Sheridan, That is the kind of attitude that started teen pregnancy rates spiking in the United States. Yes, we are all well aware of the fact that abstinance is the only surefire way to prevent STIs and unplanned pregnancy. But to deny that people will still engage in sexual activity and promote an abstinance-only message is dangerous and, frankly, criminal. I am also further infuriated by your claim that those who contract HIV should "bear the consequenses of their actions." In other words, you would like to punish people for having sex. It is that kind of attitude that has lead to the anti-choice, anti-comprehensive sex education platforms that run rampant in the U.S. Your ultimate goal isn't to stop HIV, or decrease unwanted pregnancy, it is merely to control the sexuality of others, and punish them for not conforming to your own majorly screwed-up views of sexuality.

have to disagree with you Michelle. No one is denying the apparent statement that "people will still engage in sexual activity". So if having promiscuous sex is the obvious problem, should that not be what gets addressed?

And why are you "infuriated"? If you knowingly take on obvious risky lifestyles, shouldnt you be responsible for what happens? Who should be? In no way am I saying that I am happy that people get any type of STD, but is it our fault that they got it or theirs? No one is saying to punish people for having sex, but rather be accountable for your actions. Why should a gov't and its tax payers pay for someone elses bad choice? Why should tax dollars be used for that? Build a rec center.

Sheridan - "The unfortunate part of this is that other innocent people can then be infected, for instance their wives and yet to be born children"

So are you saying wives dont cheat and/or do these kinds of things? Its only the man?

Let me make sure I understand this... it is soccers responsibility to provide- for free!- all prostitutes, rooms, toys, protection, shopping lists, charts and graphs, display cases, transportation, health reports etc... FOR THE WORLD- because you cant keep it in your pants during a game? And I thought the airport and cell phone fees were too much!

Not to go way off topic but by providing contraceptives, it is indirectly promoting the prostitution industry, which most people are forced into.

Yes, giving out condoms and such provides a false security. People think that because they use a condom they will be fine. It encourages more people to go out and do as they please with the misconception that there will be no consequence. Self control is indeed a good remedy. Unfortunately, it's not given away for free.

"Self control is indeed a good remedy"

Why is it your business what folks should 'control?' They're adults, they are allowed to make such decisions, and be involved in such activities. What are you trying to remedy? The possibility that an infection could spread? Or their enjoyment of life?

"So if having promiscuous sex is the obvious problem"

Umm, no. The obvious problem is the spread of disease. It can be countered by allowing the distribution of condoms and educational literature. Combine that with zero regulation of a rampant underground industry (prostitution), and you have achieved the magical recipe for a black market, with serious negative side-effects.

Condoms allow a reasonable chance for safer sexual activity. They're not perfect, and that is made evident in the instructions included in every one I've ever bought, and certain to be on the literature distributed with them, but they do reduce the spread of disease. Simply imploring people to employ better 'self control' has led to increases in disease and pregnancy.

Simply implying other people are bad for enjoying themselves, and telling them to behave better is ineffective at best, and totally counter-productive at worst. As long as no one gets hurt (and condoms significantly improve that chance), what business do you have telling them how to live?

Agreed Fred!!!

I would like to add though: It is the responsibility of the organization to provide condoms. They have attracted an enormous amount of people to a country with an HIV/AIDs crisis. Any one there infected will take that to their home country and pontentially infect others. In fact they are most likely to infect others. Unless testing has improved in the last few years beyond my knowledge HIV/AIDs takes 6 months to register on tests. That's 6 months for an infected WC fan to return home, donate blood, and have multipul partners and for those partners to have multipul partners.

The South African HIV/AIDs organization is right to be paniced. Their country is at serious risk of being the source of making an already global crisis (HIV/AIDs) significantly worse.

The article said nothing about trying to control the fans or prostitution. Just hand out protection for those who want to have sex. People who want to have sex will. A condom isn't going to enourage them, just make them safer. FIFA get your head on straight you are making enough money from this, be charitable and let the South African charity organizations in to protect the fans. You should consider them experts and best equiped to handle the situation in their home country.

The provision of Birth Control and Condoms does not promote these behaviors, to say otherwise is a fallacious argument.

It is also cheaper to the tax payers to provide birth control and condoms, let's say $1 for the pill, and $0.25 condom than it is for tax payers to cover the end of life care, or a unplanned child, who may also contract the disease. HMM $1.25 for a sexual encounter or many many thousands of dollars for all of the "Consequences" later.

Humans as well as Animals also have the instinct to kill and fight for domination, mating rights, territory; it is only because society as a whole has demonized the act of killing that the majority of us can 'control' and subdue acting upon our instincts. Should we stop discouraging killing as well? The urge to have promiscuous sex with prostitutes and random people at the world cup (or at any time) does not seem to me like acting out on the need to procreate? If that was the case then why would they use a condom, would that not be counter productive in trying to procreate?

Sex is in NO WAY equivalent to murder. Nor is HIV/AIDS restricted to prostitution. There is a lot of religious rhetoric disguised as for "the public good"... the Jesus I was taught to believe in did not judge and treated prostitutes with compassion. Has anyone questioned why there is such rampant prostitution? I trust that is not because the folks are inherently immoral and somehow deserve their daily terror.

There is rampant prostitution because humans love sex. if there is money to be made doing something, you can bet your bottom dollar that people will be doing that. Its not a mind bender.

It is because these folks have no other economic opportunity. I dare say this is not a first choice career move. I suggest (we) the global we, not only invest in condoms but also in infrastructure, education and healthcare. Then and only then can we build a civilized and compassionate society. .

A society that actually cares for its brethren inherently encourages all of these lofty goals that are trying to be accomplished through shame and legislation.

Abstinence does not work... just ask the pope.

"happier lives through abstinence and good choices"

I don't know about you, but my life does NOT qualify as happier when I am abstinent. I don't know who you've been sleeping with...

And 'good choices'? Whose idea of 'good choices' are we talking about here? Yours? Admittedly, there are consequences of sleeping with a prostitute, but if someone is willing to take those risks (disease, etc) what business is it of yours? As long as the prostitute is willing, and not a slave, where's the harm?

"The only scientifically proven method for reducing the number of new cases of HIV/AIDS is through a concentrated campaign for abstinence."? Sorry Topper3 but someone had to call you out on that. Providing Safe Sex Education and means to birth control is actually the most effective way to reduce the transmission of STIs. This was proven time and time again in case studies in places all over the world.

Promoting abstinence is theoretically sound, but just isn't practical. People are going to have sex. Accept it. It may not be please your moral fibres but its the reality. If 1/2 prostitutes in South Africa have HIV/AIDS and people from all over the world are coming there, and some are having sex with these prostitutes, why shouldn't they be given condoms? Do you think giving someone a condom translates into 'come have sex with our prostitute'? If giving them out could spare even one person a life with HIV/AIDS, isn't it worth having condoms distributed?

Topper, you say that the only scientifically proven method for reducing HIV/AIDS is through an abstinence campaign. I'm not sure what constitutes "scientifically proven" to you, but every scientific study I have seen concludes that abstinence education does not work, and in fact, recent studies have shown that it can be counterproductive, to the extent that young people who take a vow of abstinence are FAR more likely than their peers to engage in unprotected sex. This is simply human nature, since if you take such a vow, you are not likely to carry a condom with you in case you fall short of your self-proclaimed standard.

the studies I have seen in comparing nations who promote an "abstinence only program" to those who promote a "safe sex education program" point out a huge disparity between the number of new cases of HIV/AIDS. In the SSEP country the number of cases continued to skyrocket while in the country with the AOP the number of HIV cases staye relatively the same over the past 15 years.

It is interesting to me that we all agree that holding people to a higher standard is ideal and yet nobody wants to do it. People will make mistakes, but those people who take an abstinence pledge will also recognize their mistake for what it is and will more than likely commit that mistake far less often than the child who hears, "Have sex as much as you want, just make sure you use a condom." The person having sex more often is more likely to contract an STD. Nobody can deny that.

Besides that, who says that teens want to be told that we can't trust them to make the right decisions and not put themselves at risk for these STDs and "unplanned pregnancies." All the teens that I work with and have seen especially in the past 5-10 years have wanted to be held to a higher standard. By doing so, we show we respect them and acknowledge their ability to do the right thing. Again, people failt to meet high standards all the time. That doesn't mean they shouldn't be set and we should just lower the bar.

Lest we forget, too, we are talking about adults who will be attending these games. Yes, they are free to make their own choices about with whom and how often they have sex. I'm just saying that they should be able to purchase their own condoms or those handing them out should have to pay to do so. I think it sends a better message of personal responsibility.

Topper~

I went to a school in which AOP was taught, and had a baptist church focus on faith based education. Here is a fun fact for you. 4 out of 5 students had sex by the time they graduated. 90% failure. We knew who had and who hadn't, do you think we would have told the adults the truth of that? No chance. Sorry but kids aren't going to talk to adults about sex, or whether or not they are active, especially if they know who is giving the poll. And latest research polls indicate that 85% of teen boys have sex by the time they are 18. AOP doesn't work, never has.

Please feel free to CITE these studies Topper, I have YET to see one that even came close to finding what you claim.

jmorgan, first of all, 4 out of 5 is an 80% failure rate. And it doesn't really sound like you counted exactly the number of teens who had sex, is that a true statistic? Perhaps it is and I hate to hear it. That doesn't disprove the method. Did they have it multiple times? Did you have experience with other schools who had the Sex Education program? What were your statistics from that school? And again, I didn't say that people weren't going to have sex just because they were told not to, I simply said that they would recognize it as a mistake or a failure. Teens will laugh that off and I'm guessing most of the teens having sex had access to condoms and used them regularly (despite the absitinence education, not because of it). I still believe whole heartedly that the message your school received was better than the "its okay, everybody's doing it, so just go have fun and be safe."

Oh, and in a serious question, were you told what to abstain from (in reference to Kenneth's comment below)? Did you learn that vaginal penetration was not the only form of "sex" and that one can extract STDs from other forms of sex?

Fred, while I couldn't find a direct link to a study- mostly because I didn't take the time- I didn't find this article which mentions the studies I've heard about: http://familylifenz.wordpress.com/2010/06/11/life-matters-a-defense-of-the-catholic-position-that-abstinence-and-fidelity-should-be-used-to-fight-hiv/.

sorry, *did find this article...

Not animals really?... after breastfeeding two children, conceived by sex, I am pretty sure I am a mammal. The notion that we are somehow not animal has done nothing for us but given us an inflated sense of entitlement that has caused us to destroy our own environment. Just because we have been given the gift of reason does not make us better, it makes us responsible for those lesser than we perceive ourselves.

Leenie, you have made a wise but very unpopular comment. Breast feeding made comments of animal behavior in my hearing, but it is truth. We also have instincts and I have observed that sexual desire varies greatly, and those who prefer abstinence seem never to have been overwhelmed by the urge. I was partnered with one who had little urge and he and his family seemed to think that abstinence was easily achieved. We are not all made the same. Yes, it is better to be safe than sorry, but alcohol also has it's effects and sobriety is also difficult for SOME to achieve. Be thankful if you have control of your urges, it helps prevent hasty actions. But recognize that all men may be created equal, but all are not endowed with urges equally, unfortunately. Abstinence should still be encouraged, but don't count on it! It's a fools wager!!

Why should sex between two consenting adults be delayed until marriage?

Oh... well that makes all the difference in the world! Since SA has legalized it, that means that it is completely safe! So there is no need for protection since it is legal for this event. That is great that they have banned all STDs from the Cup.

It's not just religion crap any more although perhaps historically religion based. Abstinance has taken to the education world, although not scientifically supported, it is taught so even those who aren't religious only have abstinance education in some areas.

P.S. Abstinance isn't crap. It's abstinance only sex education that is crap. The act of abstinance in its self does work. It's free and 100% effectiveness rate. Just have to rein in the animal instincts.

Who says anyone is judging them? All that has been stated is that for every decision their is a consequence. Unless people are completely ignorant, it would seem that the chance of getting an STD from a prostitute would be pretty common knowledge. If you decide to play with fire, your going to get burned.

kathryn,

So you are saying that if someone gets infected its the Bibles fault?

It doesnt matter what they do or dont believe, risky behaviour is still just that. Isnt it showing love to warn them of the danger AND to provide them with a fail safe option? Seems to me that you are in favor of pushing someone out there to get infected by telling them that its safe to do it... as long as they do it they way YOU want them to!

You are all missing the point with your abstinence/consequences BS! Yes, abstinence is an effective prevention measure, but so are condoms. There is no need for anyone to get STIs or to become pregnant unintentionally. By making condoms available and educating people about safer sex choices, we can virtually eliminate both. Recommending abstinence and making safer choices when choosing the alternative is not an either or proposition as you would have it. It is proved that abstinence only programs DO NOT WORK! So perhaps a better choice would be teaching abstinence as a fail safe method of prevention, while teaching safer methods for those who, no matter how hard you proselytize, are going to have sex anyway.

absenence works 100% of the time... when practiced. How many people do you know of who never had sex and still got an STD? When people like yourself go around telling people that there is nothing out there to worry about and do whatever, whenever to whoever, that is the problem.

News flash!: You dont have to believe in the Bible to get AIDS. You can try to ignore it all you want, but if you do the behavior of what gets it, why be surprised and toss blame when you do?

QUE?

Rick you are quite confused. Abstinence works fine to prevent STIs, however, programs that only teach abstinence do not. Sex is part of human nature. Some will follow religious dogma and wait for marriage, many others will not. Those who do not follow your particular brand of religion are just as entitled to a full and healthy life. Therefore, while there is nothing wrong with letting them know abstinence works, it is not full disclosure, as condoms and safer sex practices also work. A host of STIs are on the rise amongst teens who have only been taught abstinence because they haven't been taught that they can get STIs through the "back door," and without proper sex education, they think that abstinence only refers to vaginal penetration.

"How many people do you know of who never had sex and still got an STD?"

None, but I know plenty of virgins who want to blow their brains out. Sex is a natural, normal activity. Indeed, without it, people can go a little nuts. It's good exercise, with a much better payoff than a treadmill. Leave your judgementalism in your closet where it belongs.

Or would you rather I start telling you how to live your life?

they think that abstinence only refers to vaginal penetration

I'd be curious to know, Kenneth, if you have ever experienced an abstinence only program. How do you know they haven't been told what to abstain from? That was not meant to be sarcastic, because I haven't read up on all the literature, but I just want to know where this is coming from.

URIDIOTS-1874571

you 100% right, South Americans are fanatics about soccer games, more than religion, remember few years ago a goal keeper was killed, in Colombia or Venezuela, I am not sure, just because he missed the ball and the other team made the winner goal? at the Olimpics game, when the team arrive on his Country, he was shot dead at the airport; in my Country, we loose few Olympics games, and some fanatics comited suicide, they kill themselves because they lost the championship; and lets face it, man can not pratice abstinence, if there is a hot girl, they go for it and loose control, no matter what., it happens all the time!!!

your are the mucho angrys.....get helps

Bull@!$%#.

When used properly, condoms DO prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS, very effectively! If you want to continue believing in fairy tales such as god, that's fine, but DO NOT expect everyone to share your belief. Some people have brains.

why ignorance? adulterer or cheater, to me it is undestanding what it meant, if you did not understand, whom's the ignorant? however, why the insult, moron..

I'm glad you are able to use overly complex language to make yourself sound "smart," and humans could be considered animals, but our "superior reasoning power" makes us more accountable for our actions. I have to say that I am not an athiest, and I do believe in supporting abstinence. That being said, it is extremely ignorant to preach abstinance as the end-all-be-all method of safe sex. I believe abstinence should be strongly encouraged for our youth, but we cannot kid ourselves - people are always going to have sex. Instead, I think we should encourage abstinence ALONG with encouraging the use of condoms. Making them easily and discretely available would be a huge help, especially for teens.

Raul CP

Why don't you Self-Righteous ignorants ABSTAIN yourselves from trying to spread you MORALITY/IDIOCY? To oppose the distribution of condoms to prostitute seeking-drunk-horny tourists is a position that guarantees 100% risk of contracting a disease. Keep your outlook self-dillusions to yourselves. I would abstain from attacking your superstitions if only you would keep them in your churches.

why is it the responsibility of the gov't to provide condoms to the world? If you can afford to travel 5,000 + miles to watch a game, then you can afford a box of rubbers! If you are not prepared, then dont play. I would bet you that none of those players would get on the field without a cup!

Whereas you are making it a religious issue, it is actually pretty much common sense to not do a dangerous activity if you are not prepared. Hey, I want to street race, why doesnt the gov't provide me with a Ferrari? Why should I buy my own? If they dont get me one, then they are endagering everyone because I drive a crappy car. People should provide for their own vices.

Nobody is charging you or the government for the condoms. These non-profit organizations will provide them. And I am responding to the people who are opposed to the distribution of these free condoms (once again nobody is sending you or the goverment the bill for them). the yare opposed to this because according to them ABSTINENCE is the only way. I am not opposed to people going to church and praying to a non-existent being, at least in my view. While I am not in favor of self-dillusion it does not cost me a cent.

I would bet you that none of those players would get on the field without a cup!

You'd lose the bet...

raul

you do realize that non-profits get most of their money from gov't right? And you also realize that the gov't gets its money from taxes from its citizens right? So you also realize that you are incorrect in saying that it is not provided by the gov't or tax payers right? Whereas it is partly true that they dont directly send a bill to me or Uncle Sam, they do not have fund raisers on the corner at a red light asking for condom donations that they can give away to the world. That is known as "taxes". Then you also pay more in these taxes when the dummy you are trying to defend "doesnt feel like" using a condom, but still wants to get some, gets infected and you have to pay for his treatments at the "free" clinic. Just because the word "free" is there, doesnt make it so.

Rick,

I have a pretty good understanding what taxes are. My wife works for a non-profit organization and they do not receive money from the government, what they don't get from direct private donations they get from grants from private foundations. And even if these condoms they want to distribute in Africa came from a dispensary funded directly by the Federal Government it would bother me less than when my tax dollars go to fund guns, bullets and explosives. Mostly because they will go to prevent the spread of disease rather than to spread misery. A very "Christian-like" position from an atheist.

Unfortunately this discussion has turned to politics, because what set me off in the first place was the "abstinence-only no-condom" stance of the "Holier-than-Thou" crowd.

I never said no condoms or that they dontwork. I said that if they want them, they should get them themselves and not rely on others to get it for them. I said abstinence will 100% prevent all STDs, condoms dont.

What brought me into the discussion was the "abstinence cant prevent anything" crowd. I think that if you have a vice, it should not be anyone elses responsibility to fund it. If you (not you, but people) want to do drugs, have guns, have free promiscuous lifestyle- fine! Just dont come to me to clean up via a hand out because you were not responsible for yourself. Sex should not be a gov't (or anyone other than the one involved) funded activity- including the consequences of it. If it brings a baby...should I have to pay for it? Thats getting screwed without getting laid!

Oddly enough, I don't think Jesus would have commented on it. I think he would have quoted Scripture, then said something cryptic in sort of a riddle format, turning it back on the individual to interpret it him/herself.

I frankly don't think there is an answer at all. Sex is neither good nor bad. Neither is disease really. If we want to kill ourselves with AIDS or other STDs, why, that's our prerogative and God isn't going to stop us from doing it.

Love your post, Alanna... Smart, well written. Well done!

I agree with you Alanna. But I also think that he would not have opposed the distribution of the free condoms. Which is what these self-proclaimed Christians maintain and propose abstinence as the only solution. I am only trying to remind them that the character they revere and should aspire to emulate, according to their own scripture, was charitable, compassionate and loathed self-righteousness.

Not everybody's sexual behavior is similar, much less the same. Nobody has the right to dictate anyone else's either. And to the present point, nobody has a right to oppose free public health measures for any reason, much less if it is to impose their own personal "morality".

Great posts as well, Raul CP. Agreed, agreed, agreed...

You've said everything that I would have liked to have said, only much more eloquently. Bravo...

Try telling the millions of HIV-positive children in Africa that their parents should have abstained from having sex. Try telling the spouses of these tourists lacking self-control that you had a chance to allow their spouses to have free condoms but chose to chastise them instead.

Abstinence flies out the window in the heat of the moment. Even the best of us can loose self control. I have twin sons. When they became teenagers, I put a box of condoms in the linen closet and told them to use them as needed. I also told them the box would be unending and no questions would be asked. It worked, I had no teen pregnancies to contend with and no std's as well.

I find it amusing that pretty much the only example of abstinence not working is in the bible with the example of the "virgin" Mary.

That irony duly noted, NO ONE HERE IS SAYING ABSTINENCE DOESN'T WORK. That would be a positively asinine position. Actually READ what people are saying. The abstinence-only approach to sex education is what doesn't work, and this has been shown time and time again. Do a simple 2 minute search on PubMed.

"Abstinence-only curricula have been found to contain scientifically inaccurate information, distorting data on topics such as condom efficacy, and promote gender stereotypes. An independent evaluation of the federal program, several systematic reviews, and cohort data from population-based surveys find little evidence of efficacy and evidence of possible harm. In contrast, comprehensive sexuality education programs have been found to help teens delay initiation of intercourse and reduce sexual risk behaviors. Abstinence-only policies violate the human rights of adolescents because they withhold potentially life-saving information on HIV and other sexually transmitted infections."

Wow. Thanks, science.

Are there isolated studies that say otherwise? Of course. There's usually a study for most parts of a spectrum, but the MAJORITY opinion from science is that abstinence only education is worthless.

I personally always love the saying, "A man has a brain and a penis, but only enough blood to use one at a time." Throw in alcohol and sports and my god... completely take the brain out of the equation.

Sports are based on such primal, animalistic (and yes we are animals, anyone who thinks otherwise learned nothing from biology [not "believing" in it doesn't make it any less factual, I'm sorry]) instincts... us vs. them, domination and victory, it's easy to see how anyone could get carried away.

When it comes to looking at this from what is undoubtedly a sexist viewpoint, the issue of male prostitution seems vastly unexplored, in this article and in general... not to mention I'm not sure how much of the fan base is female, etc., so I really can't guess at that side of the issue; I bet it will also be a problem, as is the everpresent worry of sexual assault/rape (especially scary with those HIV statistics).

As for all those fancy metaphors you have for abstinence, those work much better for birth control. I especially like the parachute one. People abstaining from skydiving would just keep riding in the plane. Those who make the jump have to be sure to pack protection for the fall ;-)

Rick7030 -

Are you secretly Dr. Phil?

LOL! No, just someone trying to make sense with the senseless.

Raul CP

Try telling the millions of HIV-positive children in Africa that their parents should have abstained from having sex. Try telling the spouses of these tourists lacking self-control that you had a chance to allow their spouses to have free condoms but chose to chastise them instead.

first off, with the children, you are talking about something you apparently have no idea about. Many parts of MUSLIM (so you dont blame Christians for everything) Africa, they do not believe in any type of contraceptive. Even if they know for a fact that they have AIDS, their culture does not allow them to use condoms. That is a cultural issue. Dont you think that the children already thought that they would not be tortured like this if the parent didnt have sex knowing they had AIDS? Why do you want to put that on the child Raul? Isnt that the parents fault? Not the child or the gov't. So you want to blame the gov't that an AIDS infected person continued his/her behaviour? And the partner didnt care to do anything about it if they knew? You are sick!

Second... is it the responsibility of SA to report to the spouses what they were up to? If they did, then you would say that they are intruding on personal matters. But now, you want them to claim responsibility for an unfaithful spouse?! So with your logic- they should call all the spouses to say that if your husband/wife/boy/girlfriend gives you something... its not our fault because we gave him the resources to cheat on you properly?