Dear NNS,

You wrote;

“As for absence and celibacy. I don't think those cause as many issues as an actively gay life will cause. In fact an unfortunate issue is pedophilia in gay communities.”

Are you really going to run that line when a Royal Commission in this country showed the celibate religious class in this country where abusing young Australian children in obscene numbers and where the percentage of offenders in some religious orders reached 25%.

Your faith has a hell of a lot to answer for. Go deal with the mote in your own eye.

Hi Steele Redux.

For your own time to educate yourself (it's fairly long), here's a link on studies of Catholic abuse.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6026962/

The hard reality is the number of boys that were abused. With that in mind it sound like the issue is resolved if homosexuals are not allowed to become priests or higher up in the church. There are others in my opinion that should be kicked out of that kind of office, such as those who commit adultry should no longer be allowed to be a priest or an elder. That's for any church, not just the Catholic Church.

Though I doubt you want to hear of what I think should be standards for being a priest, the point is that homosexuals among the clergy is more to blame then celibacy is. Read the report. (On your own time. I don't expect you to read it all before this topic has gone away).

Individual,

Your interest in alco-wipes speaks for itself.

Foxy,

WTF is this obsession with alco-wipes?

ALTRAV,

Ask Individual - he brought up the subject.
I'm merely responding.

Dear NNS,

What a very ordinary report.

It flags its bias from the very start;

“A number of well-designed studies have found that men with SSA are more likely to have psychiatric and substance abuse disorders and STDs than heterosexual males, and are more likely to have a positive attitude to sexual relations between adult and adolescent males.”

But then gives scant data to back up the claim. There is also no discussion about how society's attitudes toward gay people have impacted their mental health and substance abuse levels.

It then flippantly dismisses the question of access of offending priests to boys which is appropriately one of the central planks of many of the reports on this topic;

“Karen Terry, a researcher who worked on the John Jay report, suggested that factors such as greater access to boys could explain the skewed ratio. Priests do not persevere in their commitment to vows of chastity, because they lack opportunity. If these offending clergy had been sexually attracted to women, it is a tragic reality that they would have no difficulty finding women willing to engage in sexual relations with them.”

What does that even mean and why does it refer to women instead of girls?

All in all pretty piss poor.

Do you have anything a little more objective?