[Vicki]

Eight: I'll shop for a gun.

[waweru]

The question is this:

If the Church is capable of covering up such a henious crime, what else is it covering up?????

There have been whispers of many secret documents dating from the European Dark Ages in the deep Vatican dungeons.

After this coverup I am inclined to believe that they are true.

[waweru]

Isn't this the same Church that justified Slavery, Colonialism and Imperialism. And today it is just making feeble noises about the unjust world economic order!

Keep on waiting for yours in heaven......

[bryo99]

Gaidi Sugu, I couldn't have put in any better.

I said it before and I am saying it now:" OPEN your eyes and SEE the truth."

It is about time for people to realize that there are many LIES that they accept everyday. Some of these events unfolding should serve as an eye opener. I just wonder why the church is concerned about keeping it IMAGE intact instead of protecting its congregation, especially the innocent children.

As Waweru asked: "If the Church is capable of covering up such a henious crime, what else is it covering up?????"

I am very certain that if these priests were commoners, they would be rotting away in jail.
The pope and the entire Catholic Organization is guilty of harboring criminals in the name of sex offenders and should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
I propose a full-scale investigation of the Catholic Church to uncover other dark secrets that they might be hiding.

[nyawera_1]

Another example of why religion and politics should not be mixed at all.

Now it’ s become all about the blame game. The priests have been caught with their hands down a 12 year old’s pants, it has nothing to do with morals, or who was affected. They hurt the people they are meant to be saving the most.
One of the solutions they proposed was to make sure that from now on all the priests will be screened – because the problem was…… they were hiring gay priests-….there, according to them is where the problem lies

[kibz]

The catholic church is a state with a central government & it should do what any state faced with it's current problems does,ammend it's constitution,celibacy & birth control among other issues should be looked into...

The world is passing the church by...

[silk202]

WHAT IS THE WORLD COMING TO????????
First..ati Jesus was castrated, then the Pope is now gay??Where the HELL do pple come up with this vibe...arrrggghhhh!!!dang!x(

[ike]

Gaidi Sugu,
let me start by giving you afew lessons on Fallacies in logic.
the 1st fallacy is "post hoc" just because event "B" occured after event "A" that does not mean that "A" necessarily caused "B". the fact that the POPE was not quick to condemn that act just like he did on abortion and many others, does not qualify you to say that he is "gay" without further evidence, we cannot assume that this is the reason behind it.This is the first fallacy you are commiting.
the 2nd fallacy is "faulty comparison or analogy" this is basing an arguement on a comparison of 2 things , ideas, events, or situations that are similar but not identical.www.prehall.com/reid/fallacies. although this comparisons are always effective in arguements, they can hide this logical fallacy problems.so you are basically using something that is familiar, like what some priests have done, to explain something that is complex "less familiar" like saying the pope is "gay" did it cross your mind b4 you read the article? HECK NO! the point is, acknowledge the difference between the two things being compered,THE POPE'S REACTION TO GAY PRIESTS,and THE POPE BAING GAY.
my 3rd and last fallacy is " Ad populum" this is an emotional appeal to positive concepts ie GOD, rather than a direct discussion of the real issue, if you have good intetions,you would talk about the gay priest, and only if its been proven. instead of the popes reaction to the issue.
THEREFORE, b4 you pass such information, take a moment to eliminate these LOGIC ERRORS.
THANKYOU!

[ike]

Gaidi Sugu,
let me start by giving you afew lessons on Fallacies in logic.
the 1st fallacy is "post hoc" just because event "B" occured after event "A" that does not mean that "A" necessarily caused "B". the fact that the POPE was not quick to condemn that act just like he did on abortion and many others, does not qualify you to say that he is "gay" without further evidence, we cannot assume that this is the reason behind it.This is the first fallacy you are commiting.
the 2nd fallacy is "faulty comparison or analogy" this is basing an arguement on a comparison of 2 things , ideas, events, or situations that are similar but not identical.www.prehall.com/reid/fallacies. although this comparisons are always effective in arguements, they can hide this logical fallacy problems.so you are basically using something that is familiar, like what some priests have done, to explain something that is complex "less familiar" like saying the pope is "gay" did it cross your mind b4 you read the article? HECK NO! the point is, acknowledge the difference between the two things being compered,THE POPE'S REACTION TO GAY PRIESTS,and THE POPE BAING GAY.
my 3rd and last fallacy is " Ad populum" this is an emotional appeal to positive concepts ie GOD, rather than a direct discussion of the real issue, if you have good intetions,you would talk about the gay priest, and only if its been proven. instead of the popes reaction to the issue.
THEREFORE, b4 you pass such information, take a moment to eliminate these LOGIC ERRORS.
THANKYOU!

[polo]

wacheni UONGO!!!