So, in other words, there's nothing "fatuous" about it. Cardinal Sfeir has forgotten more about married priests than you or I know.
The very first sentence in post #9 invalidates your premise. Nyer's post makes it very clear that there is a difference. Hence, the Cardinal cannot have anything to base his claim.
Let me try and follow what you're saying.
Cardinal Sfeir says that married priests solve some problems but create others.
You say that's "fatuous" and he has "nothing upon which to base his claim" because "there are no married priests".
I point out that Cdl. Sfeir comes from a church which has married priests itself, and which has, as near neighbors, churches which have even more married priests. Therefore, the claim that Cardinal Sfeir's opinion is unfounded because "there are no married priests" is nonsense.
You respond by quoting NYer's point that divorce is more common in the West, therefore married priests in the West are more likely to divorce, and that's a problem.
So not only are there the problems with married priests Cdl. Sfeir knows about, but, as NYer notes, there are even more problems. That strengthens the Cardinal's argument and weakens yours.