[George W. Bush]

True, but most of the cases of abuse involved teenage boys in the 16-17 year old range. And 90% of the cases of abuse involved males.

Okay. Then your priest can molest your Sweet Sixteen boy and you won't have a problem with it.

But if he complains to the authorities, we Prots and Baptists will make Rome (and you, the parishioner) pay a very dear price for the priest's violation of his innocence.

[Aquinasfan]

Okay. Then your priest can molest your Sweet Sixteen boy and you won't have a problem with it.

You misunderstood my post, which was clarified above:

The point he was making is that the NYT was pulling a Clinton. Depends on what the meaning of "is" is...In other words, it may be technically true that molesting teenage boys is not pedophilia in the strict sense of the word, if it is taken only to refer to younger children. So the Times is trying to confuse and protect its favored group, as usual.

[nina0113]

[AF:] True, but most of the cases of abuse involved teenage boys in the 16-17 year old range. And 90% of the cases of abuse involved males.

[GWB]: Okay. Then your priest can molest your Sweet Sixteen boy and you won't have a problem with it.

It would be difficult to molest a 16 year old without his consent. The even greater crime here is the SEDUCTION of these boys, confusing them about their own orientation and sending them off to the disease, death and damnation of the "gay" lifestyle.

[Great Caesars Ghost]

Don't get too high and mighty there W, Baptist preachers molest young boys too. They also smoke, drink, f*ck, dance, wear makeup, get d-i-v-o-r-c-e-d, remarry, have affairs, talk with funny accents, mock the sacraments, make up their own personal interpretations of scripture, have sappy music, steal, cheat, and lie, and get fat like everybody else.

OK, now feel free to go back to bashing us mackeral snappers, and have a happy thanksgiving.