Tony Norman's diatribe against the pope's comment that the widespread use of condoms to prevent HIV/AIDS "could make the problem worse" on the continent of Africa is most interesting ("The Pope's Message of No Hope on AIDS," March 20).
The difference in strategies between Mr. Norman and the pope for the prevention and spread of HIV/AIDS raises the question of what method is better - condoms or no condoms? I have my opinion, but I would rather refer to statistical studies from respected sources for an answer.
In 2008, Edward C. Green, director of the AIDS Prevention Research Project at the Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies, wrote that, "Many countries that have not seen declines in HIV have seen increases in condom use, but in every country worldwide in which HIV has declined there have been increases in levels of faithfulness and usually abstinence as well."
So the facts as presented by the Harvard studies counters Mr. Norman's premise that HIV/AIDS will diminish with the widespread use of condoms.
Mr. Norman also disdains the "orthodoxy" of the "old men" of the Catholic Church, but the Harvard study finds that the orthodoxy of abstinence and fidelity to one's spouse prevents the spread of HIV/AIDS and the unorthodox profligate use of condoms does not.
Mr. Norman's knowledge of Catholic moral theology and hermeneutics, which he uses to support his position, are in need of further education. Indeed, it would be appropriate for Mr. Norman to investigate this topic more closely instead of relying on his uninformed position and bias.