More first impressions:
1) The very SAME Catholic officials targeting gay folks with a vengeance & trying to lay the abuse horror show at the feet of gay priests were covering up sexual abuse of minors & protecting priests abusing minors as they claimed that gay people represent an extreme moral danger.— 𝚆𝚒𝚕𝚕𝚒𝚊𝚖 𝙳. 𝙻𝚒𝚗𝚍𝚜𝚎𝚢 (@wdlindsy) August 14, 2018
1) The very SAME Catholic officials targeting gay folks with a vengeance & trying to lay the abuse horror show at the feet of gay priests were covering up sexual abuse of minors & protecting priests abusing minors as they claimed that gay people represent an extreme moral danger.— 𝚆𝚒𝚕𝚕𝚒𝚊𝚖 𝙳. 𝙻𝚒𝚗𝚍𝚜𝚎𝚢 (@wdlindsy) August 14, 2018
3) Given who they are and what they've done, it's astonishing that those Catholic officials think they can divert the conversation of their spectacular corruption to the purported moral danger posed by the gays. Talk about projection!— 𝚆𝚒𝚕𝚕𝚒𝚊𝚖 𝙳. 𝙻𝚒𝚗𝚍𝚜𝚎𝚢 (@wdlindsy) August 14, 2018
"The report on balance shows predominantly homosexual predators," says "Thomas Aquinas," who came to this blog to troll a little while ago.
Yes, as in previous reports about the abuse horror show in the Catholic church, a majority of victims are males — for reasons the John Jay study explained in great detail. But as that study also stated, sexual orientation is a red herring designed to draw our attention away from the real roots of this horror show, which have nothing at all to do with sexual orientation.
If we're going to conclude that priests who abuse boys are homosexual and engage in abuse of minors for that reason, then are we going to reach the same conclusion about the priest in the diocese of Greensburg who raped and impregnated a 17-year-old girl, forged his head pastor's name on a marriage certificate, then married the girl and divorced her months later — and was permitted to remain in ministry (pp. 4-5 of the report)?
Did that priest rape an underaged girl because he is heterosexual? Is he, like the large majority of those sexually abusing minors in society at large, a man living a heterosexual life — and so heterosexuals and heterosexuality are responsible for pedophilia and ephebophilia?
Or how about the priest in the diocese of Harrisburg who raped five girls in a family, collecting samples of their urine, pubic hair, and menstrual blood (pp. 5-6 of report)? Heterosexual acting out? Is sauce for the goose sauce for the gander: if we intend to call priests abusing boys homosexuals acting out homosexually, should we not reach the very same conclusion about priests abusing girls — heterosexuals acting out heterosexually? If we care about the truth and about solving these problems, that is….
Or is this not in the least about sexual orientation, and is sexual orientation a huge red herring designed to serve the interests of the very gay-bashing hierarchs who crafted that red herring to draw attention away from their moral corruption and failure to deal with this crisis?
How about the priest who raped and impregnated a girl, got her an abortion, and then received a letter from his bishop expressing sympathy for the priest — not the girl (p. 6 of report)? Heterosexual acting out?
Doi we need to bar heterosexual men from seminaries and the priesthood if we want to prevent atrocities like this?
Or is it not about sexual orientation at all, and are the trolls who want to keep pushing that meme more interested in attacking a vulnerable minority group than in addressing these horrors effectively? Hate's a powerfully addictive — and powerfully stupefying — drug. And homophobia is, indeed, a form of hate. Dressing it up in religious clothes only makes the pig's lipstick brighter. It does not disguise the pig in the least.
