@Dolce, Your summation is right on the money.

@bABA, one cannot choose to be moral selectively. Either one is morally correct all the time or one loses that authority be it a priest or someone else. Further, where was the outrage from the evangelicals and the church over this matter? The same people that are so eager to trash movies, other religions and harmless TV shows like Sponge bob showed their true colors during the priest abuse scandal. These evangelicals are so screwed up that they are trying to convert people to Christianity in Tsunami ravaged areas. These are the same people who have termed your religion as " Satan's religion".

I have very little respect for evangelicals, racists and the morally corrupt. As of now the above trifecta is true of a good number of the vocal evangelicals in the US.

Personally I do not approve of homosexuality. That does not mean I am going to discriminate against them or anybody else. Everybody is a sinner and for evangelicals to act as if they are superior to others is simply ludicrous.

bABA, I'm not saying every single catholic priest did it. But they are culpable for not standing up for the victims. What I am saying is the church and the evangelicals lost that moral authority to judge people when they all remained silent during that scandal. The silence and the lack of outrage from the catholic church sent a bigger message than any directive from the church could have.

@ Krem: I don't. Personally I believe organized religion is the biggest problem facing the world.

@ bABA, generalization works in this case because though not everybody did it, all were guilty of moral bankruptcy and that is unacceptable when you are in the business of morality.

jb - then how can the church "lose" moral authority if it doesn't have any to begin with?

All are guilty because of 1 issue?? I know its a pretty big issue but you can't condemn each and everyone of them. Just because one may not be in a position yet to do something about it does not mean they leave the institution completely.

While that point is fine, there is a mistake here.

Priests may cover things up, just like my mom will condemn the person who hurts another but will protect me even though she knows something is wrong but i'm still her son and she loves me. But that doesn't mean she encourages it, believes in it or anything like that. I do not think that the catholic "central command" issues orders or OKAYs for alter boy molestations. Its viewed as wrong, its even condemned but when the event takes place, they do try to cover it to save face. That isn't right but theres a fine difference here.

It's a crime, Baba. Molesting children is a crime. If you cover it up, you are part of a conspiracy and can be found just as guilty. High ranking important people in the Catholic Church committed crimes.

Suppose it was the Boy Scouts or a boarding school that allowed these things to happen and then covered it up. Would you agree to that, or is there a double standard for churches?

It's a crime, Baba. Molesting children is a crime. If you cover it up, you are part of a conspiracy and can be found just as guilty. High ranking important people in the Catholic Church committed crimes.

Suppose it was the Boy Scouts or a boarding school that allowed these things to happen and then covered it up. Would you agree to that, or is there a double standard for churches?