(Brazilian) Supermodel Gisele Bundchen (former girlfriend of Hollywood actor Leonardo Di Caprio) has outraged Catholics over the world by publicly denouncing the Church’s beliefs.
Almost every newspaper in the world has headlines which carry her controversial remarks:
“Today no one is a virgin when they get married … show me someone who’s a virgin!”
Further to the controversy, Jon Holato makes a (good imo) point:
Celebrities often mistakes themselves for politicians, and seem to think that the rest of the world actually cares remotely about what they think on ethical and social issues. The reality is that celebrities are usually famous for reasons that are anything but moral and righteous.
To me, it’s not about whether people are virgins or not. It’s about the right each one of us has to choose what we want.
Gisele is obviously free to choose to not be a virgin.
She is also free to choose to slam the Church.
The Church in turn is free to choose to ignore her.
The Church is also free to tell her followers what they believe to be the right way.
And even within the Church, Catholics are free to listen.
Or not to.
Ultimately we all have free will.
But that doesn’t mean that our choices are right.
Who decides what is right or not? We Catholics believe it to be the Church.
And Gisele if you don’t, well you’re free to that opinion too.
Just don’t expect us to change our opinion because it doesn’t agree with yours.
And oh, my hand’s raised.
Tags: AIDS, Brazilian, Catholic-Church, Condoms, Contraception, Family-Planning, Fornication, Free-Will, Gisele-Bundchen, Sex, Supermodel, The-Right-To-Choose, Virginity, Virgins
; ?>/feed-icon-24x24.png){kind=icon}
June 7th, 2007 at 11:25 am
well…the virginity comment aside, Ms.Bündchen is opposing the church on some valid points like the use of condoms and women’s right to abortion.
Although abortion is a topic with both sides having a point each, the church prohibiting the use of contraception is, forgive me for being blasphemic here, stupid. Look at the number of AIDS cases growing around the world…and it is well known that condoms are helpful in protecting from AIDS & other STDs.
Unless, of course, His Holiness would want catholics around the world to believe that saying your prayers after having unprotected sex will reduce your risk of getting AIDS!!!!
June 7th, 2007 at 12:45 pm
i’d rather look at Gisele
June 7th, 2007 at 12:52 pm
Stupid? According to you Ashish & others who subscribe to the view.
Please do not assume that everyone subscribes to this view though. I definitely do not. And I do not appreciate people calling my views/the view of my faith stupid because it’s different from theirs.
“Unless, of course, His Holiness would want catholics around the world to believe that saying your prayers after having unprotected sex will reduce your risk of getting AIDS!!!!”
A sarcastic statement which is completely far from the truth. The Church would have us believe in Virginity before marriage & Monogamy after.
However it is your right to say & believe what you want.
@ St:
As would a million other men, I’m sure!
June 7th, 2007 at 1:14 pm
silly.. who is Jon Haloto and who is he to decide what morality is?
btw she isnt forcing/expecting u to change ur opinion but she tried to advise in her own way by outright condemnation of church… to get free of the shackles and to stop believing blindly…
seriously .. not using of contraceptives was stupid enuff to defend virginity before marriage..
how about family planning after marriage? isnt that blasphemy too
ok what “i think” Jon Halato wanted to say is that not every one can and should live like celebrities and they(celebs) should stop giving advices..
now what i want to say is that .. not everyone can be as self-controlling as the pope and the church is
…
June 7th, 2007 at 1:24 pm
And if Gisele Bundchen has “tried to advise in her own way” as you put it, we are free to reject such (unsolicited) advice too aren’t we?
As we are free to believe what we want & the right to choose to do what we want based on our beliefs.
While I don’t necessarily subscribe to everything in other religions / other religious leaders say to their people, I do not go around calling them stupid or telling them what I think they should do. Because that would make me a bigot.
June 7th, 2007 at 1:26 pm
and oh by the way its not about the ones who have a firm view on .. think about those people who really want to do things(by their own choice) but a ‘belief’ in church is stopping them .. so this woman’s advice was well enuff for those who are willing to break free.
June 7th, 2007 at 1:38 pm
Or do you think people like you or Ms. Bundchen need tell us what we need to “break free” from?
June 7th, 2007 at 1:43 pm
heh! oh my! u got offended
.. sorry
Come on!! not using contraceptives!! what else did i say stupid .. if the church wants to make the followers to be virgin before marriage they can just SAY and not give false logics of not using contraceptives..
i talked about family planning after marriage for the same reason..
June 7th, 2007 at 1:44 pm
precisely….!!!
see, the point here is not whether the viewpoint I carry is correct, or if the viewpoint advocated by the church is correct…the point is that we as people have stopped trying to rationalise with another point of view. which i why I say that though we are really many pages into our belief books, we forget the first lesson…
and that, irrespective of faith, is being tolerant of another’s views.
June 7th, 2007 at 1:48 pm
Now the Church has it’s own understanding into Virginity, (the lack of using) Contraception & even Family Planning.
I don’t want to go into depth into any of them but I’m sure they’re available online if you want to read.
Regardless of that though, it’s really the Church’s choice to understand things as they choose & the believer’s choice to accept the teachings or not.
And others who don’t believe are free to say so - but as I said we won’t change our opinions because they differ from theirs.
I think the world would be a better place if everyone respected everyone else’s opinions & views. But hey, that maybe just me.
June 7th, 2007 at 1:49 pm
Absolutely.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:03 pm
The church prohibiting the use of contraception is a bit funny ….
Contraceptives can *also* be used by *married* people. I don’t know what is the Church’s stand on married men using condoms ( of course with their wives
). Is the Church against use of any kind of birth control method ?
I really wonder how catholics go about family planning ? What technique ? The Pope may not need one but what about the general folks ?
P.S : No offense meant.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:04 pm
heh! its absolutely ur right to what u believe and preach(advice) people…
similarily .. its absolutely her right to what Ms. Bundchen believes in and advice people..
but one’s belief should not torment millions of people.. Ms. Bundchen’s belief is open .. it has a choice… church doesn’t.. its as simpe
..
one who has a completely different lifestyle may want to believe in Jesus.. but if church wants to impose a compulsory link between LIFESTYLE and CHRISTIANITY .. i call it forcing down the throat..
there was this religion .. where people underwent mass suicides by drowning into river … because the prophet wanted them to do so.. and its perfectly fine since they wanted to ‘believe’ in something … but influencing hundreds thru belief is wat i dont like … influence thru logic n reason if u can
anyway .. i think its the same rhetoric thing that goes on everywhere..
.. take no offenses and sorry for calling that point stupid even though i still hold the view 
June 7th, 2007 at 2:07 pm
That being said, this is not the platform to answer your questions. That was not what this post was about. Do check online, I’m sure you’ll find the resources you’re looking for.
PS: Appreciate the PS. None taken.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:11 pm
the problem with faith always is that there are believers, and there are sceptics. Now if Hitler would have had his way with the world, one of us would have been thrown in a concentration camp just for airing our views
but since he isn’t around…all i can say is no offense meant from my side…opinions are opinions you know..and i would want mine to leave a bad taste
June 7th, 2007 at 2:19 pm
I’m sorry you think millions of people are being tormented by the Church’s beliefs. I definitely am not part of that million - and I know a WHOLE LOT of others who aren’t too.
I’m saying it again -> Ultimately one has the right to believe what they want to
In the mass suicide thing you talk about - that is brain washing - which you perhaps think Christianity is about!! - even there I think people have a choice to believe or accept in blind faith. I have read the life of Jim Jones (which perhaps is what you’re referring to) & lots of people did get out before the mass suicide.
I know for a fact that I wouldn’t commit suicide if the Church told me tomorrow (even though I know it won’t).
And fyi, the Church has lots of reasons why it advocates what it does. Perhaps they do not merit themselves as “reasons” to you / all but as I was saying - it is the Church’s right to believe what it does. And her followers right to accept it or not.
“take no offenses and sorry for calling that point stupid even though i still hold the view”
Appreciate this. Have no issues with you holding on to whatever view you have - wasn’t trying to influence you anyway.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:20 pm
June 7th, 2007 at 2:36 pm
“Who decides what is right or not? We Catholics believe it to be the Church”. This standpoint looks a bit dangerous to me. The Church comprises of men/women like you and me who are all imperfect. By blindly following them, people can see, perceive things from their viewpoint only, but again as you say it is your choice what you want to believe.
But still, I would have agreed with you more if you would have said the basis to decide what is right or not is the Bible/Jesus rather than the Church.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:44 pm
June 7th, 2007 at 3:12 pm
@Mel : That was not always true. If you read up the chapters of history you will know what I am talking about. There have been many conflicts in the past with what Church preached and what people thought. Take for instance the Church’s standpoint against the scientific findings by many of the scientists, the birth of the protestant sect, etc.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:22 pm
It’s very heartening to see a person defend his faith but I feel one needs to criticize where criticism is due. You and I might choose or choose not to accept the Church’s advice on using contraceptives but what of the average poor African who’s preached by ‘men of faith’ against the use of condoms, and follows it out of fear of invoking God’s wrath?
June 7th, 2007 at 3:28 pm
well…in all fairness…I did say one of us…
didn’t really say which one
June 7th, 2007 at 4:44 pm
Thank you & sure.
“what of the average poor African who’s preached by ‘men of faith’ against the use of condoms, and follows it out of fear of invoking God’s wrath?”
Then those same men, if they are that “fearful” of God’s wrath will keep the other teachings & not have pre-marital sex or be anything but monogamous.
June 7th, 2007 at 4:45 pm
Incidentally, just a side note (not related to the post!) whenever I don’t understand any teaching of the Church - or disagree with it at face value - I always study up on WHY it is so. 100% of the time I’ve agreed with the Church after study.
But then I’m a practicing Catholic to start with. I do not expect everyone to feel the same.
@ Ashish: lol
June 7th, 2007 at 4:50 pm
Some points that go against both sides:
There is no free will. Free will is a myth. You should read some of the latest scientific american articles on the topic. Or if you don’t want to get too technical about it, just read Scott Adam’s blog (the creator of Dilbert comics.)
A few scientists now claim that HIV and AIDS has no connection (and thus unprotected sex and AIDS should not be connected either). (Many people who have AIDS *don’t* have HIV.) There is a higher co-relation between Benzene and Aids. Benzene is an ingredient found in many sexual balms and jellies. (More gay people tend to use these - and that may be one reason why gay people are more probable to get AIDS.)
Last I heard - Jesus had an affair with Mary Magdalene. And yes - the Discovery channel showed that. It was based on gnostic papers found from Egypt (One of them being the Gospel of Philip). (The whole Da Vinci Code gossip is based on that too.) Feel free to claim that the Gospel of Philip is not accurate because it was never added to the Bible. But not before you find out how the new testament was compiled.
Unfortunately - all the Church’s decisions are not based on Bible and Jesus’s teachings. It is based on the Pope’s “interpretations.” History shows us that many Popes were evil and power-hungry to twist the Bible for their own benefit.
Do your own research people. Stop letting other people and institutions think for you.
June 7th, 2007 at 5:12 pm
(01) I do believe in Free Will. But thx for the pointer, will definitely read up. Any links?
(02) Very very interesting about the HIV AIDS relation or the lack of one.
(03) There are also other programmes which claim Jesus was gay, that He was an Indian Guru, that He died & His grave was discovered etc etc. I choose not to believe things which are (a) against what Scripture teaches me & which are (b) without any firm base in itself!
(04) You’re right about many of the teachings being based on the Pope’s interpretations, as well as the part of earlier Pope’s being politically minded (so much that they did do evil).
But that being said, I have studied on the reasons why the Church takes a stand on these issues (have you?) and I choose to agree with the Church.
Why do people assume that if one agrees with an institution that they have neither done any research nor are thinking for themselves?
Or are you saying that the only way one can think for themselves is to choose an opposing view to other people / institutions?
June 7th, 2007 at 6:22 pm
mel.. regarding ur 24th comment..
y? remains unanswered. ok! a choice!) and affairs outside marriage..
yes. everyone knows y this contraceptive thing was introduced by the church.. u know to stop pre-marital se
so for family planning .. the natural family planning(NFP) is advocated.
issues.
1. MANY donot know about NFP and it has a failure rate of 25%. how is church going to deal with countries with population explosion and also with STDs.
2. cant the NFP techniques also be used by the ones who anyway want to do things? (both premarital and extramarital affairs) — so y does the church advocate NFP techniques too .. its like giving alternative to the perpetrators(perpetrators acc. to church)..
the church believes that “if we say using contraceptives is blasphemy, then people are going to be in control”… but y dont they just teach “premarital sex and extramarital affairs are blasphemy”(with no tags added)
this condemnation of contraceptive use is just a redundancy.. a redundancy with adverse effects.. most adverse to some communities and countries.. and hence i called it stupidity.. its like disturbing an established balance..
anyway came across this thing by Voltaire on virginity..
“It is an infantile superstition of the human spirit that virginity would be thought a virtue and not the barrier that separates ignorance from knowledge.”
@Philomath: benzene and AIDS?
June 7th, 2007 at 6:24 pm
oops unintended smiley .. it was ..
“u know to stop pre-marital sex (y? remains unanswered…”)
June 7th, 2007 at 7:05 pm
Thanks Melody.
(01) Can’t point you to any links online. I read about it offline. But do a search for Benjamin Libet. He proved that your nerves shoot impulses *before* your concious mind makes the decision.
If unconcious processes and impulses are the initiators of actions, then there can be no free will.
(03) That Jesus and Mary Magdalene had something between them is based on the Gospel of Philip. I myself haven’t read the translation of the Gospel of Philip. But I doubt Discovery channel would interprete the translations that badly. I think gnostic writings are a good firm base for forming conclusions.
No scripture says that Jesus was single and couldn’t marry and/or have an affair (as far as I know). So Jesus+Mary isn’t against scripture teachings either.
(04) Tell me Melody: did you first do your research and then formed the opinion that the Church is right? Or did you start off with the conclusion that the Church is right and then did your research?
If you did your studies before forming your conclusions, my salute to you. You are indeed amongst the minority.
Unfortunately, most people don’t do that.
June 7th, 2007 at 7:13 pm
Virgo & others:
Benzene & Aids:
http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/data/sblubejob.htm
June 7th, 2007 at 7:29 pm
@philomath: interesting comments, but if all you base point(03) on is a discovery channel programme, then you are totally misplaced. Discovery channel doesn;t have any proof, and their documentary was totally inconclusive without any decision for or against this so-called relationship(i happen to have seen that one).
also dude(ette), people will always have their own beliefs, and the beauty of free will is not only in having your own but in letting people have theirs too…otherwise by forcing your opinion on them, you are no more than another dictator in the making…
so chill out, and stay away from benzene
June 7th, 2007 at 8:25 pm
Oh My God! Where was I when this honeypot of God-talk flowed over?
The mass of ideas above me is overpowering, but here’s my point anyway.
Everyone who disagrees with the Church is free to do so. But in the end, it is not about the Church.
Look at it this way. Why do you suppose your ideas (about virginity, contraception or whatever) are more valid? Because they are yours. The Church and people who choose to follow it are equally sure about what they believe in. Try and empty your heads of things ‘learned’ and then look at things. People choose for themselves.
Speaking of which… Philomath, you crack me up. (There is no free will. Free will is a myth.) While I agree free will is debatable, its always funny to see people fall for one research or another and profess with definitive surety that “Thare is no free will.” If you expect to criticise someone’s faith and have your ideas debated with fairness, I would expect you to use the words ‘may’ and ‘could’ more. You can’t bundle together a bunch of ‘findings’ and label it research. I could say people who hide behind pseudonyms in online discussions are all perverts and I could find ’scientific’ evidence to back that up as well.
Scott Adams is intelligent. But using his blog to research isn’t really academic. Same goes for his blogs. They are intelligent but not definitive.
June 7th, 2007 at 8:46 pm
Also, I am as big a fan of Discovery Channel as the next guy, but they are more into features than documentaries. Its more about possibilities than actual research. National Geographical is more for you if you are into research.
June 7th, 2007 at 9:23 pm
And to Mel: I dodn’t quite get your reply to Harsha in comment 23.
June 8th, 2007 at 12:20 am
oh yes. even my last reply was directed to ur 23rd comment not 24th(typo).. i just made Harsha’s point more elaborate(with one more point of mine) since u dint quite get what he wanted to say..
heh! i saw ur other posts on virginity and stuff and the replies too.. heh people seem to get real shaken-up by such posts
June 8th, 2007 at 12:30 am
@ Virgo: There are so many flaws in your comment, I wouldn’t know where to start! But I think it would be best if you just read Vijay’s comment (32) & understand where I’m coming from. I have no more energy at this point to keep trying to make you understand! Perhaps tomorrow.
@ Philomath: “I think gnostic writings are a good firm base for forming conclusions” - this is where you & I differ. I do not accept these writings & you do. But, to each our own.
June 8th, 2007 at 1:18 am
arre baba.. i got what vijay wanted to say and i have been sticking to it all along(i think). i dont and should not have objection in what u believe and what u dont..
i just objected how can u justify(morally, because people’s lives are at stake) a thing which can have adverse effects for certain communities and countries? i dont have a prob if someone thinks virginity is good/bad or polygamy is bad/good…
just see for urself harsha’s comment(and my elaborated one if u dint get his point) and think whether the church is going in a right direction by advising not to use contraceptives. i read church’s view on contraceptives and its reasons to teach so.. and this is what i understood.. they just ignored the repercussions
cheers!
June 8th, 2007 at 2:22 am
I believe, if there anyone is so “fearful” of the “wrath of God” that they buy into the Church’s teachings to use contraception, then it stands to reason that these same people should by default be also “fearful” of the “wrath of God” and buy into the Church’s teachings to remain virgins before marriage. Hence there is no risk or danger or any “people’s lives being at stake” by sexual transmission of diseases.
Virgo, incidentally, a lot of what you’ve said about the Church & it’s viewpoints is very flawed. However, I don’t believe that you are coming from a point of view of any malice but that you, like perhaps many of my other non-Catholic friends, just do not know/understand the Catholic Church’s teachings on these issues. However in that case, I think it is unfair to slam the Church & say it’s wrong.
Anyway, I’m fed up of all of this, it’s been a long day & I’m going to close comments after this one.
This is & has always been my personal journal / blog where I air my views. While I do not expect everyone to agree with me, I definitely do not feel the need to sit & justify my beliefs (or have people belittle my views / my faith!), especially since in many comments I see a lack of understanding about the actual teachings of the Church. I have never understood why people who know a little feel the need to argue. I wouldn’t be arguing with any Hindus about Ram, for sure. Anyway.
If you don’t get the post, please read it again. Or read Vijay’s comment 32. And have a good day y’all.
Whatever your viewpoints on this issue, I wish you well. If you wish to discuss this further, do it someplace else please. Merci.