think that most area good men. I also do not think that most of the abusers are gay. A homosexual subculture in seminaries? Oh, really! You accuse me of making some dotty point but I have no idea what the heck your point is! My point is that I choose to think well of people in general until/unless one particular person proves to not be good. In that case, I will change my opinion of that one person not the whole group to which they belong. It's how Catholics are suppose to behave towards one another, is it not? Sophias_Favorite Yes, really. Plainly you have never read a single word about how the scandal actually happened, yet you offer opinions anyway. People do not have a right to opinions that are totally divorced from facts. GoodCatholicGirl My original answer got lost in the shuffle - So, only abuse can make someone gay? Hmm, let's explore that theory . . . Using this reasoning, we then have to conclude that the priests who abused children were actually responsible for them becoming gay adutls. So, in the prient's warped minds, it would have been acceptable for them to have sex with children and young teenagers but once they were done with them, these newly-formed homosexuals were not to ever have sexual relations again becauese they would then be sinning. Sophias_Favorite One problem, genius. Those priests didn't consider homosexual sex a sin. Know why? They were gayer than springtime. They had all gone