Cover Up by the NYT

The American Spectator has a story about a cover up by the New York Times:
"There are, in fact, at least three scandals here. One, that a priest molested boys thirty years ago, is scandal to be sure, but alas, hardly news now, given the number of such stories over the past decade -- including one in California that came to light only this past week.
"The second, and underlying, scandal is that it's the homosexuals allowed into the priesthood in the sixties who have been causing most of the trouble.
"Are all homosexuals child molesters? Certainly not.
"Are most child molesters in the Catholic Church homosexuals? Almost certainly."
The full story bears reading. I was alerted to this story by Pundit and Pundette. On the right side of the page Jill at P & P keeps up to date links of some of the most interesting and relevant posts from around the net.
Here are two more quotes from the Am Spec story:
"The pedophilia story really begins more than forty years ago, when the Roman Catholic Church began accepting known homosexuals into the priesthood. The traditionalists objected, but the sixties were when enlightened, progressive, sophisticated life began. Like children who think they are the very first to discover sex, the sixties' liberals thought that any restrictions on what homosexuals could do must be wrongly discriminatory. For a liberal, everything goes. So, everything went, including homosexuals to seminaries.
"In the years since then, we -- the Catholic Church in particular, but all of us, really -- have reaped the fruits of what was sown in those turbulent years."

......................................................
"In fact, wouldn't it make sense to pay special attention to the assignments given to homosexual priests until it was certain that they were not more likely to molest children than normal priests?
"Not, apparently, to the New York Times. That would require it to be critical of supervisors who failed to identify priests who were homosexual and who assigned them to positions where they could abuse children. It's much easier for the Times simply to pile on after the abuses have happened, and write about a cover-up.
What is the primary public-policy goal of a news story that exposes a cover-up? Presumably, to put future offenders (or their superiors) on notice that eventually they are likely to be detected and perhaps punished. The hope is that that knowledge might make those in positions of authority more vigilant in assigning, supervising, and punishing priests who might abuse children.
"But wouldn't identifying the likely perpetrators, or a class of people likely to be perpetrators, and supervising them more carefully before they perpetrate be even more likely to serve the public policy of preventing abuse of children?
Again, surely yes.
"And that is the third, and most serious, scandal. There is almost surely a cover-up here. But it's a cover-up by the New York Times of a group of people whose lifestyle the Times celebrates. The Times seems to be more interested in protecting its friends in the homosexual community than the youngsters in churches -- and in any other institutions where they might fall victim to predatory homosexuals."