Milo's sad story is proof that it was homosexuals who wrecked the Catholic priesthood

[Blackrook]

Milo sees "Father Michael' as a hero for allowing him to have oral sex with him, and he does not see himself as a victim of abuse at all. And I think that may be true that many gay men, who as altar boys had sex with gay priests, don't see themselves as unwilling victims, but as willing consenting sexual partners who may even have been in love with these priests.

I see this as a bigger problem than ever, because if the boys don't see themselves as victims, this is a homosexual problem, not a pedophile problem. Milo thinks it's perfectly acceptable for men to have sex with boys who have been through puberty, and this accounts for the vast majority of the relationships between priests and altar boys, there's only a small percentage of victims under the age of puberty.

All of this happened while the straight priests looked the other way. They must have known about it, but they chose to let it happen. And the bishops, when a sexual incident was reported, encouraged the parents to keep quiet about it and the gay priest was quietly transferred to another parish, where of course he could continue to go on as before, having sex with gay altar boys.

The Catholic Church is supposedly dealing with the problem right now, but there hasn't been a purge of gay priests and altar boys, and until that happens, I'm not convinced the problem has been completely resolved. Also, I am pretty sure this has been going for the last 2000 years or so, and is not something that is recent in Church history, it is only recent that lay Catholic parishioners finally got fed up and started going to courts and lawyers to get some sort of relief.

What's ironic is that the Catholic Church's official position is that gay men are "defective", and not qualified to be priests, and should not be ordained. This rule is obviously not followed, in fact, there is no telling how many Catholic priests are gay, it could be a huge percentage of them, who knows? How can one learn the truth in an institution as secretive as the Catholic Church, with a code of silence that would put the corrupt Chicago Police Department to shame.

It all makes me quite reluctant to participate in Catholic activities, like Sunday Mass, or confession, wondering how the priest's sins could make my own feeble trespasses pale in comparison.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Well, that's your opinion, but the Catholic priesthood is not wrecked. blackrook.

 

[mudwhistle]

Milo sees "Father Michael' as a hero for allowing him to have oral sex with him, and he does not see himself as a victim of abuse at all. And I think that may be true that many gay men, who as altar boys had sex with gay priests, don't see themselves as unwilling victims, but as willing consenting sexual partners who may even have been in love with these priests.

I see this as a bigger problem than ever, because if the boys don't see themselves as victims, this is a homosexual problem, not a pedophile problem. Milo thinks it's perfectly acceptable for men to have sex with boys who have been through puberty, and this accounts for the vast majority of the relationships between priests and altar boys, there's only a small percentage of victims under the age of puberty.

All of this happened while the straight priests looked the other way. They must have known about it, but they chose to let it happen. And the bishops, when a sexual incident was reported, encouraged the parents to keep quiet about it and the gay priest was quietly transferred to another parish, where of course he could continue to go on as before, having sex with gay altar boys.

The Catholic Church is supposedly dealing with the problem right now, but there hasn't been a purge of gay priests and altar boys, and until that happens, I'm not convinced the problem has been completely resolved. Also, I am pretty sure this has been going for the last 2000 years or so, and is not something that is recent in Church history, it is only recent that lay Catholic parishioners finally got fed up and started going to courts and lawyers to get some sort of relief.

What's ironic is that the Catholic Church's official position is that gay men are "defective", and not qualified to be priests, and should not be ordained. This rule is obviously not followed, in fact, there is no telling how many Catholic priests are gay, it could be a huge percentage of them, who knows? How can one learn the truth in an institution as secretive as the Catholic Church, with a code of silence that would put the corrupt Chicago Police Department to shame.

It all makes me quite reluctant to participate in Catholic activities, like Sunday Mass, or confession, wondering how the priest's sins could make my own feeble trespasses pale in comparison.

No small wonder that Democrats and the Catholic Church see eye to eye.
Strange how they used the church to attack Christians in general when in fact this was only going on in one cult that has little do with the teachings of Jesus.

It's also strange that the left can be so judgmental of Christians, claiming they're all the same, but give Muslims a total pass.

 

[skye]

so what side are you OP

you have posted so many threads about Milo what side are you

 

[Blackrook]

Well, that's your opinion, but the Catholic priesthood is not wrecked. blackrook.

Then explain the crisis in vocations. Most of the priests are old men and when they die off, there won't be anyone to replace them.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Well, that's your opinion, but the Catholic priesthood is not wrecked. blackrook.

Then explain the crisis in vocations. Most of the priests are old men and when they die off, there won't be anyone to replace them.

Then qualifications will be changed. Women make great clergy, and the original church had women in official positions.

 

[bodecea]

so what side are you OP

you have posted so many threads about Milo what side are you

That's an excellent question.

 

[bodecea]

Milo sees "Father Michael' as a hero for allowing him to have oral sex with him, and he does not see himself as a victim of abuse at all. And I think that may be true that many gay men, who as altar boys had sex with gay priests, don't see themselves as unwilling victims, but as willing consenting sexual partners who may even have been in love with these priests.

I see this as a bigger problem than ever, because if the boys don't see themselves as victims, this is a homosexual problem, not a pedophile problem. Milo thinks it's perfectly acceptable for men to have sex with boys who have been through puberty, and this accounts for the vast majority of the relationships between priests and altar boys, there's only a small percentage of victims under the age of puberty.

All of this happened while the straight priests looked the other way. They must have known about it, but they chose to let it happen. And the bishops, when a sexual incident was reported, encouraged the parents to keep quiet about it and the gay priest was quietly transferred to another parish, where of course he could continue to go on as before, having sex with gay altar boys.

The Catholic Church is supposedly dealing with the problem right now, but there hasn't been a purge of gay priests and altar boys, and until that happens, I'm not convinced the problem has been completely resolved. Also, I am pretty sure this has been going for the last 2000 years or so, and is not something that is recent in Church history, it is only recent that lay Catholic parishioners finally got fed up and started going to courts and lawyers to get some sort of relief.

What's ironic is that the Catholic Church's official position is that gay men are "defective", and not qualified to be priests, and should not be ordained. This rule is obviously not followed, in fact, there is no telling how many Catholic priests are gay, it could be a huge percentage of them, who knows? How can one learn the truth in an institution as secretive as the Catholic Church, with a code of silence that would put the corrupt Chicago Police Department to shame.

It all makes me quite reluctant to participate in Catholic activities, like Sunday Mass, or confession, wondering how the priest's sins could make my own feeble trespasses pale in comparison.

No small wonder that Democrats and the Catholic Church see eye to eye.
Strange how they used the church to attack Christians in general when in fact this was only going on in one cult that has little do with the teachings of Jesus.

It's also strange that the left can be so judgmental of Christians, claiming they're all the same, but give Muslims a total pass.

"but give Muslims a total pass"....who's doing that? Name names.

 

[Blackrook]

so what side are you OP

you have posted so many threads about Milo what side are you

I despised Milo from the very beginning. He may be a warrior against the forces of "political correctness" but I don't see it that way.

The reason we USED to not attack and belittle women was because it was not civilized to act that way. There was a code of conduct that gentlemen were expected to follow if they wanted to be part of polite society. Part of that gentleman's code was that we do not cuss or swear in front of women, we do not say certain things about women, and we treat women with respect.

I think feminism caused women to lose many of those protections when they chose to attack the gentleman's code of conduct, and accuse it of being just another aspect of patriarchal oppression. But I don't see it that way, I think that even today, men should treat women with respect, and if they don't appreciate it, we should treat them with respect anyway, because it's the gentlemanly thing to do.

The problem is much bigger than Milo, our entire society has been degraded with crude talk and bad manners, and I admit that I am as guilty as any when I'm on this political forum. But in real life, when I am with my wife (soon to be ex-wife), my daughters, my sisters, my step-mother, and the women I encounter at work, I do not treat them as I might treat a man. I am more gentle with them, and I am more careful of what I say and what I do.

Milo, was seeking to take the conservative movement down to the level where liberals already reside, in the gutter. I am glad that now he has been stopped.

 

[skye]

so what side are you OP

you have posted so many threads about Milo what side are you

I despised Milo from the very beginning. He may be a warrior against the forces of "political correctness" but I don't see it that way.

The reason we USED to not attack and belittle women was because it was not civilized to act that way. There was a code of conduct that gentlemen were expected to follow if they wanted to be part of polite society. Part of that gentleman's code was that we do not cuss or swear in front of women, we do not say certain things about women, and we treat women with respect.

I think feminism caused women to lose many of those protections when they chose to attack the gentleman's code of conduct, and accuse it of being just another aspect of patriarchal oppression. But I don't see it that way, I think that even today, men should treat women with respect, and if they don't appreciate it, we should treat them with respect anyway, because it's the gentlemanly thing to do.

The problem is much bigger than Milo, our entire society has been degraded with crude talk and bad manners, and I admit that I am as guilty as any when I'm on this political forum. But in real life, when I am with my wife (soon to be ex-wife), my daughters, my sisters, my step-mother, and the women I encounter at work, I do not treat them as I might treat a man. I am more gentle with them, and I am more careful of what I say and what I do.

Milo, was seeking to take the conservative movement down to the level where liberals already reside, in the gutter. I am glad that now he has been stopped.

there is plenty of hypocrisy on both sides.

if you are going to go after soft targets like Milo

have balls and go also after demrats , the Hillary degenerate train, and also some Republicans

BE FAIR!

 

[Blackrook]

What I see happening is that as the priests die off, the deacons will have to step up and take a more active role in running the parishes. The problem is that deacons are very limited in what they are allowed to do. The only sacrament they can administer is baptism, so we still need priests for the other six, including the Eucharist. What that means is that Catholics will no longer have the opportunity to take the Eucharist every Sunday, and that has always been true in remote areas of the world where there aren't enough priests. Instead of being assigned to one parish, priests will have to travel from parish to parish, saying Mass in a different place each week, maybe two or three places per week. The lack of vocations will not be solved until the Church cures itself of what's really ailing it, the influence of an immoral world and it's prevailing secular philosophy called liberalism. Liberalism is a cancer that is eating away at the Church like acid, corroding it and destroying it from within.

 

[Blackrook]

so what side are you OP

you have posted so many threads about Milo what side are you

I despised Milo from the very beginning. He may be a warrior against the forces of "political correctness" but I don't see it that way.

The reason we USED to not attack and belittle women was because it was not civilized to act that way. There was a code of conduct that gentlemen were expected to follow if they wanted to be part of polite society. Part of that gentleman's code was that we do not cuss or swear in front of women, we do not say certain things about women, and we treat women with respect.

I think feminism caused women to lose many of those protections when they chose to attack the gentleman's code of conduct, and accuse it of being just another aspect of patriarchal oppression. But I don't see it that way, I think that even today, men should treat women with respect, and if they don't appreciate it, we should treat them with respect anyway, because it's the gentlemanly thing to do.

The problem is much bigger than Milo, our entire society has been degraded with crude talk and bad manners, and I admit that I am as guilty as any when I'm on this political forum. But in real life, when I am with my wife (soon to be ex-wife), my daughters, my sisters, my step-mother, and the women I encounter at work, I do not treat them as I might treat a man. I am more gentle with them, and I am more careful of what I say and what I do.

Milo, was seeking to take the conservative movement down to the level where liberals already reside, in the gutter. I am glad that now he has been stopped.

there is plenty of hypocrisy on both sides.

if you are going to go after soft targets like Milo

have balls and go also after demrats , the Hillary degenerate train, and also some Republicans

BE FAIR!

If you know me, you know I go after the Democrats constantly, but also Trump. I am unhappy with all of them.

 

[Syriusly]

Milo sees "Father Michael' as a hero for allowing him to have oral sex with him, and he does not see himself as a victim of abuse at all. And I think that may be true that many gay men, who as altar boys had sex with gay priests, don't see themselves as unwilling victims, but as willing consenting sexual partners who may even have been in love with these priests.

I see this as a bigger problem than ever, because if the boys don't see themselves as victims, this is a homosexual problem, not a pedophile problem. Milo thinks it's perfectly acceptable for men to have sex with boys who have been through puberty, and this accounts for the vast majority of the relationships between priests and altar boys, there's only a small percentage of victims under the age of puberty.

All of this happened while the straight priests looked the other way. They must have known about it, but they chose to let it happen. And the bishops, when a sexual incident was reported, encouraged the parents to keep quiet about it and the gay priest was quietly transferred to another parish, where of course he could continue to go on as before, having sex with gay altar boys.

The Catholic Church is supposedly dealing with the problem right now, but there hasn't been a purge of gay priests and altar boys, and until that happens, I'm not convinced the problem has been completely resolved. Also, I am pretty sure this has been going for the last 2000 years or so, and is not something that is recent in Church history, it is only recent that lay Catholic parishioners finally got fed up and started going to courts and lawyers to get some sort of relief.

What's ironic is that the Catholic Church's official position is that gay men are "defective", and not qualified to be priests, and should not be ordained. This rule is obviously not followed, in fact, there is no telling how many Catholic priests are gay, it could be a huge percentage of them, who knows? How can one learn the truth in an institution as secretive as the Catholic Church, with a code of silence that would put the corrupt Chicago Police Department to shame.

It all makes me quite reluctant to participate in Catholic activities, like Sunday Mass, or confession, wondering how the priest's sins could make my own feeble trespasses pale in comparison.

Clearly once again- everything is the homosexuals fault. Not the child molesters.

The Catholic Church didn't try to cover up anything.

 

[Compost]

There are some bad priests. That doesn't mean the whole priesthood is wrecked. Milo was a victim of a priest when he was young. As for Milo considering Father Michael a hero, it sounds like OP didn't listen to what Milo said. It was a joke. Milo has become famous saying outrageous things. To suggest this recent Milo scandal is proof the homosexuals are to blame for problems in the Church is just unhinged. Church teaching is that homosexuality is a sin. The priests who have engaged in homosexual behavior have sinned. This is really not complicated.

 

[MarathonMike]

Milo is not a Pedophile, he did not advocate for Pedophilia and he is not a degenerate. He is Gay. He is also very intelligent and is a solid conservative who needs to not be tossed overboard by a gotcha interview.

Now we have the strange bedfellows of Liberals and Fundamentalist Christian Conservatives hooting and howling together with Milo's head on a stick.

 

[Blackrook]

I know homosexuality is a sin, but that's not the extent of it. Homosexuality is not only a sexual orientation, it is a psychological defect. Gay men aren't just normal men who "just happen to be homosexual." There is something flawed in their personality that makes them that way.

The fact is, the typical gay man has hundreds of sexual partners in his lifetime, and this is not a normal way to behave to be so promiscuous. There is something deeply wrong with homosexuals, and this effects everything they say, think and do.

They should not be Catholic priests, but the Catholic Church has ignored it's own rules and allowed many thousands of homosexuals to join the priesthood. And now, the Church has paid the price because the sex scandal thoroughly destroyed the reputation of the Church, and the goodwill it had in the world. I don't go anywhere without hearing jokes about Catholic priests being child molesters. If I go into a group of non-Catholics, and tell them I'm Catholic, I can be sure to hear a crack about Catholic priests molesting children. If I start a thread about the Catholic Church, at least half of the posts will be cracks about Catholic priests molesting children.

In 1000 years, the Catholic Church will not live this down, there is never forgiveness for anything the Catholic Church does. People are still talking about the Crusades, the Inquisition, and Bloody Queen Mary, even hundreds of years later. There is no forgiveness, even if the Pope apologizes, there is no forgiveness.

 

[RodISHI]

What I see happening is that as the priests die off, the deacons will have to step up and take a more active role in running the parishes. The problem is that deacons are very limited in what they are allowed to do. The only sacrament they can administer is baptism, so we still need priests for the other six, including the Eucharist. What that means is that Catholics will no longer have the opportunity to take the Eucharist every Sunday, and that has always been true in remote areas of the world where there aren't enough priests. Instead of being assigned to one parish, priests will have to travel from parish to parish, saying Mass in a different place each week, maybe two or three places per week. The lack of vocations will not be solved until the Church cures itself of what's really ailing it, the influence of an immoral world and it's prevailing secular philosophy called liberalism. Liberalism is a cancer that is eating away at the Church like acid, corroding it and destroying it from within.

Exalted religions end up going the way of the dinosaur.

 

[aris2chat]

so what side are you OP

you have posted so many threads about Milo what side are you

I despised Milo from the very beginning. He may be a warrior against the forces of "political correctness" but I don't see it that way.

The reason we USED to not attack and belittle women was because it was not civilized to act that way. There was a code of conduct that gentlemen were expected to follow if they wanted to be part of polite society. Part of that gentleman's code was that we do not cuss or swear in front of women, we do not say certain things about women, and we treat women with respect.

I think feminism caused women to lose many of those protections when they chose to attack the gentleman's code of conduct, and accuse it of being just another aspect of patriarchal oppression. But I don't see it that way, I think that even today, men should treat women with respect, and if they don't appreciate it, we should treat them with respect anyway, because it's the gentlemanly thing to do.

The problem is much bigger than Milo, our entire society has been degraded with crude talk and bad manners, and I admit that I am as guilty as any when I'm on this political forum. But in real life, when I am with my wife (soon to be ex-wife), my daughters, my sisters, my step-mother, and the women I encounter at work, I do not treat them as I might treat a man. I am more gentle with them, and I am more careful of what I say and what I do.

Milo, was seeking to take the conservative movement down to the level where liberals already reside, in the gutter. I am glad that now he has been stopped.

don't blame women because your marriage failed.

 

[Compost]

I know homosexuality is a sin, but that's not the extent of it. Homosexuality is not only a sexual orientation, it is a psychological defect. Gay men aren't just normal men who "just happen to be homosexual." There is something flawed in their personality that makes them that way.

The fact is, the typical gay man has hundreds of sexual partners in his lifetime, and this is not a normal way to behave to be so promiscuous. There is something deeply wrong with homosexuals, and this effects everything they say, think and do.

They should not be Catholic priests, but the Catholic Church has ignored it's own rules and allowed many thousands of homosexuals to join the priesthood. And now, the Church has paid the price because the sex scandal thoroughly destroyed the reputation of the Church, and the goodwill it had in the world. I don't go anywhere without hearing jokes about Catholic priests being child molesters. If I go into a group of non-Catholics, and tell them I'm Catholic, I can be sure to hear a crack about Catholic priests molesting children. If I start a thread about the Catholic Church, at least half of the posts will be cracks about Catholic priests molesting children.

In 1000 years, the Catholic Church will not live this down, there is never forgiveness for anything the Catholic Church does. People are still talking about the Crusades, the Inquisition, and Bloody Queen Mary, even hundreds of years later. There is no forgiveness, even if the Pope apologizes, there is no forgiveness.

Priests are human beings. They are flawed. Review what the Catechism says about homosexuality. Section 2357. Homosexuality is disordered, contrary to natural law. People who have homosexual desires need compassion, for this is a trial for them, a cross. The Church teaches that such persons are called to chastity. Priests are called to chastity too.

Sure, some people make ignorant remarks about Catholics, and some people will never "forgive" the Catholic Church for what has (and even what hasn't) happened over the past 2,000 years. People say lots of stupid stuff. How you deal with the ignorant and hard hearted is up to you. I'm guessing you know what the Church teaches about that.