California Bishops Endorse ‘Intent’ of AIDS Education Bill

California’s Roman Catholic bishops Tuesday endorsed “the intent” of a bill in the state Senate that would require California public schools to show AIDS prevention films to students in grades 7 through 12, but criticized what they said was the lack of a “wider moral context” in the educational effort.

Bishops from all 12 California dioceses, meeting in Los Angeles, issued a short statement giving limited support to the bill introduced in January by state Sen. Gary K. Hart (D-Santa Barbara). The bill, SB 136, was passed unanimously by the Senate Education and Appropriations committees and is now due for consideration on the Senate floor.

Deciding what stance to take on the proposed legislation was a difficult one for the bishops because of their frequently stated conviction that recommending condoms as a safeguard measure implies that the church condones their use.

While agreeing that education is necessary, the bishops concluded their statement by saying, “We do not support those portions of this bill which present the use of condoms on the same level as abstinence and marital fidelity, the avoidance of promiscuous sexual practices, or the rejection of the illicit use of drugs.”

However, an aide to Hart said that the bill “nowhere mentions condoms.” On the other hand, the bill does cite “sexual abstinence as a primary method of AIDS prevention,” said Joe Caves, a legislative assistant to Hart.

Caves said the bill’s criterion for films that might be shown in classes is that they have to reflect the U.S. surgeon general’s report of last October, which says that abstinence is the safest measure outside of a monogamous relationship but which recommends condoms for those who engage in high-risk sex.

The California bishops, who are also working on the final revision of a pastoral letter on the disease, did not downplay the threat posed by AIDS. There have been 31,036 cases of acquired immune deficiency syndrome and 17,851 deaths recorded in the United States, according to public health officials.

“An information campaign about AIDS, a problem of epidemic proportions, is necessary and legitimate,” the bishops said in their 250-word statement.

“We believe that any discussion about human sexuality needs to be placed within the wider moral context that affirms the dignity and the destiny of the human person,” the statement said. “Since AIDS is transmitted through sexual practices as well as by other means, we see our responsibility going beyond the biological education suggested by the surgeon general’s report and this bill.”

David Pollard, the California bishops’ associate director for public policy in Sacramento, said in an interview that there was no inclination by the bishops during their discussions on the bill to oppose it.

“It would be almost inhuman to oppose the bill,” Pollard said. “The difficulty was created by the sensationalism over the whole issue of condoms and trying to reconcile that with the church’s position on morality and promiscuity.”

Catholic leaders have maintained that recommending condoms for sexual intercourse implies a sanction of sex outside of marriage, which the church considers immoral.

Archbishop Roger Mahony of Los Angeles withdrew support last December for a Spanish-language AIDS education project designed for presentation at Latino parishes after it was learned that condoms were to be discussed as a way to prevent transmission of the AIDS virus.

Condom ads on television have been criticized by Archbishop John Quinn of San Francisco and, most recently, by Msgr. Daniel F. Hoye, general secretary of the U.S. Catholic Conference.

Hoye called the advertising “an ultimately false solution to a serious moral problem.” He said the “implicit encouragement of permissive and immoral behavior” and “the illusion of freedom from disease will do more harm than good.”

The only organized opposition to the Hart bill has come from the Sacramento-based Committee for Moral Concerns, headed by Southern Baptist minister W. B. Timberlake.

Timberlake said in an interview Tuesday that the bill “takes away the power of local school boards to decide what to teach.” He also maintained that the incidence of AIDS among junior high school and high school students is “very small”--159 cases among U.S. students aged 13 through 19--and that the money would be better spent teaching about more common sexually transmitted diseases.