On Jun 8, 1:26?am, "RamRod Sword of Baal" <RamRod@truth_only.com>
wrote:

What would a confessed fag like you know about children, besides
lusting after them as faggots do?

Study of Catholic Priests and Child Abuse:

The Boy Scouts Were Right about the Risks of Homosexual Youth Leaders

With the skill and determination of a modern-day Houdini, the
mainstream media has been struggling to escape what appears to be an
inescapable conclusion from the national scandal of sexual abuse among
Catholic priests. Sadly, those chains just won't come off, but with
enough misdirection, maybe we won't notice they are there. Maybe we'll
overlook the inescapable conclusion that the Boy Scouts of America
were right. They have been vindicated in their cautious policies that
make it difficult for gay men to serve as respected leaders of young
boys and young men. Based on what we now know about the scandal with
priests, the concern that some homosexual men might seek access to
young victims has been entirely borne out with tragic experience.

My state of Wisconsin and many other states have been rocked by the
scandal of child molestation among Catholic priests. The scandal,
however, is far larger than most people have imagined or could have
imagined. We've been told that the molesting priests represent a few
scattered pedophiles--that's the preferred term, one that conjures up
an image of rare sickos with no particular relationship to the gay
community, mentally ill creatures going for tiny little kids. Some
journalists have even claimed that a majority of the victims were
girls, and that homosexuality was not an issue in the scandal. When
was the last time a major media outlet dared to say that the molesters
were homosexual men or that the victims were typically teenage boys?
And how often has the press dared to say that large numbers of
homosexual men have naturally been drawn to the Catholic clergy, where
they can use their positions of authority to gain sexual access to
youths?

Two new reports may help the world see the reality behind the
media-created illusion. The reports were commissioned by the US
Conference of Catholic Bishops, who asked the National Review Board, a
panel of Catholic lay people, to investigate the abuse crisis. The
National Review Board study includes information on molestation claims
from 1950 to 2002. There is also a companion study about the nature of
the problem, conducted by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in
New York. Recent news stories on the topic are available at AP.org,
Reuters, Wavy.com, the Baltimore Sun, the San Antonio Express-News,
and other news outlets. For details on the studies, see the
information at the Website for the United States Conference of
Catholic Bishops.

Priest abuse in the Catholic Church: teenage boys selectively
targeted. While it is well known that sexual molestation is typically
highly underreported, the numbers are still shockingly large. Nearly
4% of all priests have been accused of sexual molestation. About 44%
of the accused priests have been accused by more than one person. And
contrary to the insinuations of the media, the victims have not been
little kids, but are typically teenage boys, as shown in the figure to
the right from the Associated Press (The Post-Crescent, Feb. 28, 2004,
p. A-4). In fact, only 5.8% of victims were under age 7; 16% percent
were between ages 8-10; and over 78% were ages 11-17. Of course, there
were men ages 18 and older who were also exploited, but that is too
old for child molestation and beyond the scope of these studies.

Recent trials of some of these priests have shown that they used their
position of trust and influence as adult leaders to exploit their
access to boys, particularly teenagers. What can we say about males
that sexually abuse young men? Why is the word "homosexual" so rarely
heard in media discussions of this crisis? Fortunately, a few voices
have dared to say the "h" word. One is Julia Duin of the Washington
Times in her article, "Gay Priests Cited in Abuse of Boys," Feb. 28,
2004 (available online):

   Eighty-one percent of sex crimes committed against children by
Roman Catholic priests during the past 52 years were homosexual men
preying on boys, according to a comprehensive study released yesterday
on the church's sex abuse crisis. (emphasis mine)

Many studies show that homosexuals represent only about 1 to 3% of the
population, but if we assume it is 10%, as the gay community would
have us believe, and if we assume that gay men are just as likely as
heterosexuals to be child molesters, then we might expect about 10% of
the victims to be boys. But 81% of the victims are boys, and not just
small children, but mostly teenagers. There is no longer any doubt
that the problem of sexual abuse among priests has been predominately
a problem of homosexual men who have used their positions of authority
to gain access to boys and young men. The body of Catholic clergy has
become a hot bed for that minority of homosexual men who are also
child molesters.

All this leads to an inescapable conclusion: the Boy Scouts are right.
Not only should they have a right to choose who the role models are in
their private organization, but they should have a right to protect
young boys and young men from the type of abuse that has devastated so
many Catholic families. Though most homosexuals are not child
molesters, those who are may naturally seek to enter into
organizations like the Boy Scouts of America or the clergy, where
access to potential victims is easier. It's a reality that must be
faced. As painful as it is to gay men and women who would never hurt a
child, those who share their orientation but not their respect for the
young are a danger that must be faced.

Part of the Houdini-like efforts in the media involve the claim that
the problem of child molestation not a homosexual problem, and that
homosexuals are no more likely to pose a risk than anybody else.
That's another assertion that doesn't necessarily fit reality. Again,
most homosexuals are not molesters, no question! And many molesters
are heterosexual. But if you look at those who are convicted for child
molestation, the number of men who abuse boys relative to those who
abuse girls is far too high if homosexuality did not increase the
likelihood of child molestation. In fact, there are several other
types of evidence that point to a much higher that homosexual men will
be child molesters. See "Homosexuality and Child Sexual Abuse" by
Timothy J. Dailey, Ph.D., "Homosexuality and Pedophilia," and "How
Pedophiles Have Targeted the Boy Scouts of America."

Most child molestation is done by men, and I'm a man. That puts me in
the high risk group. I should not be upset if an organization like the
Girl Scouts decides to exclude men from leadership roles because I am
in a higher risk group. I can understand that. And if parents don't
want to hire my boys as babysitters because of the higher risk, I
consider that wise, and hope my own boys won't take it personally. We
men are more likely to be problems, let's face it--but that doesn't
make us all guilty or inherently vile. When it comes to molestation of
boys, homosexual men are a much greater problem than heterosexual men.
Even if I had homosexual leanings, I hope I would have the
understanding to acknowledge that and understand why a private
organization might exclude me in order to reduce risks to young boys.
The Catholic Church would be wise to exercise great caution regarding
priests who consider themselves homosexual. And United Way and others
who have opposed the Boy Scouts' policies ought to stop their
self-deception and face reality: the Boy Scouts were right.

Jeff Lindsay, Feb. 28, 2004

It is incomfortable for some segments of society to be in the company of
homosexuals because homosexuals are attracted to someone of the same sex
just like heterosexuals are attracted to someone of the opposite sex.

Pedophiles are homosexuals and heterosexuals whom are attracted to
children which makes most homosexuals and most heterosexuals very
uncomfortable.