Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:….and not one of the perpetrators was transgender.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/05/us/catholic-church-abuse-baltimore.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

#GROOMERS

No, but they were predominantly homosexual pedophiles.

No they were not. It’s a crime of opportunity male abusers are more likely to work at all boys schools. When moved to girls schools they continued to abuse.

Over 95% of the victims (children) of these priests were male. 100% of the priests are/were men. How can you not say homosexual pedophile priests are/were the problem. Good lord. And I will throw in any straight priests who covered for them. Wish they could’ve locked all these sickos up but please do not cover for priests just because they are gay. Not all gay priests were pedophiles but these ones certainly were.

Because there were no girl alter boys, because men taught at boy schools. Geez you guys need to educate yourselves. So much ignorance.

Guess what most rape in jail is male on male… do you know why?

Delusional. Priests had opportunities to access both boys and girls. Guess what? In almost every instance they chose males. Not because that was all that was there, it was all they desired. There is always this knee-jerk reaction when someone brings up the painfully obvious point that gay men flooded the priesthood particularly from the ‘50s to the ‘80s and some of them had proclivities towards young males. Shocker.

You are a complete ignoramus on the subject.

You are just a bigot looking for a reason to hate gay people.

Educate yourself.

And there it is. Can’t argue facts so just call someone a homophobe. I could say the same about you and the Church. At least I can admit the flaws of the church. To you, gays do no wrong and could not possibly be to blame for any of this scandal. Yeah, right.

Lots of evil gays. Look at the Taliban. Lots of evil straight people too.

“Delusional. Priests had opportunities to access both boys and girls. Guess what? In almost every instance they chose males. Not because that was all that was there, it was all they desired. There is always this knee-jerk reaction when someone brings up the painfully obvious point that gay men flooded the priesthood particularly from the ‘50s to the ‘80s and some of them had proclivities towards young males. Shocker.”

There are zero studies showing LBGQT folks are any more likely to be predators than heterosexuals. What did happen is the church clustered young men, many in their teens, in all male seminaries. Some, like St Mary’s Seminary in Baltimore, grew a frat like culture where older students indoctrinated the younger classes. The young seminarians were told that sex with a male did not violate their vow of chastity, that only vaginal sex with a woman did. They were correctly told that boys rarely reported abuse, so were safer targets The testosterone students did what they were told, to fit in; and the Archdiocese did nothing. After being ordained (like The Keepers Father Maskell) they continued to torture and prey n boys more than girls - believing they could have sexual release without breaking their bow of chastity or being reporting.

“The article said 10 names were redacted (some due to unsubstantiated claims) and the rest are dead.“

There were 43 previously unknown/not public abusers found in the AG investigation. Of these, 13 are alive and the other 30 are dead. The names of 13 will not be published, this was decided up front. The AOB’s credibly accused list they publish (there are more names the AOB did not themselves rule as credible) now has 152 names. That totals 195 identified sexual abusers of children. There are some of the 195 known abusers who are alive - most whose whereabouts are unknown. As the state would not criminally charge them, they are not on abuser registries, so pass background checks. Maybe teaching or coaching at a school near you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:….and not one of the perpetrators was transgender.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/05/us/catholic-church-abuse-baltimore.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

#GROOMERS

No, but they were predominantly homosexual pedophiles.

No they were not. It’s a crime of opportunity male abusers are more likely to work at all boys schools. When moved to girls schools they continued to abuse.

There has to be a sexual attraction first - it’s not just about the opportunity part.

Pedophiles are not attracted to a gender they are attracted to children of all genders. Children are essentially genderless .

You don’t know that? Are you lacking an education?

Ha ha ha. Oh, I see. It’s just an accident that almost every instance of abuse is between an adult male and juvenile male? I see. What world do you live in?

No it’s because girls were not allowed to be alter boys.

First, it is spelled “altar.” Second, pedophile priests could have accessed boys and girls. Altar boys were not the only victims of their abuse. You seem to have a hard time grasping the obvious.

When priests were found to be abusing Altar Boyz, they were move to girls schools and then they abused girls.

Because pedophiles are not attracted to a gender, they are attracted to an age

Sure. Just a coincidence that they were all boys. Ding dong.

It’s not a coincidence it’s because men teach boys and nuns teach girls.

How are you this stupid?

Happy Easter!!! Yes, men teach the “alter” boys. Trust me, let priests marry and no more abuse. Night night.

That’s not true, because there are tons of married men that are pedophiles.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:….and not one of the perpetrators was transgender.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/05/us/catholic-church-abuse-baltimore.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

#GROOMERS

No, but they were predominantly homosexual pedophiles.

No they were not. It’s a crime of opportunity male abusers are more likely to work at all boys schools. When moved to girls schools they continued to abuse.

There has to be a sexual attraction first - it’s not just about the opportunity part.

Pedophiles are not attracted to a gender they are attracted to children of all genders. Children are essentially genderless .

You don’t know that? Are you lacking an education?

Ha ha ha. Oh, I see. It’s just an accident that almost every instance of abuse is between an adult male and juvenile male? I see. What world do you live in?

No it’s because girls were not allowed to be alter boys.

First, it is spelled “altar.” Second, pedophile priests could have accessed boys and girls. Altar boys were not the only victims of their abuse. You seem to have a hard time grasping the obvious.

When priests were found to be abusing Altar Boyz, they were move to girls schools and then they abused girls.

Because pedophiles are not attracted to a gender, they are attracted to an age

Sure. Just a coincidence that they were all boys. Ding dong.

It’s not a coincidence it’s because men teach boys and nuns teach girls.

How are you this stupid?

Happy Easter!!! Yes, men teach the “alter” boys. Trust me, let priests marry and no more abuse. Night night.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:….and not one of the perpetrators was transgender.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/05/us/catholic-church-abuse-baltimore.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

#GROOMERS

No, but they were predominantly homosexual pedophiles.

No they were not. It’s a crime of opportunity male abusers are more likely to work at all boys schools. When moved to girls schools they continued to abuse.

Over 95% of the victims (children) of these priests were male. 100% of the priests are/were men. How can you not say homosexual pedophile priests are/were the problem. Good lord. And I will throw in any straight priests who covered for them. Wish they could’ve locked all these sickos up but please do not cover for priests just because they are gay. Not all gay priests were pedophiles but these ones certainly were.

Because there were no girl alter boys, because men taught at boy schools. Geez you guys need to educate yourselves. So much ignorance.

Guess what most rape in jail is male on male… do you know why?

Delusional. Priests had opportunities to access both boys and girls. Guess what? In almost every instance they chose males. Not because that was all that was there, it was all they desired. There is always this knee-jerk reaction when someone brings up the painfully obvious point that gay men flooded the priesthood particularly from the ‘50s to the ‘80s and some of them had proclivities towards young males. Shocker.

You are a complete ignoramus on the subject.

You are just a bigot looking for a reason to hate gay people.

Educate yourself.

And there it is. Can’t argue facts so just call someone a homophobe. I could say the same about you and the Church. At least I can admit the flaws of the church. To you, gays do no wrong and could not possibly be to blame for any of this scandal. Yeah, right.

I’ve already given you facts. Men are abusers, both gay and straight. They rape at the same rate, but they rape adults. Pedophiles are neither heterosexual nor homosexual. They are pedophiles.. pedophile do not have a preference for gender they have a preference for age.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:….and not one of the perpetrators was transgender.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/05/us/catholic-church-abuse-baltimore.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

#GROOMERS

No, but they were predominantly homosexual pedophiles.

No they were not. It’s a crime of opportunity male abusers are more likely to work at all boys schools. When moved to girls schools they continued to abuse.

There has to be a sexual attraction first - it’s not just about the opportunity part.

Pedophiles are not attracted to a gender they are attracted to children of all genders. Children are essentially genderless .

You don’t know that? Are you lacking an education?

Ha ha ha. Oh, I see. It’s just an accident that almost every instance of abuse is between an adult male and juvenile male? I see. What world do you live in?

No it’s because girls were not allowed to be alter boys.

First, it is spelled “altar.” Second, pedophile priests could have accessed boys and girls. Altar boys were not the only victims of their abuse. You seem to have a hard time grasping the obvious.

When priests were found to be abusing Altar Boyz, they were move to girls schools and then they abused girls.

Because pedophiles are not attracted to a gender, they are attracted to an age

Sure. Just a coincidence that they were all boys. Ding dong.

It’s not a coincidence it’s because men teach boys and nuns teach girls.

How are you this stupid?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:….and not one of the perpetrators was transgender.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/05/us/catholic-church-abuse-baltimore.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

#GROOMERS

No, but they were predominantly homosexual pedophiles.

No they were not. It’s a crime of opportunity male abusers are more likely to work at all boys schools. When moved to girls schools they continued to abuse.

There has to be a sexual attraction first - it’s not just about the opportunity part.

Pedophiles are not attracted to a gender they are attracted to children of all genders. Children are essentially genderless .

You don’t know that? Are you lacking an education?

Ha ha ha. Oh, I see. It’s just an accident that almost every instance of abuse is between an adult male and juvenile male? I see. What world do you live in?

No it’s because girls were not allowed to be alter boys.

First, it is spelled “altar.” Second, pedophile priests could have accessed boys and girls. Altar boys were not the only victims of their abuse. You seem to have a hard time grasping the obvious.

When priests were found to be abusing Altar Boyz, they were move to girls schools and then they abused girls.

Because pedophiles are not attracted to a gender, they are attracted to an age

Sure. Just a coincidence that they were all boys. Ding dong.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:….and not one of the perpetrators was transgender.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/05/us/catholic-church-abuse-baltimore.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

#GROOMERS

No, but they were predominantly homosexual pedophiles.

No they were not. It’s a crime of opportunity male abusers are more likely to work at all boys schools. When moved to girls schools they continued to abuse.

Over 95% of the victims (children) of these priests were male. 100% of the priests are/were men. How can you not say homosexual pedophile priests are/were the problem. Good lord. And I will throw in any straight priests who covered for them. Wish they could’ve locked all these sickos up but please do not cover for priests just because they are gay. Not all gay priests were pedophiles but these ones certainly were.

Because there were no girl alter boys, because men taught at boy schools. Geez you guys need to educate yourselves. So much ignorance.

Guess what most rape in jail is male on male… do you know why?

Delusional. Priests had opportunities to access both boys and girls. Guess what? In almost every instance they chose males. Not because that was all that was there, it was all they desired. There is always this knee-jerk reaction when someone brings up the painfully obvious point that gay men flooded the priesthood particularly from the ‘50s to the ‘80s and some of them had proclivities towards young males. Shocker.

You are a complete ignoramus on the subject.

You are just a bigot looking for a reason to hate gay people.

Educate yourself.

And there it is. Can’t argue facts so just call someone a homophobe. I could say the same about you and the Church. At least I can admit the flaws of the church. To you, gays do no wrong and could not possibly be to blame for any of this scandal. Yeah, right.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:….and not one of the perpetrators was transgender.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/05/us/catholic-church-abuse-baltimore.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

#GROOMERS

No, but they were predominantly homosexual pedophiles.

No they were not. It’s a crime of opportunity male abusers are more likely to work at all boys schools. When moved to girls schools they continued to abuse.

There has to be a sexual attraction first - it’s not just about the opportunity part.

Pedophiles are not attracted to a gender they are attracted to children of all genders. Children are essentially genderless .

You don’t know that? Are you lacking an education?

Ha ha ha. Oh, I see. It’s just an accident that almost every instance of abuse is between an adult male and juvenile male? I see. What world do you live in?

No it’s because girls were not allowed to be alter boys.

First, it is spelled “altar.” Second, pedophile priests could have accessed boys and girls. Altar boys were not the only victims of their abuse. You seem to have a hard time grasping the obvious.

When priests were found to be abusing Altar Boyz, they were move to girls schools and then they abused girls.

Because pedophiles are not attracted to a gender, they are attracted to an age

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:….and not one of the perpetrators was transgender.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/05/us/catholic-church-abuse-baltimore.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

#GROOMERS

No, but they were predominantly homosexual pedophiles.

No they were not. It’s a crime of opportunity male abusers are more likely to work at all boys schools. When moved to girls schools they continued to abuse.

There has to be a sexual attraction first - it’s not just about the opportunity part.

Pedophiles are not attracted to a gender they are attracted to children of all genders. Children are essentially genderless .

You don’t know that? Are you lacking an education?

Ha ha ha. Oh, I see. It’s just an accident that almost every instance of abuse is between an adult male and juvenile male? I see. What world do you live in?

No it’s because girls were not allowed to be alter boys.

First, it is spelled “altar.” Second, pedophile priests could have accessed boys and girls. Altar boys were not the only victims of their abuse. You seem to have a hard time grasping the obvious.

Tell it to voice to text.

You’re completely wrong and ignorant on the subject

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:….and not one of the perpetrators was transgender.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/05/us/catholic-church-abuse-baltimore.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

#GROOMERS

No, but they were predominantly homosexual pedophiles.

No they were not. It’s a crime of opportunity male abusers are more likely to work at all boys schools. When moved to girls schools they continued to abuse.

There has to be a sexual attraction first - it’s not just about the opportunity part.

Pedophiles are not attracted to a gender they are attracted to children of all genders. Children are essentially genderless .

You don’t know that? Are you lacking an education?

Children are genderless? Wow. Radical gender theory on full display here.

Yes they have not gone through puberty are you attracted to children of your chosen gender? Do you have sexual attraction to 5 year olds? If not, why not. If your heterosexual why not be sexually attracted to children of your chosen gender?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:….and not one of the perpetrators was transgender.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/05/us/catholic-church-abuse-baltimore.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

#GROOMERS

No, but they were predominantly homosexual pedophiles.

No they were not. It’s a crime of opportunity male abusers are more likely to work at all boys schools. When moved to girls schools they continued to abuse.

There has to be a sexual attraction first - it’s not just about the opportunity part.

Pedophiles are not attracted to a gender they are attracted to children of all genders. Children are essentially genderless .

You don’t know that? Are you lacking an education?

Ha ha ha. Oh, I see. It’s just an accident that almost every instance of abuse is between an adult male and juvenile male? I see. What world do you live in?

No it’s because girls were not allowed to be alter boys.

First, it is spelled “altar.” Second, pedophile priests could have accessed boys and girls. Altar boys were not the only victims of their abuse. You seem to have a hard time grasping the obvious.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:….and not one of the perpetrators was transgender.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/05/us/catholic-church-abuse-baltimore.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

#GROOMERS

No, but they were predominantly homosexual pedophiles.

No they were not. It’s a crime of opportunity male abusers are more likely to work at all boys schools. When moved to girls schools they continued to abuse.

Over 95% of the victims (children) of these priests were male. 100% of the priests are/were men. How can you not say homosexual pedophile priests are/were the problem. Good lord. And I will throw in any straight priests who covered for them. Wish they could’ve locked all these sickos up but please do not cover for priests just because they are gay. Not all gay priests were pedophiles but these ones certainly were.

Because there were no girl alter boys, because men taught at boy schools. Geez you guys need to educate yourselves. So much ignorance.

Guess what most rape in jail is male on male… do you know why?

Delusional. Priests had opportunities to access both boys and girls. Guess what? In almost every instance they chose males. Not because that was all that was there, it was all they desired. There is always this knee-jerk reaction when someone brings up the painfully obvious point that gay men flooded the priesthood particularly from the ‘50s to the ‘80s and some of them had proclivities towards young males. Shocker.

You are a complete ignoramus on the subject.

You are just a bigot looking for a reason to hate gay people.

Educate yourself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:….and not one of the perpetrators was transgender.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/05/us/catholic-church-abuse-baltimore.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

#GROOMERS

No, but they were predominantly homosexual pedophiles.

No they were not. It’s a crime of opportunity male abusers are more likely to work at all boys schools. When moved to girls schools they continued to abuse.

There has to be a sexual attraction first - it’s not just about the opportunity part.

Pedophiles are not attracted to a gender they are attracted to children of all genders. Children are essentially genderless .

You don’t know that? Are you lacking an education?

Children are genderless? Wow. Radical gender theory on full display here.