[Notwithstanding]

No one has taught me more about marriage and family life and even about an authentic appreciation for the gift of the sexual act than this pope.

I was married for a half dozen years and had several children when I stumbled upon his thoughts on these topics.

He spent the first 20 years of his priesthood becoming very very close to families and observed them closely and talked with them at great length about the most important things in life. Thus he has great insight - and the insight of an unbiased but very interested observer.

His insights helped me realize just how great a thing marriage and family are and how amazing the marital embrace - sex - was meant to be.

I can only laugh - not in a mean way, for I understand how easily one can draw such a conclusion - at those who think a celibate man (one who has forsaken marriage and family and sex not because those things are bad but to do something ELSE for God) does not understand that which he freely gave up in exchange for priesthood merely because he does not have/live them. It is like saying a male gynecologist cannot treat a woman patient because he has a different body.

[Illbay]

It is like saying a male gynecologist cannot treat a woman patient because he has a different body.

Equating human physiology to human emotional interaction is a false analogy.

I have never been a car, either, but I've fixed engines before. You just follow the diagram, make sure part "A" fits snugly into part "B" as the diagram shows, and it works.

There is no way in my mind that a man who not only doesn't participate, but ESCHEWS familial responsibility as somehow a compromise with our evil natures, is a man who can offer help in such areas.

I have never been a Roman Catholic. I'm not talking from my own experience. But I've heard this said, time and time again, by practicing Catholics whom I've had as friends.

You want a REALLY good analogy? It's like a lifelong hermit being touted as the perfect sociologist, because he hasn't got the slightest idea how humans can or should interact, and therefore he's "objective."

It isn't objectivity that's called for. Actually, quite the opposite.

And lastly, I submit that it is this "standing outside looking in" attitude that has led to the priesthood being considered a "safe haven" for homosexuals, and also the notion that FIRST, the "brotherhood" must be protected at all costs before we worry about the victims.

They're "below the salt" in many ways, and so only worthy of secondary consideration.