Aww shucks Belly - thanks. Tis common sense really isn't it.

Proxy
All I can say is we are agreed that all child abuse is a bad thing regardless of the sexual preference of the perpetrator. No group in society is completely free of evil as you put it.
Your statistical analysis is however inaccurate. You are assuming that all abuse of boys is carried out by homosexual men. This is untrue. Sexuality is a complicated issue, and it is why some men in prison will have sex with another male where there is no choice. They are not homosexual although I don't fully understand this syndrome myself - it is probably something along the lines of opportunity and any port in a storm (if you will excuse the terminology).
Being attracted to someone from the same gender is not the same as being attracted to children. One does not necessarily go with the other.

Foxy
Yes I think the Catholic Church is at a turning point and with constant public and media pressure we may see positive change within the next few years. At least child abusers will feel less protected by the institution than years past and may think twice about abusing their position or seeking help for their tendencies.

Indeed *Pelican* & *Belly* it is a sad thing that we even need to be having this debate.

And no need to apologise:

" ... Any port in a storm ... "

is quite apt.

From memory *RObert* earlier said something similar to the effect that some people like it any which way.

And that dear *Boazy* is where the underpinning of some of your assertions falls down. That is to say that to immediately make a leap of logic and state that male priest -> male altar boy -> therefore homosexuality, is a flawed posit.

To look at the history of the marching army for example, even the likes of Alexander the Great, in the absence of the fairer sex, were quite happy to indulge in the pleasures of the flesh amongst themselves, and then revert to their chosen sexual preference when circumstances permitted. Point being, sexual engagement and relief, a therapy in and of itself, appears to be the prime motivator, not the gender of the partner.

I suspect that even within the Vatican itself, if and when they unburden themselves of the "web" of their own making, that more than 2 will come out of the shadows and seek a *Blessing of their Union*

..

And yes *Pelican,* there are Gay & BiSexual Priests practicing in Australia, in places where they are Luved and cherished no more and no less than any other in this "our" Australia.

..

Oh, and I quite agree with *Runner,* in that all of the victims must be drawn back unto "our" bosom, and all the abusers must be tried and bound.

pelican,
You said that I am "assuming that all abuse of boys is carried out by homosexual men."
This is a reasonable assumption.
You cannot arbitrarily claim that abuse of boys is carried out by heterosexuals without running up against the counter proposition that abuse of girls is carried out by homosexuals.
In other words, if some abuse of boys is carried out by heterosexuals then it is equally likely that some abuse of girls is carried out by homosexuals. This is an equitable assumption in the absence of any data to the contrary.
There remains the 40 fold discrepancy in the hard data.

pelican,
Your "prison syndrome" analogy is also weak, at best.
Paedophiles are said to be cunning and calculating, and one could imagine that they would have to be, to first capture their young prey, hide their activities and then escape detection.
It would seem strange then that all those heterosexual paedophiles didn't think far enough ahead so that they would end up in a girls (or at least co-ed) school, rather than having to make do with "any port in a storm" in the confessional.
Couldn't they foresee that they would end up with altar boys and not school girls?
It seems reasonable to assume that heterosexual paedophiles would seek out young girls and homosexual paedophiles would seek out young boys.
From a sexual point of view, wouldn't heterosexual male prisoners rather be incarcerated with women if they had the choice?
In other words, free people have the freedom to choose the vocation which presents them with the most attractive opportunities but prisoners can't choose with whom they are incarcerated.
In which case, we are still left with a forty-fold discrepancy in the statistics.

Proxy, give it a rest and go talk about your favourite homosexual subject on another thread!
I wonder why you have such a fascination about gay men?

I think this discussion has run it's course for me now.
Thanks to all other people who have contributed to a subject that I also wish we never had to discuss in the first place.

I just hope that all priests who did molest children are brought to justice as soon as possible, and that all those who tried to shield or hide them are prosecuted for this action too.

Dear Proxy,

Dr Paul Collins is not a dissident.
He does not depart from the accepted
beliefs or standards at all. On the
contrary, he explains and analyzes
them. As I suggested to you earlier,
read the book.

As for Michael Jackson? I wasn't trying
to prove that blacks can't change their
race. I merely cited an example of one
who tried. There was no other hidden agenda.

However, as you seem to be interested in the
topic of homosexuality I can recommend another
text for you to read and that is, Ian Robertson's,
"Sociology." He's got a whole chapter on
sexuality and society. Robertson explains that homosexuality
as the principal variation on the norm of heterosexuality,
presents a recurring issue for both society and
sociology. The behaviour occurs all over the world and
throughout history, although its form, acceptability,
and apparent extent vary greatly from one society to
another. Fascinating reading for anyone interested in the
subject.