Now now now. That's the kind of sweeping prejudicial generalisation that leads to all sorts of problems. The Catholic Church may be pent up and behind the times and dogmatic - I mean, it's without question - but 'priest' is not synonymous with 'child molestor'. I know this is a sensitive issue (we've been dealing with highly publicised cases over here for more than a decade, so you don't have the self-pity monopoly on this), but it's completely unfair (and plain hypocritical of the supposedly liberal-minded) to tar everyone with the same brush when the majority of priests are basically good people who feel as outraged about it as you or I.

The Catholic Church does not have a moral leg left to stand on. They have no business deciding who can and can't get married. I say AMEN to the link title.

all very true. not all priests are child molesters. it's a pity, then, that all gay marriages are sinful degradations that will bring ruin to all we hold dear and that the legal joining of two people who love each other stops when they can't pump out more kids. (i'm paraphrasing, of course.)

A priest, a child molester, and a homosexual walked into a bar and...oh wait — it’s the same person.

Forget the Catholic Church, Gay Marriage has been recognized by "The Amazing Race"... So who d'ya think'll win this one? The Gay Marrieds, the Virgins (yes, that's the way the show IDs this couple on-screen), the Clowns, the Air Traffic Controllers or the NFL Wives? I think we got diversity here. Tops on my "guilty pleasures TV list"...

Of course, another thing that isn't being recognised here is there are many priests who preach tolerance, whatever the Pope or the higher-ups say. Some of them are a lot more progressive than you give them credit for. Homophobia is not the cornerstone of Christianity, it's just an unfortunately backwards idea that got tied into it (and most mainstream religions too, I might add - that's the thing about dogma). That's where the problem is, at the top. By the by, I'm not religious myself, thought I was brought up a Catholic in a predominantly Catholic country, and I've known my fair share of priests in my time that have been anything but the kind of monsters people here seem determined to paint them as.

And just to avoid any more confusion, I never objected to the subject of the title (that being gay marriage), only the lame-ass prejudicial label of 'child molestor'. That's just stupid slanderous name-calling and has no place outside of the schoolyard, let alone a discussion between supposedly enlightened individuals.

what gets me about the article is this quote from Bishop Daniel P. Reilly of Worcester :

''It is not an anti-anything statement, but a reminder that marriage holds a unique role in the history of mankind and should be respected for what it is, a union of a man and a woman who seek to live a new life focused on the best interests of that new couple and their potential family, not just each other's personal interests.''

This coming from a religion that sanctions shot gun weddings. Many times these sort of marriages end up abusive and destructive to the entire family. Hetros marry for all sorts of "personal interests" money, immigration, sex, et al. Same sex marriage is not going to all of a sudden pervert marriage. Same sex couples marry (or wish to) for the same reason many hetros marry...because they love one another and want to commit to each other life long.

It all boils down to the rights that married couples enjoy that so many "conservatives" wish to deny homosexuals (inheritance, health coverage, et al) in order degrade their social status. When you degrade some one's social status then big hetro white man won't have to worry about living near a hate social group. Just lovely.

Sure there are some Catholics would are fine with homosexuality, but not the ones being talked about in the article...you know, the article about bishops urging people to ban same sex marriage. I'd say it's a great link title, because the fact is, they, as a group, are the last people who should be spouting off their holier-than-thou status on sexuality.

That wasn't my point. I was offended by the name calling, which just cheapens the validity of the point (and the point you make is valid, I'm not disputing that). Yes, of course they are the last people who should be spouting off their holier-than-thou status on sexuality, but tell me, is any other mainsteam religion any different. Isn't sexual repression - especially when it comes to homosexuality - a common trait? 'Child molestor protectors' would be a more apt title, because that's what they did and that's what they are. They swept it under the carpet and they should be ashamed of that. But as the title is, can you not see how it might come across as just self-congratulatory smugness? I don't really need to say any more on this, because if I kept commenting I'd just be reiterating the same arguments.

Lance is obviously more personally affected by this story then you are, Macdara. You make a valid point, but you could cut him a little slack for having a tiny little display of anger and frustration. It's just a sidebar on a weblog, for crying out loud. It hardly cheapens the gay rights movement as a whole.

I apologise if I've hurt anyone with my comments. That wasn't my honest intention. Words are powerful things. But they also cut both ways.

Yes, words are powerful things. That is why people often choose to say 'Anti-' when it is not their viewpoint.

See, I'm pro-heterosexual, but that would get twisted to be anti-gay. I'm pro-life, which would be labeled anti-choice. ...and that's how people get labeled. I may not agree with what you do, but that doesn't mean I dislike you or wouldn't want to call you my friend. I think it's a double-standard.

I think the media does a fantastic job of convincing people that if one person does something wrong/improper (sin), say a priest or Christian Evangelist, then the whole lot gets a bad rap. The thing is, we've all got the same problem. Sin. We can't do a thing about it. Nothing. There's only one way to handle it and that's through Jesus. What we can't handle, he did.

Lance, you missed the point with your comment "all very true. not all priests are child molesters. it's a pity, then, that all gay marriages are sinful degradations..."
You may not understand the word sin or the act of sinning. Or maybe you have decided what you feel is sin and what is not. It's not our decision. Please don't feel I am putting myself on any pedestal. Far from it. Like I said, sin is sin, not matter what flavor. All sin is considered the same. No one sin is worse than the next. It's our society that has determined these 'levels of sin/wrong/evil'. It all comes down to one thing, that sin separates us from knowing and experiencing God.

...and I hesitated writing any of this because it's such a sticky issue. But just as gays desire to be respected with coming out of the closet, so should believers in Jesus Christ!

dear lance or whoever posted this link: I like your politics. I think you're cool, and I would gladly hang out with you any time. the end.

Hmm, it looks like my words have inadvertently supported Jeff's argument. To kfan and lance or whoever posted the link: any chance I can buy ye a beverage sometime? To make up for my bullheadedness?

I'll take you up on that next time I'm in town, MacDara. There used to be a little restaurant in Temple Bar I loved.

Gratitude is born in hearts that take time to count up past mercies.