I never quite understood why people get so hot and bothered when they discuss condoms on campus. Mention the contraceptive device and you are sure to get a heated response, for all the world as though the presence, or otherwise, of a condom machine on campus would make any difference whatsoever in the general scheme of things. Do people seriously believe that the availability of a condom vending machine on the University grounds is a make-or-break issue? What does it say about our student population, and the nation as a whole, that we waste so much time arguing about the location of a vending machine!
News-flash everyone: if kids want to have sex they can purchase a box of condoms from their neighbourhood pharmacy. If they feel uncomfortable asking for the stuff, they can go and buy a packet from a supermarket, or if push comes to shove they can get a box from the many vending machines available in bars, restaurants and places of entertainment.
Getting hold of condoms is not an issue, and we should not treat it as such.
What IS an issue, in my opinion, is having academics at the University treat us all like a bunch of idiots. The local press reported that a priest who forms part of the Faculty of Theology, Fr Ray Zammit, took an active role in the discussion, making some truly startling statements.
Fr Zammit apparently compared the use of contraceptives to being a paedophile or a heroin addict. In other words: if you have sex but choose not to risk getting pregnant or getting HIV, you are at par with a child molester.
I can only assume that the good Father was trying to make a point without considering the substance of what he was saying. Otherwise I would have to think that, according to him, the great majority of couples are destined for the fires of hell… how else does he explain the fact that the birth rate in Malta is in freefall?
Housewives can now pick up a packet of condoms with the milk and bread at their local supermarket. The theory of supply and demand explains that shops will make something available only if people want to buy it – so the presence of condoms (as opposed to thermometers for women to take their daily temperature) on supermarket shelves next to shampoo and other toiletries is a clear indicator of the preferred form of contraception in Malta. People are voting with their wallets.
What is even more reprehensible is that Fr Zammit claimed that the only country in Africa where HIV infections has been reduced is Uganda, where abstinence and being faithful were promoted. Condoms had nothing to do with it, apparently.
Now, much as it pains me to admit it, our youngsters are not renowned for their general knowledge and a grasp of current affairs. It is likely that the great majority of his listeners accepted his statement as a fact and walked away thinking that using a condom is not useful in preventing the spread of sexually-transmitted diseases.
The reality, however, is that Fr Zammit totally misrepresented what happened in Uganda.
The first AIDS case was diagnosed in this country in 1982. Unfortunately, the country was going through a major upheaval at the time, and it was only in 1986 (when the civil war ended), that something was done about the spread of the disease. By then, around 15% of the population were HIV-positive.
A strong campaign was launched, urging people to Abstain, Be Faithful and Use a Condom (ABC). The number of condoms distributed annually by international groups rose from 1.5 million in 1992 to nearly 10 million in 1996.
An interesting point is that the main reason for the dramatic reduction in the number of people with AIDS in Uganda is the high number of AIDS-related deaths in the 1990s. People were not abstaining from having sex – they were dropping like flies. The dead are not promiscuous.
During the 1990s the Ugandans were encouraged to be frank about sex. The government made a conscious effort to eliminate the taboos associated with the topic, and encouraged monogamy and the use of condoms. This helped reduce the number of new infections, and also contributed to the reduction of HIV patients in the country.
However, the situation has now changed. The Government has caved in to US pressure to promote abstinence-based prevention programmes, with funding for the campaigns being administered by faith-based organisations that attempt to discourage condom use – much as Fr Zammit is doing at the University of Malta.
In 2004 and 2005 condom distribution almost ground to a halt. The result is that HIV infections in Uganda appear to be on the rise again.
AIDS has had a devastating impact on Uganda. Approximately a million people have died, leaving to mourn them over a million orphans. A country which up to a few years ago was widely praised for acting decisively in the fight against AIDS is now being criticised for losing momentum.
The government in Uganda is now re-assessing the situation and we can only hope that they will opt to return to the previous comprehensive HIV-prevention strategy, advocating not only abstinence and fidelity, but also regular condom use and HIV testing.
So much for the argument that Uganda is a case study for the success of abstinence-only campaigns.
Members of the clergy have every right to advocate abstinence and good moral conduct. In fact they would be remiss if they did not do so, because it is their job. However they should base their argument on morality and theology, and not try to confuse their listeners by making bogus scientific arguments. Unfortunately when they do so, they risk alienating their audience, who will end up dismissing everything they say. This is a pity, because our young people sorely need a strong voice guiding them through these turbulent times of change.
FAA and their letter of objection An online petition launched by FAA objecting to Renzo Piano’s plans for the regeneration of Valletta attracted 600 signatures. Each person who “signed” the form generated an email that was sent to MEPA, so it is to be assumed that the Authority’s objections inbox was full to overflowing last week.
Some people have implied that 600 is not a large number of objections and that we can safely ignore these people. Well, anyone making this statement should keep in mind that last year an election was won with a surplus of just 1,500 votes.
Kind of puts things into perspective, doesn’t it?
www.claudinecassar.com
Any comments?
If you wish your comments to be published in our Letters pages please click button below. Please write a contact number and a postal address where you may be contacted.
Search:
MALTATODAY
BUSINESSTODAY
Download MaltaToday Sunday issue front page in pdf file format
All the interviews from Reporter on MaltaToday's YouTube channel.
Do people seriously believe that the availability of a condom vending machine on the University grounds is a make-or-break issue? What does it say about our student population, and the nation as a whole, that we waste so much time arguing about the location of a vending machine!
