Had to walk away from this one and clear my head.
In February 1992, a representative of the Catholic Church in Puerto Rico
gave a radio interview (broadcast on National Public Radio) in which he
said that the Church was against the use of condoms. Even though the
rate of AIDS infection in Puerto Rico is much higher than on the U.S.
mainland, the spokesman said that the Church could not support the use
of condoms because they are not absolutely reliable in preventing the
spread of the disease. “If you could prove that condoms were absolutely
dependable in preventing a person from contracting AIDS, then the
Church could support their use.
Is it misplacing Burden of Proof
OR...Strawman
I would guess straw man -- because from everything I've ever read or heard, the Church will not approve of any birth control method.
Other teachers may have different opinions.
Based on the given information, it appears that the representative of the Catholic Church in Puerto Rico is making two claims:
1. The Church is against the use of condoms.
2. The Church could support the use of condoms if their absolute reliability in preventing the spread of AIDS is proven.
The concept of burden of proof refers to the obligation to provide evidence or justification for a claim. In this case, the representative of the Catholic Church is placing the burden of proof on those advocating for condom use, stating that the Church could only support it if absolute reliability in preventing the spread of AIDS is proven. This places the burden of proof on the advocates of condom use rather than on the Church itself. Therefore, the representative's argument can be seen as misplacing the burden of proof.
On the other hand, a strawman argument occurs when someone misrepresents an opponent's position in order to make it easier to criticize. In this case, the representative is not necessarily misrepresenting an opponent's position but rather stating the Church's stance on condom use and presenting the requirement of absolute reliability as a condition for supporting it. Therefore, the representative's argument does not seem to be a strawman.