This is Moral?
Sep. 25th, 2008 10:49 amOn my morning jog, I ran by a newspaper box. The headline read "Catholic Students Won't Get Cancer". For a moment I pondered what possible mechanism would cause this (while also thanking my lucky stars that I went to Catholic schools). Then I realized that I probably hadn't read the whole headline. Checking online I discover that that was the case. The headline reads: Catholic students won't get cancer vaccine.
Apparently they're doing this on moral grounds. They don't want to be seen as condoning pre-marital sex. Because, naturally, no woman in the history of the world ever got HPV from her husband after their wedding night.
You know, even saying that this will inevitably hurt some percentage of blushing virgin-until-married women is missing the point. It's simply none of the church's business if some girl wants to celebrate her 16th birthday by taking on the football team. For the record, I'd probably agree that that's not a terribly healthy sweet-sixteen, but it's not my business either.
Simply put, it doesn't matter if the mechanism for cervical cancer is a sexually transmitted disease, a true catholic should be worried about saving lives. Pragmatically, a saved life is a life with a greater opportunity for a saved soul. Do they really need an atheist like me to tell them that?
Bishop Henry (and his masters in Rome) don't seem to worry about that though. Is it that they just want to make sure that sex leads to punishment or is it just that they lack a cervix?
(crossposted to
calgarians)
Apparently they're doing this on moral grounds. They don't want to be seen as condoning pre-marital sex. Because, naturally, no woman in the history of the world ever got HPV from her husband after their wedding night.
You know, even saying that this will inevitably hurt some percentage of blushing virgin-until-married women is missing the point. It's simply none of the church's business if some girl wants to celebrate her 16th birthday by taking on the football team. For the record, I'd probably agree that that's not a terribly healthy sweet-sixteen, but it's not my business either.
Simply put, it doesn't matter if the mechanism for cervical cancer is a sexually transmitted disease, a true catholic should be worried about saving lives. Pragmatically, a saved life is a life with a greater opportunity for a saved soul. Do they really need an atheist like me to tell them that?
Bishop Henry (and his masters in Rome) don't seem to worry about that though. Is it that they just want to make sure that sex leads to punishment or is it just that they lack a cervix?
(crossposted to
no subject
Date: 2008-09-25 05:45 pm (UTC)Declining the vaccine on the basis of not enough evidence is one thing (there's still papers being published debating it) but this is crap.
Sounds like it's time for another letter to the Board.
ETA: And, if I'm not mistaken, they still distribute the Hep B vaccine in the Catholic system, which is primarily a STD. It's just silly grandstanding.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-25 05:56 pm (UTC)/sarcasm
no subject
Date: 2008-09-25 06:45 pm (UTC)Probably the first, possibly enabled by the second.
Good deconstruction, though. There are a couple of implicit assumptions in the rationale behind denying access to HPV vaccines that are unfounded:
1) "Sex is bad/immoral." (The rationalization being that sex outside of marriage is immoral, but the underlying sentiment being that sex, period, is naughty stuff that should only be engaged in at arm's length, so to speak, and never enjoyed.)
2) "Allowing access to a vaccine to prevent a multi-year-incubating STD will automatically and unavoidably lead to teen girls having promiscuous sex at every opportunity."
I agree with you. The girl celebrating her 16th birthday by taking on the football team may not necessarily be making a particularly smart decision, but the problems with it aren't *moral* problems, and I'd have to submit that whether or not she got her HPV vaccine 6 years ago probably won't be a large factor in that decision.
(I won't indulge in the rant about Catholic and, to an only slightly lesser extent, "Protestant" fundamentalist, sex-negative propaganda in general .. at least not this time.)
no subject
Date: 2008-09-25 06:45 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-09-25 06:53 pm (UTC)I would love to slap the 'moral' decision. I've already had to get the call to come in for intense testing for a 2 year duration because of anomalous tests results. It's one of the worst feelings you can have, having your doctor make an appointment for the Cross Cancer Institute.
I hope some of these parents get to live with their daughters when they get the call and then wonder at the morality of the decision before it's too late.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-25 09:06 pm (UTC)Me too... every time I read about it.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-26 08:11 pm (UTC)