence could be more permanently harmful than your average paedophile.

Other Comments by stephenray

40. Comment #72542 by Eric Blair on September 21, 2007 at 2:26 pm

Jimbob, I'm not sure how much of your post is you and how much the RC magazine. But …

"Post-pubescent boys" may change the perpetrator from pedophile to rapist or sexual manipulator – depending on the victim's actual age -- but the effect is the same. Priests and other church leaders are using their position of authority to gratify themselves. Let's not be complacent about this.

I've always had problems with RD's equation of parents instilling religion in their kids with child abuse.

How many cases might you actually show where parents' actions hurt a child in a measurable way? If it's just a rhetorical accusation, it's pointless hyperbole that serves only to trivialize real child abuse.

Typical parents "teach" all kinds of things to their children that someone might decide should be called child abuse, from to smoking and drinking, to bad driving habits and bigotry.

The answer is to try to make up for these in the education system, not demonize parents.

EB

Other Comments by Eric Blair