Mike Hardy responds (italicized) to several of my previous comments (in bold):

After today, Roger Ho just might not be one of my favorite blogs. Three comments;

Pope accepts Weakland's resignation. My question to this Bishop is, even if he didn't molest anyone, does
he believe the homosexual desires he apparently acted upon were disordered? If so, and he is sincerely sorry
for what he did, he should be forgiven.

What if he's just sincerely sorry for what he did?

My reply: If he's sorry he violated his vow of celibacy, I suppose I wouldn't have a problem forgiving him. I would, however, have a problem if he didn't think homosexuality wasn't a disordered affliction.

Also

If the California Legislature votes to pass a bill that allows people engaged in an active homosexual "deathstyle" to be foster parents then I better not see one priest in this state imprisoned for pedophilia or one Bishop sued for trying to cover it up.

At least Mr. Ho doesn't come right out and say that the only thing homosexual foster parents want to do is fondle their charges. (Do I need to bother to say they don't?). It sure as heck looks like he wants you to believe it though. There's also this

My reply: The underlying presumption in Mr. Hardy's comment, of course, is that homosexuality is perfectly normal. It isn't. As such, I would ask Mr. Hardy if he thinks it would be wise for two homosexual acting males to act as the foster parents for a young boy who has been taken out of his home by Child Protective Services because his father was sexually molesting him.

You want to know what CPS' dirty little secret is? Even without the proposed law, children are already being placed in the homes of people who openly practice homosexuality, and more often times than not, these children are being sexually abused, if not by the foster parent, then by one of the foster parent's "acquaitances". But because CPS is allowed to operate by its own rules (an agent can refuse to allow a child to have an attorney present when he/she is asked questions about his/her parents) and is staffed by people who are vehemently anti-Christian and pro-homosexual, a blind eye is often turned. How do I know this? I get calls almost everyday about it, and I work with attorneys who are developing a strategy for suing CPS on a state by state basis.

And in case you're wondering, I'm not really in favor of placing children in the homes of people who, although not "gay", aren't married.

if the priests quoted in this decidedly slanted
article are not acting upon their desires, and they
are upholding the teachings of the Church, they aren't
"gay".

Baloney!

My reply: ...and cheese!

There's a certain over-used 4-letter word I try to avoid on this blog: "hate". Looking at the comments above, coming from a lawyer who is presumably bright enough to know better, you can see why many folks often find that word to be appropriate.

My reply: Ah, yes...the old standard reply of a liberal who is incapable of providing a reasoned response to a comment or statement he disagrees with. If homosexuality was an immutable characteristic on the level of race or ethnicity, MAYBE I would agree with you. But it isn't. Homosexuality is a disordered act eminating from a disordered desire. It is not much different than a man who can only feel satisfied by either masturbating or having as much sex with as many women he can find.