The Church's stonewall reaction has been unconscionable but fortunately the Catholic laity and the secular press has been all over their sorry asses 24/7. Contrast this with how such societal reaction against suspected terrorists in the Muslim community is greeted by denials from CAIR and lawsuits from the ACLU and tsk-tsk editorials blanket defending the Religion of Peace. An interesting contrast.

Yes, isn't it?

First: No one has profiled all Catholic priests as potential child molesters, whereas a man with dark skin and a beard can expect to be searched and possibly detained if he attempts to board a plane.

Second: We are still innocent until proven guilty in this country. In the cases of these Catholic priests, we're talking about a conspiracy that has gone on for decades, and still there are not many compared to the number of Catholic priests as a whole. They are now being pursued by the law for individual cases. They are not being plucked out of crowds based on their clothing.

Third: The ACLU defends people whose civil rights are abridged on the basis of their religion. The Catholic priests in question have no religious rights to child molestation. Some Muslims, due to the use of profiling, actually have a case on these legal grounds.

Fourth: How is one organization stonewalling different from any other organization stonewalling?

Fifth: If we had seen the kind of wholesale condemnation of Islam based on the acts of a relative few as you have demonstrated on this board turned against the entire Catholic Church rather than a relative few criminal clergy, I hope to say there would be a few editorials in blanket defense of the Church.

To condemn an entire religion composed of millions of members who largely just take care of their families and do their jobs because some of its members are rotten human beings and some others violently dislike us is completely counterproductive.