I doubt if the Weekly would publish any comments that were rude about Muslims, Jewish, Mormons, Afro-Americans, Asians or any other group, but Catholics are 'fair game'. No one tells sports writers or announcers not to use the term 'Hail Mary pass". And the Weekly would not have the guts to correct Mr. Losch.

The catholic church is fair game given their record on child molestation, opposition to women' s rights and intolerance of gays.

>The catholic church is fair game given their record on child molestation, opposition to women' s rights and intolerance of gays. By those standards, so are Muslims. Talk about intolerant....

Steve -- but we are not talking about Muslims in this thread. Is it intolerant to point out the facts about the catholic church? Their actions regarding the priest pedophile scandals has been intolerable-- it leads to the former pope and to many of the cardinals who will choose a new pope. Nothing intolerant about pointing out the fact the church has supported and covered for people that have molested children. The catholic church should not be lecturing anyone on morals.

>Steve -- but we are not talking about Muslims in this thread. Is it intolerant to point out the facts about the catholic church? Their actions regarding the priest pedophile scandals has been intolerable-- it leads to the former pope and to many of the cardinals who will choose a new pope. Nothing intolerant about pointing out the fact the church has supported and covered for people that have molested children. Not an issue, Actually, in the first response, by Bob, the assertion was made that Muslims (and others) are protected, while the Cathlolics gets hammered by Paul Losch. I am not religious, so I don't have a dog in the fight. However, I do think the Catholics get targeted, unfairly and fairly. I would like to add one more thing to your response: The sexual abuse scandals of the Catholic Church are not due to pedophilia, but to homosexuality, which are very different things. The CC is actually quietly tolerant of homosexaul priests, as an orientation, but it is intolerant about acting upon the orientation. The vast majority of abusing priests abuse post-pubescent male young men...simple homosexual statutory rape (and a breaking of their vows). Pedophelia is an entirely different thing, the abuse of pre-pubescent kids. I think that the CC, if it wants to stay around, should allow heterosexual priests to marry, and then to ban homosexual priests who cannot deal with their vows (given that homosexuality is banned by the Bible). If the CC could get over the Biblical prohibitions about homosexuality, then allow the homosexual priests to marry, too. The bottom line is that sexual abuse of kids under the age of consent is rape.

Hi Steve- you have covered the " priests are not pedophiles" issue before. In fact your comments are word for word what you have written before in your attempt to defend the church. The catholic church supports pedophile priests. They have covered for them and tried to hush up the scandals. The vast majority of the offending priests go after young underage children and subject them to abuse, which is the covered up by the church and it's higher ups. If it makes you feel better to claim that the abuse of children is somehow okay because it is homosexual in nature, then go for it. I am sure that is scant comfort to the many many victims of these pedophiles who masquerade as men of god. Not sure how you can somehow try to justify the actions of these perverts.

Steve - here is a link to a Wikipedia page regarding sexual abuse by priests Web Link You can read all about the cases on under age children that were abused by catholic clergy. Sexual abuse by pedophiles is wrong regardless of the age of the minor. No point in trying to defend these people that most human beings find revolting

>Not sure how you can somehow try to justify the actions of these perverts. I don't. I just describe the actual situation, which you fail to do. It is not pedophelia, it is homsexuality. You need to do some research. This is well known among those of us who study the issue.

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

Completely at a loss to understand what Paul is on about and what it has to do with the Chaucer bridge. However, as the resident vocabulary police today, please realise that all the comments above are about the Roman Catholic Church or RC not the Christian church as a whole which is also called catholic - meaning universal. Here is the dictionary definition < cath·o·lic [kath-uh-lik, kath-lik] Show IPA adjective 1. broad or wide-ranging in tastes, interests, or the like; having sympathies with all; broad-minded; liberal. 2. universal in extent; involving all; of interest to all. 3. pertaining to the whole Christian body or church. >

Steve - How would you "define" a male teacher having an "affair" with a POST-pubescent female middle school student in middle school? Middle school being the work place of the male teacher, same middle school being the place where the post-pubescent female was to be educated. That happened in PAUSD, you know. Female claimed year after that many in the middle school knew, and ignored.

>Steve - How would you "define" a male teacher having an "affair" with a POST-pubescent female middle school student in middle school? Statutory rape, and an abuse of trust. However, is would not be pedophelia, which is a different thing. If a 3rd grade male teacher had sex with a 3rd grade girl, it would be pedophiia. What you don't seem to udnerstand is that that same 3rd grade male teacher would not be interested in an 10th grade female. Pedopholia is a specific psychological condition, and it is different than statutory rape among those abusers of post-pubescent victims. The main problem with the Catholic Church, in terms of sexaul abuse, is homosexual abuse of young men, not pedophelia.

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

[Post removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]

> What kind of person makes excuses for pedophiles that abuse children? Certainly not me. However, the problem is not pedophelia, it is homosexual statutory rape, little else. I don't understand why this is even contoversial. The CC has a major problem with homosexual priests. It does not have a major problem with pedophile priests or heterosexual priests, although there is an occasional problem.

Steve continues to remain in denial-- feeling the need to tar gays with the claim the problem of the church is homosexuality, while defending pedophile priests. I have provided links for these facts. The facts are clear for decades,all around the world, pedophile priests have been preying on children, with the knowledge of the church hierarchy. This sexual abuse of children has been perpetrated by pedophiles-- who for some reason Steve/Sharon feels the need to make excuse for while trying to blame it on homosexuals. What kind of people support and provide cover for those that prey on innocent children? Maybe Steve is making a case for his election as the new pope!

>feeling the need to tar gays with the claim the problem of the church is homosexuality, while defending pedophile priests. I have not, and will not, defend pedophile priests. However the problem is not pedophile priests, it is homosexual priests, who commit statutory rape, and break their vows. [Portion removed by Palo Alto Online staff.]