They share many similarities. This is one. Demanding that taxpayers support new social programs with questionable goals without even providing overwhelming evidence of their success is not conservative. It's a form of statism that's frequently practiced by progressives, socialist and totalitarians.
" Principled conservatives don't base their policies on what they've always figured. "
Uh-huh, If you're going to go out of your way to be contentious over semantics, that doesn’t say much for the validity of your argument.
" First you tell me that SADs don't like to be celibate because they tend to be oversexed. Then you tell me they are attracted to a field that requires celibacy?"
Yes, but one that provides them great authority, lots of private time with boys and protection and forgiveness afterwards.
" They don't need to end the celibacy requirement to keep SADs out, they just need to refuse them entry, like the Boy Scouts."
Many people obviously disagree. It's not my battle. If it works, fine. If it works like I think, the trial lawyers will bleed them into fixing it for real.
Shalom
Maintaining the sexual roles and mores that have been foundational for millennia against new experiments is a questionable goal?
Obviously I disagree. Just like I disagree with you that the phrase "I've always figured" is just a semantic oddity.
Celibacy isn't a problem for the priesthood. Pretending a mental disorder is normal and acceptable for priests is the problem. Easy to fix, like the Boy Scouts.
Shalom.